Episode 69

Any conversation about the trustworthiness of the Bible will inevitably include questions regarding authorship, errors, preservation, and the plethora of Bible versions available. These are important questions, especially since the Bible makes exclusive and very heavy claims that are of consequence to all people. So how can we know if the Bible can be trusted? Do we even have it in its entirety? What about all of the allegations of errors, omissions, and additions? In this episode of the Removing Barriers podcast, we have a conversation with Pastor Todd about this most influential Book, and how we can know whether it is trustworthy.

No book from man can bring about that same type of spiritual conviction.

Thank you for tuning in to the Removing Barriers Podcast. I’m Jay and i’m Mcg, and we’re attempting to Remove Barriers so we can all have a clear view of the club us.

This is episode 69 of the Removing Barriers Podcast, and in this episode we will be discussing the KJV and the Canon of Scripture. This is a heavy topic, and joining us is our guest from episode 34, pastor Todd. Welcome back and thank you for joining us once again on the Removing Barriers Podcast. Thank you so very much. It is a delight and pleasure to be with you. Great. Well, let’s dive right into it.

Pastor, tell me, what do we mean when we say the Canon of Scripture? And how was the Scripture canonized? When we talk about the Canon of Scripture, we refer to the completion of the Word of God and meaning. We have all of the books that God inspired within one book called the Bible. So we have broken up that book called the Bible into 66 different books, 39 in the Old Testament, 27 in the New Testament. And we call that the completed work of God. So for hundreds and hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of years, they had the five original books of the Pentateuque. Then you moved into the completed finished version of the Old Testament that’s given to us in Hebrew between the final book of the Old Testament, the Book of Malachi, and the first book of the New Testament, the Book of Matthew, which is not chronologically, the first, but it’s the first in the order there of the New Testament. There’s 400 years of silence. And so in that 400 years, the Old Testament is then available for people to read and to know. And so by the time of the Lord Jesus Christ and the time of John the Baptist, they had the Old Testament available to them. And the Lord refers to the Old Testament in a number of different settings. And then you have the four Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. We go then into the Acts or the activities of the first Church in the Book of Acts. And then you go into what we call the Epistles. And they are the books that are written by different Apostles and individuals that knew the Apostles and so forth. And we find the 27 books of the New Testament and the 27 books of the New Testament were finished in Greek. And we have the completion of the 66 books or the totality of the one book called the Bible is what we mean by the completed Canon of Scripture.

Pastor, when I was in College, my professor when covering the history of the Bible, mentioned that, oh, you know, the Bible is just a book that a whole bunch of guys got together at the Council of Nicea and decided, Well, this is what we’re going to believe. And this is what we think the Bible is. And that’s why we have the Bible today. Is that how Scripture was canonized? Well, I would declare myself to be somewhat of an authority, but not a great PhD authority on the matter, but from my understanding of the things that I’ve read from people that have studied this much deeper than I have, the authority of the Word of God is contained in several different passages of Scripture. Second Timothy, chapter three, verses 16 and 17. Two Peter, chapter one, the Bible declares that Holy men of God Spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. And so we can definitely see that God used certain individuals to record His word. But he used the unique writing ability of each of the individuals that were penning His word. And then we find that as the Epistles were spread from one Church to another, there were a number of copies that were made so that more and more people could read the Word of God. And that’s what brings us from the difference of inspiration to preservation. So God inspired his original word. He literally breathed His word through Holy men. And that’s the combination of Second Timothy three and Second Peter, chapter one, he breathed his word. He inspired his word in the original autographs of the original Canon. And then he preserved his word. And so we find that there are thousands of copies that reinforce what we read in our English Bible. And we know, for example, the Book of Colossians is written to the believers there in Colossey. And no doubt the believers in Rome wanted to see what Paul said to Colossi or the believers in Philippi wanted to know what God was saying to the Church and Ephesus. And so we find them making very careful copies of each of the books. And as they copied each book, then it was passed so that other churches could read it. And in fact, in one of the Epistles from the Apostle Paul, he desired that the Church would read the letter that he sent to them. But then he said, when you’re done with this letter, send it to this next place, and then make sure you get the letter from them that I had sent to them. So the Apostle Paul recognized that he was writing things under the inspiration of God. And the Bible is not only inspired, but it’s also been preserved for us with the manuscripts and the number of manuscripts that we have available to us.

