When addressing King James Onlyism, there are several important and substantive issues to discuss. Yet, in some corners of the movement, those issues get set aside in favor of frankly silly arguments based on word plays or number games that allegedly show “miracles” in the KJV. But even these strange claims about numerology or the grand importance of minor coincidences can often be worth addressing, not only because these are the kinds of arguments that really do convince certain kinds of people, but also because they often inadvertently bring out more important issues. This is certainly the case with an argument recently sent to me regarding the verses that say “man shall not live by bread alone.”
The argument: verse number numerology
The argument claims that a miraculous message confirming the KJV is embedded in the verse numbers of three related texts:
“But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God” (Matthew 4:4, KJV).
“But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God” (Luke 4:4, KJV).
“And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live,” (Deuteronomy 8:3, KJV).
The King James Onlyist points out that these three verses constitute three witnesses, all testifying that we should live by every word of God. And where do we find these words? This is where a little creative numerology comes in. According to this argument, the chapter and verse numbers tell us. If we add 4:4 + 4:4 + 8:3, we get 16:11. Thus, the Bible itself testifies that the 1611 KJV is the true word of God. Needless to say, this argument contains a number of issues.
On verse numbers and common sense
Arguments based on looking for secret hidden messages in the letters and numbers of the Bible rather than reading the plain words God actually revealed are already dubious at best. But there is a bigger problem with this particular KVJO argument (and others like it). The numbers they are using are not actually part of the inspired text at all! The system of chapter and verse numbers we know today is a 16th-century invention. It is a useful reference tool but is not part of any of the original writings. It is like a table of contents or thumb tabs marking the beginning of each book. These are all tools that later men added simply to help readers find their place in the Bible more easily and reference it more effectively.
Thus, even if there were hidden messages secretly encoded in the chapter and verse numbers, they wouldn’t be inspired by the Holy Spirit of God. They would have been put there by fallible men. Even if one accepts that these reference numbers are meant to command obedience to a particular English translation (and let’s face it, this kind of chapter and verse numerology really defies credulity), it would only be the command of mere men living over 1,500 years after the time of the New Testament.
Beyond numerology: looking to the actual words
Yet, it is actually helpful that King James Onlyists draw our attention to these verses because they do turn out to be relevant to the King James Only debate! Instead of looking at the reference numbers, let’s look at the actual words of the three verses in question. In particular, since both the verses in Matthew and Luke involve Jesus quoting the verse in Deuteronomy, let’s take a look at how Jesus quoted the verse in comparison to how it reads in the Deuteronomy of the KJV:
“But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God” (Matthew 4:4, KJV).
“But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God” (Luke 4:4, KJV).
“…man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live” (Deuteronomy 8:3b, KJV).
The difference between “mouth of the LORD” and “mouth of God” may seem trivial, and it certainly has no impact on the meaning, but there is a reason why it matters here. Jesus didn’t just decide to change the wording of Scripture. He was saying exactly what was written, in this case, what was written in the Septuagint (LXX), the ancient Greek translation of the Old Testament:
“…οὐκ ἐπ᾽ ἄρτῳ μόνῳ ζήσεται ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἀλλ᾽ ἐπὶ παντὶ ῥήματι τῷ ἐκπορευομένῳ διὰ στόματος θεοῦ,” (Deuteronomy 8:3b, LXX)
“…οὐκ ἐπ᾽ ἄρτῳ μόνῳ ζήσεται ἄνθρωπος ἀλλ᾽ ἐπὶ παντὶ ῥήματι ἐκπορευομένῳ διὰ στόματος θεοῦ,” (Matthew 4:4b)
Even if you can’t read Greek, one can see that Jesus’ words match the Septuagint exactly (with the exception only of the absence of the Greek article in two places). What’s more, the Septuagint is the only ancient version that says “mouth of God” rather than “mouth of the LORD.” Plainly, Jesus is here quoting from the Septuagint, a translation that differs starkly from the wording in the KJV in numerous places. Jesus regards the Septuagint translation as the genuine word of God, even where it disagrees with the KJV, something no KJVO could possibly do! Clever numerology aside, these verses actually point out why King James Onlyism is not correct. Jesus Himself did not believe a translation had to perfectly match the KJV to be the word of God!
