Which Bible Translation Should You Read? A Case for the King James Version

The speaker recommends the King James Version (KJV), first published in 1611. He says its translators examined earlier Bible copies and manuscripts, and he urges readers to compare translation choices and decide which version they trust.

Why the speaker favors the King James Version

The speaker says 54 respected theologians, linguists, and academics worked on the KJV. They were organized into six groups, and he says they examined available manuscripts, which he estimates now number about 5,200 documents worldwide. He describes the result as the most comprehensive biblical document available today.

He argues that modern translations draw on different source texts and make different translation choices. As one example, he says the ESV came from the 1971 text edition of the RSV and was first published in 2001. He cites ESV translation committee member Wayne Grudem as saying that about 8%, or 60,000 words, of the 1971 RSV text was used for the ESV.

The speaker also claims the RSV leaves out the word “homosexual” in 1 Corinthians 6:9–10. He presents that difference as a reason to examine how each translation handles specific passages.

The speaker’s concerns about the NIV

The speaker says the NIV explicitly aims to go beyond a formal, word-for-word rendering of the original texts. He connects gender-neutral language in Bible translations to a wider change in English usage.

He claims the NIV has removed 64,500 words, naming “Jehovah,” “Calvary,” “Holy Ghost,” and “omnipotent” as examples. He also argues that NIV, ESV, and other translations have removed 45 complete verses.

In his view, replacing male-oriented gender-inclusive language with gender-neutral wording reflects feminism and challenges what he sees as God’s order and authority. He points to gender-inclusive language guidelines at liberal universities as part of this broader change.

Translation committee members and gender language

The speaker discusses Virginia Mollenkott, whom he identifies as a consultant who worked on the NIV throughout its translation and review. He describes her as pro-abortion and says she denied the God of the Bible, worshipped a female deity, and openly identified as a lesbian. He quotes her as saying, “My lesbianism has always been a part of me.”

He also names Dr. Marten Woudstra as chairman of the NIV’s Old Testament translation committee. The speaker says Woudstra was homosexual and that his views aligned with those of Mollenkott and other Christian homosexuals.

Bible app updates and changes to familiar verses

The speaker notes that many people read the Bible on phones and devices such as Android tablets. He points to John 10:10, quoting the familiar KJV wording: “The thief cometh not but to steal, kill, and destroy. I have come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.”

He warns that Bible apps can update automatically when users download a modern translation and install an update. He argues that later updates may remove or add material, and asks why translations would change if the meaning stayed exactly the same.

Revelation 1:5 and the wording about Jesus’ blood

The speaker argues that modern translations change the KJV wording in Revelation 1:5. The KJV says Jesus “loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood.” He claims the versions below do not say that readers are washed in Jesus’ blood:

• ASV
• NRSV
• NLB
• NCV
• Amplified
• TLB
• NIV
• TEV
• ISV
• NASB
• ESV

He presents this difference as a serious concern, saying that the spirit of the age and “the god of this world” can draw people away from God.

Deuteronomy and Revelation warn against changing Scripture

The speaker closes by citing Deuteronomy 4:2, which warns against adding to or taking away from God’s commands. He also quotes Revelation 22:18–19, which warns against adding to or removing words from the book of prophecy.

For him, those warnings support his preference for the KJV and his call to weigh translation differences carefully. He leaves readers to make their own decision about which Bible to read.