Click here to learn more about the author. Click here for recommendations by various Christian leaders. Click here for ordering information using your credit card.

Chapter 2

Deity Denied

For if the true New Testament text came from God, whence came the erroneous variant readings ultimately save from the evil one; and how could the true text have been preserved save through the providence of God working through His Church? 1

- David Otis Fuller

For decades now, modern versions have been hitting the market at the rate of several per year. As a result, we now have hundreds of different versions on the market. How did it all begin? To answer this question, we must revisit the early formative years of the modern debate concerning updating the word of God. The first modern version to appear on the market was the English Revised Version (ERV) of 1881. It was supposed to be a revision of the KJB but became a new translation. The American Standard Version (ASV) was first published in 1901 in America as a revision of the 1881 English Revised Version.

The ERV and the ASV are the great granddaddies of all the modern translations. They initiated the changes that are so common today. These versions also included study footnotes for the reader. Examining the footnotes found in these early versions, one can quickly ascertain the thoughts and intentions of the earliest revisers. Although its copyright page claims the ASV to be a revision of the King James Bible, it is not.

The claimed purpose of this older translation, as well as the stated purpose of today’s translations, is simply to modernize the language and render these versions easier to read and understand. If the intention of the revisers was merely to modernize the language of the King James Bible, why then do these modern versions all attack the deity of our Lord Jesus Christ?

Jesus — Accepts Worship

The American Standard Version died out long ago. It is no longer an acceptable version, having been replaced by the more than 200 more modern choices. For this reason, only a single verse from the ASV, along with its corresponding footnote, will be considered in the present study.

(KJB) John 9:38 And he said, Lord, I believe. And he worshipped him.

Amazingly, we have agreement between the two texts. The ASV says the exact same thing as the King James Bible.

(ASV) John 9:38 And he said, Lord, I believe. And he worshipped him.

In this case, the problem does not involve a change in the text itself. Instead, the attack manifests itself in the footnotes of the ASV. Both versions reveal that the Lord Jesus Christ received worship. However, the footnote corresponding to this verse in the ASV blasphemes God. Here, in the great granddaddy of all the modern versions, the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ is vehemently and overtly attacked. By examining this footnote, one can quickly see that the revisers did not believe Jesus to be God.

The footnote: "The Greek word denotes an act of reverence, whether paid to a creature (as here), or to the Creator." Translators of the American Standard Version and the English Revised Version believed our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to be a created being. Since Jesus was the One being worshipped in this passage, the translators reveal their unbelief that He is the Creator of the universe. Many other passages could be considered. However, such a flagrant attack on the deity of Christ should suffice to illustrate the point.

Another major revision to hit the market was the Revised Standard Version (RSV) published in 1952. It was a revision of the American Standard Version. The copyright page of the RSV says that it is a revision of the English Revised Version of 1881-1885 and the American Standard Version of 1901.

From the above information taken from the copyright page, one can see that the RSV is a child or a grandchild of the American Standard Version. As we have seen, the translators of the American Standard Version had a problem with the Lord Jesus Christ’s receiving worship. After publishing the ASV, it appears that these revisers realized they could still communicate their message while better disguising their intent by tampering only with the verses rather than expressing their true beliefs in their footnotes.

(KJB) Luke 24:51 And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he was parted from them, and carried up into heaven. 52 And they worshipped him, and returned to Jerusalem with great joy:

Instead of bringing doubt upon the Lord’s deity through a footnote, the RSV simply deletes the fact that the Lord Jesus Christ received worship. The scripture teaches that only God is to receive worship (Matthew 4:10) and we have already read the revisers’ footnote revealing how they felt concerning this matter.

(RSV) Luke 24:51 While he blessed them, he parted from them. 52 And they returned to Jerusalem with great joy.

Of course, the 1960 NASV follows its predecessor by omitting worship. Interestingly, the updated 1995 NASV places worship back into the text after having omitted it from the text for 35 years.

