What's the Big Deal About the KJV?

Important Issue or Fringe Heresy?

Help Spread the Message

Share on Your Blog

Use the following code to post a banner on your blog:

About the Film

Vision for the Project

The basic concept of this endeavor was placed on the hearts of Sam Gipp and Jonathan Marshall during the King James Bible 400th Anniversary Conference at Hope Baptist Church in Toledo, Ohio in April 2011. Their mutual desire was to present the Bible version issue in a unique way using cinematography.


Who is Sam Gipp?

Dr. Sam Gipp is a former pastor, an evangelist, teacher, author and Bible conference speaker. He has the unique ability to digest large amounts of information and then present it in an analytical, understandable, format. His humorous, informative and forceful preaching style make him popular with all ages and keeps him in demand as a Revivalist and Bible conference speaker. He has authored numerous books on the subject of the King James Bible and other versions. His materials are available through Daystar Publishing.

Who is Justin Doty?

Justin was raised in a good Christian home with his parents working for over 20 years as the youth leaders at his home church, Treasure Valley Baptist Church in Meridian, ID. He received Christ as his Saviour November 7, 1990, felt the call to preach in high school, and graduated with a bachelor of divinity degree from his church’s Bible Institute in 2010. God gave him a wonderful wife, Amber, who grew up in the church as well, and a beautiful little girl named Abigail. He went to Christian schools from elementary through graduation where he was the only one in the school using a King James Bible other than those who attended from his church. On many occasions he had to defend his stance on the King James issue to students and teachers. He believes it would have been extremely beneficial to have had something like this project available to him.

About the Filmmaker

Andrew Garcia is a full time video editor, cinematographer and motion graphics designer. He and his wife Kayla recently produced the feature-length missions documentary Two Hats. Andrew’s talents keep him busy around the country, yet he and his wife remain active church members and dedicated Christians.

About the Director

Jonathan Marshall was introduced to video production at an early age, watching his father, John Marshall, produce videos as a part of his evangelism ministry. At the age of 9, he acted in the full-length movie Pray for Daddy. The desire to use video for the glory of Jesus Christ has remained with him throughout his life. He is currently an assistant pastor at the Hope Baptist Church in Toledo, Ohio under Pastor Rick Sowell.


Why did you make this film?

The desire in making this film is to help Christians understand the importance of having a final authority and to find that authority in the time-honored King James Bible. While many helpful books have been written on the subject, today's generation is still searching for answers. We hope this film will serve as a point of entry to the subject and foster a desire in the heart of the viewer to be able to say, "I believe the Bible I hold in my hand is the inspired Word of God!".

When does the next episode come out?

The seventh, and final, episode will most likely be produced in late winter/early spring of 2015. If you would like to share your ideas for the script, the setting, or the theme, please contact us via Twitter (@bigdealkjv).

Why do we make an issue out of using the KJV?

To the average English-speaking Christian, it is simply a “rabbit trail” to argue for one Bible version over another. Many consider it to be “divisive” to the Body of Christ. The truth is, as recently as 100 years ago the King James Bible was used exclusively by the vast majority of Christians who believed it to be the perfect Word of God. We believe that if it ever was inerrant, it remains so to this day.

In Psalm 12:6-7 God promised to preserve His pure Word forever. Thus, there must exist somewhere on the earth today a complete and inerrant Bible. The question every Christian must answer is this, “Where is the Final Authority of God’s Word, uncorrupted, complete, and accessible?” No other book but the King James Version fits all the requirements. It was produced by the most potent collection of 54 English scholars ever assembled, at a time when the English language was at its zenith. It has simultaneously withstood the scrutiny and attacks of its enemies, sparked the flames of hundreds of revivals, inspired more missionaries than any other Bible in church history, and comforted the hearts of struggling saints for over 400 years. And all without a copyright.

Why the KJV and not another English version?

To address the question, “Why the KJV and not another English version?” you must divide the question into two halves:

  1. Why the KJV and not a pre-King James English version?
  2. Why the KJV and not a post-King James English version?
  1. 1. Why not a pre-King James English translation?

    As I’ve said, I cannot declare that the following are the reasons for God not using a pre-KJB translation. I can only examine the historic evidence.

