Another King James Bible Believer

James White - the Protestant Pope of the New Vatican Versions

James White - the Protestant Pope of the New Vatican Versions

 



James White is not the devil incarnate, nor is he a prophet of God, but he may very well be the equivalent of the Protestant Pope of the new Vatican Versions.  

I have read James White’s book, The King James Only Controversy, several times over and have dealt personally with him both on the internet and twice on Christian radio. I believe he has a lot of good things to say when it comes to the cults, and I believe he is a true, born again, redeemed by the blood of the Lamb Christian, but when it comes to the Bible version issue, he is completely on the wrong side.

James White SAYS he believes The Bible IS the infallible words of God. I asked him this question personally on his radio program. But when I asked Mr. White where we can see a copy of this infallible Bible he PROFESSES to believe in, he immediately changes the subject. He will never tell you.  The simple fact is this - James White is lying when he says he believes The Bible IS the infallible words of God.

 

When James White says "I believe the Bible IS the infallible words of God" he is not referring to a real, tangible, in print, hold it in your hands and read, Book at all. He is referring to a mythical, imaginary, hypothetical, invisible and non-existent, phantom "bible" that he has never seen, does not have and certainly cannot give to anybody else.

In other words, he is professing faith in a Fantasy. And then he thinks we Bible believers who have a real Bible printed on paper between two covers we can actually hold in our hands and give to anybody that asks to see it are "a cult", and even heretics.

In his way of thinking, those of us who confess a faith in a tangible, preserved, and inerrant Bible are "heretics" and "cultic", but people like him who lie when they say they believe the Bible IS (as though it really exists) the infallible words of God" are somehow "Orthodox". 

The Vatican Versions

“Mystery, Babylon the Great, The Mother of Harlots and Abominations of the Earth..is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit...and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication...Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins” Revelation 17:2-5; 18:2-4

 

 

 See “A Reasoned Response to the James White “interview” on his Dividing Line Radio Program” 

http://brandplucked.webs.com/jameswhitedivideline.htm

See also "Answering James White’s Question - Which King James Version is the infallible words of God?"

http://brandplucked.webs.com/answerwhitewhichkjb.htm

Mr. White used to work for the New American Standard Version, at least in a part time position, but now it seems his favorite flavor of the month Bible version is the ESV, the revision of the revision of the liberal RSV.  But what Mr. White may not be aware of is the undeniable FACT that all these modern versions like the ESV, NIV, NASB, NET and the brand new Common English Version are all the new “Vatican Versions”.

You may think this charge is utterly ridiculous. But the proof is undeniable and easily verified. All anyone has to do to confirm the truth of this is to simply read what their own editors of the UBS (United Bible Society) and Nestle-Aland ever changing critical text have written in their own Greek critical text.  Then simply compare the TEXTS  to see the thousands of omissions and the scores of places where versions like the ESV, NIV, NASB, NET and the modern Catholic bible versions like the St. Joseph New American Bible and the New Jerusalem bible all reject thousands of words from the Reformation New Testament and numerous clear Hebrew readings and add hundreds of words to the inspired Hebrew writings in the Old Testament.

 See Undeniable Proof the ESV, NIV, NASB, NET etc. are  the new "Catholic" bibles.
http://brandplucked.webs.com/realcatholicbibles.htm

  There you will find the complete articles, both parts One and Two, and you can see for yourself in black and white that the New Testament and Old Testament texts of the modern Catholic bible versions and the ESV, NIV, NASB, NET are virtually identical in the thousands of words that they all omit and change.

Here is part of what you will find when you read this article.  Do you know why the UBS (United Bible Society) Greek texts are the basis for all these new versions? It's because Catholics and Evangelicals were united to produce this text. One of the 5 chief editors was the New Age Jesuit Cardinal Carlos Martini, who believed god was in all men and in all religions. Just open a copy of the UBS New Testament Greek and turn to the first page.  There you will see a list of the 5 chief editors who put this abomination together.  The 4th name on the list, right before the inerrancy denying Bruce Metzger, is Carlo M. Martini.  In his book "In the Thick of His Ministry" Cardinal Martini writes: “The deification which is the aim of all religious life takes place. During a recent trip to India I was struck by the yearning for the divine that pervades the whole of Hindu culture. It gives rise to extraordinary religious forms and extremely meaningful prayers. I wondered: What is authentic in this longing to fuse with the divine dominating the spirituality of hundreds of millions of human beings, so that they bear hardship, privation, exhausting pilgrimages, in search of this ecstasy?" (In The Thick Of His Ministry, Carlo M. Martini, page 42.) 

