Another King James Bible Believer



 What Muslims are saying about our Bible


“How can Christians say The Bible is the infallible words of God when it has been changed so many times and there are so many contradictory versions?  The Quran has never been changed.”


At one of the Bible clubs on Facebook where we were discussing the various Bible versions and how different they are, I mentioned how the Muslims have many articles on the internet where they criticize the Bible as being corrupt and full of errors and contradictions. One of the members was not aware of this, so I decided to document some of what I have seen on the internet the last few years.


There is a Muslim site called Salafi Publications. They have an article called Concerning the Authenticity of the Bible, The Christian New Testament.  In it they present many arguments and examples of contradiction and textual differences among the various Bible translations and they sound remarkably like the "Christian" modern, Vatican Version promoters (ESV, NIV, NASB, NET, Holman, ISV) I run into almost every day on the internet and in books like James White's The KJV Controversy, or Rick Norris' The Unbound Scriptures, or James Price's King James Onlyism: A New Sect.  Here is the Muslim site and the article they have written. -


By the way, I personally have read all three of these Anti-King James Bible books (White, Norris and Price) and am very familiar with their arguments. Not one of these men believes there exists a complete, inspired and 100% true words of God Bible in ANY language on the face of this earth. Each of these men is what I call a Bible Agnostic who do not know where to find a copy of God's complete and infallible words in any Bible.  Just ask them where you can get a copy of God's infallible Book.  They will NEVER tell you.  You can see the articles I have written about these three Bible Agnostics and their writings at the bottom of this page.


#1.  Ex Harvard Divinity School graduate and former preacher says texts of Bible have been corrupted and changed, and is now a Muslim.


30 minute video.  At 8 minutes into the interview, he begins to talk about how there have been many changes in the Bible texts that raise “serious, serious questions” about the Fundamental beliefs of Christianity that affect the Trinity, the Sonship of Jesus, the crucifixion of Jesus, the atonement and the blood.  He says that he learned all these things in Seminary and that after graduation half of his class then left the Christian ministry.


Both Muslims refer favorably to Dr. Bart Ehrman, who himself says he was once a “born again Christian”, but then studied Textual Criticism under Bruce Metzger and now calls himself  “a happy agnostic”.  Bart Ehrman has written several books like “Misquoting Jesus” and is now going around the country to many universities and giving talks about how the Bible is a man made invention full of errors and textual corruptions.


(My note: I have read Bart Ehrman’s book and also written an article that examines his claims about the New Testament and  his “happy agnosticism” - You can see it here if you like: )



#2 Here is a Muslim site by Osama Abdallah which has many articles that “prove” the Bible is corrupt and contradictory.


One of his articles is of special interest.  It is called “All Versions are NOT saying the same thing!”


This Muslim states: “This chart is by no means complete.

Most Christians recognize the New World Translation (NWT - Jehovah's Witness Bible) for the corrupt work it is. What most Christians don't recognize is the same corruption in their own "Christian" bibles!


Then he lists about 25 different verses taken from the King James Bible, the NIV, NASB and the New World translation and lays them down side by side to show how different they are.  (My note: he could have listed hundreds more -


#3.   At another huge Muslim site called Muslim Awareness, in their article titled Textual Reliability/Accuracy of the New Testament - (you can see it here -



They factually explode the often quoted statement by textual critic Bruce Metzger and repeated by most modern version promoters that “The N.T. text is 99.5% authenticated”. 


(My Note: This false claim of 99.5% the same for all New Testament versions IS false.  In this instance the Muslim scholars are being more truthful than the modern day Evangelicals.  Here is the proof - )


In their Conclusion at Islamic Awareness they state:  “We can see that the modern day textual critics portray a very different set of statistics quite contrary to the over-hyped claims of the missionaries and apologists. The Alands, discussing the differences between seven popular critical editions of the New Testament, excluding orthographic differences and differences of only one word, calculate that 62.9% of the verses of the entire New Testament are in agreement with each other. Similarly, if we look at the statistics for the gospels, we find that there is a 54.5% agreement. If we look at the textual "certainty" of the United Bible Societies' The Greek New Testament, a text which is based on the decisions of a committee, the result is close to 83.5%. There is no mention of 99.5% agreement here. In a twist of irony further compounding the foolishness of the missionaries' and apologists' position, the Bibles they use (normally the NIV version) are based on the very same critical editions of the New Testament by the very same people who have calculated the above percentages!”


(My note: At our Which Version club a member asked me if I really believed these statistics by the Alands, etc.  Well, Yes.  That is what they say as can be seen here where they discuss the Greek New Testament (it is NOT a Muslim site) -


In "The Text Of The New Testament", Kurt Aland and Barbara Aland compare the total number of variant-free verses, and the number of variants per page (excluding orthographic errors), among the seven major editions of the Greek NT (Tischendorf, Westcott-Hort, von Soden, Vogels, Merk, Bover and Nestle-Aland) concluding 62.9% agreement.” - K. Aland and B. Aland, "The Text of the New Testament: An Introduction to the Critical Editions & to the Theory & Practice of Modern Textual Criticism", 1995, op. cit., p. 29-30.


(My note: And then they call this 62.9% “an amazing agreement among the Greek texts, greater than the textual scholars would have suspected.”!!!  And even then the Alands did not include the basic Traditional Greek text used by the Reformation Bibles, whether English, German, French, Portuguese or Spanish, or the Trinitarian Bible Society Greek text by Scrivener that shows the Greek text that underlies the King James Bible.  If they had included these in their comparison study, the textual agreement would be far, far less than their 62.9%.)


 #4. At another Muslim site, in an article titled "Answers to a Muslim Critic" a man named Khaled answers a professing convert to Christianity


"Since all these different versions of Bibles on the earth today do not agree with each other - does this mean, that they are accusing each other of being "suspect of corruption"?