Jesus — the Son of God

Not only do the revisions attack the Lordship of Jesus Christ, but they also attack every other major attribute concerning His deity, including His virgin birth. Most Bible students recognize the prophecy contained in Isaiah chapter seven to be critical to a true understanding of the redemptive work of the Lord Jesus Christ. The KJB states that a virgin shall conceive, establishing that a supernatural act would take place and result in the conception of the Son of God in human form.

(KJB) Isaiah 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

The removal of virgin from Isaiah chapter seven in the RSV directly attacks the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ. The fact that Mary was a virgin made the conception and birth of Christ a supernatural act, also eliminating the sinful blood of Adam’s race from His veins.

(RSV) Isaiah 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, a young woman shall conceive and bear a son and shall call his name Immanuel.

Satan knows that if the doctrine of the virgin birth is eliminated, likewise the efficacy of the blood shed on Calvary’s cross is destroyed. The Bible says that God shed His own blood (Acts 20:28), not the blood of a mere sinful man of Adam’s race. Sometimes a new translation goes too far in its attack of the truth. This passage from the RSV is just such a case. Immediately upon discovery of this attack in the early 1950’s, an uproar against the RSV commenced. The blatant infidelity of the RSV eventually brought about its own demise.

Although the attack from Isaiah chapter seven was well-publicized, another less obvious attack by the RSV on the virgin birth went unnoticed.

(KJB) Luke 1:34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?

When a woman says, I know not a man; she is a virgin. But what about a person with no husband — does this mean by default that she is always a virgin?

(RSV) Luke 1:34 And Mary said to the angel, "How shall this be, since I have no husband?"

Obviously, these two verses do not say the same thing. One proves the virgin birth (KJB) and the other leaves room for doubt (RSV). A woman that states that she does not have a husband proves nothing concerning her virginity. There are many more examples from the RSV that attack the virgin birth, but these two should suffice. Therefore, we will look at the most popular modern version — the New International Version (NIV).

Because the Lord Jesus Christ is the virgin born Son of God, the Bible carefully points out that Joseph is not His father. Only the King James Bible remains true to God’s defined plan. It clearly distinguishes between Joseph and the mother of the Lord, preserving a distinction of paternity. Mary is called His mother, but Joseph is not called His father.

(KJB) Luke 2:43 And when they had fulfilled the days, as they returned, the child Jesus tarried behind in Jerusalem; and Joseph and his mother knew not of it.

The peculiar wording of Joseph and his mother is sure to stand out as rather odd-sounding to the reader. God wants His word to be especially unique — uniquely God-like! The NIV removes this distinction and changes its impact by replacing the distinctive wording with the vague "his parents."

(NIV) Luke 2:43 After the Feast was over, while his parents were returning home, the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem, but they were unaware of it.

It is not necessarily incorrect to say that Joseph and Mary were the parents of the Lord (Luke 2:41). However, it is wrong when God desires to point out that Joseph’s relationship to the Lord differs from Mary’s relationship to Him.

(KJB) Luke 2:33 And Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him.

Satan is never satisfied with an indirect attack on truth. He must go for the kill. However, when he does so, it is much easier to identify his handiwork. No matter how one feels about the preceding verse from the NIV, the attack grows even stronger and more direct as we continue the comparison. The next verse directly attacks the Lord’s deity by destroying the doctrine of the virgin birth. See for yourself:

(NIV) Luke 2:33 The child’s father and mother marveled at what was said about him.

Joseph was not the father of the virgin born Son of God! However, he was the father of all of Mary’s other children (Matthew 13:55). The King James Bible only refers to Joseph as the father of the Lord one time. This happens as Mary rebukes her son for staying behind in the temple conversing with the religious leaders. Mary says, "Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing." How does her Son (THE Son of God) respond?

The Lord Jesus Christ corrects her. Her words were misguided and the Lord corrects her as follows: "How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father’s business?" (Luke 2:48-49).

