The
King James Bible And The Doctrine of
Verbal
Plenary Preservation
Lesson 7
| I. |
INTRODUCTION
What is the
relationship between the King James Bible and the doctrine of Verbal
Plenary Preservation of God’s Word? The answer is simple. The King
James Bible accurately preserves God’s divine words in the Hebrew and
Greek languages by accurately translating these words into the English
language.
To avoid confusion and misunderstanding of the matter, it is necessary
to clarify that VPP proponents believe God has preserved for His people
His 100% Perfect Hebrew and Greek words. And these are the Hebrew and
Greek words that underlie the King James Bible. The King James Bible is
only a translation. No translated words can be better than the inspired
Hebrew and Greek words given by God.
When using the KJB, it is necessary to go back to the words in the
original languages for clarity and fullness of meaning. By way of
illustration, the words in the original languages underlying the KJB
are like the perfect platinum ruler of the Smithsonian Institute,
inerrant, infallible, and authoritative. The KJB and other accurate and
reliable translations are like the common ruler, though not perfect,
are good and safe enough for use.
In this study, we shall look at how we got our King James Bible and how
the King James Bible is superior in four areas (Texts, Translators,
Techniques, Theology) as compared to all the other modern English Bible
translations today.
|
| II. |
THE BOOK
OF BOOKS … HOW WE GOT THE KING JAMES BIBLE 1
No
book is like the Bible: it is the BOOK of books. Its words are
“God-breathed,” inspired. “All
scripture is given by inspiration of God . . .” (2 Tim
3:16). God was the unseen Author; the men who wrote were amanuenses. 2
Peter 1:19–21 says,
For we have also a more sure word of prophecy;
. . .. Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any
private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the
will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy
Ghost.
In
old time God spoke, and holy men wrote. To John the Apostle it was
given to “bare record of
the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ . . .”
(Rev 1:2). Our Lord, the One that sat upon the Throne, said to John: “Write: for these words are true
and faithful” (Rev 21:5). The spoken words are
preserved for us through the ages, as the written words in the
Bible, a sure record that withstands the ravages of time and decay.
The original
records of God’s
words, the AUTOGRAPHS, were written in Hebrew (almost all
of the Old Testament) and Greek (New Testament). Today the autographs are long
gone through years of hard usage. But copies of God’s words are still
with us. Thanks be unto God for preserving His words in the thousands
of Hebrew and Greek manuscripts by the hands of faithful men. God has
not left Himself without a witness.
The
Word of God is not to be bound, but must be published to all people,
that they may obtain salvation by Jesus Christ. For this purpose God
raised up godly men of wisdom and learning, to translate His Word into
many languages. Our discussion here focuses on the English
translations, not the non-English translations.
John Wycliffe
was
the first to give the English people a translation in their own tongue
(1382), but it was based on the Latin
Vulgate (a Latin Bible translated from Hebrew and Greek). William Tyndale was
the first to produce an English translation from the original Greek and
Hebrew texts (1525), for which he suffered martyrdom. Other
translations followed, based on the same Hebrew and Greek texts: Coverdale (1535), Matthew (1537), Taverner (1539), the Great Bible
(1539), the Geneva
(1560), the Bishops’
(1568).
These
translations
were useful as forerunners of the King
James Version (KJV) or Authorised Version
(AV) of 1611. Within a short time of its appearance, the KJV was
acknowledged as the superior and unrivalled translation. This was due
to the superior scholarship of the translators: a team of the best
scholars from Oxford and Cambridge, who were godly men with a high view
of the Scriptures, fully committed to the accurate and faithful
rendering of God’s eternal Word from the original languages into the
best classical English. The KJV or Authorised Version (AV) is the
Twenty-First Century English Reader’s Bible. We present this Book to
our readers as THE one English translation which, above all other
English Bibles, is the most complete, accurate and faithful English
translation of the original inspired words of God. With the KJB, the
reader will not be deceived in any matters that God has chosen to
reveal to us through His inspired words.
|
| III. |
A FOUR-FOLD SUPERIORITY OF THE KING JAMES
BIBLE 2
|
A.