The preface to one of the most accurately translated Bibles (Revised Standard Version) says on the second page, "Yet, the King James Version has grave defects." - That is definitely accusation of being "suspect of corruption."


The Catholic Bible (based on the Latin Vulgate of the fourth century) has 73 books, while the Protestant Bible (one thousand years later) only has 66 books. One of them (or both?) is obviously corrupt. Which one? The new one (66 books)? Or the old one (73 books)?


The scholars of the Old Testament state very clear in all of their works, they no longer have the original documents penned by any prophet, (peace be upon them all). So the scholars of Old Testament claim they do not have the exact texts and they also state clearly there many are different versions. Does this mean they are accusing the Old Testament of being "suspect and it should not be accepted as authentic testimony"?


***[my note - I think this Muslim is referring to Jeremiah 8:8 as found in several modern versions. Not to the King James Bible translation of this verse. "the pen of the scribes is in vain" The KJB got it right. Many modern versions do not. See my article on this here:



The Muslim continues: "Scholars of New Testament state without doubt, they do not possess the actual texts of any of Jesus' (peace be upon him) companions - and no one has ever claimed to have anything written by Jesus or even anything recited by him. Does this not indicate "suspect and it should not be accepted as authentic testimony"?


 What do you say about the Bible? Do you claim it is suspect and should not be accepted as authentic testimony? Or do you claim you have the original? Or do you even know what language the Bible came in originally?... According to your own words, by your own standards, the Bible has been accused and is suspect by experts and therefore, you have nothing to offer at all.


#5. At another Muslim site called "Answering Christianity" this Muslim writer  says:


" What parts of the Bible do Muslims believe are closest to the Truth?


First of all, it is important to know that if the "Bibles" of today, with all their versions and differences in the quantity of their "books" and "gospels", were in fact the Original Holy Word of GOD Almighty, then there would be no need for the Noble Quran.  But since they are corrupt, then we obviously can't consider them as GOD Almighty's Holy and Divine Words.


 The Noble Quran came to confirm Truth that exists in the Manuscripts in the different canons and to filter out Truth from falsehood in them.  Allah Almighty never claimed that the bible is fully and 100% Divine.  Islam is a witness on the Bible.  It filters out the truth from falsehood and corruption in the Bible.  The Noble Quran only recognizes the Bible as a HISTORY BOOK with errors and man's alteration in it.  Anything that agrees 100% with Islam is valid, and anything else that has even the slightest disagreement with Islam is discarded."



#6  And on a less formal level, you will find many Muslim blogs on the internet that proclaim the Bible has been corrupted.  Here is one such blog by a  Muslim man named Shajahan Ahmed


Abdullah Says:


January 29, 2010 at 6:37 am

“It is a fact that the Bible is corrupt, Christian scholars have been saying so for hundreds of years and yet they have no problem to use verses of the Bible to justify their theology.”


Abdullah Says:


January 29, 2010 at 6:33 pm

“No, Christian scholars have been saying that the text contains errors, contradictions, alterations and unintelligible verses. Moreover, we know this to be true because we read the Bible. Only the blind cannot see.”  


 #7. In June of 2012 at a Facebook club called King James Version Only Discussion a Muslim posts the following comments: "Ijaz Ahmad Al Aqsaee     6:05am Jun 18  "I don't know how I missed this earlier, but I am a Muslim...Our problems come down to the fact that verses, chapters and sometimes even entire books are rendered apocryphal as time goes by and continues to do so today. The Nestle Aland 27th edition which most of the modern translations are based on reflect words, verses and chapters just vanishing. The diminishing canon of your Bible is our problem with your scripture.  Hope that helps."
- Ijaz Ahmad, author @


(End of comments made by Muslims and their beliefs about how The Bible has been corrupted.”)



The Infallibility of the Scriptures and the absolute truthfulness of The Bible is under attack today like at no other time in history.  What has changed is that it is no longer just the Atheists, the Skeptics, the Muslims and other Bible bashers that are claiming that there is no such thing as a complete, inspired and 100% true Holy Bible in any language, but most professing Christians as well! 


I and many others Christians believe God HAS GIVEN us “the book of the LORD” that is 100% true and it is in the end time universal language of English, and more specifically, the King James Holy Bible.



By His grace, believing The Book, 


“He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.”  Matthew 11:15


Will Kinney

Return to Articles - 



Further Reading


For those who want to learn more about whether or not we have a complete, inspired and 100% true Holy Bible called the King James Holy Bible,  you may be interested in the following articles:


Undeniable Proof the ESV, NIV, NASB, NET etc. are the new Vatican Versions -


Are you a Bible believer or a Bible agnostic?


“Is King James Bible onlyism Scriptural?”


Answering the Bible Agnostics like Rick Norris, James Price and James White


A King James Bible believer answers  Rick Norris' Book "The Unbound Scriptures" -


A Bible Believers Response to James Price's book King James Onlyism, A New Sect -


James White's Shell Game -


All modern versions like the NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV, NET, Holman Standard etc. often reject the Hebrew texts, and not even in the same places



“No Doctrines are Changed?” in the modern versions


“The Oldest and the Best Manuscripts?” upon which most modern versions like the NASB, NIV, ESV, NET, Holman Standard are based


“The so called “science” of Textual Criticism”


The Text of the Quran certainly has been changed over the years 


If any Muslims or other interested parties are reading this, May I suggest this wonderful site where you will find many Muslim testimonies of how they came to believe the gospel of salvation through the Lord Jesus Christ.  Many of these video testimonies are in Arabic and you can hear about how God transformed their lives through the saving grace of God in Jesus Christ.