Do you beleive there is even such a thing as INFALLIBLE BIBLES?

The only Christians I have run into over the years who REALLY believe in an infallible Bible are the King James Bible believers. We may not always agree on what the Biblical texts MEAN, but we all DO agree on what the Bible text SAYS. 
Those in the Bible Babble Buffet Camp don't always agree on what their varying texts mean either, and they certainly do not agree on what their contradictory and ever changing texts SAY. 
USA Today came out with a very interesting article in 2011 that found that people who actually READ the Bible, are far more likely to be King James Bible readers.  It's called Bible Readers Prefer King James Version. You can see the article here. 
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/religion/2011-04-21-king-james-bible.htm
Here is one quote from this USA Today article - "Although there are two dozen English-language Bibles in many contemporary translations, the King James Version reigns even more supreme among those who actually read their Bibles: 82% of those who read the Good Book at least once a month rely on the translation that first brought the Scripture to the English-speaking masses worldwide." 
It is a proven fact that the majority of present day professing Christians no longer believe that "The Bible" is the infallible words of God. Among the clergy and seminary students the percentage is in the 90's.  See what the polls and professors are saying here -  "The Bible is NOT the infallible words of God." -
http://brandplucked.webs.com/thebiblenotinspired.htm

IF a Christian REALLY believes the Bible is the infallible words of God, then the "old fashioned language" is not an issue at all. Sure, the King James Bible has some words that are older or have different meanings than we may be familiar with.
But people are learning new vocabulary or new meanings to English words all the time in any field of study, be it sports, biology, the sciences, mathematics, medicine or just about anything imaginable. If you are interested in something, you learn the meaning of the words that are found in this field of interest. Even when you start using the computer we have to learn some new words or different meanings to words we already knew - Words like "mouse", IPad, "Kindle", Office, Word, "paste".

Do we need to "update" the language of the Bible?
Usually it is the bible agnostic crowd that keeps telling us that  “The N.T. was written in Koine Greek” and this somehow proves that bible versions need to be “updated and revised” and put into modern English and other languages.
But let’s look at it a different way. Does God see the beginning from the end? What is the pattern we see Him use in history?  Usually the bible agnostics and unbelievers in the infallibility of ANY Bible tell us we need to study and learn “the Hebrew and Greek” or “the original languages” in order to find out what God REALLY said. Right?

Well, this same God who sees the end from the beginning also knew that the biblical languages of the never seen by any man alive today and the forever lost originals would be written in a form of Hebrew and Greek that are no longer spoken or used today.  They are both in a slightly “archaic” form, yet the native speaking Jews and Greeks today can read them and understand them. 
Would any Bible believing, devout Jew change a single syllable of his “archaic” Hebrew Bible? Or a believing Orthodox Greek change his “old fashioned” Textus Receptus New Testament? Of course not; they have too much respect and reverence for the biblical texts.

 I believe it is the same thing with the English language.  God knew that languages would change over time and that His pure words, as found only in the King James Bible, would sound slightly “strange, different and old fashioned”, but this is  a good thing. 
When people read out of the King James Bible we are immediately struck by the fact that it reads like NO OTHER BOOK on this earth.  It is an OLD Book that has been around for a good long time, and it speaks God’s eternal truths to us like no other book or Bible on this earth.  The very way it is written sticks in the mind and makes you think about what it is saying the way the watered down and dumbed down modern versions do not. 
Most modern versions have more the taste of cardboard than of the sweet honey of God’s pure words as found in the King James Bible. And it is the ONLY one seriously believed by thousands even today to be the complete, inspired and 100% true words of the living God. 
 I’m always amazed when I hear a college educated person say, "I can’t understand the King James Bible with all its "thee"s, "ye"s, and other archaic words." To see why the use of all those "thee"s and "ye"s are far more accurate and should be retained see -
http://brandplucked.webs.com/theeandye.htm  

