As a young Christian I sometimes wondered why so many different preachers and churches that used the same KJV Holy Bible often disagreed with each other regarding certain bible doctrines and teachings. I soon realized that among other reasons for their disagreements is the fact that most of the pastors and churches that use the KJV Holy Bible don't actually believe it to be the Holy Bible. Most Bible students today, even in conservative churches, believe that the KJV Holy Bible is not totally reliable, and therefore we can alter it using a “more accurate” English word garnered from a “more reliable” source as we see fit, “every man whatsoever is right in his own eyes” (Deut. 12:8). “All Christians profess to believe that God speaks to them in the Bible. He speaks, and therefore He can make us hear and know His voice. But we fall far too readily into the notion that the book only speaks to us; and we find, when we think so, that our spirit does not hear. Then we go to commentaries; we try one after another; we know not how to ascertain whether this or that commentary may be most safely trusted; we go further and further from the Book which all the time we profess to consider divine, and we despair of its teaching, even whilst we seem to ourselves to be reverencing it.” (Bible Readings, Edinburgh, 1864, Preface page VI). Each time we go beyond what the Word of God in the Bible gives us, we go further and further from the scriptures.

     Nineteenth century English physicist, Michael Faraday (1791-1867), said, “[T]he Christian who is taught of God (by His Word and the Holy Spirit) to trust in the promise of salvation through the work of Jesus Christ.... finds his guide in the Word of God, and commits the keeping of his soul into the hands of God. He looks for no assurance beyond what the Word can give him, and if his mind is troubled by the cares and fears which may assail him, he can go nowhere but in prayer to the throne of grace and to Scripture.” (The Life and Letters of Faraday, Vol. 2, 1870, p. 431)

     Is it a biblical practice to consult bible lexicons for the purpose of obtaining a more accurate translation of a biblical word or passage? If so, just who gets to choose which word is going to be used? Is it “ye”, as in Genesis 3: “ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil?” May we each re-do the “pure words” of the English Bible, one word at a time? May each of us translate the Greek New Testament into English? God has already given us the answers to these questions in the scriptures. Paul told us to “all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.” (I Cor. 1:10). Paul went on to say that our spiritual fathers “did all eat the same spiritual meat; And did all drink the same spiritual drink” (I Cor. 10:3,4). Then Paul said, “To write the same things to you, to me indeed is not grievous, but for you it is safe.” (Philip. 3:1). Using bible lexicons or three different bible versions which uses three different English words for the same Greek word in the same scripture passage is not only un-safe, it is un-biblical and anti-biblical as well, because of the corrupt sources of the underlying texts — “for ye have perverted the words of the living God” (Jer. 23:36); “Her priests have violated my law, and have profaned mine holy things: they have put no difference between the holy and profane” (Ezek. 22:26).

“Have not I written to thee excellent things in counsels and knowledge, That I might make thee know the certainty of the words of truth; that thou mightest answer the words of truth to them that send unto thee?” (Prov. 22:20,21).
“But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.” (John 14:26).
“The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.” (Psalms 12:6,7).
“Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.” (Proverbs 30:5,6).

     The prophet Isaiah said, “To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.” (Isaiah 8:20). The apostle Paul instructs us to “stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.” (II Thess. 2:15). Jesus said to “hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown.” (Rev. 3:11). The Lord said, “he that hath my word, let him speak my word faithfully.” (Jer. 23:28); and “let God be true, but every man a liar” (Romans 3:4). Jesus said, “The seed is the word of God.” (Luke 8:11), and “Satan cometh immediately, and taketh away the word” (Mark 4:15). God has never told his people to look outside of his word to find the meaning of his words. The practice of searching bible lexicons and interlinears for the so called true meaning of God's word is unscriptural. Few people today realize the true source of bible dictionaries and interlinears. The men who gave us our Greek/Hebrew dictionaries were, for the most part, un-saved liberals who's views and interpretations of the Bible were tainted by Gnosticism, mythology, mysticism, humanism and secularism. Man-made dictionaries and lexicons attempting to give a more "accurate" meaning of some biblical word or passage will inevitably corrupt the true meaning. This is because those Greek and Hebrew bible lexicon definitions are derived from mythological, secular or classical interpretations of biblical words.

“Is not my word like as a fire? saith the LORD; and like a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces?” (Jeremiah 23:29)
“What is this then that is written, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner? Whosoever shall fall upon that stone shall be broken; but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.” (Luke 20:17,18)
“Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner, And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed.” (I Peter 2:7,8)

     The Hebrew scriptures were written in a biblical vocabulary, not a secular vocabulary. The same is true for the inspired Greek New Testament and the preserved English Bible (KJV). Whenever someone has difficulty understanding the King James Bible, it is not because the KJV is an outdated book with archaic words. It is because of the reader's lack of spiritual understanding of biblical English (Isa. 55:8,9; Luke 24:45; Acts 16:14; I Cor. 2:14; I Pet. 2:2). The apostle Paul said that “some have not the knowledge of God: I speak this to your shame.” (I Cor. 15:34). God knows the English language as well as he knows ancient Koine Greek and Hebrew. The preservation of God's word in the English language is no more difficult than the preservation of his word in the Greek and Hebrew languages. “And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.... And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.” (Acts 2:1-6).