The Jesuit Cardinal Martini served on the editorial committee for the United Bible Societies' 2nd, 3rd and 4th editions, and he is still listed on the opening page of the latest Nestle-Aland 28th edition critical text. These are the "bibles" most modern Christians are using today when they pick up the ESV, NIV, NASB, NET or modern Catholic "bibles".

 In 1965, Pope Paul VI authorized the publication of a new Latin Vulgate, with the Latin text conformed to the United Bible Societies Greek New Testament (Michael de Semlyen, All Roads Lead to Rome, p. 201). In 1987 a formal agreement was made between the Roman Catholic Church and the United Bible Societies that the critical Greek New Testament will be used for all future translations, both Catholic and Protestant (Guidelines for International Cooperation in Translating the Bible, Rome, 1987, p. 5). Most of the translations produced by the United Bible Societies are “interconfessional,” meaning they have Roman Catholic participation and backing.”

It is interesting to note that the latest United Bible Societies Text, descended from the Westcott and Hort family, boasts, "the new text is a reality, and as the text distributed by the United Bible Societies and by the corresponding office of the Roman Catholic Church it has rapidly become the commonly accepted text for research and study in universities and church." - Kurt Aland and Barbara Aland, The Text of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Wm B Eerdmans, 1995), 35.
 
I have a copy of the Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece 27th edition right here in front of me.  It is the same Greek text as the UBS (United Bible Society) 4th edition.  These are the Greek readings and texts that are followed by such modern versions as the ESV, NIV, NASB, Holman Standard AND the new Catholic versions like the St. Joseph New American Bible 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible 1985.
 
If you have a copy of the Nestle-Aland 27th edition, open the book and read what they tell us in their own words on page 45 of the Introduction.  Here these critical Greek text editors tell us about how the Greek New Testament (GNT, now known as the UBS) and the Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece grew together and shared the same basic text.
 
In the last paragraph on page 45 we read these words: "The text shared by these two editions was adopted internationally by Bible Societies, and FOLLOWING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE VATICAN AND THE UNITIED BIBLE SOCIETIES IT HAS SERVED AS THE BASIS FOR THE NEW TRANSLATIONS AND FOR REVISIONS MADE UNDER THEIR SUPERVISION.  This marks a significant step with regard to interconfessional relationships. It should naturally be understood that this text is a working text: it is not to be considered as definitive, but as a stimulus to further efforts toward defining and verifying the text of the New Testament."



 
There it is folks, in their own words. They openly admit that this text is the result of an agreement between the Vatican and the UBS and that the text itself is not "definitive" - it can change, as it already has and will do so in the future, and is not the infallible words of God but merely "a stimulus to further efforts".  And this is the type of “infallible Bible” men like James White are promoting.

As I previously said, I have read James White’s book several times and have written several articles dealing with the examples of alleged “errors” he claims to have found in the King James Bible. James White is a smooth and fast talker and he has a lot of experience debating people. However upon further investigation and study, I have found much of his apparent “scholarship” to be often not true and sometimes even shoddy.

I will give you a couple of examples, but you can find many more in "James White - blind scholar" In that particular article I deal with a few of the alleged “problems” James thinks he has found in the King James Bible and I give a link to an online conversation James and I had several years ago where you can see him interact with me on a person to person level. I think it is quite revealing to see where James White REALLY stands on the issue of whether or not there exists such a thing as an inerrant Bible or not.  Here is the link to that article.

http://brandplucked.webs.com/acts1011isa1910fish.htm

One of many examples of James White's hypocrisy -
 
"Word" and "Turn"

In his book, The King James Only Controversy, chapter Nine, which is titled "Problems in the KJV", on page 231  Mr. James White states: "Jack Lewis notes that the KJV is also well known for the large variety of ways in which it will translate the same word. Now certainly there are many times when one will wish to use synonyms to translate particular terms, and context is vitally important in determining the actual meaning of a word, but the KJV goes beyond the bounds a number of times."