|
Superior Original Language Texts
The textual
foundation of
the King James Bible is the best compared to that used by all other
English Bibles that exist today. The King James Old Testament is
translated from the Traditional Masoretic Hebrew Old Testament text
(Ben Chayyim). The Masoretes handed down this text from generation to
generation, guarded it and kept it well. The majority of the modern
English versions, however, were translated from other Hebrew texts like
Rudolph Kittel's Biblia Hebraica, Samaritan Pentateuch, etc., which are
different from the Traditional Masoretic Text. If the Hebrew foundation
of the modern English versions and the King James Bible are different,
how can their translated English words be the same? Surely, they cannot
be the same. They are different. Why is the Old Testament Hebrew Text
of the King James Bible superior? It is superior because: Firstly, it
was preserved by the Jews. Secondly, the traditional text of the Jews
was authorised by Jesus. He has never refuted any text, any word or any
letter in the Hebrew Old Testament. He stamped His authorisation on the
Masoretic Hebrew Text. He did not give His approval on the Septuagint,
the Latin Vulgate, some scribal tradition, Josephus, Jerome, the Syriac
version or any other document present at that time! In Matthew 5:18,
Jesus said, "Till heaven
and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the
law, till all be fulfilled." This proves that our Lord
believes in the preservation of the Scripture to the extent that every
word of it has been kept intact.
The King James Bible
is
also based on a superior Greek New Testament, the Textus Receptus. The
chief opponent of the Textus Receptus is the Nestle/Aland Greek New
Testament 26th edition, which is used in most colleges, universities,
and seminaries today (even conservative and/or fundamental ones). The
editors of this corrupt Greek Text were made up of a committee
comprising unbelievers, a Roman Catholic Cardinal, and apostates.
Basically, it is this same Greek Text that underlies almost all modern
English versions.
The Textus Receptus
that
underlies the King James Bible, however, was received by the Church for
almost 1,800 years until 1881 when Westcott and Hort’s Greek Text came
into the scene. Since then, almost all preachers studied this corrupt
Greek Text, but still preached out of the King James Bible (which was
based on a different Greek text). Later, even the King James Bible was
kicked out in favour of English Bibles that are based on the
“preferred” corrupt Greek text.
|
|
B.
|
Superior Translators
The King James
translators
were men of great spiritual insight. They believed that people need to
read the Bible, and therefore, there was a need for proper translation
of the Scripture.
There were
fifty-seven
translators, divided into six teams. They met in three cities, namely,
Cambridge, Westminster and Oxford. They began their work in 1604 and
completed it in 1611. In both Westminster and Oxford, the translators
focused on the Old Testament and New Testament. In Cambridge, they had
a team working with the Old Testament and Apocrypha. Even though the
translators included the Apocrypha in the original King James Bible,
they did not believe it was inspired. Therefore, they translated it as
history between the Old and New Testaments. Dr. John Reynolds, a devout
puritan, led this great work of translation from the beginning to the
end.
Many of them
possessed
superb language skills and were known for their expertise in Hebrew,
Greek and English. They applied their skills and did excellently in the
translation. With all these fifty-seven superior translators, we can be
assured of the superiority of their product.
|
|
C.
|
Superior Technique
There are two aspects
to
the superior technique used by the translators of the King James Bible:
Superior Team Technique, and Superior Translation Technique.
The King James Bible
was
translated differently from other modern English versions. Each
translator had to translate the books on his own, unaided by anyone
else. Every translator on the six teams, fifty-seven of them, had to be
so skilled in the Hebrew or Greek books assigned to him that he had to
translate all of them by himself in his own handwriting. In addition,
they had a total of fifteen rules to govern their translation work.
They had a team technique that
is unequalled by any modern translators. This is how they do it. They
had about seven translators in a team. One translator is assigned to
one book. For each completed book, it had to be examined by the other
six translators individually, and one more time meeting together to go
over it to decide which translated words would stand – in total eight
times. Then it will be sent to the other five teams for vetting – that
is five more times and at the end they had a joint meeting of two men
from each of the six teams – twelve men. That makes a total of fourteen
different times for one book. That was how they translated, analysed
and corrected in their translation from Genesis to Revelation. This
technique was a team effort and certainly superior without any doubt!
The translation technique
adopted by the King James translators is the verbal and formal
translation technique. This method is the translation of Hebrew and
Greek words as closely as possible into English. Every noun, adjective,
preposition, participle and so on in the Hebrew and Greek text is
brought into the English in the same way. That includes the structure
and form as well. Dynamic equivalence is directly opposite of the
verbal and formal equivalence technique. It is not a word-for-word
translation. The words were either added, changed or subtracted in the
English. This is also known as “paraphrasing.”
