Spiritual Remembrance, Historical Residue, and the Prophesied Bible Changes
There is a question that has occupied my thoughts for the past several years. It’s a question that deserves careful consideration by every Bible-believing Christian.
Can the Holy Spirit preserve the remembrance of God’s Word in the hearts and minds of His children, even when the words they remember differ from those found in their Bibles today?
I believe He can. And I believe Scripture gives us good reason to consider that possibility.
Before dismissing such a thought, let’s examine what the Bible teaches about the natural man, the regenerated soul, and the ministry of the Holy Spirit.
Man Is More Than Flesh and Blood
Genesis 1:27 tells us:
“So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.”
Man isn’t merely a physical creature. Scripture speaks of his spirit, soul, and body.
Paul wrote in 1 Thessalonians 5:23:
“And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.”
When a sinner is born again, something takes place that cannot be explained by the natural workings of the human body.
Jesus told Nicodemus in John 3:6:
“That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.”
The regenerated believer possesses something the un-regenerated man does not, the indwelling Holy Spirit.
This distinction is important to the subject we’re examining.
The Natural Man and Spiritual Discernment
Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 2:14:
“But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.”
The natural man may possess a remarkable intellect. He may be highly educated, knowledgeable in ancient languages, and familiar with the history of the Bible.
But intellectual ability and spiritual discernment aren’t necessarily the same thing.
A regenerated believer has access to spiritual understanding through the Holy Spirit.
Does that mean every saved person remembers everything perfectly? Certainly not.
Does it mean that the Holy Spirit is capable of preserving a remembrance of God’s Word in His children?
I believe it does.
And there’s a passage of Scripture that deserves our particular attention.
The Holy Spirit and Remembrance
In John 14:26, Jesus declared:
“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.”
Notice the words, “bring all things to your remembrance.”
Jesus was speaking directly to His disciples. We must recognize that context. Nevertheless, the passage establishes that bringing Christ’s words to remembrance is within the power and ministry of the Holy Ghost.
Now consider the question before us.
If the Holy Spirit can bring the words of Christ to remembrance, is it unreasonable to consider that He might preserve the remembrance of Scripture in a believer’s mind?
I don’t believe it is.
That doesn’t mean every memory we possess is necessarily inspired or supernaturally preserved. We must be careful not to claim more than Scripture establishes.
But neither should we dismiss the possibility simply because it cannot be explained through ordinary human memory.
Can a Christian Become Spiritually Dull?
There’s another matter we must consider.
Not every regenerated believer maintains the same degree of spiritual maturity or attentiveness.
Hebrews 5:11 says:
“Of whom we have many things to say, and hard to be uttered, seeing ye are dull of hearing.”
And verse 14 declares:
“But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.”
Here we find a distinction between spiritual immaturity and spiritual maturity.
Notice that spiritual senses are exercised through use.
A believer may neglect the Word, become careless in spiritual matters, or grow dull of hearing.
Paul also warned in 1 Thessalonians 5:19:
“Quench not the Spirit.”
Therefore, I wouldn’t argue that every saved individual possesses an equally reliable spiritual remembrance of Scripture.
Rather, I believe we should consider whether a believer’s spiritual attentiveness and maturity may have some bearing upon the Spirit’s ministry of remembrance.
This is a theological proposition, not a claim that every spiritually mature Christian possesses perfect recall.
The Wind Bloweth Where It Listeth
Now let’s return to the conversation between Jesus and Nicodemus.
John 3:8 reads:
“The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.”
What a remarkable illustration!
Nicodemus could hear the wind. He could observe its effects. Yet he couldn’t fully explain its movements.
Jesus used that illustration to explain the work of the Spirit in the new birth.
There is a principle here that deserves consideration.
Our inability to observe or explain the operation of something doesn’t necessarily mean its effects aren’t real.
I believe this principle is relevant to the investigation of what I’ve called historical residue.
We may not understand how a supernatural alteration of Scripture could occur. We may not be able to observe such an event taking place.
But that doesn’t mean we should refuse to investigate evidence that appears unusual or difficult to explain.
Of course, observing an unusual effect doesn’t automatically identify its cause. That is precisely why careful investigation is necessary.
Something I’ve Experienced in the Pulpit
Over the years, I’ve preached from passages of Scripture that I remember differently from the wording found in today’s King James Bible.
One example is John 8:32.
I remember the words:
“And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free.”
Yet the KJV reads today:
“And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”
During sermons, I’ve quoted the wording I remember and received resounding amens from spiritually mature members of the congregation.
Now, an amen by itself doesn’t establish that every person present remembered the exact same wording. A congregation may simply be affirming the truth of the message.
But something else happened.
On various occasions, individuals later approached me after examining their Bibles. They pointed out the wording they had found.
A smaller number asked me for additional examples.
When I provided those examples, some began to believe that something supernatural was taking place.
I don’t offer their conclusions as scientific proof. I offer these experiences as testimony to what prompted further examination.
These weren’t simply people repeating something they had read on the internet. They were believers examining passages, asking questions, and attempting to reconcile what they remembered with what they were reading.
To me, that deserves consideration.
What Is Historical Residue?
In my research, I use the word residue to describe historical evidence of biblical wording that differs from the wording presently found in the Bible.
Such evidence may appear in old sermons, commentaries, books, concordances, or other religious literature.
