Tag: which bible

Where does God say the book of Esther is perfect Scripture?

Not to spoil the ending too badly for you, but: nowhere.

Let me back up a bit.

There are a class of questions one hears when discussing the Bible version issue that I call “stumpers.” I use the word derisively, because of course, none of these questions are really stumpers at all. These are questions usually asked as if they end the debate and are rarely posed by someone interested in an honest answer or examination of the question.

Here is a good one:

Where in the Bible does God say the KJV is perfect?

To the uninitiated, maybe this seems like a logical question that any King James Bible proponent must be expected to answer and defend, right? If somebody is telling you the King James Bible is pure, you can just ask this simple question, to which he has no answer, so you can just mosey right along and give the issue of Bible versions nary another thought.

I was informed a moment ago, by someone refusing to answer the very real problems that deleting verses from the Bible represent, that this is “the most important question.”

For a moment, let’s focus on two things we can all agree came long before the King James Bible was translated, or before even Tyndale set out to make ploughboys know more of the Scriptures than the Pope. Before we got there:

  • 66 books were written and eventually were adopted as the standard Christian scriptural canon.
  • Perfect divine authorship of these books was assumed — we have the general ideas of infallibility and inerrancy because of this.
    • Yet, few if any of these books have clear claims of perfection, and some of these books even include claims of personal opinion, like 2Co 8:8 could imply.

So, in the spirit of the question “Where does God say the KJV is perfect:”

  • Can somebody show me which verse in the Bible says the book of Jude is Scripture? Or the other 65 books?
  • Can somebody show me where these books are each called out as “perfect?”
  • Try to do so without begging the question. Citing a verse that says God’s word is pure (Ps 119:140; Pr 30:5) only returns us to the first question.

Don’t misunderstand me. I believe the 66 book canon is correct. I believe all of the text from Genesis 1:1 to Revelation 22:21 are God’s pure, perfect word. I even take the “extreme” position that God’s hand was in the division of that text into its 31,102 verses of 1,189 chapters, but I digress.

Here is what I am getting at: Can the same guy who demands a Bible verse to state that the King James Bible is perfect show a Bible verse that says the 66 book canon is correct?

No, of course, he cannot. There are no such verses. Period. They do not exist.

But here’s where it gets fun: the same guy will not ask (or answer) these questions:

What verse of the Bible says only the originals are inspired, infallible, and inerrant?

Where does God say that he permits competing, conflicting “versions” in English that are all to be considered equally “the Bible” and chosen based on personal preference?

Where does God say that his word can only be perfect in Greek or Hebrew? Or that it is only to be preserved in those two languages?

Nowhere, of course.

You see, the minister of questions who asks “where does God say the KJV is perfect?” is not consistent in his own thoughts. He is double minded, and we know what that means (well, Bible readers do. James 1:8). He doesn’t care to find a Biblical basis for his ideas that “only the originals are inspired.” He isn’t interested too much in finding a “God-breathed” list of the contents of the Bible so he can know for sure that 2nd Sam 1:18 is supposed to be in the Bible but the book of Jasher that it mentions is not. He doesn’t much care that there are no verses that say God doesn’t involve himself in translations of his word, even though he strongly believes that any translation of the Bible is merely the work of sinful man.

There are, in fact, many verses and precepts in the Bible that address all these issues, and all quite to the contrary of the opinions of the modern versionist. This website is full of such discussions and answers, of course.

Now here is the crux of the matter:

Hebrews 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

Start with faith, because without it, your questions are pointless.

And then go here:

Proverbs 30:5 Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.

Once you come to the point of faith where you recognize that the book you hold really is God’s word, and therefor must be pure, you don’t need much help “making the leap” calling your Bible perfect. And if you can’t muster the faith to call your Bible PERFECT, maybe you have the wrong one. Nobody calls the ESV or NIV perfect, and for good reason!

Now I already know what many of the “no perfect Bible” proponents will say: “King James Onlysim is man-made doctrine,” or “you aren’t answering the question,” etc., etc. All of the things I point out in this post go right over the heads of people who adamantly refuse to begin from a position of faith on the topic.

You aren’t going to find “a verse” that says “the King James Bible is the Bible in English” because it’s right next to the verse that says which 66 books are supposed to be in the Bible.

And Esther. Where does God say the book of Esther is perfect, let alone part of the Bible? It doesn’t even directly mention God anywhere.