Should not God's Word
be
read in English exactly as we would find in the Hebrew and Greek texts?
We can see this in the King James Bible which has been translated by
the verbal and formal equivalence technique, but not in other modern
versions which used the dynamic equivalence technique that mixes God's
words with man's words. Indeed we can confidently trust that the King
James Bible is God's Word accurately translated into English.
|
|
D.
|
Superior Theology
There are those who
say
that no vital doctrine is affected in the modern English versions. This
claim is clearly false. There are two possible ways theology (or
doctrines) can be affected in the modern English versions:
(a)
through the
translators’ paraphrasing in the modern English versions,
(b) through the
corrupt
Greek text used.
Theology is affected
in the
modern English versions when important words in the Greek text are
changed or omitted. The followings are just some examples how theology
has been affected:
|
a)
|
The Doctrine
of Holy Trinity
1 John 5:7 (KJV
based
on the TR): “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word,
and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.”
1 John 5:8 (KJV
based
on TR): “And there are
three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the
water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.”
1 John 5:7 and
8 are
one of the clearest biblical support for the Doctrine of the Holy
Trinity.
Yet, the
italicized
portions are eliminated
from the corrupt Greek texts (Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus) and
are therefore not found in the modern English versions that are based
on these corrupt Greek texts. Egs of such English versions are the NIV,
NASV, and NKJV.
This is
certainly a
matter of doctrine and theology. The corrupt Greek texts and their
subsequent English translations are theologically deficient, whereas
the Textus Receptus and, subsequently, the King James Bible are
theologically superior.
|
|
b)
|
The Doctrine
of the Judgment
2 Peter 3:10
(KJV
based on the TR): “But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the
night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and
the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works
that are therein shall be burned
up.”
The italicized
portion is altered
in the corrupt Greek texts (Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus) and
their subsequent English translations (NIV, NKJV). Instead of the words
“burned up,” the words “laid bare” are used. There is a vast difference
between “burned up” and “laid bare.” The word “laid bare” is an
entirely different concept and word picture. This is no clear
description of how hell is to be like.
This is
certainly a
matter of doctrine and theology. There corrupt Greek texts and their
subsequent English translations are theologically deficient, whereas
the Textus Receptus and, subsequently, the King James Bible are
theologically superior.
|
|
c)
|
The Doctrine
of the Christ
Luke 2:22 (KJV
based
on the TR): “And when the days of her
purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they
brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord.”
The italicized
portion is changed
in the Greek texts (Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus) and their
subsequent English translations (NIV, NASV, NB). The word “her” is
changed to “their,” thus making the Lord Jesus Christ One who needed
“purification,” and therefore a sinner! This is unthinkable!
This is
certainly a
matter of doctrine and theology. These Greek texts and their subsequent
English translations are theologically deficient, whereas the Textus
Receptus and, subsequently, the King James Bible are theologically
superior.
|
Other theological
doctrines affected that are either eliminated,
altered or changed
are the doctrine of the church (Revelation 2:15), the doctrine of
angels (Luke 22:43), the doctrine of Satan (Luke 4:8), the doctrine of
the Bible (Mark 16:9-20; John 7:53-8:11; etc.), the doctrine of last
things or prophecy (Matthew 25:13; Mark 12:23; etc.), the doctrine of
salvation (Revelation 21:24; 1 Peter 2:2; etc.), and the doctrine of
Christ (John 3:13; 1 Corinthians 11:24; etc.).
Theology is indeed
affected
and undermined in the modern English versions today. How can the whole
counsel of God be faithfully taught in these modern English perversions?
|
|
| IV. |
THE GREEK SOURCE TEXT OF MODERN ENGLISH
BIBLES 3
The subject has been well
researched
and documented by the Trinitarian Bible Society of England in “The Divine Original.”
We can do no better than quote from it:
The Vatican and Sinai Manuscripts
In the mid-nineteenth century the Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus
became available to Biblical scholars, and in 1881 Westcott and Hort
advanced the theory that the New Testament text was preserved in an
almost perfect state in these two fourth century manuscripts.