God the Son corrected His earthly mother when she inaccurately stated that Joseph was His father. God never leaves truths like these open to mere chance. He settles the matter and holds each person responsible for how he handles these precious truths. Any bible that addresses Joseph as the father of the Lord Jesus Christ (uncontested) is a deceptive counterfeit (II Corinthians 2:17). The Lord thought the distinction important enough to correct His own mother. One can imagine what will happen to these bible revisers when they stand before Him in the day of judgment.

Jesus — the Creator

The Jehovah’s Witnesses do not believe that Jesus is God. Therefore, their own version of the bible, called the New World Translation (NWT) serves their purposes. It is usually a green book and claims to be rendered from the original languages by the New World Bible Translation Committee with a revision date of "1961 C.E."

Even the use of C.E. in the copyright date is a blatant attack on the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ. Use of the C.E. implies a failure to recognize A.D. — Ano Domini (translated "in the year of our Lord"). "C.E." stands for Common Era, representing nothing, but certainly denying the Lord.

An important point to consider is that the Christ-rejecting NWT originated from the same set of manuscripts as the other modern translations on the market. Granted, the NWT goes farther than any of the others, but the association still exists.

(KJB) John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

The most recently developed versions do too, but much more subtly (Genesis 3:1), making the newer versions even more dangerous. Hundreds of additional verses from the NWT could be used to further illustrate this heresy, but why waste the space and time? "Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them" (Matthew 7:20).

Keep in mind that the majority of the verses compared with the NIV in this book could also be compared with the NWT. The results would be profound. Usually when the modern versions (such as the NIV, NASV, Living Bible, etc.) differ from the KJB, they align themselves more closely with the Christ-rejecting bible of the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Get a copy of the NWT, and compare the changes yourself. The NIV and NWT align in concert against the KJB (Amos 3:3).

The following example reveals the NIV’s association with the NWT. The NIV attacks Jesus as the Creator, too. The Bible says the Father did not create anything by Himself. The Father created all things by the Son. Yet, in Genesis chapter one, the Bible says "And God said." Consequently, Jesus must be the person of the Godhead that spoke everything into existence in the beginning. Ephesians provides another great proof text for the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ.

(KJB) Ephesians 3:9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:

Once again, the modern versions alter a passage in the KJB so that it no longer proves the Lord Jesus Christ to be the Creator. This attack is reminiscent of the assault found in the great granddaddy version, the ASV (like father, like son). The Bible foretells the result of the blind leading the blind — they both fall (Matthew 15:14).

(NIV) Ephesians 3:9 and to make plain to everyone the administration of this mystery, which for ages past was kept hidden in God, who created all things.

According to the NIV, the Lord Jesus Christ is not the Creator. Something that destroys such an important doctrine and aligns itself with the most perverted version ever written needs further examination.

Jesus — Manifest in the Flesh

One book stands alone in claiming "without controversy" that GOD was manifest in the flesh. When something is without controversy it is not controversial and it is indisputable . . . at least when you read it in the King James Bible. God became a man; therefore, He was manifest in the flesh. Jesus claimed to be that man and the Bible says that He is. That makes Jesus God. This is the end of controversy when one reads the clear testimony of the King James Bible.

(KJB) I Timothy 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

Believing the King James Bible, there can be no doubt Who was manifest in the flesh. It was God. However, the New International Version attacks the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ in very subtle ways. The indisputable truth proclaimed by the KJB cannot be found in the same passage of the New International Version. The Bible plainly states it was God that was manifest. The NIV no longer makes this truth evident, but replaces "God" with "He."

(NIV) I Timothy 3:16 Beyond all question, the mystery of godliness is great: He appeared in a body, was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory.

The NIV says absolutely nothing. To say that "He appeared in a body…" means nothing. Everyone has appeared in a body. When the KJB states that "God was manifest in the flesh…" a critical statement is made and a crucial truth is conveyed. The NIV is not even grammatically correct. He is a pronoun that refers to a noun or antecedent. There is no antecedent in the context. Therefore, this verse cannot be used as a proof text for the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ and does not even conform to common grammatical rules. As the ancient landmarks are removed (Proverbs 22:28), is it any wonder the world stands confused?

Jesus — from Everlasting

Now we come to a particularly overt attack on the Lord’s deity. The Old Testament book of Micah prophesies of the coming Messiah from Bethlehem (Matthew 2:1). The verse plainly says that the ruler in Israel one day is to be the Lord who is "from everlasting."

(KJB) Micah 5:2 But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.

Undeniably, the one from everlasting has no beginning, otherwise He could not be from everlasting. The Lord Jesus Christ is from everlasting, and therefore no beginning can be attributed to Him. The blasphemous NIV instead asserts that Jesus had an origin. Thus, the NIV creates doubt about the Lord’s eternal pre-existence (before taking upon Himself human flesh). That is blasphemous! The Jesus I serve is God and has no beginning; He has no origin.

(NIV) Micah 5:2 "But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times."

The NIV claims that the Lord Jesus Christ had a starting point. If He has an origin (or a beginning), He is not God! One should not fail to grasp this truth. God has no beginning. If Jesus has origins then He is a god, just as the Jehovah’s Witnesses claim! God the Son was present in Genesis 1:1, "In the beginning…" This same heresy was also very evident in the Revised Standard Version of 1952 which includes the same falsehood in the book of Hebrews: "For he who sanctifies and those who are sanctified have all one origin. That is why he is not ashamed to call them brethren." (Hebrews 2:11). The Lord has no origin, regardless of how many of the modern perversions agree together against the testimony of God’s one book.

If the motive of the new versions is simply to update the language, then why do they pervert the truth and in fact destroy it? The Lord Jesus Christ has no beginning and will have no end! Otherwise, He would not be God and the Saviour of the world.

The Bible refers to the Lord Jesus Christ as the only begotten Son (John 1:18, 3:16, 3:18) thus emphasizing the distinction between Him, the begotten Son, and believers who are adopted sons (Ephesians 1:5). The New American Standard Version, following the lead of the corrupt Vaticanus and Sinaiticus Greek manuscripts, have God the Father creating (begetting) another lesser god in John 1:18. However, Acts chapter 13 in the King James Bible clearly refers to the begotten Son.

(KJB) Acts 13:33 God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.

When the Father said this to the Son, it was not at His birth. It was at His resurrection. He became the "…first begotten of the dead…" (Revelation 1:5). God did not become the Lord’s Father when He was born of Mary or at His resurrection. He is from everlasting, with no beginning. The Son always was… but not so in the NIV.

(NIV) Acts 13:33 he has fulfilled for us, their children, by raising up Jesus. As it is written in the second Psalm: "`You are my Son; today I have become your Father.’

The Lord Jesus Christ did not become the Son of God at any time during His earthly life or ministry (Psalm 2:12). The Lord Jesus Christ (God the Son) can be found throughout the Old Testament. Numerous appearances are revealed prior to His being born of Mary. A great passage in proof of this truth is located in the book of Daniel when Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego are thrown into the fiery furnace. Notice who else shows up — the eternal Son of God.

(KJB) Daniel 3:25 He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.

They recognized the fourth figure in the furnace for who He was and who He is. For the Son of God to show up in the fiery furnace, He must have existed prior to His becoming a man in Matthew chapter one. Can this be proven using an NIV?

(NIV) Daniel 3:25 He said, "Look! I see four men walking around in the fire, unbound and unharmed, and the fourth looks like a son of the gods."

The NIV fails to reveal who the fourth person in the furnace is. He is the Son of God. The NIV aligns itself with the Christ-rejecting Jehovah’s Witness bible by refusing to identify the Lord Jesus Christ. Considering that the sons of God can have a negative connotation as reflected in Genesis 6:2 and Job 1:6, further compounds the error. The Apostle Paul tells us of the second Adam, showing that He is "the Lord" from heaven (present tense).

(KJB) I Corinthians 15:47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.

The second man refers to the Lord Jesus Christ. He had no beginnings, no origin. He is "the Lord" from heaven. This is another proof of His deity (at least in a King James Bible).

(NIV) I Corinthians 15:47 The first man was of the dust of the earth, the second man from heaven.

No longer is He the Lord from heaven. No longer can one use these very clear testimonies of the Lord’s deity in the perverted New International Version. They don’t say the same thing.

Jesus — Without Sin

The NIV stoops so low as to attack the sinlessness of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Most Bible students are aware that the Lord became angry when he saw the hypocrisy of His fellow Jewish brethren. The Lord’s anger is illustrated in the following passage where the hypocritical Pharisees are watching to see if He will heal on the Sabbath day.

(KJB) Mark 3:5 And when he had looked round about on them with anger, being grieved for the hardness of their hearts, he saith unto the man, Stretch forth thine hand. And he stretched it out: and his hand was restored whole as the other.

In this case the New International Version agrees with the King James Bible. Both verify that the Lord got angry.

(NIV) Mark 3:5 He looked around at them in anger and, deeply distressed at their stubborn hearts, said to the man, "Stretch out your hand." He stretched it out, and his hand was completely restored.

Although a man’s anger is frequently sinful, it would be blasphemous to claim that the Lord sinned when he became angry. The King James Bible protects the sinlessness of our Lord by explaining that one can be angry with His brethren without sinning as long as there is a cause (or reason) for this anger. Anger, however, cannot be justified without a cause or reason.

(KJB) Matthew 5:22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

No true child of God would ever claim that the anger of the Lord was unjustified. He certainly had cause. However, the NIV removes that important phrase ("without a cause") and makes a blanket condemnation of anyone who becomes angry for any reason. According to the NIV, anyone that becomes angry with his brother is a sinner, including our Lord.

(NIV) Matthew 5:22 But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, ‘Raca,’ is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.

This verse in the NIV makes the Lord Jesus Christ a sinner. It says "anyone who is angry!" The Lord Himself got angry! Verses such as these infuriate true Bible believers. Was there not a cause (I Samuel 17:29)? David knew there was a cause when Goliath was reproaching Israel and His God. Bible believers know there is a cause when man attacks God’s word and work. Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath: (Ephesians 4:26).

God — Laid Down His Life

First John contains another passage that undeniably proves the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ. In this text, the pronoun "he" refers to the antecedent "God."

(KJB) I John 3:16 Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.

Since the KJB indisputably proves the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ, one can well imagine Satan’s opposition. Read the NIV and sense the hostility against the truth. Unlike the KJB, this verse in the modern versions cannot be used to prove the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ.

(NIV) I John 3:16 This is how we know what love is: Jesus Christ laid down his life for us. And we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers.

Yes, Jesus Christ laid down His life, but the purpose of the passage is lost in the modern versions. We are to see that it was God that died for our sins in the form of human flesh.

Jesus — The Morning Star

Now that the modern versions’ attack on the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ has been clearly identified, we turn our attention toward the source of this attack. Satan is identified as Lucifer only one time in the word of God. Before we look at the passage in the book of Isaiah, which identifies Lucifer, reveals his past, and foretells his future, we must first establish who Lucifer is not. For this reason, we must take note of the identity of the morning star.

(KJB) Revelation 22:16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

The Bible and the modern versions both state that Jesus is the bright and morning star. Now, having established the identity of the morning star, our attention is directed to Isaiah chapter fourteen — the only place in the Bible that mentions Lucifer by name. He is the son of the morning that was created perfect until pride destroyed him. Notice the five times that he uses the personal pronoun "I."

(KJB) Isaiah 14:12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! 13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: 14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High. 15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.

Satan, Lucifer, the Devil, that crooked serpent — all the same. Praise God, one day Lucifer will be brought down to hell. The KJB proclaims this truth in this singular biography and identification of Lucifer. However, this is not the case in the blasphemous NIV. Instead of being brought low, the NIV allows Lucifer to become the imposter he desires so much to be (II Thessalonians 2:4).

Instead of revealing Satan to be the archenemy of God and man, the finger is pointed in the Saviour’s direction as though He is the imposter. Remember who the book of the Revelation identified as the morning star…now, look at the One to whom the NIV blasphemously points its finger — Jesus Christ!

(NIV) Isaiah 14:12 How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations! 13 You said in your heart, "I will ascend to heaven; I will raise my throne above the stars of God; I will sit enthroned on the mount of assembly, on the utmost heights of the sacred mountain. 14 I will ascend above the tops of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High." 15 But you are brought down to the grave, to the depths of the pit.

The NIV fails to reveal Lucifer, but instead attributes the history and future of Lucifer to the morning star. According to Revelation 22:16, the morning star is the Lord Jesus Christ — not Lucifer! Thus, the NIV indicates that the Lord, rather than Satan, was actually the One that fell. This passage in the KJB is the only place Lucifer shows up by name. He remains hidden in the NIV.

Displacing the Lord has always been the goal of Satan. All of this has been done in preparation for the day when the antichrist will outwardly claim that he is God. The Bible foretells this future event: "so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God" (II Thessalonians 2:4). The NIV makes that deception all the more possible. The antichrist will claim that the Lord Jesus Christ was the false Messiah and that he is the true one. Can you imagine how much easier the deception will be when he picks up one of these modern versions to "prove" his point?

In his book which attacks the King James Bible, the author James White answers these legitimate concerns with the following response. "The person under discussion in Isaiah 14 is obviously not the Lord Jesus Christ, and how anyone could confuse the person who is obviously under the wrath of God in that passage (note verse 15) with the Lord Jesus is hard to imagine." My concerns for misunderstanding are not self-motivated. I know to whom the passage refers because my King James Bible tells me it is Lucifer.

However, the lost person of the future may only have exposure to the modern versions. The Bible says Satan will come "with all deceivableness of unrighteousness…" (II Thessalonians 2:10). This passage may be one of the key tools used by him to deceive many people (Mark 13:5-6). The Bible says many will come in the name of Christ (imposters) (Luke 21:8), claiming that He never came in the flesh (II John 7). We can expect that they will point to the Lord Jesus Christ (the Morning Star) as the true deceiver (Matthew 27:63). The Bible foretells that deception will increase dramatically in the last days (II Timothy 3:13). For someone, such as Mr. White, to defend these changes while understanding their implications is complete biblical infidelity!

For instance, consider the implications during the Tribulation of the NIV’s saying that Christians are marked. (See Ephesians 1:13 discussion in chapter four.) The NIV Christians are marked. The future consequences of such an error are more bleak than can be conveyed within the pages of this book (Revelation 13:16). After the rapture, when the modern versions finally displace the King James Bible, will those left behind be convinced by these modern perversions that "God’s people" truly do take the mark…then why should they resist it? The battle for the Bible pits the Bible believer against the "father of lies" (John 8:44). Whose side do you find yourself on?

Jesus — in the Old Testament

Many of the changes revealed so far have shown a direct attack on the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ. One book stands alone in painting clear pictures of Christ’s deity in the Old Testament. One of the author’s favorite Old Testament pictures of our Saviour occurs in the story of Abraham and Isaac. When Isaac asks about the lamb sacrifice, Abraham reveals the future sacrifice of the Lamb of God. The Bible does not simply say God will provide a lamb. It implies that He will provide Himself !

(KJB) Genesis 22:8 And Abraham said, My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering: so they went both of them together.

The Bible says that God will provide himself a lamb. Recall that a ram was caught in the thicket (Genesis 22:13). God provided a ram at that time. This seemingly insignificant detail actually adds further significance to Abraham’s comment concerning the future coming of a Lamb (John 1:29). This poignant picture, along with many others, is destroyed by the modern versions.