     Note that “every man heard them speak in his own language”. Bibles were written in several languages (Greek, Syriac, Latin, Gothic, et al) within a few years of the New Testament's creation, as the “pure words” of the Holy Ghost are not limited to one or two ancient languages. When translating the Bible into English the KJV translators had before them many copies of these ancient Bibles, numerous patristic writings and vast numbers of original language manuscripts. “And the word of God increased.” “But the word of God grew and multiplied.” “And the word of the Lord was published throughout all the region.” “So mightily grew the word of God and prevailed.” (Acts 6:7; 12:24; 13:49; 19:20). To those who charge that inspiration is lost with translation, John Wycliffe says, �...such a charge is a condemnation of the Holy Ghost, who first gave the Scriptures in tongues to the Apostles of Christ, to speak that word in all languages that were ordained under heaven� (John Wycliffe, Wycket (a treatise against the Catholic view of the Eucharist), printed in Nuremberg in 1546, by Coverdale in 1548-1550, and again in Oxford in 1612, as cited in John Eadie, The English Bible: An External and Critical History of the Various English Translations of Scripture, vol. I, London: MacMillan, 1876, p. 81 et al.). “There are no Bible verses which indicate that vernacular translations, like the KJV, will be inferior to those of ancient languages. There are no Bible verses that state that Bible study should be done in those ancient languages. If such were a benefit to our understanding, one would think that at least one verse would mention it. There are no Bible examples of Jesus Christ or the apostles correcting the Bible of their day or refusing to communicate to the common man in his own vernacular tongue. Paul's captors chided, "Canst thou speak Greek?" Paul ignored them and continued to speak to the people in their own language (Acts 21:37, 40).” (In Awe Of Thy Word, p. 498)

     The articles on this page expound on this subject and shows why it is so important to "Seek ye out of the book of the LORD, and read"(Isa. 34:16), and to "set thine heart to understand, and to chasten thyself before thy God"(Dan. 10:12). And "the Spirit of truth ... will guide you into all truth"(John 16:13), "not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth [through Greek/Hebrew dictionaries], but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual"(I Cor. 2:13). "It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man."(Psa. 118:8). "The anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you"(I John 2:27). "If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him. But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed."(James 1:5,6).

“There are definite elements of choice, preference, and uncertainty involved in Greek scholarship, which prevent it from being the absolute authority. The debate as to whether the KJV retains the inspiration of God, or does not, is important because it affects many practical things. The KJV, like all translations, sometimes translates several different Greek words with the same English word (or the same Greek word as several different English words). Although it may be quite straightforward to determine the English equivalent of the Greek word for dog, many other Greek words have many English counterparts. In English one can describe a fat dog, as stout, obese, overweight, heavy, plump, chubby, paunchy, stocky, tubby, overweight, overfed, overstuffed, well-fed, strapping, blubbery, roly-poly, mammoth, king-size, husky, imposing, massive, overgrown, hulking, huge, lumbering, immense, whopping, adipose, burly, portly, pudgy, chunky, dumpy, stubby, thickset, corpulent, and 'big as a house'! Who gets to choose which word is going to be used? Is it "ye," as in Genesis 3? May we each re-do the fixed form of the English Bible? Or if we can not bear the printing co$t or ensuing criticism, may we do it extemporaneously, piece-by-piece? Is the word of God perfect and pure, or is it defiled and less than perfect in any of its word choices? In other words, may each of us translate the Greek Bible into English? (See The Language of the King James Bible, p. 72.)” (In Awe Of Thy Word, p. 504)

     Unlike the KJV translators, who had the entire original work (vast numbers of original language manuscripts, many citations of the early church fathers, and numerous bible translations in different languages from various lands) which contains the word in question and could read the word ‘in use’ in its entire context, those who translate the Textus Receptus today from Greek to English have only pagan, classical and secular viewpoints to draw from, and must, therefore, rely on the "corrupt words" of unsaved liberal lexicon writers.