The
discovery of these MSS betrayed many Biblical students into a
lamentable infirmity of critical judgement. Tischendorf himself, the
discoverer of the Sinai Codex, amended his eighth edition in at least
3,505 places in conformity with new readings which he found in this
document. The Codex Vaticanus exercised a similar mesmeric influence on
the minds of many 19th and 20th century scholars. The Revised Greek
Text underlying the modern versions has the support only of that very
small minority of the available MSS which are in some respects in
agreement with the unreliable text of the Sinai and Vatican codices.
An Elaborate
Theory
Westcott and Hort devised an elaborate theory, based more on
imagination and intuition than upon evidence, elevating this little
group of MSS to the heights of almost infallible authority. Their
treatise on the subject and their edition of the Greek NT exercised a
powerful and far-reaching influence, not only on the next generation of
students and scholars, but also indirectly upon the minds of millions
who have had neither the ability, nor the time, nor the inclination to
submit the theory to a searching examination.
Doctrinal
Deficiencies of these
MSS
These two MSS and a few others containing a similar text present in a
weakened form many passages of Holy Scripture which speak most plainly
of the deity of the Son of God. The trend of Biblical scholarship in
the 19th and 20th centuries has been towards a “humanitarian” view of
the person of Christ. It is not surprising that many modern scholars
should welcome the support of these two ancient documents, but it is
sad to see so many earnest evangelical Christians ready to accept
without question a theory so destructive of the faith once delivered to
the saints.
The True Text
The Sinai and Vatican manuscripts represent a small family of documents
containing various readings which the Church as a whole rejected before
the end of the 4th century. Under the singular care and providence of
God more reliable MSS were multiplied and copied from generation to
generation, and the great majority of existing MSS exhibit a faithful
reproduction of the true text which was acknowledged by the entire
Greek Church in the Byzantine period A.D. 312–1453. . . . This text is
represented by the Authorised Version and other Protestant translations
up to the latter part of the 19th century. 4
The foregoing revelation by the Trinitarian Bible Society is simply
devastating!
In the critical assessment of
ancient Bible texts, we must rely on trustworthy experts in the fields.
No one was better qualified than the brilliant linguist and Bible
scholar John William Burgon (1813–1888). A man of rare integrity and
fidelity to Holy Scripture, he was alarmed by the rising wave of
antagonism against the Word of God.
Burgon, determined to unravel the
truth about the newly discovered texts, went to Rome in 1860 to examine
the Codex Vaticanus
and to Mount Sinai to acquaint himself with St. Catherine’s monastery
where the Codex
Sinaiticus was found.
A meticulous student, Burgon gave
himself wholly to extensive study of Greek manuscripts, to research in
the textual field, in order to be adequately equipped to defend the
Bible under attack.
We quote from David Cloud’s
publication, Modern
Bible Versions:
Of
the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus and the textual theories which exalt these
manuscripts, the brilliant John Burgon, after decades of lonely,
vigilant toil in the dim corners of Britain, Europe, and Egypt,
testified:
“On
first seriously applying ourselves to these studies, many years ago . .
. turn which way we would, we were encountered by the same confident
terminology: ‘the best documents,’ ‘primary manuscripts,’ ‘first-rate
authorities,’ ‘primitive evidence,’ ‘ancient readings,’ and so forth: we found that thereby codices א
[Sinaiticus] or B [Vaticanus], codices C or D [two similar manuscripts]
were invariably and exclusively meant. It was not until we
had laboriously collated these documents for ourselves, that we became
aware of their true character. Long before coming to the end of our
task (and it occupied us, off and on, for eight years) we had become
convinced that the supposed ‘best documents’ and ‘first-rate
authorities’ are in reality among the worst.
“A
diligent inspection of a vast number of later copies scattered
throughout the principal libraries of Europe, and the exact collation
of a few, further convinced us that the deference generally claimed for
B, א, C, D is nothing else but a weak superstition and a vulgar error,
that the date for a MS is not of its essence, but is a mere accident of
the problem, and that later
copies . . . on countless occasions, and as a rule, preserve those
delicate lineaments and minute refinements which the ‘old uncials’ are
constantly observed to obliterate. And so, rising to a
systematic survey of the entire field of Evidence, we found reason to
suspect more and more the soundness of the conclusions at which
Lachmann, Tregelles, and Tischendorf had arrived: while we seemed led,
as if by the hand, to discern plain indications of the existence for
ourselves of a far ‘more excellent way’ (Revision Revised,
pp. 337, 338).
“We
suspect that these two manuscripts [Sinaiticus and Vaticanus] are
indebted for their preservation, solely to their ascertained evil
character; which has occasioned that the one eventually found its way,
four centuries ago, to a forgotten shelf in the Vatican library; while
the other, after exercising the ingenuity of several generations of
critical correctors, eventually got deposited in the waste-paper basket
of the convent at the foot of Mount Sinai. Had these been copies of
average purity, they must long since have shared the inevitable fate of
books which are freely used and highly prized; namely, they would have
fallen into decadence and disappeared from sight (Revision Revised,
p. 319).”
Thus
we see that during the 1800s, one of the greatest missionary eras in
history, while godly men were carrying the preserved Bible to the ends
of the earth, unbelieving textual critics, enamoured by German
rationalism, went about searching the dusty libraries of apostate
institutions to rediscover the Word of God that had never been lost! 5
These two MSS fell into the hands of
Westcott and Hort, two unregenerate professors in Cambridge, who
promptly elevated them to a place of authority, lending the weight of
their names to the texts.
|
| V. |
TWO ANGLICAN CHURCHMEN FROM
CAMBRIDGE 6
Soon after the discovery of the Codex
Sinaiticus and Codex
Vaticanus, two learned professors, Westcott and Hort,
Anglican Churchmen from Cambridge, got to work on these defective
manuscripts. Out of them they published their edition of the Greek NT
which was then presented to the world as the most accurate, authentic
and trustworthy.
With their stamp of authority, their Greek NT literally captured the
imagination of the scholastic community. Since then the Westcott-Hort Greek NT
has dominated the field of NT Greek scholars and translators around the
world. By one fell stroke the TR (Textus
Receptus or Majority Text) was dethroned, and the Westcott-Hort (W-H)
text was seated in the chair of authority. While these two men and
their followers exalt their text as “the best,” another school (as we
have seen) rejects them as “the worst.” What does God’s Word say on the
matter? Our Lord’s teaching from the “Sermon on the Mount” (Matt
7:15–18) applies:
Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but
inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits.
Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good
tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil
fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt
tree bring forth good fruit.
Then says the Apostle James: “Doth
a fountain send forth at the same place sweet water and bitter? Can the
fig tree . . . bear olive berries? . . . so can no fountain both yield
salt water and fresh” (Jas 3:11–12).
What sort of “tree” and “fountain” are Westcott and Hort? What are
their doctrinal beliefs and persuasion? These have been subjected to a
penetrating analysis in Heresies of Westcott and Hort by D A Waite.
Behind their academic gowns and “evangelical” fa�ade, the real Westcott
and Hort harboured a secret affection for Rome and the Virgin Mary. By
their own writings the men reveal their true selves: unregenerate,
strangers to the saving grace of God, and enemies of the Gospel of
Jesus Christ. Hereat we present incontrovertible proof of the unbelief
and anti-Christian position of Westcott and Hort, summarised from
Waite’s book.7
|
Denials
of Basic Bible Truth by Westcott and Hort
Whether jointly or individually, Westcott and Hort, by their own pens,
have denied or attacked the following fundamental doctrines of “the faith which was once
delivered unto the saints” (Jude 3).
Westcott and Hort DENIED:
|
a)
|
the doctrine of the inspiration of Scripture,
|
|
b)
|
the Genesis record of the Creation and the
Fall of man,
|
|
c)
|
the Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ, His
eternal pre-existence and Godhead, His Messiahship, and His
sinlessness,
|
|
d)
|
the substitutionary atonement of Christ and
redemption by His blood,
|
|
e)
|
the bodily resurrection of our Lord Jesus
Christ,
|
|
f)
|
the Second Coming of Christ,
|
|
g)
|
the doctrine of Eternal Life,
|
|
h)
|
the reality of Heaven and Hell,
|
|
i)
|
the personality of the Devil.
|
Westcott and Hort BELIEVED IN:
|
a)
|
the inherent goodness and perfectibility of
man,
|
|
b)
|
the Darwinian theory of Evolution,
|
|
c)
|
the Universal Fatherhood of God,
|
|
d)
|
the ultimate salvation of all men,
|
|
e)
|
the efficacy of water baptism for
Regeneration.