Once you can honestly answer that question, maybe you will be able to handle the really hard ones.

If Jesus Preached in Your Church, Which Bible Would He Use?

(A small review and recommendation of Jack McElroy’s book, Which Bible Would Jesus Use?)

It would be foolish to say he would use no Bible, since he used one during his earthly ministry (Luke 4:16-20; 24:27, etc.).

Would he use a Bible that makes him a liar, as the NIV and ESV do in John 7:8?

John 7:8-10 (KJV) Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up yet unto this feast; for my time is not yet full come. When he had said these words unto them, he abode still in Galilee. But when his brethren were gone up, then went he also up unto the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret.

(NIV) “You go to the festival. I am not going up to this festival, because my time has not yet fully come.” After he had said this, he stayed in Galilee. However, after his brothers had left for the festival, he went also, not publicly, but in secret.

(ESV) “You go up to the feast. I am not going up to this feast, for my time has not yet fully come.” After saying this, he remained in Galilee. But after his brothers had gone up to the feast, then he also went up, not publicly but in private.

Sometimes it’s hard for me to believe how many Christians will accept version upon version of the Bible that shows their Lord to be a liar, as the NIV, ESV, and so many others plainly do, but it would be crazy to think Jesus would carry a book to the pulpit that has him breaking the law he came to fulfil.

This is the simple question asked by Jack McElroy in his book, Which Bible Would Jesus Use? (Also available for Kindle.)

The mere question would be laughed off by modern scholarship as too absurd to consider.

But this question deserves serious consideration by any genuine follower of Christ. After all, the Bible is Jesus’ book, and so picking the one he would have us use is certainly something we should do!

Would Jesus use a Bible that gives Satan his own title in Isaiah 14:12?

Isaiah 14:12 (KJV) 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!

Revelation 22:16 (KJV) 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 NIV gives Satan the title Jesus has plainly reserved for himself:

Isa 14:12 (NIV) How you have fallen from heaven, morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations!

Are you okay with that? Do you think Jesus is okay with that? (See this article for more on Lucifer vs the Morning Star.)

McElroy’s book is an excellent addition to the many on the “Which Bible” topic. The tone is easy and conversational, laying out the issues in a manner that makes the answers obvious. In fact, I suspect this will be my new “go to” introductory book for believers new to the topic.

McElroy gives an excellent overview of the preservation and translation of the Bible, presenting a clear and compelling case for why we should trust that the King James Bible is in fact the very word of God without error. His deductive logical arguments are enough to convince any sincere seeker that we can have faith in God’s book as it is preserved to us today.

But he does not stop there — McElroy isn’t afraid to point out the deficiencies of the modern and commonly held definition of inspiration, getting to the heart of the matter and demonstrating that not only do modern experts have a flawed theology of inspiration, with their own words they show that they don’t believe there ever was a perfect “act of inspiration” in the first place.

Even if you’re already a King James Bible Believer and need no convincing, this book is still a great read. I’ve had a public presence on the Internet defending the Authorized Bible for almost 20 years now, and I’ve heard it all.  McElroy must have had a peek into my inbox, because all the common “gotcha” questions are here. More importantly, they’re all answered ably.

  • Yeah? So where was God’s word before 1611?
  • The NIV and ESV are no different than the different “revisions” of the KJV.
  • So Which Edition of the KJV is perfect? What about the differences between editions?

Now, we know that in the end this is still a matter of faith. After all:

Hebrews 11:6 (KJV) But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

Any time someone demands “proof” that the King James is God’s word they are seeking to avoid the issue of faith and excuse the egregious errors in their favorite Bible versions. However, it can be (and has many times been) proven beyond any reasonable doubt that modern Bible versions contain error. As McElroy demonstrates with their own writings, modern Bible editors actually believe that imperfection is often a sign of a more genuine reading.

But it’s not enough to demonstrate the corruptions of modern Bible versions, because the question will still remain: why the KJV? There are deductive reasons good enough to answer the sincere seeker willing to place faith in God that he would preserve his word, and Which Bible Would Jesus Use? provides these reasons and more.

Highly recommended!

Jack McElroy has kindly made chapter 8 of his book available in full here: Why can’t the Lord choose the ©1982 New King James Version?

Which Bible Would Jesus Use? is available in print from Amazon.com and also on Kindle. You can read more about Jack at his website.