the King James Bible inspired or preserved?
The original autographs were inspired. The King James
Bible is those same autographs preserved up to today.
The best way to simply describe inspiration and
preservation of the Bible is as follows:
Inspiration is when God takes a blank
piece of paper (papyrus, vellum, etc.) and uses men to write His words.
Preservation is when God takes those words
already written and uses men to preserve them to
Both of these actions are DIVINE and
are assured by God as recorded in Psalm 12:6, 7.
6 "The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a
furnace of earth, purified seven times.
7 Thou shalt keep them, 0 LORD, thou shalt preserve them from
this generation for ever."
In Psalm 12:6 God assures us that His originals are perfect. Even
though penned by fallible men with the heinous sins of; murder (Moses and
David), adultery (David), idolatry (Solomon), and denial of the lord
(Peter), God's words are untainted by the sins of the penmen.
That the originals were inspired perfect in their entirety is an
undisputed belief among fundamentalists today.
But most fundamentalists argue that only the
"originals” were perfect. They say that today we have nothing but copies
and translations of those copies. They seem indignant at the thought that
any "mere translation" should be considered a perfect copy of the
originals. They claim that copies and translations are products of
uninspired men and therefore must all contain mistakes.
Fundamentalists clinging to this tenet are mislead. Their folly in
accepting this erroneous teaching is fourfold.
1. It is somewhat confusing and unexplainable that a person could
claim that God could not use, sinful men to preserve His
words when all fundamentalists believe that he used
sinful men to write His inspired words. Certainly a God
who had enough power to inspire His words would also have
enough power to preserve them. I highly doubt that He has lost
such ability over the years.
2. Why would God inspire the originals and then lose them? Why give a
perfect Bible to men like Peter, John, James, Andrew and
company and not us? They had seen, heard, and touched the
Lord (I John 1:1). We haven't! If anyone ever needed a perfect
Bible it is us, nearly two thousand years separated from a
Saviour we have never seen!
Why did God inspire a perfect original if He didn't plan on preserving
it? Couldn't He have afforded some error, in His originals just as some
believe He has allowed some errors in today's Bible! Or do critics of
God's perfect Bible believe that God was unable to prevent
errors in the copies. It would seem like only half of a God who had the
power to do one but not the other.
3. It is a "convenient" faith which cannot be tested. In other words,
it is rather safe to believe in a perfect set of originals which have been
LOST. Since they are lost, no one can ever practically challenge
such a belief. Adherents to such a shallow persuasion can rest safely in
the fact that they will never be proven wrong since the evidence needed to
prove them wrong (the "originals") is lost.
But if they dare put the same faith in a Bible available today, they
know that they will definitely be bloodied defending their faith.
Thus, to believe in a perfect set of originals, but not to believe in
a perfect English Bible, is to believe nothing at all.
4. Regardless of their arguments against the doctrine of a
preserved perfect Bible, such a fact as much guaranteed by
Scripture as the bodily return of Jesus Christ (Acts 1:8).
Psalm 12:7 plainly states, thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt
preserve them from this generation for ever."
Thus we have God promising to preserve
the same words that He inspired. Not too much of a feat
to overwhelm such an omnipotent Being.
The fearful fundamentalist launches two attacks on the Scriptural
teaching found in Psalm 12:7.
1. They claim, "Verse 7 is talking about the Jews, not the Bible."
Then to add credence to their claim they rush out and publish a
translation that says just that in Psalm 12:7. Let's look at this verse in
the New International Version.
"O LORD, you will keep us safe and protect us
from such people forever."
This is an irresponsible and dishonest translation. The Hebrew word "shamar"
meaning "to keep" which the New International Version translators render
"you will keep us" is found in the future second person
singular "thou shalt keep" and is directed to the THIRD
person plural "them" and NOT the first
person plural "us" as the New International Version translators rendered
it. Thus we see it is the King James, God’s perfect, preserved Bible which
has accurately preserved the reading of the originals,
not the unreliable New International Version.
Psalm 12:7 is not God's promise to preserve the Jews,
a promise which flourishes elsewhere in Scripture. It is God’s promise to
preserve His words, and is a direct reference to those words as described
in Psalm 12:6.
2. Oftimes a Christian, whose faith is too weak to accept the literal
truth of Psalm 12:6, 7, will piously quote Psalm 119:89.
“For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven.” Then they will
state that God actually meant that He preserved His perfect Bible in
Heaven, not on Earth. And they say this with a straight
face! This escape to a house of straw is embarrassingly humorous.
First, it is foolish for anyone to believe that God inspired a perfect
original on earth so that He could have it brought to
Heaven. Is that supposed to be the reason that He wrote
the originals? The answer is embarrassingly simple. The Bible
is addressed to man, not God. God did not write a perfect
book directed to man and then put it in a library in
Heaven where man cannot benefit from its existence. Again we ask, "What
good to us, here and now, is a perfect
book locked up out of reach in Heaven?"
Secondly, Psalm 12:6 makes reference to His words being on
earth. To preserve them somewhere other than on earth is not to
preserve them at all. So we see then that God inspired
the originals perfectly. Then over the centuries He has preserved
those same word today. They are found in the Authorized Version.
In the area of "inspired translations" it might be noted that the
double truth of Genesis 22:8 which in a King James Bible is plainly
revealed as a prophetic reference to Jesus Christ, is lost in such weak
translations as the New King James, the New International Version, and the
New American Standard Version.