The King James Version.

When King James commissioned a group of 57 scholars to translate the Bible in 1607, he looked for the best men at that time to produce a new translation using only the original Hebrew (Masoretic Text) and Greek (Byzantine/Received/Antiochian Text) manuscripts.

These men were divided into six groups: Three for the Old Testament, two for the New Testament, and one for the Apocrypha (later dropped). When each group finished its work, they submitted it to another group of twelve men for review. This next group found it necessary to add certain words not found in the original in order for the text to flow in the English language. These added words are in italics so that anyone reading will be able to tell which words were added. The initial job was finished in two years, but an additional nine months was taken for yet another group to evaluate the work of the first groups. Since it was first published in 1611, only minor modifications (mostly spelling) have been made.

The King James Version uses the “Byzantine Text” (also known as the “Syrian” “Antiochian” and “Received” texts) for its main manuscript of the New Testament. This text circulated throughout the Byzantine Empire. It also circulated in Syria and in its capital, Antioch. Scholars often call it Koine(Greek: “common”) to designate its 95% accuracy.

There are some small differences among the almost 5,000 Greek manuscripts that we use to compare. But most of these differences do not change the intent or meaning of the verses.

The Bible is inspired by God in such a way that we cannot base doctrine on any one verse. Doctrine or teaching is not found nicely wrapped up in one place. “For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little” (Isa. 28:10).

The actual differences in manuscripts involve words or phrases that do not change the intent of the verse. By putting all the verses together on any particular subject, you can come to a sound decision on what the verses’ intent is.

Questions of Authority

There are only two places in the New Testament that come into question about authenticity: Mark 16:9-20 and John 7:53-8:11.

The last part of Mark’s gospel is not found in some of the oldest manuscripts, but it is found in some copies. The language used is somewhat different than that of the rest of the book, leading some to believe that someone other than Mark actually finished this section. But if these last verses are left out, the chapter does not come to a logical ending. Because God does things decently and in order (I Cor. 14:40), these verses do belong; they were inspired by God to be there.

Referring to John 7:53-8:11, the margin notes in the New King James Version (NKJV) state, “NU brackets 7:53 through 8:11 as not in the original text. They are present in over 900 manuscripts of John.” Again, this section does not take away nor add anything that would change the intent of the book. In fact, a theologian once said, “the account has all the earmarks of historical veracity.”

One deliberate hoax that was perpetrated after the New Testament was completed is found in I John 5:7-8: “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree as one.” Transcribers who believed in the pagan Trinity concept added the italicized words to support their beliefs.

Those who use this verse to support the Trinity doctrine are either ignorant of the verse being altered, or are blatantly trying to deceive. Nowhere does the Bible teach the pagan doctrine of the Trinity. Although this verse is found in the KJV and the NKJV, there is a marginal note in the NKJV stating, “NU, M omit the rest of v. 7 and through on earth of v. 8, a passage found in Greek in only four or five very late mss.”

The Critical and Experimental Commentary says of this section that the verse was not found in the Latin Vulgate until the eighth century. Adam Clarke’s Commentary states, “But it is likely that this verse is not genuine. It is wanting in every MS. Of this epistle written before the invention of printing, one excepted, the Codex Montifortii, in Trinity College, Dublin: the others which omit this verse amount to one hundred and twelve.

“It is wanting in both the Syriac, all the Arabic, Ethiopic, the Coptic, Sahidic, Armenian, Slavonian, etc., in a word, in all the ancient versions but the Vulgate; and even of this version many of the most ancient and correct MSS. have it not. It is wanting also in all the ancient Greek fathers; and in most even of the Latin.”