KJV Perfect? Sorry. Nope. Far from it.

Published by Rob Skiba April 20, 2013 at 1:20 AM

There are many out there who are hyper-dogmatic in their belief that the King James Version of the Bible is the ONLY “perfect” version of the Bible – some going so far as to claim that the KJV is the very definition of Scripture, and if you challenge it, you apparently don’t believe in the Bible. That, of course, is quite absurd. But you simply cannot reason with such people. While I do, in fact, love and study from the KJV (and have since 1977), I recognize that it is far from perfect, and that while it may be one of the “better” English translations available to us, I maintain that one simply cannot fully understand the Holy Scriptures without diving into the Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek – the languages the Bible was originally written in by Holy Spirit inspired men. There is so much more and far richer understanding that can be gained from looking at the texts that lie beneath the KJV English.Simple example:

What is really being said in John 21:15-17?

John 21 (KJV):

15 So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs.

16 He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep.

17 He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.

The English word “love” fails miserably in telling us the significance of what is really being said here and why Peter grieved the third time. Only by looking at the Greek can you see what’s truly being said in this discussion.


Jesus or Joshua?

Why does the KJV have Stephen saying it was JESUS who brought the tabernacle in from the wilderness, when clearly it was JOSHUA (NOTE: the NKJV corrected it):

Acts 7 (KJV):

44 Our fathers had the tabernacle of witness in the wilderness, as he had appointed, speaking unto Moses, that he should make it according to the fashion that he had seen.

45 Which also our fathers that came after brought in with Jesus into the possession of the Gentiles, whom God drave out before the face of our fathers, unto the days of David;

Hebrews 4 (KJV):

8 For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day.

In context, the proper translation for both of the above is Joshua not Jesus. That said, it should be noted that the obvious reason for this error is the fact that “Jesus” was derived from the exact same word used for Joshua – in fact, that would be a more accurate translation for our Savior’s name all through the New Testament: The Hebrew Yeshua is short for Yehoshua (God is salvation), which is translated as the English word “Joshua” all throughout the Old Testament. So, why the change in the New Testament?


I calleth fowl on the reptile offerings!

Leviticus 12 (KJV):

8 And if she be not able to bring a lamb, then she shall bring two turtles, or two young pigeons; the one for the burnt offering, and the other for a sin offering: and the priest shall make an atonement for her, and she shall be clean.

Leviticus 15 (KJV):

12 And on the eighth day she shall take unto her two turtles, or two young pigeons, and bring them unto the priest, to the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.

Numbers 6 (KJV):

10 And on the eighth day he shall bring two turtles, or two young pigeons, to the priest, to the door of the tabernacle of the congregation:

TURTLES? Really?

No. She is not to bring reptiles, but rather birds. Thankfully, Mary knew her Hebrew Torah:

Luke 2 (KJV):

22 And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord;

23 (As it is written in the law of the Lord, Every male that openeth the womb shall be called holy to the Lord;)

24 And to offer a sacrifice according to that which is said in the law of the Lord, A pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons.

Please bear in mind that it was not MOSES who got it wrong, but rather the KJV translators! But can you imagine if Mary and Joseph were hardcore KJV Only types? Can you see them bringing reptiles to the Temple for their offering for baby Jesus?

Should we not revile the other gods that YHWH Himself detests? KJV says no:

These are just a few of many. Perhaps I will add more as I find this sort of thing in my studies. Then again, I don’t know – maybe it’s a waste of time pointing these things out? I know this will never convince those who have made up their mind and cannot see facts staring them in the face.

In any case, please don’t bother trying to defend the notion that the KJV is perfect, because clearly it is not. And please stop accusing others who use different translations or – GOD FORBID – those who choose to look at the Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek for deeper understanding of being “heretics” or other such non-sense. It’s getting old.

Frustrated by KJV Only-lunacy,

– Rob Skiba

P.S.: You will notice a common set of attributes among KJV Only types who are sure to respond to this note:

1. They tend to be hyper-dogmatic – to the point of exhibiting cult-like behavior.

2. They love to attack anyone who does not believe as they do.

3. They love to use the word “heretic” (and other words of similar meaning) when referring to those who disagree with them (which only reinforces numbers 1 and 2).

4. They generally lack the most basic of reading/listening comprehension skills.

5. They like to twist what you say into things you did not say, then set up strawman arguments to crucify you with.

6. They will associate your disbelief in the inerrancy of the KJV with a disbelief in the Bible itself and thus accuse you of not believing in Scripture.

7. They like to broadcast their list of “heretics” to the world and tell people to stay away from them because they are “false teachers” and other such non-sense.

8. They tend to vehemently defend paganism – such as the practice of celebrating Easter in place of the Hebrew Passover and the celebration of Christmas as the birth of Christ on December 25th.

9. Though they will almost never admit it, they also tend to be quite antisemitic, shunning anything that has to do with our roots, which happen to trace back to the Hebrew people/culture/Scriptures.

10. They also tend be afraid of tools like a concordance, which can reveal all of the errors they love to defend.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *