King James BIBLE (KJB) Deception

Many people write to me in defense of the King James Bible (KJB). At first I thought it was just an anomaly, maybe a misunderstanding or a typo. Over time, however, I began to realize that there is a sub-culture of KJV onlyism that believes that the KJV is literally THE original BIBLE. They refuse to acknowledge that the KJV is just a VERSION and label it as THE BIBLE – (King James Bible as opposed to the King James Version). Although the strict churches I grew up in were KJV only they at least recognized the KJV as a VERSION and didn’t go so far as to label it as THE BIBLE. Here’s an example of the types of emails I receive:

Philip writes:

I am a Independent Fundamental Baptist, that believes the KJB to be the Word of God and am glad to be counted as one of them. No, I have not been deceived by the teaching of the KJB only. It is without question, the Word of God. 1. Inspiration 2. Preservation 3. Observation When man begins to change the Bible, then the Bible ceases to change man. Instead of men lining up with scripture, they change it, to suite their lifestyle. If God is a God of the impossible, and He is, do you not think He is able to give us a perfect Bible? If its not perfect, how do we know which part is wrong? You could be in trouble regarding eternity, if its wrong in that area. Thank God for the Word of God, the KJB. Amen

Notice two very important things in this message: 1. Philip writes as if the KJB is a real thing. He doesn’t even try to convince me that the KJV is really the KJB he just assumes that it’s the KJB. 2. He writes as if the KJB is THE BIBLE, unaltered, original and perfectly preserved. This blows my mind. I just don’t get it.

There’s no such thing as the KJB – it doesn’t exist. There’s the KJV (King James VERSION), but no KJB. The KJV is a version of the Bible just like all the other versions. Last I checked, my NIV and my KJV both said exactly the same thing regarding eternal salvation. On a similar note, none of my Bibles (KJV included) mention anything about relying only on the KJV for salvation. Nor do they even hint to the idea that the KJV is the perfect, preserved word of God or that God promised to preserve his word via the KJV. I can’t find anything in the Bible that tells us that the KJV is God’s perfect preservation of His Word.

Even if that were the only issue we can deduce the absurdity of believing in the KJB (a perfectly preserved and inerrant scriptures), but it’s not. As I’ve written in other similar articles, The fundamental flaw in this KJB logic is the faulty interpretation of what “God’s Word” means.

It’s important to make the distinction about what is meant by God’s “words”. This essentially has two meanings. In today’s Christian circles, “God’s Word” is typically taken to mean what we know of as the Bible or the “Word of God”. But God’s words can also mean his promises. These KJB promoters are making the argument that God’s words represent the Word of God (i.e., the Bible, scriptures) only and doesn’t have any other context. Unfortunately they are severely mistaken.

As such, this is a good example of where the KJV is wrong. When the Bible talks about God’s word (Psalm 12:6-7; Matthew 24:35) it is talking about literally God’s word or God’s promises, NOT the Bible as we know of it today. It’s similar to our phrase “you have my word on that”. It means God’s promises NOT the “Word of God” or the Bible. The bible wasn’t assembled, as it is for Christians today, during the times that those verses were written. We currently refer to the Bible as the “Word of God”, but when those verses were written that phraseology wasn’t used so to interpret “God’s words” as the Bible or the Word of God is incorrect translation (especially the KJV) – (by the way the NLT among others properly translate those verses as “God’s promises”). So we can see just from this that God never promised to give us modern NT Christians a perfectly preserved Bible. He’s just telling is that he keeps his word (promises).

But lets say for argument’s sake that God did promised to preserve the “Word of God” (the Bible). If he promised to preserve his Word he never told us how he would accomplish that promise. One thing is for sure, he did not promise to preserve his words by using only the KJV(B) (if this is in the Bible somewhere I have yet to see it). To think that the KJV is the preserved Word of God simply because God promised to preserve his Word is nothing more than mere speculation and hearsay.

Psalm 12:6-7 is about God keeping his promises, it has nothing to do with the preservation of the Bible. Matthew 24:35 says that God’s words will never pass away not that God will preserve his word through the use of the KJV. KJBers take those verses and twist them so that they fit their agenda. The use of those verses to support their argument is manipulative at best and heretical at worst.

I will offer a challenge to anyone who want’s to accept it. If you can prove by using the Bible that God promised to preserve either the “Word of God”/the Bible or even God’s words/promises, by way of the KJV I will take this site offline and put up a site promoting KJV onlyism in it’s place.


  1. The Interlinear Bible was written in both Hebrew Masoretic Text and Greek Textus Receptus and translated to English right there on the same page. These are the same manuscripts that were used to translate the KJB. Futhmnore there is many know versions of the Torah translated to English used in Synagogues in predominately English speaking countries around the world. To say one or the other is the best is opening your mind to Satan. The Lord himself makes certain only the truth is told.

  2. Revelation 22:18 KJV. Good luck, brother.

    1. Considering that this verse is speaking only of the “scroll” of Revelation, and not the entire bible, this proves nothing.

  3. My readings of bible history show that other bibles were used to create the KJV bible during the Protestant Reformation. Many Reformed Christians consider the KJV bible a Reformation Bible so I am surprised that Baptists would cling strongly to the KJV bible when most of the KJV translators were Calvinists and of course Protestants.

Comments are closed.