Regarding the KJV Dispute

Much ink has been spilled in the debate over Bible translations, but with the addition of the KJV (1611) to VersePack, I felt it my responsibility to add a few thoughts.

Before I go any further, please know that if you are reading this and are convinced that the KJV is superior, I still think it important that you continue to memorize Scripture! God’s word is living and active, a light unto His path. Be blessed in your pursuit and love of God’s Word, and don’t miss my three final notes below!

There are many good english translations of the Bible available today, and while there are groups of people who are vehemently supportive of certain translations, the KJV is perhaps the translation that is most likely to have the “-only” attached to it. That is, there are likely more people to say that the KJV is the only reliable translation of the Scriptures, and use of any other translation is either heretical or a gateway to heresy.

I am not here to propose a “best” translation, but in the interests of Christian charity, I’d like to take a moment to ask all parties involved to take a moment to extend a bit of grace, learn a bit about the history of the KJV, and resolve to spend a little more time loving their brothers and sisters who also affirm that salvation is by Grace alone, through faith in Jesus Christ and his atoning work on the cross. The KJV certainly has a very majestic tone, a “Scriptural” quality that many cherish dearly, and is ingrained in culture and history very deeply. It is valuable for faith and practice, and ought not to be disregarded. Many of us (me included!) began memorizing verses in the KJV and will never forget them.

The blessing of quality english translations of the Bible is something we ought not to take for granted. Historically, Hebrew, Greek, and Latin translations were not very accessible to the common man who spoke any other language and could not afford the time or expense of learning those languages. With Luther’s German Bible began a modern era in which the common man could read Scripture for him/herself under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, thus making it possible for personal study and growth outside of the (often ill-motivated) interpretations of a privileged clergy.

Luther’s Bible was based on Erasmus’ Greek New Testament known as the Textus Receptus, as is (largely) the King James Version. What is notable about this is that (much like the game of telephone), repeated hand-copying of manuscripts makes room for slight variations or errors in a text. Modern scholarship, by comparing myriad surviving copies of the greek (and Hebrew) manuscripts, has been able to discern with an extremely high probability, what the original text actually said–no one chooses “just one” Greek manuscript, but uses many to identify places in which individual manuscripts differ from all of the others. Without going into much detail about the process, Erasmus didn’t have the benefit of comparing so many manuscripts, so he used what he had available. In a few cases, he didn’t even have any Greek manuscripts, so he translated from the Latin Vulgate back into Greek.

The result is that Erasmus’ GNT isn’t the best one we have available today. As a result, there are some small parts in the KJV that have been translated from likely textual mistakes that came about over time as Greek manuscripts were copied out by hand. Again though, this is not a reason to disregard the translation–these textual variations are almost always very minor, with little to no doctrinal significance.

What this does mean though, is that there are places when one might find slight differences between the KJV and the ESV or the NIV or the NASB. In these cases, it is best to understand that newer translations typically have the benefit of being translated from “better” Greek sources. The ESV and NIV try to capture the sense of phrases in their translation, while the NASB goes for a more literal word-for-word faithfulness. Reading ALL of these translations is a good way to try and understand what the author was trying to say when it was originally written.

What we should not do is assume one language is always perfectly right and the others aren’t. When Paul wrote to Timothy (in Greek) that “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.” (2 Tim 3:16-17, KJV) it was true. Talk of “refinements” of the text over various copyings and translations through history culminating in a “perfect” KJV deny that Scripture was true when it was written and deny that anyone prior to 1611 had access to God’s will as revealed in Scripture.

Aside from considerations of origins and the like lie a few final concerns: 
1. The KJV contains a lot of archaic words. If you read, memorize, and/or share this translation, please educate yourself on what they mean so you can fully understand God’s Word and help others to do so as well.
2. Jesus says “By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.” (John 13:35, KJV) If you continue this debate (either here or elsewhere), please do so in love. As you quote Scripture that you have memorized, please do so in love.
3. The furor over omissions is sadly misguided (more info).

Blessings,
Andy Pull
7/17/2010