sign in sign up
<<
Home , Great Bible

VILLAINOUS VERSIONS?

The Ongoing KJV vs. Modern Versions Debate January, 1997 Do the Facts Really Matter?

od’s Word provides the foundation for Christian Is the KJV truly the inspired translation? Has it no faults orthodoxy. Because the Scriptures are “God- or, at least, far fewer faults than the modern translations? G breathed,”1 they must be the Christian’s final How about the fact that many newer versions leave out authority. One understands, then, why some today are verses and parts of verses which are in our tried and true concerned about the quality and accuracy of the many ? Is it not the Authorized Version based modern English language translations of God’s Word. on the (Received Text)? Should we not Several authors and Christian radio hosts have even claimed remain loyal to the version that has stood the test of time? that the modern versions are tools of Satan, which are All these questions are important ones and ones we should preparing Christians to accept the New Age Movement’s study for ourselves, fairly and with hearts open to truth— doctrines and other “end-times” heresies. These allegations God’s truth. are cause for legitimate concern and, if factual, must be regarded very seriously by God’s people. Yet committed Christians will not merely accept all accusations as veritable, Inspiration: From God to Us but will carefully (and nobly2) consider the evidence of such he orthodox position regarding the inspiration of claims. God’s Word is that the original manuscripts as penned T by His prophets and apostles were fully inspired by God. The Holy Spirit miraculously guided the thoughts and pens of the human authors to compose His Holy Word, fully reliable, trustworthy, and authoritative. Thus the very words I N THIS ARTICLE themselves in the original languages (Hebrew, , and Greek) can be regarded as “God-breathed.” Inspiration: From God to Us The Holy Scriptures were inspired in the language of the 1 common person. The grammar, vocabulary, and sentence structure of a great extent of the Old Testament Scriptures is 2 The Manuscripts simple, earthy, and unpolished. For many years scholars believed that the New Testament was Who Inspired the KJV? written in a special “Holy Ghost” Greek, because it was so 2 different from the Greek of contemporary secular writings.3 But near the turn of this century archeologists began to 3 The Bigger Issue discover large numbers of ancient papyri fragments. Many were notes to friends, bills of receipt, and other business 4 What the “KJV only” Advocates Don’t Tell Us transactions. All were written in the Greek dialect of the manuscripts of the Christian Scriptures (the Greek New Testament). This dialect became known as Koine Greek, the Who’s Behind All this Controversy Anyway? 5 Greek of the common person. God had spurned the Classical Greek of the refined, the educated and the upper class, and 6 Appendix A had chosen to frame and freeze His enduring Word in the tongue of the poor, the uneducated, and the insignificant. 8 Appendix B His message was and continues to be for all.

1 2 Timothy 3:16 (NIV), from the Greek Theopneustos. 3 Eg. Caesar, Gallic Wars (100-44 B.C.); Livy, History of Rome (59 B.C. - A.D. 17); Tacitus, Annals (A.D. 100); Pliny 2 Cf. Acts 17:11 (KJV). Secundus, Natural History (A.D. 61-113). Villainous Versions? January, 1997

Shortly following the New Testament era missionaries of deciphering which variants best reflect the original, and the pushed into frontiers where Greek was not the mother tongue. ongoing study of the original manuscripts is also to be In the second and third centuries a whole new generation of credited with the even greater accuracy of most modern translations emerged: Syriac, Ethiopic, and other vernaculars. versions. These early Christian missionaries shared the Apostle Paul’s One must keep in mind that these variant readings are few conviction that each Christian must be given the opportunity and far between. The differences between the KJV and the to read and understand God’s Word in its written form. But modern translations are mostly differences of translation (i.e. they also realized that translations would always be less than archaic speech versus modern English). Less than one percent perfect, for humans were doing the translating. The translators of Scripture has variants of any significance among the never claimed inspiration. They accepted that the canon of manuscripts. And in most of these cases it is easy to decide Scripture had been closed, that the gift of divine inspiration which manuscript was recopied incorrectly. No debated had been given only to the authors of the 66 books that variant affects any central biblical doctrine or practice. The comprised God’s Word. Now God was allowing fallible differences and doctrinal problems are almost entirely human beings to take His Word to every person. problems of translation, that is, of taking the words and meanings of the original languages and putting them into an English, Spanish, French, or Chinese equivalent. The Manuscripts utenberg’s press turned out the first printed , a New Testament, in 1456. Before that Who Inspired the KJV? G date all and portions of the Biblical text were arge charts abound in which modern versions are written by hand. Hence the term “manuscript.” Today we accused of having removed many important verses have approximately 5500 manuscripts of the Greek New L from the Holy Writ and of having watered down others. Testament. Some of these manually copied documents We are reminded of the judgment pronounced by God in contain the New Testament in its near entirety. Others such as Revelation 22:19 against those who would remove anything the earliest know manuscript dating back to approximately from His Word. A comparison of the KJV and a modern A.D. 125 contain only fragments of several verses.4 The translation will soon reveal that there are words, phrases, and Hebrew manuscripts, although not as plentiful, are generally even verses in the KJV which are not present in the modern in much better condition and of greater accuracy, due to the version, whether it is the NRSV, NIV, NASB, CEV, or astounding precautions the Hebrew scribes (Masoretes) GNB.6 But before we throw out all these versions we need to undertook in manually copying their Holy Scriptures. ask the crucial question: Were these words, phrases, and These manuscripts have been discovered all over the verses actually in the original? Did Paul, Matthew, or Moses Mediterranean world5 and vary in age from several decades actually write these words or were they added in later? The before the birth of Christ to the sixteenth century A.D. verse just prior to Revelation 22:19 also pronounces a severe From the very beginning of the Christian era, biblical curse on those who would add to the Scriptures. That offence scholars have been collecting and studying these manuscripts, is equally great. noting the variant readings and attempting to discern what The standard should be the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek manuscript has the correct rendering when differences are text, not a translation produced in 1611 which has undergone found. Remember, the scribes who copied and recopied the many updates and revisions, so many that the original KJV is inspired text were not inspired themselves, and unfortunately very, very different from the KJV in our possession today.7 some were remarkably sloppy in their copying. In cases where Wycliffe was the first to give English speakers their own manuscripts differ, those manuscripts which are known to be Bible. Then came ’s translation. The more accurate in other passages, those manuscripts which came next, followed by Matthew’s, agree on that variant while coming from a variety of Taverner’s, the Great Bible, the , the Bishop’s geographical locations within the Mediterranean region, and those manuscripts which are the oldest and thus a shorter 6 New , New International history of copying and recopying are considered to be most Version, New American Standard Bible, Contemporary accurate. Of course, this process has many criteria and is a English Bible, or . laborious academic process, requiring a lifetime of research 7 The most glaring error in one of the two original 1611 and study. The amazing accuracy of the KJV is due to the versions of the KJV was Matthew 26:36: “Then cometh dedicated labor of Christian scholars involved in this process Judas.” It should read as our KJV today does, “Then cometh Jesus.” The KJV went through many, many major 4 This papyrus document called the John Rylands fragment revisions between 1611 and 1962. For example, the contains parts of John 18:31-33. It is, of course, extremely examined just six different versions fragile and in poor repair. circulating in the 19th century, and found more than 24,000 5 Later manuscripts come from European monasteries and variants in text and punctuation. See further Jack P. Lewis, churches where monks had copied them and/or placed them The English Bible: From KJV to NIV. 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: for safekeeping. Baker, 1991), 37-40.

Villainous Versions? January, 1997

Bible, the Rheims-Douay, and finally the King James in 1611. arguments in favor of their Bible because of its more “holy” All were based on the standard Bible of the Middle Ages, the and “dignified” language. In 1611 “you” was used for the Latin Vulgate. The last several were compared with the Greek king, the upper class, people in royalty, and those generally and Hebrew manuscripts that could be found, but in the who were in a social class above one’s own. The translators of translating of the KJV less than 30 Greek manuscripts were the KJV purposely chose “thee” and “thou,” the terms for the used and these together did not constitute the entire New common person, for everyone in the Bible, regardless of class, Testament. All were quite late manuscripts produced during including God Himself. In an ironic twist of history, we have the Middle Ages by the Roman Catholic and Eastern turned this choice on its head and have insisted that “thee” Orthodox church. and “thou” shows a greater reverence to God than does the Later manuscripts tend to have more additions to the text “common” you. than the earlier manuscripts did. The reasons for this are not Tyndale, one of the first to bring to England a Bible for difficult to explain. Just as the practice continues with everyone, told an irate clergyman bent on keeping the Bible in preachers today, commentary notes were often written in the Latin and away from the common person that his goal was for margin of a manuscript. When a scribe would use this the ploughboy to be able better to understand God’s Word manuscript to produce another it was easy for him to mistake than that clergyman. In many ways Tyndale was successful in these marginal notes (glosses) for a part of the text. this goal. Will we with our “vain disputations” reverse that Furthermore, when in doubt as to whether a word or phrase success, so honored and blessed by God? belonged in the text, the scribes almost always considered the History has a way of repeating itself. By the fourth century error of putting too much into the new manuscript a lesser evil Latin had become the language of Western Christendom. The than not including enough. “When in doubt don’t keep it out.” need for an accurate Bible in the lingua franca (language of Not much has changed.8 the average person) caused the bishop of Rome to There are several instances in which the KJV has left out commission Jerome to translate such a Bible. Jerome, an phrases that were almost certainly part of the original text. accomplished scholar and exegete, finished the remarkably This is not to fault the KJV translators. They did their best accurate Latin Vulgate around A.D. 404. For over 1000 years with the materials available to them. The translators of the it was the official Bible of the church. But while the Bible of KJV did not claim inspiration; in fact, they went out of their the church remained in early Latin, the language of the people way to explain their failings and inadequacies. Neither should continued to evolve. Latin itself advanced and changed so we claim for them what belongs rightfully only to those that, like the KJV today, the Vulgate began to sound archaic. apostles and prophets who were chosen by God to set His New languages with Latin roots developed. Within a period of Word to sacred text for all future generations. several centuries the laity lost all ability to comprehend the text of God’s Word and because the church (now the Roman Catholic church) had begun to ascribe inspiration to Jerome’s The Bigger Issue Latin Translation, new translations were forbidden. One must t stake, however, is not simply the question of which not tamper with the Holy Word of God, the argument went. Christians are right and which Christians are carrying Thus the failure of the Church was a large contribution to the A some faulty notions regarding . Dark Ages. Because the people had no guidance from the Rather, the heart issue is whether the English Bible should Word they lived lives steeped in empty tradition. Only in the remain in Victorian English or whether we should allow it to Reformation, when Luther finally courageously translated the continue to speak in the tongue of the common person (as the Latin Vulgate into the lingua,franca, everyday German, were KJV did in 1611). people given the means to throw off their spiritual chains. This was the deep desire of the 47 translators of the King Many would say the parallel is unfounded. Surely the James Version, and they would be appalled by today’s “KJV only” position is not a satanically engineered tactic to keep God’s Word from the average Christian. Most would 8 A detailed list and explanation of the words and phrases left affirm strongly that they understand their King James Bible out of modern translations although included in the KJV is perfectly and have no trouble with the outdated language.9 beyond the scope of this paper. The discussion requires at While it is true that those who all their lives have read, studied least a basic understanding of the primary languages. The and heard preached the KJV are much better equipped to apparatus in the United Bible Society’s Greek New Testament understand this version’s archaisms in vocabulary and explains each significant variant. A standard textbook dealing sentence structure, a brief consideration of some of King with the entire subject of Biblical inspiration, canonicity, James’ words will convince most that they need a good transmission, and translation is A General Introduction to the Bible, rev. ed., by Norman L. Geisler and William E. Nix, 9 One very strong argument for the use of the KJV is, “I’m Chicago: Moody P, 1986. Those who would carefully (and familiar with it; I’ve memorized in it; I like it!” This personal with minds open to truth) evaluate the evidence will see that argument is perfectly legitimate. No one should be forced to translators have not made their decisions with the sinister give up what has become an emotional part of them. ambition of getting rid of doctrines they dislike but with the However, personal reasons like this do not validate the goal of being true to God’s eternal Word. forcing of a certain version on others.

