This document discusses why the author only uses the King James Bible. It provides the following key points: 1. The King James Bible was the undisputed English Bible from 1611 to 1876. 2. In the late 1800s, Westcott and Hort produced a Greek version that criticized the King James Bible and claimed it contained errors. 3. All other Bible versions are based on the work of Westcott and Hort, not the Textus Receptus used for the King James Bible. It argues that God could preserve his word without mistakes, would want to preserve it exactly, and did so in the King James Bible based on its underlying texts.

1. WHY WE USE ONLY THE
KING JAMES BIBLE

2. • 1. From 1611 to about 1876, the King James Bible is the undisputed, authorized Bible of the
English speaking world.
• 2. In late 1800’s, Westcott and Hort, produced a Greek version of the Bible and attacked the
King James Bible as having errors
• 3. Every version of the Bible besides the King James, is based upon the work of Westcott and
Hort.
• 4. The Textus Receptus, upon which the King James is based, comes from 1000’s of ancient
manuscripts. The Westcott and Hort/Nestle text is based on primarily just three ancient texts,
their argument being that they are better because they are older.
• 5. Every other version of the Bible rests on the philosophy that the Bible has been corrupted
by time and people and that we depend on modern scholarship to make it as close to what
God meant to say as possible.

3. I. COULD GOD?
• If He can call into existence the heavens and the earth, He can
preserve His word without mistakes
• If He can part the Red Sea, He can preserve His Word without
mistakes
• If He can dwell among us as Jesus did, He can preserve His Word
without mistakes

4. II. WOULD GOD?
Notice the passage promises to preserve His “words” and not just
His Word. The modernist argues that while all versions of the Bible
today have some mistakes, the gist of the Word is still trustworthy
and accurate.
• They would say that we can trust God’s Word
• Even if we can’t trust His words

5. II. WOULD GOD?
1. God’s willingness to preserve His Word
2. His will is that every jot and tittle be fulfilled and not merely the
gist of the Bible

6. III. DID GOD?
A. Paul believed that God had preserved His Words perfectly
2 Timothy 3:15-17 KJV
B. Peter believed that God had preserved His Words perfectly
1 Peter 1:23-25 KJV

7. CONCLUSION
One of the silliest things I think Satan ever introduced into the world
is the idea that:
-God spoke to people His living Word
-God led them to record that living Word in written form but then
-God allowed mistakes to be introduced into His Word
so that we cannot be sure what we have today is the perfect Word
of God.

8. CONCLUSION
I am convinced that:
God could preserve His Word without mistakes
God would want to preserve His Word without mistakes and
God did preserve His Word without mistakes
in the King James Version of the Bible.