(NIV) Genesis 22:8 Abraham answered, "God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering, my son." And the two of them went on together.

Yes, God will provide a lamb, but the greater truth is revealed when one realizes that Abraham was prophesying of the day when the Lord would provide Himself as the sacrifice for our sins! What picture does your version convey?

Jesus — the Judge

The Lord Jesus Christ is not only the Creator of the universe, but will also be the Judge of the same. However, only God can judge on the last day. Thus, the following passage further proves the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ. Christians will stand at His judgment seat.

(KJB) Romans 14:10 But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.

All Christians will stand before the judgment seat of Christ. Each of us will have his work judged to determine whether or not he will receive an eternal reward. Clearly, the One who died for us — the Lord Jesus Christ — will be our Judge. Not so clear in the NIV, which fails to refer to this as the judgment seat of Christ.

(NIV) Romans 14:10 You, then, why do you judge your brother? Or why do you look down on your brother? For we will all stand before God’s judgment seat.

Not only is the deity diminished, but the NIV contradicts the truth. God the Father has assigned all judgment to the Son. The NIV passage contradicts this truth as presented in the NIV and the KJB in John 5:22. "For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son."

Jesus — Omnipresent

When the Lord Jesus Christ was talking to Nicodemus, He gave proof of His deity and oneness with the Father. According to this verse, while the Lord was physically on earth, He was in heaven as well. We may not fully understand these truths because of our finite abilities of comprehension, but the truth remains. Jesus was in heaven while He was walking on the earth.

(KJB) John 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.

The evidence continues to mount. Verse after verse shows the attack on the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ. The truth is easy to see when one compares the modern versions to the standard (Jeremiah 50:2). Unfortunately, there is no opportunity for comparison when a person uses only one of these modern versions. The problems can only be recognized when a comparison is made. Only a person that has read and memorized the King James Bible can recognize the existence or magnitude of these changes.

(NIV) John 3:13 No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven-the Son of Man.

In the NIV, this verse no longer reveals that the Lord was in more than one place at a time. He is one with the Father. The Lord Jesus Christ was walking on this earth at the same time that He was in heaven. His hearers must have thought Him crazy or heretical…I think Him to be God. The Jews understood the meaning. Look at their reaction when the Lord Jesus Christ proclaimed: I and my Father are one. 31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him. (John 10:30-31).

Jesus — the Resurrection

Next, we consider the attack on the resurrection of the Lord. The Lord told His hearers that, shortly, they would no longer see Him because He was going to the Father. Upon their death, the souls of all Old Testament saints were sent to the heart of the earth in paradise. But the eternal, sinless Son of God was resurrected FROM the dead (Mark 9:9-10) and went to the Father.

(KJB) John 16:16 A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a little while, and ye shall see me, because I go to the Father.

Satan hates the resurrection with a passion. When he finds an opportune time to destroy it, he opens his penknife (Jeremiah 36:23). No mention of the resurrection is made in the following verse from the NIV. The NIV sounds more like a magician’s disappearing act.

(NIV) John 16:16 "In a little while you will see me no more, and then after a little while you will see me."

The resurrection has been attacked and has disappeared from the verse! Jesus foretold His death many times (John 12:33). The KJB points out that He would be going to the Father (who is in heaven). This statement foretells of His resurrection and the fact that His body would not remain in the grave, nor would His soul remain in the heart of the earth.

Jesus — Equal with God

As we have seen, the King James Bible clearly declares the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ time and again. If Christ was not in fact God manifest in the flesh as He claimed to be, He was the great deceiver. If His claims to be equal with God were false, everything He said could be questioned. However, He was and is God and did not think it robbery of God’s glory to claim it for Himself.

(KJB) Philippians 2:6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

The NIV again subtly denies the deity of our Lord and Saviour by stating that equality with God was not something to be grasped. Grasped by whom? By man or Jesus Himself?