 In his book, Answering the Myths on the Bible Version Debate on page 91, Mr. David Cloud quotes linguistic scholar A.T. Robertson (by no means a KJB onlyist) who makes this observation about the King James Bible:  "No one today speaks the English of the Authorized Version, or ever did for that matter, for though, like Shakespeare, it is pure Anglo-Saxon, yet unlike Shakespeare, IT REPRODUCES TO A REMARKABLE EXTENT THE SPIRIT AND LANGUAGE OF THE BIBLE." (A Grammar of the Greek New Testament, p. 56).
Amazing quote from the Professor of English Literature at Yale University.  
From the Introduction to Human Nature in the Bible, August 22, 1922!.  "But the Crowning achievement of those spacious times was the Authorized Translation of the Bible, which appeared in 1611... The art of English composition reached its climax in the pages of the Bible... We Anglo-Saxons have a better Bible than the French or the Germans or the Italians or the Spanish; our English translation is even better than the original Hebrew and Greek. There is only way to explain this; I have no theory ...to account for the so-called "inspiration of the Bible," but I am confident that the Authorised Version was inspired. Now as the English-speaking people have the best Bible in the world, and as it is the most beautiful monument ever erected with the English alphabet, we ought to make the most of it, for it is an incomparably rich inheritance, free to all who can read. This means that we ought invariably in the church and on public occasions to use the Authorised Version; all others are inferior. And...it should be used exclusively in private reading. Why make constant companions of the second best, when the best is available?"  - William Lyon Phelps, Lampson Professor of English Literature at Yale 1922
PREVIOUS GENERATIONS EDUCATED THE PEOPLE UP TO THE BIBLE, AND THAT IS WHAT WE SHOULD DO TODAY.
"Instead of lowering the Bible to a lowest common denominator, why should we not educate people to rise to the level required to experience the Bible in its full richness and exaltation? Instead of expecting the least from Bible readers, we should expect the most from them. The greatness of the Bible requires the best, not the least. ... The most difficult of modern English translations -- the King James -- is used most by segments of our society that are relatively uneducated as defined by formal education. ... research has shown repeatedly that people are capable of rising to surprising and even amazing abilities to read and master a subject that is important to them. ... Previous generations did not find the King James Bible, with its theological heaviness, beyond their comprehension. Nor do readers and congregations who continue to use the King James translation find it incomprehensible. Neither of my parents finished grade school, and they learned to understand the King James Bible from their reading of it and the preaching they heard based on it. We do not need to assume a theologically inept readership for the Bible. Furthermore, if modern readers are less adept at theology than they can and should be, it is the task of the church to educate them, not to give them Bible translations that will permanently deprive them of the theological content that is really present in the Bible" (Leland Ryken, The Word of God in English, pp. 107, 109).
THOUGH THE TERMS "THOU" AND "THINE" HAVE BEEN OUT OF COMMON USAGE OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE FOR MORE THAN 400 YEARS, IT WAS ONLY A FEW DECADES AGO THAT PEOPLE STARTED COMPLAINING ABOUT IT.
One of the main reasons the modern version promoters tell us we need to get rid of the King James Bible and buy one of the multiple choice modern versions is because they say that the old King James Bible is too hard to understand and it uses "archaic" words.  They tell us that people don't talk like that today (with all those "thee"s and "ye"s)  and that we need something  easy to understand. 
First of all, let me point out what none of these people are telling you. You need to know where they are coming from and where they want to take you. It is a proven fact that not one of them actually believes that ANY Bible in ANY language IS or ever was the complete, inspired and infallible words of God.
Just ask them. I have been discussing and debating the King James Bible issue for years now, and I have never run into a single modern version user who honestly believes that his particular version IS the infallible words of God and that when other versions differ from his in either text or meaning, then the others are wrong and his is right. NOT ONE.

When you ask them to SHOW you a copy of this "infallible Bible" they seem to want you to think they actually believe in, most of these people then begin to backtrack and come out with something like "Well, only the original Hebrew and Greek are inspired." 
What they utterly fail to notice is the obvious FACT that there IS NO "the original Hebrew and Greek" in existence. They have never seen a single word of these "original autographs" and have no way of knowing if their particular flavor of the month bible version (which are always changing with each new edition to come down the pike) matches their unseen, unknown and unreadable "the originals" or not.  They are bluffing and they are professing a faith in something that they KNOW does not even exist!

Furthermore, I always find it amusing and highly ironic that these same people (Bible agnostics - they don't know for sure what God may or may not have said) and unbelievers in the infallibility of ANY Bible end up referring us to "the" Hebrew and "the" Greek.
It should be pointed out that there is no such thing as "the" Hebrew and much less anything called "the" Greek. There are literally THOUSANDS of variant readings in both the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts and numerous very different printed Greek editions are out there in Bible Babblelonia Land today. 
I also find it highly ironic that these same people who complain about the "hard to understand and archaic language" of the King James Bible, now want us to learn two very difficult archaic languages that are no longer spoken today and that are FAR more difficult than anything you will find in the English text of the King James Bible.
Biblical Hebrew and Greek are very different from modern Hebrew and Greek and no native speaker talks that way.  Don't these people ever stop to think through their position and what they are actually saying? 
Where do these modern Version promoters want to take us? The simple truth is they want us to become bible agnostics and unbelievers in the infallibility of the Bible - ANY bible in ANY language -  just like they are.


Shared from blogger Jeff Kinney