He continues: "For example, the Hebrew term for "word" or "thing" is rendered by EIGHTY FOUR different English words in the KJV! Another term, "to turn back" is rendered in one particular grammatical form by SIXTY different English words! Those who have attempted to follow the usage of a particular Hebrew or Greek term through the AV know how difficult such a task can be, and the inconsistency of the KJV in translating terms only makes the job that much harder." (End of quote.)

Most people who read this in Mr. White's book would think something like: "Oh, that nasty KJV. What a lousy translation it is. How unscholarly! Why would anybody want to use that?"

Most people would never take the time to verify if there is any validity to what Mr. White quotes from a certain Jack Lewis here; they would just accept his "scholarly" statements as facts.

James White knows both Hebrew and Greek and professes to be an expert in textual matters. He either didn't check the validity of the claims of Jack Lewis, or he is deliberately misrepresenting the facts to bolster his attacks on God's preserved words in the King James Bible. In either case, his hypocrisy is simply inexcusable.

The Hebrew word for the English "word" or "thing" is # 1697 Dabar. I only counted 78 different meanings found in the King James Bible, but I'll give Mr. White the benefit of the doubt and let him have his 84.

A simple look at the complete NASB concordance shows that the NASB has translated this single word Dabar in at least NINETY THREE very different ways while the NIV has over 200 different English meanings for this single Hebrew word.

Among the 94 different English words the NASB uses to translate this single Hebrew word are: account, act, advice, affair, agreement, amount, annals, answer, anything, asked, because, business, case, cause, charge, Chronicles, claims, commandment, compliments, concerned, conclusion, conditions, conduct, conferred, consultation, conversation, counsel, custom, dealings, decree, deed, defect, desires, dispute, doings, duty, edict, eloquent, event, fulfillment, harm, idea, instructed, manner, matter, message, nothing, oath, obligations, one, order, parts, pertains, plan, plot, portion, promise, proposal, proven, purpose, question, ration, reason, records, regard, reports, request, required, rule, said, same thing, saying, so much, some, something, songs, speaks, speech, talk, task, theme, thing, this, thoughts, threats, thus, told, trouble, verdict, way, what, whatever, word and work.

As I said, the NIV has over twice this amount of different meanings - well over 200 - as compared to the KJB's 84.

The second word mentioned by Mr. White is "to turn back" and it is # 7725 Shoov or Shub, and in this case Mr. White is correct in that the King James Bible does translate it some 60 different ways.

However what James forgot to mention is that his favorite NASB has translated this same single Hebrew word at least 104 different ways, while the NIV again has over 200 different meanings! 

For example, that second word # 7725 shoov or shub. It is used some 1,200 times or more.  The KJB has about 60 different meanings including "returned, gone back, come again, turn away, go home, certainly, to cease, go back, again, to reward, convert, restore, restorer, recover, bethink, bring back, withdraw, deliver again, recompense, in any case, fetch home again, requiting, to bring again, to answer, restore, to deliver, to give again, to say nay, to refresh, to render, to recompense, to draw back and to relieve."

But the NIV translates this word as "to return, turn, bring back, go back, again, restore, turn away, repent, give back, recover, answer, bring, change, go, refuse, relent, reward, take, withdrew, regain, start back, stop, brought, come, give, keep, left, oppose, to pay, rebuilt, reject, reply, repulse, restrain, retreat, revert, revoke, rewards, sent, take vengeance, turn around, withdraw, again be used, again give allegiance, another, arrived, break, bring in, broke off, brought down, call to mind, changed, changed mind, continually, cover up, depart, did, dole out, drew back, dwell, escaping, flow back, forced to restore, gave, get back, give up, go on, hold back, keep themselves alive, keeps saying, lose, left behind,made prosperous again, made pay for, made retreat, make full restitution, make go, marauding, mislead, no longer, not angry, overruling, overthrows, paid,  paid back, pass again, penitent, prompt to answer,pull back, pursues, raised, ran, reappears, recoil, reconsider, recover, refreshes, refund, renew, renounce, repay, rescue, respond, rest, restitution, restore again, restrained, retire, retreat, reversed, revived, revoke, roll back, say, send, shy away, something else, strayed, subsides, supply, take away, take back, try again, turned again, to vent, to ward off, withdraw, withhold, and 33 times leaves as untranslated."