Villainous Versions? January, 1997 dictionary.10 Unfortunately dictionaries do not help when a opposition to their new translation and they got it.12 Their word used one way in 1611 is used in a completely different foreword, unfortunately no longer included in today’s sense in today’s speech. Neither does a dictionary help with editions of the KJV, made very firm disclaimers against the grammatical difficulties. infallibility of translation. Is the KJV the version authorized by God? Certainly it is Last year I used the KJV in our classroom devotions. The known as the Authorized Version, but this misnomer is students were interested in the content of Scripture; we had merely a result of an advertising blurb inserted by the many animated discussions about topics in God’s Word. publishers in their preface of an early edition of the KJV. However when we actually read out of the Bibles the text This hardly can be called God’s authorization. Certainly failed to maintain the students’ attention. I knew the problem God’s hand was in the translation, for many English- was not the students’ apathy toward God and His Word. Yet, speaking people have come to know God and increased in whether I read to them or they read in turn, many students godliness through this great translation. But just as the Latin were looking in every direction but the Bible in front of them. Vulgate needed to be replaced with vernacular versions so This year we are using an up-to-date translation, and this year that the Bible would no longer be a closed book, even so we they are interested in the actual text of Scripture too. These must be willing to allow the KJV to be replaced by a worthy students are not from non-Christian homes. All of them are translation in the language of the average English speaker. familiar with the KJV. It is the translation they have in their Otherwise we may need to bear some of the responsibility possession at home and it is what they hear in church every for this culture’s entry into a new dark age. Sunday. But God’s Word must be allowed to speak in their Those who claim that the KJV is the only Bible free of language if it is to be seen as relevant. error also fail to explain that the KJV is not based How far the “KJV only” advocates have strayed from early completely on the Majority Text or even the Textus Reformation and Anabaptist principles and positions. Our Receptus for that matter. The discussion regarding spiritual forefathers insisted that there must be no separation manuscript types and families is tedious and rather involved, between the sacred and the secular in a Christian’s life. All is and again beyond the scope of this paper. Almost all sacred. But today we have one language for business and Biblical scholars today are convinced that the eclectic text leisure and family, and another language for church. Our (critical text) best represents the original documents. KJV children cannot be blamed for concluding that we are spiritual advocates argue that the Majority Text is the most accurate. schizophrenics, speaking and acting one way on Sundays, and However, they invariably opt for the King James rendering another the rest of the week. Our lives should reflect Jesus and whenever the KJV is in conflict with the Majority Text or His Word naturally at all times and to all with whom we the Textus Receptus.13 Disagreements between the KJV and associate. But maintaining two kinds of speech and language, either or both are quite numerous.14 the sacred and the secular, strongly mitigates against a natural, The “KJV only” advocates do not tell us about the great consistent, daily and sacred faith-walk. difficulties the KJV had in gaining acceptance in England. How unfortunate when Christians fall in love with a translation (which cannot help but be faulty, for it has been What the “KJV Only” Advocates Don’t produced by fallible humans) rather than with the enduring Tell Us 12 f the KJV is the version whereby all other versions are to Most versions, when they first appear, are not well be measured, including versions of other languages,11 then accepted. Christians become attached to the versions they I there are some big questions left unanswered, questions are familiar with, and rightly so. They are not impressed most “KJV only” advocates would rather were left unasked. when the verses they have spent much time memorizing are First of all, who decided that the KJV should be the now changed in their wording. You can be sure that many of standard by which all other English Bibles are measured? those who oppose the new translations today would have Certainly not the translators. The 47 scholars involved in stood in opposition to the KJV when it was first published, producing the first edition of the KJV anticipated much had they been put on earth a few centuries earlier. The Geneva Bible and Bishop’s Bibles were considered excellent translations by many in England and not to be improved upon. 10 Do you know the meaning of the following words? 13 The Majority Text and Textus Receptus is not one and the Almug, charashim, chapt, habergeon, wimples, ouches, wot, same, as some “KJV only” advocates would have us to trow, sod, ligure, nusings, mallows, pilled, sith, tabering, believe. ambassage, collops, bruit, sottish, rereward, wist and leasing 14 At least 160 passages in the KJV deviate from the Textus are just a tiny smattering of words that we will probably Receptus, not counting the passages where the KJV only come across when reading our KJVs. followed the text of the Latin Vulgate (Lewis, 334). The 11 Many who argue for the KJV as the only true Bible don’t deviations of the KJV from the Majority Text are more seem to realize that there is no KJV in Spanish, Greek, numerous, largely because the Majority Text had not been Swahili, or any other language for that matter. established at the time of the KJV’s translation.

