I am currently teaching different attributes during the Sunday school, and during this time someone asked me whether or not the King James Version was the only reliable version. I must confess that I have not heard this question in all seriousness in all my years in ministry. I have looked at the arguments during my time in Seminary, but I have not run into anyone that actually holds this view. That is until this young lady asked the question.
I first asked if that is what she believed, and she said no, but her employer believes that the KJV is the only inspired version of the Bible. I do believe that the KJV is a beautiful translation and believe it to be a valuable translation, but it is not the only infallible translation, and definitely not the only inspired.
There are just too many questions that would need to be answered for the English version of the Bible to be considered the only inspired version and the only version to be used. There are at least 1,200 versions of the Bible out there in many languages, so why not the Latin version, or the African version, or the Greek version?
If we were going to pick based on the longest enduring version then we would have to use the Latin Vulgate and if we were going to use the most widely available and used today it would then be the New International Version.
Why do they consider the recent KJV to be the inspired version and not the 1611 version? One reason would be because the 1611 version had many errors in it. Not just simplistic errors either, but serious errors. One was in Matthew 26:36 where Jesus’ name was replaced with Judas’ name in the verse. Or what about the second edition where 20 words are repeated in Exodus 14:10? In 1611 there were two different editions that differ from one another. Which one should be used?
The errors mentioned above are just some of the problems over the years that the KJV has been distributed. There is the wicked version where one of the commandments says, “though shalt commit adultery” in Exodus 20:14. In the 1659 version there was a claim of 20,000 errors, and I did not mistype that number, it is 20, 000. Not to mention the original KJV version had the apocryphal books in it, and those are not considered part of the canonical books.
Now, if you pick the KJV in the original as the inspired version then you have to admit that some things are meaningless and false. What do you think is meant by “We do you to wit” in 2 Corinthians 8:1 (KJV)? How about “I trow not” in Luke 17:9 (KJV)? How is possible that words are continuously changed in the inspired version? Just in case you are wondering the “We do you to wit” means “We want you to know,” and “I trow not” means “I think not.” Other words now not in use: creeple, et, shalbe, middes and ioy. I have not even gotten into verses that would have the exact opposite meaning if we relied only on the original KJV today.
Taking the extreme view that the KJV is the only version to use can be seen as anti-intellectual as it fails to carefully and insightfully respond to language changes and thus culture. They tend to isolate themselves instead of engaging culture as Paul did (Acts 17). How can one preach the Word effectively to other societies and cultures if one does not understand to whom they are preaching it and their surroundings? Must we teach everyone the English language before they can understand the Saving grace of Christ?
Below is a list taken from Dr. Norman Geisler’s Theology, Volume 1 that gives some reasons for not accepting that the KJV is the only version that is inspired and all others should be compared to it. We forget that Christ was fully God and fully man, and to place one version of the Bible diminishes the human side of the Bible.
The Bible had forty human authors utilizing their own writing style and personality to proclaim the words within the Bible.
The Bible was written in Greek, Hebrew and Aramiac, which are all human languages and not a spiritual one.
Poetry, allegory, parables and symbols are all used within the Bible as literary forms.
There is simplistic to very extravagant language used in the Bible, demonstrating different human literary forms.
Shepherds, prophets, historians, and the apostles all used their different human perspectives to write the truths contained in the Bible.
Human thought processes are revealed within the pages of the Bible. Just read Psalms sometime.
Joy, pain, anger, vengeance, forgiveness and many more human emotions are seen within the text of the Bible.
Different human cultures are seen within the Bible.
Josh. 10:13; Numbers 21:14; Acts 17:28; 1 Cor. 15:33; Titus 1:12 are all other written sources used within the Bible.
Again, I do not believe there is any version better then the other in a fashion where one is “more” inspired, but believe we can utilize many different versions from all the different languages out there today. One should not place the Bible on a pedestal above God, as that becomes Bibliolatry.
The KJV Bible is a wonderful version, and should be read for its’ beauty, but it should not be considered as the only inspired version out there today. A new Christian today would have many struggles reading the KJV version as compared to the NIV or even the New King James Version. As long as the truths are not changed then we need to allow these versions that will help someone from America and from Africa to understand the saving grace of Christ and how to live out that life in their daily lives.
For more information on this debate you can pick up Dr. Norman Geisler’s theology work mentioned above or D.A. Carson, “The King James Debate.”
No comments:
Post a Comment