Two further examples from this context
Both Matthew 4:4 and Luke 4:4 come from the same story, i.e., Jesus’ confrontation with the devil in the wilderness: Both accounts also tell of two other verses from Deuteronomy that Jesus’ quoted to refute Satan. For example, we read:
“Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God” (Matthew 4:7, KJV).
“And Jesus answering said unto him, It is said, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God” (Luke 4:12, KJV).
Both Matthew and Luke agree on Jesus’ exact wording when it comes to quoting the verse. Once again, there is a small but noticeable difference when we look at that verse in the Old Testament of the KJV:
“Ye shall not tempt the Lord your God, as ye tempted him in Massah” (Deuteronomy 6:16).
Jesus cites the passage as addressing the singular “thou, thy,” while the KJV’s Deuteronomy places it in the plural “ye, your.” This, again, might not seem to matter, but once more the Septuagint likewise places this in the singular. And, again, Jesus’ wording matches the LXX precisely:
“Οὐκ ἐκπειράσεις κύριον τὸν θεόν σου,” (Dueteronomy 6:16, LXX).
“Οὐκ ἐκπειράσεις κύριον τὸν θεόν σου,” (Matthew 4:7).
Again, when we look at the actual words rather than distracting ourselves with meaningless numerology, we see that Jesus is authoritatively quoting a translation that the King James Onlyist must denounce as a perversion, yet Jesus thinks it is the word of God! Similarly, in both Matthew’s and Luke’s accounts, we read:
“Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve” (Matthew 4:10, KJV).
“And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve” (Luke 4:8, KJV).
Both gospel writers still agree precisely on what Jesus said was “written.” In this case, Jesus’ words differ enough from the KJV’s Old Testament that we can only narrow it down to one of two possible verses that Jesus was quoting:
“Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God, and serve him, and shalt swear by his name” (Deuteronomy 6:13, KJV).
“Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God; him shalt thou serve, and to him shalt thou cleave, and swear by his name” (Deuteronomy 10:20, KJV).
In either case, Jesus’ cites the verse as “worship the Lord” rather than “fear the Lord” and includes the word “alone” in the second clause. Now, numerology aside, if we think about the typical way most King James Onlyists handle differences with other translations, this creates some problems. Consider:
- If a modern translation differed from the KJV in this way, King James Onlyists would accuse them of trying to soften or suppress the biblical command to fear the Lord, yet it is Jesus who freely cites the verse this way. Likewise, Jesus cites the verse as saying to serve God alone.
- The KJV’s version of Deuteronomy lacks the word “alone.” If the KJV had “alone” but a modern translation didn’t, they would accuse that translation of trying to permit serving other gods, yet their own translation of Deuteronomy lacks “alone” when Jesus’ version includes it.
This shows us that the standards of the KJV Only movement, if applied consistently, ultimately turn back on them and undermine the KJV itself. I love the KJV and consider it a fine translation, and therefore I must reject the standards used by King James Onlyists in evaluating translations.
It is also worth noting that these last verses also provide us with yet another place in this one short passage where Jesus cites what is “written” in the Old Testament in a way that does not agree with the KJV’s own Old Testament. If Jesus was not a King James Onlyist, we shouldn’t be either.
Conclusion
As any fair reader can see, not only does numerology of chapter and verse numbers not prove anything about the KJV, the actual passages cited here show that King James Onlyism is certainly not the view Jesus or the New Testament writers held regarding translations of the Bible. Versions that differ notably from the KJV were cited in the New Testament and the very words of Jesus Himself as the Word of God. If we want a biblical view of Bible translations, we should opt for the one that Christ had.