For example, suppose we find a sermon published in 1850 containing the words:
“And the truth shall set you free.”
That establishes that the expression appeared in literature at that time.
But we must go farther.
Was the author quoting Scripture? Was he using the King James Bible? Was he translating from another language? Was he paraphrasing?
These questions matter.
A quotation from an entirely different Bible translation cannot automatically be presented as evidence of an earlier KJV reading.
Neither can an English translation of an ancient writer be treated as though its exact English wording existed in the ancient world.
We must identify the source.
Why I Search Old Books
My usual research begins with an exact-phrase search through historical literature, often using Google Books.
I commonly restrict the publication dates to the period between 1611 and 1950.
But locating a quotation is only the beginning.
I then attempt to establish whether the author used the King James Bible as his source.
If he used another translation, I generally exclude that quotation from my primary KJV evidence.
If the author relied upon the KJV, the quotation becomes a candidate for closer examination.
Later, I may investigate his other biblical quotations to determine whether he ordinarily quoted Scripture accurately or frequently paraphrased.
I also look for statements such as “the Scripture saith,” “as our Lord said,” or references identifying a particular book, chapter, and verse.
These details help determine whether the writer intended to reproduce the words of Scripture.
And I don’t believe we should ignore findings that disagree with our expectations.
If an old concordance contains the same wording as today’s KJV, that belongs in the research record too.
Truth doesn’t need us to hide evidence.
Why Concordances Are Important
Historical Bible concordances deserve special attention.
A preacher may quote from memory. A commentator may paraphrase a passage to explain its meaning.
But a concordance is generally intended to identify the actual words appearing in Scripture.
That makes old concordances potentially valuable witnesses to the biblical text used by their compilers.
Among the works worthy of investigation are Alexander Cruden’s Complete Concordance, Robert Young’s Analytical Concordance, and James Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance.
The objective isn’t merely to find something unusual.
It’s to determine what the historical document actually says, when it was printed, which Bible it indexed, and whether its wording can be verified from the original scanned page.
A historical quotation may establish that certain words were attributed to Scripture. It doesn’t necessarily establish that those words appeared in a printed KJV.
We must keep that distinction in mind.
The Famine of Hearing
Now we come to the prophecy that has occupied so much of my attention.
Amos 8:11 declares:
“Behold, the days come, saith the Lord GOD, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the LORD:”
Notice something important.
The prophecy speaks of a famine of hearing the words of the LORD.
Amos was addressing Israel in the context of divine judgment. That historical setting must not be ignored.
Nevertheless, I believe the passage deserves consideration when examining the possibility of a future spiritual famine.
Could there be a famine of hearing God’s words even in a world filled with printed Bibles?
I believe that possibility deserves serious thought.
And if such a famine were taking place, could the Holy Spirit preserve the remembrance of God’s Word among His children?
That is the question at the heart of this article.
Daniel 7:25 also speaks of one who shall “think to change times and laws.”
I regard that passage as relevant to the larger prophetic investigation, although it doesn’t expressly state that the wording of the KJV will be supernaturally altered.
These are passages I believe should be studied together, carefully and in their proper contexts.
What About Natural Explanations?
Some will immediately suggest faulty memory.
Others will point to paraphrasing, different translations, popular religious expressions, or mistakes made by preachers.
Those are legitimate possibilities, and they should be examined.
But offering a possible explanation isn’t the same as demonstrating that it adequately accounts for a particular piece of evidence.
Likewise, finding something that cannot presently be explained doesn’t automatically establish a supernatural cause.
We must apply the same standard of examination to both positions.
My purpose isn’t to declare that every unusual quotation proves a supernatural Bible change.
My purpose is to ask whether the supernatural possibility should be dismissed before the evidence has been properly examined.
I don’t believe it should.
The Testimony of Regenerated Believers
There is one final matter I want readers to consider.
If we accept that the Holy Spirit indwells the regenerated believer, that He teaches and guides His children, and that He is capable of bringing truth to remembrance, why should we automatically dismiss the possibility of spiritually preserved remembrance?
We shouldn’t confuse spiritual maturity with infallibility.
Nor should we assume that every remembered wording comes from the Holy Spirit.
But neither should we treat the testimony of mature believers as worthless merely because it differs from the wording presently before them.
Their testimony can be recorded, compared, and investigated.
And when similar remembered expressions appear in independently dated historical literature, we have additional material to examine.
That doesn’t settle the question of supernatural alteration.
But it gives us a reason to continue searching.
Conclusion: Let Us Examine the Evidence
I’ve spent many years defending the King James Bible and investigating what I believe may be supernatural, prophesied changes to Scripture.
I recognize that others will disagree with my conclusions.
That’s their privilege.
But I would ask them to examine the evidence rather than dismiss the subject without investigation.
Search the old books. Examine the original pages. Identify the Bible used by the author. Compare the quotations. Record the findings, including those that don’t support the proposed explanation.
And above all, search the Scriptures.
I believe the Holy Spirit is capable of preserving the remembrance of God’s Word. Whether any particular remembered wording has been preserved supernaturally is a question that requires discernment and careful examination.
I’ll leave the reader with this question:
If the Holy Spirit can bring the words of Christ to remembrance, should we automatically dismiss the testimony of believers who remember Scripture differently from what they read today?
I believe that question is worthy of serious consideration.
Scripture quotations are from the King James Version. This article presents the author’s theological interpretation and research approach.