So pastor dive a little bit deeper. So how do we know the penitude from Genesis to Deuteronomy and the major profit minor prophets? How do we know that they’re actually Scripture Jesus quote from some of these books dive a little bit deeper into that? Well, I think that’s where you begin is what did the Lord Jesus himself say? So if you’ll bear with me for just a moment as we walk through this. The Bible says in John chapter One that Jesus Christ is the living word. The Bible says in John chapter one in verse number 14, and the word was made flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, the glorious of the only begotten of the Father, full of Grace and truth. And so Jesus Christ was the living Word, and he at different times gives examples. For example, in Matthew chapter 19, he reinforces what Moses wrote in the Pantuke and in the Book of Genesis concerning the nature of husbands and wives and God bringing one man for one woman for one lifetime. And Jesus quotes from the Pentagonube in that story about marriage. And so he’s quoting directly from Moses. In another location, the Lord refers to the story of Jonah, and so he refers to the nature of the minor prophets, and he validates what is written in the book of Jonah. In another passage on the issue of the Sabbath, the Lord reinforces what is written in one Samuel when David is on the run from Saul and he goes into the priest, himalec, I think, was the name there in one Samuel, chapter 21. And himalayk says, All I have is the showbred, and then the sword of Goliath and the Pharisees brought that matter up. And the Lord Jesus Christ uses that as an example for those that were worshipping the stuff more than the Savior. And it’s very significant that on different occasions throughout the Bible, Jesus Christ and or the Epistles like the Apostle Paul continued to quote from what we find in the Old Testament. Peter quoted from the Old Testament, Steven the first martyr quoted from the Old Testament. The Apostle Paul quoted from the Old Testament, and they give validation to what was written. They give validation to the acceptance of the authors and to the acceptance of the fact that that is in fact the Scriptures. And so even take the Lord Jesus Christ talking about Moses and the bill of Divorcement and referencing the fact that it was for the hardness of the heart of Israel that God gave the bill of Divorcement. And the Lord specifically refers to Moses, and all of that is laid out there in those first five chapters. And so we see the New Testament authors validating the Old Testament authors, if you would.

Yeah. So pathway. It seems like we overlook in something here. What about the Apocrypha? Should genuine Christians acknowledge it as Scripture? I don’t want to speak as an authority on the Apocrypha because I’m not that knowledgeable in that arena. But I can say that the early Christians in the New Testament Church through time understood the books that were inspired and the ones that were not inspired. And so for example, in Colossians, chapter four, in verse number 16, the Bible says that there was an epistle that Paul sent to Colossi and he said cause that epistle would be read in the Church at Laodicea. And then he says for the people in Colossey to read the epistle that was sent to layout of SIA. Well, we do not have an epistle written to the layout of Siens in the final Canon of Scripture, but apparently there were other letters that the Apostle Paul did write. And so we want to make sure that we look at the evidence that has been handed down through the generations and what the early believers accepted as the completed Canon of scripture. One thing to lay out for you in this study is the fact that in the Greek, the Coina Creek that was utilized in the New Testament, there’s over 5250 different manuscripts that back up our version of the New Testament. It’s really the foundation or the family of manuscripts that reinforces the Texas receptors. And so as they receive these copies and copies and copies and copies, they reinforce a family of manuscripts from which we get our King Jane version. And so with that family of manuscripts, we take better understanding of what the early Church believed to be the actual inspired word of God. And I know that at different times people have come out and said that there was an epistle from Judas to Scario. There was an epistle from this one, not an epistle from this one. And it is true from the scriptures that the Apostle Paul himself said that he wrote more than what was in the word of God. But we accept the thousands of documents that reinforce what we find in our New Testament. And we go back all the way to the early Christians because they would have been the ones that would have verified that this is authoritative and inspired.

And this one is not you mentioned the text is receptive faster, and I imagine that some people may be wondering, okay, what do you mean by Texas receptors as opposed to is there a different body of manuscripts that we should be looking out for in translations Besides the Texas receptive? So there’s basically two different Greek New Testaments that are their primary uses. There’s a Greek New Testament which is often referred to as from West Cotton and Hoard. It’s also called Nestles text. And then there’s the manuscript that we call the Texas Receptors, or the Greek New Testament called the Texas Receptors. And what you have is on the one side, you have a few copies of a New Testament that are very old. And then on the other side, you have thousands of manuscripts that are not as old, but they’ve been copied over and over and over again. So the Texas Receptors is backed by over 5200 different manuscripts or copies of the New Testament. The other one that I mentioned, the West Cotton Court New Testament is backed by two primary copies of the New Testament, and they were found in a Catholic monastery. And people say that we should use those two manuscript or copies because they’re so much older. But history tells us that those two were hidden for over 1500 years. So if that’s really the best version of the Scriptures, then why would God have allowed it to be hidden from mankind for 1500 years? And the other side of the coin is that these thousands of manuscripts that reinforced the Texas Receptors appear to point us to the fact that they were the most accepted by the original believers and that they were copied and copied and copied and copied and copied and copied. And so you have a lot of manuscripts that are reinforcing what we find in the Texas receptice. So the two primary lines there the West Cotton Horde or the Texas Receptors. The majority of the versions of the Word of God come from the line of the West Cotton horde. The primary one that comes from the Texas receptice or the family of Texas Receptors family of manuscripts is the King James version. And so that is kind of the debate. And it basically falls on those two lines. And from those two lines, you have variables as to whether or not the Texas even authentic to the original Greek. And what is given in both of those families of manuscripts.

Are there any contradictions between the Texas receptors and the critical text? Well, that’s a great point. Is the critical text. The West Cotton Horse that I’m referring to is also the critical text. So thank you for bringing in those words. There are 10,000 differences, at least between the critical text and the Texas receptors. And so when you look at all of those differences, if there’s that many differences in just the New Testament and those two things can’t be the same, and if they’re not the same, why aren’t they the same? Where are they different? Where does it show itself as being different? And on the one hand, you have these people with the critical text and say, okay, these manuscripts are older, on the other one with the Texas receptors. They’re saying, no, we’re not looking for the older one necessarily. That was hidden for these 1500 plus years. We’re looking at the volume of manuscripts that backs up the Texas receptors, and we believe that it was copied numerous times, and it demonstrates how God preserved his word for future language groups and future people.

Are you able to tell us maybe a few of the differences, maybe directional differences between them. To be honest with you tonight, I did not bring my Greek New Testaments. I have a copy of the critical text. In fact, when I went to College, the College that I went to use the critical text in Greek class, there are other colleges that use the Texas receptors, and I have a copy of both. I do not have those things before me. Right here. The one thing that I would take you to after we discern between critical text and Textus is the matter of formal equivalency versus dynamic equivalency. And there is a real problem with the translations that are primarily done in this day in that I believe we should go to the right family of manuscripts, which I believe is the Texas receptors. And when we go to the right family of manuscripts, we should then go to a formal equivalency. And when I say formal equivalency, we mean a word for word translation. You look at the difference between a formal equivalency. They’re doing it a word for word translation. In the dynamic equivalency, there are many translations that have used that method, and the translators use the method of dynamic equivalency. So instead of doing a word for word translation, their desire was to give us the thought of what the translation is trying to say, and it’s a dynamic equivalency. So if the translators, for example, didn’t believe in a worldwide flood that may come out in their translations, if they wanted to call the Holy Spirit, not by the pronouns of the masculine pronouns, then they make those changes and so forth because it’s dynamic and they look at it as they can input their philosophy, their theology into the version. And if I was critical text or Texas receptors, a dynamic equivalency is not even an option. And so we would want to make sure we adhere to what’s a formal word for word copy of what is given to us in the Hebrew and the Greek.

That seems to be a big point. If we want to know what thus say it’s the Lord. It seems reasonable, logical that we would want a word for word translation, and we wouldn’t want the word filtered through the opinions or the position or predispositions of some scholar. We would want exactly what the word of God says. You mentioned earlier that the overwhelming majority of translations today are derived from the critical text, while the King James and perhaps the new King James are derived from the text is receptive. Why is that? Are these things that we need to look for when we’re selecting a Bible translation? Well, you bring up a great point because in truth, I’m not opposed to a modern translation because it’s a translation. So we need to define some things. Okay. As a Church in our setting and as a pastor, I believe in three things. I believe in inspiration, which is in the original autographs. God inspired. For example, Peter, he inspired Paul. They wrote the original autograph of the Book of Romans. They wrote the original autograph of one Peter. And when it was done, God used that book then, and it needed to be translated into other languages. So we moved from what’s called inspiration in the original autograph for the original book. And we move from that matter of inspiration being absolutely a miracle to then a level of preservation. And we have to understand that God, in a miraculous way, preserved his Word. So he gave us his inspired word originally, and then he preserved his Word, especially in the English language, for us in a wonderful way. And I think preservation is as much a miracle because of all the things that could have happened to the Word of God, the people that have sought to destroy the Word of God. And yet, time and again, as archeological digs have been done. And as people have found different copies of the Word of God throughout the ages, they go into a family of manuscripts, which is the preserved word. Now again, it might line up with the critical text, or it might line up with the Texas Receptors. Again, the predominant backing of the critical Texas two main manuscripts, the backing of the Texas receptors is over 5000, somewhere around 52 50.

Now that being said, God has preserved His Word. And I believe that every language group in the world deserves or should have a copy of the Bible in their language. And here’s what we’re talking about when we talk about this difference. Should I as a translator, if I knew a language, should I translate a new Bible or a new language from the King James version of the Word of God, or should I translate it from the original Greek and the original Hebrew? Well, if I’m going to be doing a formal equivalency, then I’d have to go back to the original Hebrew and the Greek and make a translation in that next language group. And that would give them an authentic copy, a preserved copy of the Word of God in their language. So let’s just pick a language like Portuguese. And let’s say that Brazil or Portugal did not have a copy of the Bible in their language, or someone that knew the original Hebrew and knew the original Greek. And I would say and recommend that it came from the family of the Texas receptors. They would sit down and in Portuguese do a word from word translation, and then you would be able to have that Bible in their language. We understand that there’s hundreds of languages today that do not have a copy of the Word of God in their hands, or if they do have a copy of the Word of God, it’s been preserved in a very poor manner. And so it is one of the effects of the Bible Museum that’s in Washington, DC. And it demonstrates how few languages actually have a completed copy of the Word of God and their own ability to understand the Word of God. And so we want to make sure we define terms and we define inspiration as it is with the original autographs. And we define preservation from a family of manuscripts that is faithful to the originals where there were copies made and copies made and copies made. And then it goes from that original language into every other language that we have in the world today. And I believe that God has uniquely preserved his work. And so I don’t believe in double inspiration. And there are a lot of people out there that think that the translators of the King James Version were just as inspired as the Apostle Paul and Apostle Peter and the others were when they wrote their books. But I believe that God inspired the originals, and that was miraculous. But then he’s also preserved His word, and he desires for us to get it copied into every language that we possibly can. And that’s where you get the word translation. So we have in our hands a faithful translation of the original books that were given in the New Testament, the Old Testament. Yeah. You have touching a lot on inspiration preservation.

What about illumination? Is there a difference between those three? Well, that’s the third part of this matter, and it’s a part that the world often. Well, the world does not understand. The Bible says that the Holy Spirit. Let’s go back to what the Bible actually says first, Peter, chapter one, the Bible says Holy men of God Spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. So the Holy Spirit was active in this matter of inspiration. I believe that the Holy Spirit is absolutely involved in the matter of preservation and preserving His Word in a miraculous way. The Bible says again in John chapter One, that the word became flesh. They were able to see the Word in living color, if you would, and to see what it would be like if the word was actually lived out in a person’s life, and it was lived out in the life of the God man. Well, from those two things, inspiration and preservation, we come to what’s called illumination. And that’s where the Holy Spirit of God opens our eyes to understand the truth of His Word. So he’s supernaturally given His Word. But if I don’t know the Holy Spirit of God and have the Holy Spirit of God in my heart, and I’ve never been saved, then I don’t have the I’ll call him the Holy Spirit glasses, or the Holy Spirit insight into what the Bible says and how it applies to me. And a great example of that is that you have many people that read through the Bible every single year. And yet a pastor, an advanced list, gets up and reads from a passage that they’ve read dozens of times. And when he preaches on that passage, the person that’s read it dozens of times under the inside of the Holy Spirit of God in that message and the Word of God being shared, they come under deep conviction. And even though they’ve read it so many times because it’s the Word of God, because it’s sharp, because it’s powerful, it discerns. The Bible says in the book of Hebrews the thoughts and intents of the heart, and it directs a man to the desire to get right. And that’s the illumination or that’s where the Bible says that it reveals to us. I’ll read you specifically what it says in Hebrew, chapter four, in verse number 15, I believe the Bible says verse number twelve, the Word of God is quick and powerful and sharper than any two edged sword, piercing even the dividing asunder of soul and spirit and of the joints and Morrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. The only way this book could do that is if it was God given. No book from man can bring about that same type of spiritual conviction. And so you’re right. It’s the trio of those words that help man understand what God has given to us in His word. It’s Holy inspired. It’s been preserved in our language. And then the Holy Spirit illuminates our eyes when we know Him as our guiding light as our Spirit that happens at the point of Salvation. Then he gives us the insight to see how the Scriptures applied to us in everyday life.

You listen to the Removing Barriers broadcast. We are sitting down with Pastor Todd and we’re talking about the KV and the Canon of Scripture. When we return, we look into whether or not there’s a difference between KJV only and only KJV. We’ll be right back.

Do you have the desire to earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the Saints? Answers in Genesis can help. They provide biblically sound books, CDs, DVDs, Homeschooling materials, VBS materials, online courses, digital downloads, and the Answers magazine and more plus tickets to the Creation Museum and Ark Encounter. Go to the Answers bookstore by clicking the link in the description section below. So you, too, can be ready to give an answer to anyone who asks the reason of the hope that is in you.

Pastor, what is the difference between the phrases Kav only and only Kav? Well, that’s a great question. Let me define it this way. There are groups of people that believe different things about the King James Version. For example, they believe that the King James Version is just as inspired as the original autographs. So they would say that it’s double inspiration. There are people that believe that you can only get saved out of the King James Version. And if you’re not led to the Lord from the King James Version, then they question your Salvation. There are people that believe that you should go into other language groups and translate their Bibles from the King James Version. There are people that say that you can use the King James Version to correct what the original Hebrew and Greek say. And so it’s a translation, and they say that you can correct the original from this translation, and I won’t call out the names of all the individuals, but it runs the gamut. It runs a long way across the board. I define myself as someone that only uses the King James Version, but I don’t believe any of those things that I just said. I do not believe in double inspiration. I do not believe that you can only get saved by the King James Version. I do not believe that you should translate into a new language from the King James Version. You should go to the Hebrew and the Greek, just like we have a faithful preservation of the Scriptures in English. You should seek to have a faithful preservation of the Scriptures in that new language. And so I think probably the group, and I’m not sure which way they would define themselves if they call themselves King James only or only King James. But I use the King James version of the Bible because I believe it’s the most faithful and the most formal. And I believe it was the peak of our English language. And so it’s the most beautiful of the translations that we have, and I use it. It comes I believe, from the right family of manuscripts, and it’s been formally translated word for word. And I believe that we can lift up the Word of God and say we have a faithful preserved copy of the inspired Word of God. And so I’m very proud of that. I was told in College almost 30 years ago that in a certain number of years no one would be using the King James anymore, and they would go by the wayside. And I’m quite content to stay with it. But I understand the nature of it being the preserved word of God and a translation. And so I don’t want to be real dogmatic about the difference between KJV only, or I only use the King James version because I’m not sure how some of those people describe themselves, but I would tell you that I only use the King James, but I would not be in the camp of those that believe it’s as inspired as the originals and that you can only get saved out of it.

Okay. So then you wouldn’t say that the KJV is the inspired word of God, but rather the preserved word of God. Is that accurate? I think that’s a faithful statement. Okay, well, I believe it’s a faithful statement, but I believe that the King James version is a faithful preservation and faithful translation of the preserved Word of God, the preserved inspired Word of God. So when I lay my head on the pillow at night, I believe that I hold in my hands in the English language a faithful copy of the inspired Word of God. And I’m not going to argue about it with the populace. We don’t argue about it in our Ministry. We just simply use it. I’ve heard some that would say that the Bible is like a lion. You don’t have to defend it. You just have to let it loose. And I believe that our duty is to preach the Word of God and to be instant in season and out of season and to deliver the Word of God. And I believe that God has given us His word, and He’s not given us a spirit of doubt as to whether or not we have the Word of God. I do believe that there are a great number of very poor translations that are definitely the result of Satanic influence, and Satan has done that to confuse people and people just throw up their hands and say, Well, if there’s that many different versions of it, then I don’t know which one is telling me the truth. So I’m not going to read any of them. And I believe that there’s been a lot of damage that has been done to the translations of the Word of God because of the dynamic equivalency where authors allowed their own personal theology to play a part in how the version was given. Of course, now we’re living under the arena where they want to take out everything that’s not politically correct. They want to remove the nature of Sodom and Gomorrah. They want to remove the nature of pronouns. When God is referred to with the masculine pronouns, they surely want to remove those kinds of things. And so you find update after update after update, and it’s really watering down the word of God. One of the key. I think earlier the question was asked about differences between translations or perhaps other copies of the Scriptures. And one of the key things is in John chapter three and verse number 16. When the Bible says that Jesus is the only begotten son of God, there are a number of translations that say that He’s the one and only Son of God. And what we find in weaker translations is they’ve removed the deity of Christ. They’ve removed the blood of Christ. They’ve removed the nature of the path of true Salvation. There’s a verse in the Book of Acts where the Ethiopian eunuch asks Philip what he has to do to be saved. And in our King James, it includes, I believe it’s verse number 37 in Acts chapter number eight. And it says there in that verse that you have to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. While there are a number of translations where they’ve taken out the verse that speaks of believing in the Lord Jesus Christ. And he goes right to baptism. And it takes out verse number 37 where he said, verse number 36 see, here is water, what does hinder me to be baptized? And Philip said, if thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest and he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. Well, there’s a number of translations of the Bible that take verse 37 out, and it goes right into verse number 38. What does hinder me to be baptized? He commanded the cherry to stand still. They both went down into the water both Philip and the Eunuch, and he baptized him. And so it removes the ingredient that’s actually necessary for Salvation, and we find a significant theological difference. Are we saved by baptism or we saved by faith alone? And so there are key theological differences between a number of the translations.

Pastor, you mentioned earlier when we were trying to define KJV only or only KJV, that you wanted to be careful because you weren’t sure how others would define themselves in what they believe. But you also mentioned how in your Ministry you don’t fight over it. You just use the KJV, and that seems a pretty reasonable way to approach things. What do you think about those that feel that we should break fellowship with other believers who don’t use a particular version of the Bible? Let’s say the KJV. Do you think that’s wise? Do you think that’s a Godly thing to do to break fellowship with those that don’t use the same translation as we do? Well, let me put it to you practically it’s only right to come to some understanding for a common reading of the scriptures. So if I got up every Sunday in the Church and read from a different translation because on that Sunday, the translation that I was reading from suited my needs more for the passage than another translation, then people would always be in a state of I would call it disarray. And so I think the best thing that a congregation can do is to come to a settled understanding. This is going to be our foundational text in our Church. We have come to that understanding and we’re satisfied and content to do all of our preaching and teaching from the King James version of the Scriptures. If someone comes into our Church and they’re going to sit in the Pew and listen to the messages and stuff, and it’s true, I probably have people that are reading from other versions of the scripture. So perhaps they’re reading from the English Standard Version. Perhaps they’re reading from the new American Standard Version. I’ve heard people that have said, Well, Pastor, I use the King Jane version when I’m with you, but my own personal devotions and you fill in the blank. They have some other translation. For the most part, the people in the Pew don’t have the depth of understanding as to the different families of manuscripts, the different natures that there are in actual translation work, formal equivalency versus dynamic equivalency.

All they’re doing is this is what so often is said, they’re doing this and they’re saying this, well, this one is easier to understand. And I acknowledge that there are some words that are in the King James version of the Scriptures that we don’t often use anymore. But instead of me throwing my hands up in the air and saying, Well, I never use that word anymore. So I’m going to throw the whole translation out. It drives me to see what that word means and to have a better understanding of what the Lord was saying. So if every word and every phrase and every chapter and every book of the Bible is inspired, then it shouldn’t lead me to a controversy over or a debate over what the person may be bringing into the services and whether or not I think they should be using it. It should actually lead every believer to a better understanding of why they’re using the version that they’re using. And as a pastor, as I’m given opportunity, I don’t make fun of other versions. I don’t make light of other versions. I just want to bring people to a better understanding of why we’re using what we’re using. And so I consistently affirm inspiration, preservation, illumination. I consistently affirm what the Bible says here. This is what that means. This is how it applies in our lives. I remember years ago in Ministry, I had a lady that brought a very watered down translation of the Bible, just a terrible version in the English language. And she brought it to Church. And she told me that she brought it because that’s what she had. Well, I believe that we kind of treat that individual like Christ treated the woman at the well, we’re not jerks. We understand that they either need Salvation or they need to grow. And so in that lady’s life, she did not know the Lord. So I wasn’t surprised that she brought what she brought. If I had really rammed home the translation issue with her that day, I don’t think I would have ever been given the opportunity to share the gospel with her. And so I’m not sure that it’s a matter of me separating faith or not separating faith but separating fellowship over. But I would stand on this platform that I’m going to be in a Ministry that uses the King Jane version for the duration of my life. And so I believe that it’s the version that we should use. I’m going to stick with it. I think it’s the manual that is the most trustworthy. And I have many friends that probably use something else. But for our Ministry here, we make it very clear that we’re going to stick with this manual, the King James version.

So pastor, when I came from the Caribbean to the US, I went to College and there was a required book called Touch, Not The Unclean Tank. And I remember when I was leaving. Some missionaries on the island gave me a book called from the Mind of God to the Mind of Men. It wasn’t really an issue for me until I got to realize that there was a little bit of a quivel between College and University. Right. And I remember I had to sit through a number of lessons of why the KGV is important and why the Texas receptors is important over the critical tax. Right. So we’re talking about breaking fellowship. It seems like here are two Biber colleges supposedly have authority or learn men but it seems that they can’t agree on these things. What would you say to that? Well, I think it’s the difference between having a disagreement and being disagreeable. And as a believer, I understand that the translation issue is not the issue that determines my eternal life. My eternal life has been settled because of what Jesus Christ did on the cross. And I realized that there’s different layers of the debate. So as a pastor, if I get together with a group of pastors and we’ve had numerous years or semesters of Greek, we have a better understanding of the families of Banish trips and of how it’s been preserved. I think that there are levels at which we can have a debate because we have a little bit more knowledge than maybe the average person in the Pew. But having those debates behind closed doors makes a big difference. Then when you bring that debate out and you get a little bit hateful towards the people that are also believers, but that don’t have the same stand that you have. So I disagree with my alma mater on the version of Scripture, and in fact, I disagree with my alma mater on the Greek manuscripts that they use for Greek class. I disagree with a number of the classmates that I have because they’ve chosen to go in a different direction. So if I can give you this example, 30 years ago, when I was in College, the hip version of the scripture that everybody was switching to was the new American Standard. Everybody just said, oh, you got to get the new American Standard. You’ve got to get the new American Standard. Oh, it’s just such a great copy and everything like this. And I just said, Well, that’s great. I’m going to stay with the King James version. Well, we’re fast forwarded now ten, two, three decades. And now the hip version is the English standard version. And so we’re done with the new American Standard. And now we’re onto the English standard version. And I would dare say that in another 1020 years they’re going to be onto another version and just will be whatever’s Hipping happening.

If I could say it to you this way, I’ve always found it interesting that as I was a kid growing up in fundamentalism and in independent circles, there were two things that you would notice when a Church was going contemporary, and I’d use the word pragmatic even more so than contemporary. They were becoming more and more pragmatic when they decided to change versions of the scripture. And they were becoming more and more pragmatic when they were going to change music. And almost inevitably, these kinds of words would flow forth. They would say about the version of the scriptures. They’d say we’re going to switch to this version because it’s easier to understand. And then they say about music, we’re going to switch to this kind of music because it draws more people in and today what we find is a group of individuals that have very pragmatic and worldly music. But they stayed with the King Jane version and then over on the other side, you have a lot of people that are very high in their Church music, and I mean, high is very classical, almost Church music. And yet they’ve changed versions of the scripture. So what I experienced as a kid is now kind of really divided itself up, and you find a lot of different groups. Now. All that being said, I think the thing you do is you observe what a Church is doing when it makes the choice to switch. I know of a faithful Church that is in a city in South Carolina, and the pastor researched the matter. He explained the matter, and he switched to the new American Standard for their standard copy of the scriptures used in their services. He explained the family of manuscripts. He explained the way that the Bible is translated, and he came to the understanding that for their Church, they were going to use the new American Standard. You know what? I disagree with him, but I still believe he’s a great man. I still believe he’s being mightily used of the Lord. And I would not go into a debate with him about his Church being fundamental preaching the truth of Salvation because I know they are and they’re not going contemporary at all in any other areas. They’re not pragmatic. But he described the situation as to the totality of the situation as to why they were going to switch versions. Again. I wouldn’t do that. But he did it. And I believe that he is still a fundamental, obviously a fundamental work. There are so many others that are starting churches today, and they start out with a watered down translation, and they start out with watered down music. And that is troubling because the world again, they’re making their decision on this one phrase. It’s easier to understand, and that just truthfully can’t be a factor in the Bible that you choose, because if you said that there are just so many copies of the Bible that are just poor, poor translations. And yet you’d say, well, that’s much easier to understand, but you can’t trust that that’s not a reliable reason to switch versions.

Yeah. I think I normally would look for doctrinal errors, some things that you mentioned before, like the deity of Christ, whether Salvation is by greater loans to faith alone, or is it by some sort of work and stuff like that?

Do you believe someone can truly be saved from some of these Waterdown virgins? And how is someone biblically saved then? Well, let me go to an extreme. So the Mormon colt, which does not believe in the deity of Christ and would be considered a cult. They use the King James version of the scriptures, but then they have added to it the volumes of Joseph Smith so we would never look to that cult and say because they use the King Jane version of scripture that we’re in the same camp, right? We would say, okay, they don’t believe what is actually written in the King James version of the Bible. That being said, if I only had access to a you can pick a translation. If I only had access to it, I would look for scriptures that would do its very best to explain that Salvation is by Grace through faith. I have never done this, but I have heard of people that will go into the home of a Roman Catholic where they have a Roman Catholic Bible, and they will pick up the Roman Catholic Bible and that you can lead them through the Romans road or lead them through the truth of biblical Salvation, even in the Roman Catholic Bible. Now I would insert this Parenthetically, and I would say that this is one of the main reasons why it’s important for us to hide God’s Word in our heart. If the day ever came, that we were removed totally from the Scriptures, could we still lead someone to Christ while the Bible says faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the Word of God? So at some point in time, the Word of God has to play a part in bringing conviction to the lost person, and God can supernaturally do whatever he desires to do. But if I were holding in my hands what I believe to be a poor copy of the Bible, then I would definitely say, this is the way that you get saved. And this is the truth that I want you to know. And I take them that version of the Scripture that I really liked or not, because the main point is for them to come to know the Lord is their Savior.

So the second part of the question would be, then how would you go about showing them that? How does someone get Biblically saved? Well, for that, we go to Romans chapter Ten and we have to accept what the Bible says in Romans chapter Ten, for whose service shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. How shall they hear? Except someone goes, how shall they repent, except they hear the Word of God. And I’m not giving that to you word for word. But all lined out in Roman Shepherd Ten, where the Word of God details, hearing, conviction and then acceptance and repentance. And so we would say that we deliver the truth of the Scriptures as it’s either memorized or it’s contained in the written word or some electronic format. And by the way, I would also add this in with the many ways of the electronic format being available to us in this day and age. There’s not going to be as many times in our lives where we won’t have access to the Word of God as we would like. So for example, I was on a mission trip and we were in a remote jungle where there was no electricity and we were working by flashlights and working by the cell phone charge that we had when we left our electricity in the morning hour. And I preached from my phone that night because we didn’t have the capacity to be able to light up the building where we had services. And so we are living in a different age technologically where we will have access to the word of God in electronic format and can give that to the people that stand in need of the word more readily. But it’s definitely faith coming by hearing and hearing by the word of God. And so we want to take people through the truth of Scripture and show them their need of the Savior because of their issue of sin and the path for Salvation is that of belief and repentance.

Pastor Todd, thank you very much for joining us on the Removing Barriers Podcast. Thank you so much. God’s. Blessings upon you guys.

Thank you for listening to get a hold of us to support this podcast or to learn more about removing barriers, go to removingbarriers. Net. This has been the Removing Barriers Podcast. We attempted to remove barriers so that we all can have a clear view of the cross.