So you begin to see how utterly ridiculous and hypocritical  James White is for bringing up this example of how badly the KJB translates Hebrew words.

What makes the hypocrisy of both James White and Mr. Jack Lewis all the more astonishing, is the fact that Jack Lewis himself is one of the principal NIV translators.

This is the type of scholarship men like James White and Jack Lewis employ to discredit the truth of the King James Bible.

James White has no infallible Bible to give you and he knows it, in spite meaningless profession to believe “the Bible IS the infallible words of God”. And what he is promoting instead are in fact the new Vatican Versions produced by the Whore of Babylon who has made the inhabitants of the earth drunk with the wine of her spiritual fornication - Revelation 17-18. 

 

Why Muslims love James White

 

James White denies that 1 John 5:7 is inspired Scripture. And  his video is put up by MuslimByChoice.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgwuFcHO8j4



James White is essentially the Protestant Pope of the new Vatican Versions. And he is not giving you all the factual evidence for the inclusion of 1 John 5:7. The Reformers disagree with James Wite Out.

1 John 5:7 IS inspired Scripture.

http://brandplucked.webs.com/1john57.htm

The Muslims love James White.

He also tells us that Luke 23:34 - "Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do" - is not inspired Scripture and doesn't belong in the Bible - even though it is found in his own recommended ESV, NIV, NASB.  Do all you James White clones agree with him on this?

http://brandplucked.webs.com/jwonluke2334.htm

Why Muslims love James White

James Wite Out, as he debates a Muslim,  also denies that Mark 16:9-20 is Scripture and John 7:53-8:11 - the woman taken in adultery.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYkPn2aXKds&spfreload=10

Mark 16:9-20 is inspired Scripture

http://brandplucked.webs.com/mark16920.htm



John 7:53 to 8:11 is inspired Scripture

http://brandplucked.webs.com/john753811.htm

 

John 5:3-4 “the Troubling of the Water”  Is this Inspired Scripture or not?


http://brandplucked.webs.com/john534troubling.htm

 

 

 

I and thousands of other blood bought children of God believe that God has sovereignly acted in history to keep His promises to preserve His words for ever and to give us “the book of the LORD”.  We believe there are many reasons why this Book is none other than the Authorized King James Holy Bible.

May I suggest just one more article to you that addresses this issue. It's called ‘God's Persistent Historical Witness to the Absolute Standard of Written Truth in the King James Bible’.  You can see it here -
http://brandplucked.webs.com/absolutestandard.htm

 I urge you to prayerfully seek the mind of God on this most important matter and to examine your own present belief or unbelief in the Bible you hold in your hands. Do you REALLY believe it is the very inspired and infallible words of God?  The only Christians I know of who do, are the King James Bible believers; not men like James White.

All of grace, believing the Book and clothed in the righteousness of Christ alone,

Will Kinney

Return to Articles - http://brandplucked.webs.com/kjbarticles.htm

“If we would destroy the Christian religion, we must first of all destroy man’s belief in the Bible.”  Voltaire - ex French philosopher and former unbeliever.  

 

Notes from the Internet


Why I believe James White is a Christian -

 

I believe James White is a born again, redeemed child of God because he clearly preaches the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ as seen in this short 3 1/2 minute video


That is probably the nicest thing that James White has said about the KJB! 


"What I encourage you to do, look at what God's word says. Not what men say about it. Use the King James Version, as long as you can understand it..." 1:34-1:44


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sy9jlibUEBE