(NIV) Philippians 2:6 Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,

All of these truths about the Lord Jesus Christ must eventually disappear in order for Satan to complete his deception (II Thessalonians 2:4). Some would have us believe we should simply accept these verses and fallacies, since the truth can be found elsewhere in most of the modern versions. Not so! We must recognize these warning signs as satanic attacks on something that is holy and pure.

The modern versions apparently have a motive other than simply revising the language of the Bible. From the preceding examples, it is clear that they instead shape and support an agenda to dethrone Jesus Christ as "My Lord and my God!" (John 20:28).

The modern versions come and go, but the King James Bible cannot be dethroned. A typical justification for the existence of the modern versions is their supposed readability. The underlying premise is that our understanding of the modern languages evolved into something superior to that in 1611 and we have older and better manuscripts now. These false presumptions are dealt with in later chapters, but why do we have so many different versions? The preface to the New American Standard (a version that has fallen upon hard times too) gives great insight as to why so many have been produced. None of them can stand the test of time.

The ASV was heralded as a replacement for the KJB when it was published in 1901. Twenty-three years later it went broke and sold its copyright to the National Council of Churches. According to the preface of the New American Standard, the Lockman Foundation realized that the ASV had fallen into disuse. Quoting from the preface of the NASV:

The producers of this translation were imbued with the conviction that interest in the American Standard Version should be renewed and increased. Perhaps the most weighty impetus for this undertaking can be attributed to a disturbing awareness that the ASV of 1901 was fast disappearing from the scene.

A modern version bible publisher had a conviction ($) that interest in their copyrighted text ($) should be renewed and increased. They were disturbed that their version was disappearing from the scene (i.e. the lucrative bible market $). Of course, their motive had nothing to do with money (I Timothy 6:10).

Here is the typical position of the modern day Bible critic as expressed in a book published in 1999. The first paragraph refers to a quote from a century earlier before the Bible version debate had heated up. The next two paragraphs update their position and reveal the infidelity involved in preaching from a book one does not believe.

Do not needlessly amend our Authorized Version. It is faulty in many places, but still it is a grand work taking it for all in all, and it is unwise to be making every old lady distrust the only Bible she can get at, or what is more likely mistrust you for falling out with her cherished treasure. Correct where correction must be for truth’s sake, but never for the vainglorious display of your critical ability. 5

…not one word of God’s Word has been lost to us. And in the cases where we may not be sure which variant most accurately repeats the original wording, not one doctrine is affected. Not one truth is compromised. 6

But the fact is, most of us trying to preach Christ are doing so out of the King James Version. We love and honor it…7

What is the point? Twofold: even some great preachers from a century earlier did not understand the issue, and it is easy to justify preaching from a book that you do not believe if your audience does not know what you truly believe. The modern critic teaches that there is no significant difference between the underlying Greek texts, no significant differences between the resultant bible versions, and I suppose no issue to discuss. The fact that they are using a Bible that they do not believe matters not to them.

The next chapter addresses one of the most insidious books written on this subject. It unapologetically attacks the KJB, though the author claims to be unbiased in his presentation. He concludes that the modern versions are superior to the KJB specifically relating to the subject at hand — the deity of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Chapter 2 Endnotes

1. David Otis Fuller, Which Bible?, (Grand Rapids, MI: Grand Rapids International Publications, 1975), p. 97. 

2. American Standard Version, (NY: Thomas Nelson and Sons, American Bible Society, 1901, 1929), p. 114.

3. White, The King James Only Controversy, op. cit., p. 139.

4. New American Standard Version, (Glendale: Gospel Light Publications, 1971), p. iv, v.

5. James B. Williams, ed., From the Mind of God to the Mind of Man, (Greenville, SC: Ambassador-Emerald International, 1999), p. 93.

6. Ibid., p. 96.

7. Ibid., p. 98.

Back to