Villainous Versions? January, 1997 and infallible Word of God. They have developed a love for successfully taking our focus off God’s Word and Jesus the clothing rather than the real thing. Certainly the clothing Christ who is of God’s Word and turning our is essential, but it must be seen for what it is—a medium attention to the clothing of God’s Word—what has come to whereby God’s eternal truth is made known to His people. be perceived as a test of orthodoxy. And this is what makes Only in recent years has the KJV gained its status as the the debate so dangerous. Throughout the history of God’s venerated version. And it was a good version. It was crafted people the orthodox position was for God’s people to in the poetic language of the Elizabethan era that also saw expend their energies in getting God’s Word into the the genius of Shakespeare. It was one of the first to be the language of the common person. Today the orthodox result of several committees’ combined efforts rather than of position is perceived to be that of keeping the Scriptures in a an individual’s work, an important translation safeguard language not used in the marketplace and everyday which prevented it from exhibiting some of the conversation. It is high time God’s people consider carefully idiosyncrasies characteristic of Luther’s German Bible. The and prayerfully what God’s heart is regarding this issue. KJV in many ways set new standards for translation work. May God grant us wisdom and integrity, as well as the But again, as stated in the translators’ foreword, this version strength to obey and walk the path to which he has called us is not the final word in Biblical translation, and must not be, as language continues to change. If we truly love the Word of God we will do all we can to help others to love and obey it as well. Who’s Behind All this Controversy Anyway? here are many helpful books written by Christians who honour and respect the Bible as God’s Holy Scripture T that discuss the whole area of Biblical inspiration, canonization, transmission and translation.15 Surely God has not motivated people like Gail Riplinger to write a book full of inaccuracies, deceitful half-truths, and outright errors. Having perused the book, I am not certain whether there are too many individual pages which can be trusted for their veracity. It is a most deceitful book. However, most who hold a “KJV only” position are not knowingly deceptive. But the position remains a misguided and terribly unfortunate one, because it takes Christians’ focus and energy away from their missional calling. Every English version no doubt has its strengths and weaknesses (though I could not in any way recommend the ’s Witnesses’ doctrinally corrupted New World Translation). That exception aside, each version translates some verses better than others. Riplinger notwithstanding, no popular translation available to Christians today is heretical or produced by people bent on leading people away from the truth. Then what is at stake? First of all, the debate has caused needless division among God’s people. Second, this is just one more way—a big way—that the church is losing its relevancy to the unchurched around her. Third, Satan is

15 The following are several on my shelf and are a good place to get started: How We Got the Bible, 2nd ed. By Neil R. Lightfoot, Grand Rapids: Baker, 1988; The Books and the Parchments, rev. ed. By F. F. Bruce, Westwood, N.J.: Revell, 1963. The King James Version Debate: A Plea for Realism by D. A. Carson, Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979. Again, as mentioned earlier, one of the most thorough texts on the subject is the volume by Geisler and Nix, A General Introduction to the Bible, Revised and Expanded.

Villainous Versions? January, 1997