    1. The Translations: Every pre-KJB translation was either a “one man” or “one group” translation. The Tyndale, Coverdale, Mathews and Great Bible were obviously one man translations. The Geneva (Puritan) and Bishops’ (Anglican) were one group translations. The King James was neither. It was translated by a committee made of both Anglicans & Puritans. That would be like saying it was translated by Democrats and Republicans. The Anglicans kept it from being a purely Puritan translation and the Puritans kept it from being a purely Anglican translation.

      The truly mindless hater of the King James Bible who never thinks but tries to spin everything to hurt the Bible will attempt to use this “Two Party System” in a disparaging way, but we can’t be concerned with enlightening the politicians, only the thinkers.

    2. The English Language: Also concerning pre-KJB translation is the issue of the English language itself. English developed in three segments:

      • Old English: 449 AD – 1100 AD
      • Middle English: 1100 AD – 1450 AD
      • Modern English: 1450 AD – Present

      Because the printing font used by the printers of the original King James Bible was Gothic many think it was printed in Old English. No. We couldn’t read either Old or even Middle English. They would appear as foreign languages to us. Although spelling was still in flux, the foundational structure of Modern English finished its development at the end of the 16th Century (1500s). Thus, every pre-KJB translation was translated into a still developing, unstable language. In spite of the font used, and the less-than-honest claims of its detractors, the King James was the first translation done in Modern English.

  2. 2. Why the KJV and not a post-King James English version?

    The case of the Post-KJB translation is a bit easier to define. Every translation since 1611 is based on either flawed Greek witnesses or fatally tainted scholarship or both.

    1. The Witnesses: Prior to 1611 all English translations were products of the Textus Receptus which is vastly superior to the Critical Text of modern versions. This Critical Text (its official name) is based on inferior Greek witnesses originating in Alexandria, Egypt. When pure text manuscripts arrived in Alexandria non-believers there edited them, removing verses that didn’t agree with their unregenerate thinking. Thus, one of the hallmarks of modern translations is their weakening of biblical doctrines. (Deity of Christ, the Trinity.)

    2. Modern scholarship: The plethora of modern translations are also victims of fatally tainted scholarship such as; Westcott & Hort who publicly admitted to viewing the Bible as not inspired by God but just another book such as Shakespeare, or; men like Philip Schaff and Bruce Metzger who were students of unbelieving German rationalism.

      In the case of the New King James Version, which makes the claim to a “Majority Text” base rather than a “Critical Text” base there are numerous problems. Since this is by no means an attempt at a thorough expose’ I’ll illustrate the simple truth that it is harder to read than the King James Bible. Yes, in spite of the propaganda you’ve heard, the NKJV is harder to read than the KJB. Let the reader simply examine Titus 1:6 in a King James Bible and a NKJV with a little honesty & integrity and see what happens to the simple terms “riot” and “unruly” of the KJB and this will be obvious. There are several publications that go into the NKJV problems more thoroughly so I won’t rewrite what has already been written.


I have a lot of questions about the KJV. Where can I find answers?

The issue of a perfect Bible is not simply a mathematical equation or scholastic endeavor. Every Christian must accept that God's Word is inerrant on the basis of faith, since God demands faith from any man who desires to please Him (Hebrews 11:6). However, the stance that the King James Bible is perfect is not a position of ignorance. It is a well-studied position, with support from both history and scholarship.

A great place to start would be The Answer Book by Sam Gipp, which is available in its entirety for free online. You can also browse his website for a helpful books by a variety of authors. Some of the bestsellers are Gipp’s Understandable History of the Bible and A Charted History of the Bible.

The following sermons on the King James Bible issue were preached at the 400th Year Anniversary of the KJV Conference in April 2011 at the Hope Baptist Church in Toledo, Ohio.


What are the verses Dr. Gipp mentioned are missing from the NIV?

  1. Matthew 17:21
  2. Matthew 18:11
  3. Matthew 23:14
  4. Mark 7:16
  5. Mark 9:44
  6. Mark 9:46
  7. Mark 11:26
  8. Mark 15:28
  9. Luke 17:36
  10. Luke 23:17
  11. John 5:4
  12. Act 8:37
  13. Acts 15:34
  14. Acts 24:7
  15. Acts 28:29
  16. Romans 16:24
  17. 1 John 5:7

What does Dr. Gipp have to say to those that have tried to refute this film?

Following the completion of the final episode, Dr. Gipp gives a concise synopsis of our position, and the problems with some of the commonly used attacks against this film.