|
Westcott and Hort were false
prophets, ravening wolves
in sheep’s clothing (Matt 7:15) “deceitful workers,
transforming themselves into … ministers of righteousness” (2 Cor
11:13-15). Their theories of Textual Criticism are false and must be
utterly rejected. Their NT Greek Text is therefore also to be utterly
rejected as pernicious poison. And yet a hundred new Bibles have flowed
from this corrupt source.
|
|
| VI. |
THE TRANSLATORS’ AWESOME TASK 8
The translation of God’s Word is an
awesome task fraught with grave responsibility. What mortal being is
worthy to handle and translate the words of the Almighty? Even as those
who teach the Word of God must exercise utmost care: “. . . the word of the LORD was
unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line,
line upon line; here a little, and there a little . . .”
(Isa 28:13), so must they who translate God’s Word exercise the utmost
care.
Those who handle God’s Word are warned: “Every word of God is pure: . . .
Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a
liar” (Prov 30:5–6). In repelling the tempter, our Lord
used only God’s Word, “It
is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that
proceedeth out of the mouth of God” (Matt 4:4). Every word in the Bible is
important! Every word must be faithfully and precisely translated
without distortion, without variation, whether more or less.
Only with utmost reverence then should one handle God’s Word. Such was
the attitude of the men who translated the KJV. Those godly men of rare
scholarship, holding a “high view” of Holy Scripture, endeavoured to
translate word for word
and phrase for phrase
so as to capture the very spirit of the original text, and thus express
the mind of God faithfully.
This precise “word for
word” method (“formal equivalence” or “verbal
equivalence”) ensures that the
KJV conveys God’s message with a degree of literal and grammatical
fidelity unrivalled by any other modern English version.
One
Translator’s
Reckless Methodology
Eugene Nida is an unregenerate man who denies the blood atonement, the
reality of angels and miracles, and the infallibility of Holy
Scripture. Yet he occupied a key position in the Translations
Department of the United Bible Societies.
By the introduction of his new translation methodology, “Dynamic
Equivalence,” Eugene Nida has become the most influential person in the
field of Bible translation. The theory behind Nida’s “Dynamic
Equivalence” goes something like this:
|
a)
|
The message and events of Scripture are bound in
the culture of the past.
|
|
b)
|
The strict “word for word” translation being
“static” does not release the message of God.
|
|
c)
|
“Dynamic Equivalence” unbinds the message which
“leaps out” at the reader in today’s language and culture.
|
|
d)
|
By this method the translator is at liberty to
express just how he feels
were the Author’s thoughts.
|
|
e)
|
Instead of “word
for word,” it is now “thought
for word,” ie, man’s thoughts in place of God’s Word.
|
Eugene Nida’s theory is
theological liberalism,
which is unbelief.
It reduces God to man’s level. It implies that God is unable to
communicate with His creatures in an intelligible manner without man’s
aid.
Nida is an infidel, a “corrupt tree” which
“bringeth forth evil
fruit” (Matt 7:17).
The corrupted Modern
English
Bibles have come by the “Dynamic Equivalence” method of translation. A
corrupt methodology gives rise to corrupt versions: “by their fruits ye shall know
them” (Matt 7:20).
Heed the warning of the
Scripture: “For my
thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith
the LORD” (Isa 55:8). It is supreme folly and reckless
presumption for any man to venture to “think God’s thoughts” by wanton
manipulation of God’s inspired Word.
|
| VII. |
THE DOCTOR’S PRESCRIPTION 9
| 1. |
A good doctor’s
prescription spells life and health to the patient. It is written in
exact and precise terms. With words
(and figures) the doctor expresses his thoughts.
|
| 2. |
The doctor’s
prescription
must not be tampered with: nothing must be added, nothing taken away.
There must be no variation or manipulation.
|
| 3. |
A good pharmacist
dispenses the prescription exactly as written, word for word, letter for letter,
precise to the minutest detail. Not even a “jot or tittle” must be
altered. (A dot moved one space to the right increases a dose tenfold!)
|
| 4. |
A good pharmacist
dispenses good, wholesome, effective, healthful medicine. When taken,
the patient recovers.
|
| 5. |
An enemy gets his
hands
on the prescription and alters it. A deadly medicine is dispensed. When
taken, the patient dies.
|
Modern English
Bibles are deadly medicine.