“The lexicons and grammars of unsaved liberals are at the foundation of all Greek and Hebrew studies today. Current lexicons are either reprints of the works of 19th century liberals or highly plagiarized and slightly edited re-typeset editions. The few study aids that have been written by 'Christians' were compiled using the corrupt lexicons of un-believers. These unsaved men cannot discern spiritual things. 孏he wise men...have rejected the word of the LORD; and what wisdom is in them?� (Jer. 8:9). 𨯗 scorner seeketh wisdom, and findeth it not: but knowledge is easy unto him that understandeth� (Prov. 14:6).... Why have we abdicated, to the unsaved, our priestly position as keepers of the holy scriptures? Old Testament Jews sometimes did likewise; yet God preserved his word. �...[T]hey that handle the law knew me not...� Jer. 2:8. 𨯗nd ye have not kept the charge of mine holy things [the Holy Bible]: but ye have set keepers of my charge in my sanctuary for yourselves. Thus saith the Lord GOD; No stranger, uncircumcised in heart...shall enter into my sanctuary, of any stranger that is among the children of Israel� Ezek 44:8, 9. �...[N]one which was unclean in any thing should enter in� 2 Chron. 23:19. The 蘔oly things� could only be handled by the priesthood of believers (e.g. 蘔oly scriptures� Numbers 4:4, 5, et al.). Many people had the same skills as the Old Testament Levitical priesthood, but they were not sons (Levites) and were not washed. Only Aaron𠏋 rod brought forth new life. Even in the New Testament, the church is commanded to 尞ay hands suddenly on no man� (1 Tim. 5:22). A church does not select a deacon by grabbing the first scholar who moves through a university𠏋 revolving door. Deacons are selected only after they are 𢖯roved.� How many have 𢖯roved� the authors of today𠏋 popular reference books? They are engaged in work more serious than feeding widows (1 Tim. 3, Acts 6:1-6). Greek lexicons shroud their dead words in velvet-smooth speculation. 鏠ursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm� (Jer. 17:5). If Christians knew how these rubber crutches were constructed, so much weight would not be placed upon lexicons, constructed as follows:

“Before using a lexicon, interlinear, or computer program which pretends to tell its reader what a Greek word means in English, remember that the ancient Greeks wrote no Greek-to-English lexicons themselves. They did not speak English and never told us the precise English synonyms for the Greek word they used. All lexicon definitions are simply one person𠏋 guess as to which English word best matches a Greek word.”
“In addition to helping the translators determine the usage of Greek words, Chrysostom𠏋 manuscripts, which contain many scripture citations, document the true ancient Greek New Testament readings. Chrysostom lived during the same century that the new version𠏋 corrupt Vaticanus and Sinaiticus manuscripts were written. His scripture citations are of equal antiquity and of better authority than these two corrupt manuscripts, because of his orthodoxy. The KJV translators occasionally used Greek grammars and lexicons, but never as final authorities. Their authorities were Bibles, such as previous English Bibles or foreign Bibles.” (In Awe Of Thy Word, pp. 508,509,510,513)

“What about the Greek and Hebrew interlinears and study aids compiled by Christian men? These men may have inspired Greek and Hebrew words, but the English reference books they use to translate them into so-called "literal," "plain," "everyday" English, are anything but inspired. Since ancient Koine Greek is not the mother tongue of any living person, they must use the books with the "corrupt words" of unsaved liberal lexicon writers to create their interlinears and study aids (Dan. 2:9).” (In Awe Of Thy Word, p. 518)

“According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon. For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.” (I Corinthians 3:10,11)

     Greek text editors such as 𡌃rasmus, Theodore Beza, and Estienne (Stephanus) drew attention to the difference between biblical and classical Greek [used by lexicons], a primary issue still� (Cambridge History of the Bible, vol.3, p. 522). Erasmus warned of the font from which lexicons are taken and their 𡞫anger of taking words in a sense they may well have in classical Greek, but which is not the sense in which they are used in the New Testament.� ... Erasmus stands in sharp contrast to his contemporary Greek text editors who promote the false notion that 廍cripture remains full of meanings 𢘛hich are not able to be understood in any way other than from the very fount of the original languages� [quae nequeant aliunde quam ex ipso archetypae linguae fonte cognosci]. This quote is taken from the preface of the Catholic Complutensian Polyglot produced by Cardinal Ximenez in 1517; this Catholic 㣃ather� spawned 懀he first� Greek New Testament lexicon, which bred today𠏋 mongrels (In Awe Of Thy Word, Pelikan, p. 110; The Cambridge History of the Bible, vol 3, p. 525).

“Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!” (Isaiah 5:20,21)

     We would be wise to pay closer attention to the lives and beliefs of those who wrote our bible dictionaries and interlinears. For example, James Strong, author of the Strong's Concordance, was a liberal who was on the corrupt American Standard Version committee (1909(01?). The chairman of the ASV translation, arch-liberal Phillip Schaff, is quoted saying that he selected only committee members who denied the inspiration of the scriptures (David Schaff, The Life of Schaff, NY: Scribner's Sons 1897, pp. 439, 351, 357, 434-435). Strong's Greek and Hebrew definitions are simply his own collation of his corrupt ASV readings, with the RSV and KJV readings. The modern versions often use the ASV word. Therefore, Strong's definitions = ASV = NIV, TNIV, NKJV, ESV, HCSB, and NASB. Such wolves were recognized in a note in the Matthew's Bible of 1549. It said, “The open enemy is most ugly in sight, But the wolf in the lamb's skin doeth all the spite...” (Dore, 2nd ed., p.124).