The scholars say that you need to know the GRAMMATICAL meaning of Scripture. They look at the Scripture as made up of words. They go to their Greek, and they define what they think each word means, and how those words connect together grammatically.
The scholars say that you need to know the HISTORICAL CONTEXT of Scripture, so that the reader can understand what was being communicated according to the mind of the original audience. So they extrapolate based on Jewish tradition what they think was going on.
Both these approaches are flawed. The correct approach is a BELIEVING approach, where you get your King James Bible, and you read it as true. You trust every word of it (which eliminates the grammatical side) and you trust exactly what the Holy Ghost is revealing (which eliminates the historical context side).
The scholars doubt the words of God, and with their Grammatical-Historical method, make the Word of God of none effect.
Let us examine an example. The scholars say that the wording “sat” really means reclined, and the scholars say that in those days people reclined at low tables. Notice how they have changed the meaning of a Bible word “sit” and impose their modern opinion onto the past.
Let’s read a few verses: “And, behold, a woman in the city, which was a sinner, when she knew that Jesus sat at meat in the Pharisee’s house, brought an alabaster box of ointment, And stood at his feet behind him weeping, and began to wash his feet with tears, and did wipe them with the hairs of her head, and kissed his feet, and anointed them with the ointment.” (Luke 7:37, 38).
If Jesus was reclining, a woman could not stand behind Jesus and be touching his feet.
Here is another example, “And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters’ table.” (Matthew 15:27).
If they were reclining, the crumbs would barely fall, and dogs could just eat off the table.
Now notice the key word in this verse:
“And she answered and said unto him, Yes, Lord: yet the dogs under the table eat of the children’s crumbs.” (Mark 7:28).
If they were reclining, there is no way that dogs could fit under the table, even if they were the size of chiwawas.
In all this it is clear that believing of our Bible should be upheld, over and above the misguided view of scholarship. If they mess this up, how much more their views change vital doctrines! Thus, modern versions are dangerous, because of these kinds of alterations and modernistic interpretive bias.