GOD’S
WORD OUR PRESCRIPTION
|
1.
|
Our God, the soul’s Physician, has a Prescription
for life: the Bible.
|
|
2.
|
It comes to us by the hands of men of old inspired
by the Holy Spirit, copyists, and translators. The business of these
copyists and translators is to keep to the Bible text exactly as
written: word for word,
letter
for
letter, without alteration or variation.
|
|
3.
|
The faithful “word
for word” method of translation is termed “Verbal Equivalence.”
|
|
4.
|
The translators of the KJV
Bible appointed
by King James used the
Verbal Equivalence method, word for word, as
originally given by God.
|
|
5.
|
The MSS
they used were faithful copies of the original, known as the Received Text (TR)
or the Majority Text.
|
|
6.
|
The result of their translation: a sound,
accurate, faithful Bible, the “King
James Version” or “Authorised
Version” true to its Author in every vital detail.
|
|
7.
|
We confidently believe that the KJV
or AV is
God’s Word
kept intact in English, God’s perfect Prescription for the
English-speaking world.
|
|
|
VIII.
|
CONCLUSION
Our
all-wise God has ordained that His purpose in Creation and Redemption
should be accomplished by His Word. So highly has He esteemed His Word
that He magnified it above His name (Ps 138:2). God’s Word is forever
settled in heaven (Ps 119:89); it cannot be broken (John 10:35),
neither shall it pass away (Matt 24:35). Our Lord has confirmed, “For verily I say unto you, Till
heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from
the law, till all be fulfilled” (Matt 5:18). Who, then,
should dare to alter “one
jot or one tittle” of the Word of God? Such reckless
daring shall have its due reward: … “If any man shall add unto these
things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this
book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this
prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life…”
(Rev 22:18-19). God has spoken, be warned!
If we reject the doctrine
of VPP,
we effectively reject the faithful KJB as well. It is such an irony
that VPP opponents who hold in high esteem the KJB and yet
(a) despise the KJB’s underlying
Hebrew and Greek texts, and
(b) believe that the
preservation
of the inspired Greek words of God is also to be found in the corrupt
Westcott and Hort critical texts.
The battle today is the
battle
for the Bible. It is the battle for the King James Bible and its
underlying Hebrew and Greek texts over the many modern English versions
and their corrupt texts. This battle seeks to recapture for the Church
the traditional text and the doctrine of Bible preservation.10
God has certainly preserved His words for us today. But where are His
words? They are the Hebrew words found in the Traditional Masoretic
Hebrew Old Testament (Ben Chayyim) and the Greek words found in the
Traditional Greek New Testament of Textus Receptus, the underlying
original language texts of the King James Bible. The KJB accurately
preserves the Hebrew and Greek words in the English language based on
its four-fold superiority: Texts, Translators, Technique and Theology.
“When the enemy shall come in
like a flood, the spirit of the LORD shall lift up a Standard against
him” (Isa 59:19). “… Thy Word is Truth” (John 17:17). “For we can do nothing against
the Truth, but for the Truth” (2 Cor 13:8). “But the Word of the LORD
endureth forever…” (1 Pet 1:25). “Nevertheless the Foundation of
God standeth sure, having this seal, the Lord knoweth them that are
His. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from
iniquity” (2 Tim 2:19). Amen.
|
NOTES
| 1
|
This part is adapted from
chapter 1 of S
H Tow’s In Defence of
The King James Holy Bible, a booklet published by Calvary
Bible-Presbyterian Church, Singapore.
|
| 2 |
This part is written with
reference to D A Waite’s Defending
The King James Bible
(Collingwood: The Bible For Today Press, 1994). |
| 3 |
Chapter 6 of In Defence
of the King James Holy Bible. |
| 4 |
The Divine Original
(London: Trinitarian Bible Society, nd), 6-7.
|
| 5 |
David Cloud, Modern
Bible Versions (Oak Harbor: Way of Life Literature, 1994),
28-30.
|
| 6 |
Chapter 7 of In Defence
of the King James Holy Bible. |
| 7 |
See D A Waite, Heresies
of Westcott and Hort (Collingswood: The Bible For Today,
1979).
|
| 8 |
Chapter 8 of In Defence
of the King James Holy Bible. |
| 9 |
Ibid, chapter 9.
|
| 10 |
Jeffrey Khoo, Kept Pure
In All Ages (Singapore: Far Eastern Bible College Press,
2001), 17. |
|
