 1611 KING JAMES ONLY DECEPTION
If you say the King James Version is the best translation, I ask, compared to what?
If you declare the KJV to be the best translation because you say it is, and then judge all others translations by it, that's circular reasoning, which is absolutely ridiculous in this situation. If you declare, God inspires KJV and it's far better then all other versions, I ask how do you know? Again simply comparing KJV to other versions and using KJV, as the standard is circular reasoning. [I say KJV is the best version therefore KJV must be the best version.]
Not too smart...Let's look at the facts.
-------------------------------------
There are thousands of languages in the world. By the year 600 AD the Gospels had only been translated into a few languages. By 1456 when moveable type was invented only 33 languages had any part of the Bible. By the year 2000 the entire Bible had been translated into 371 languages and portions of the Bible were translated into 1862 languages.
It is said that the Septuagint is the oldest translation of the Bible [285-246 B.C.]. It was made for Jews. It is commonly agreed that it was made for the Jews in Alexandria. The common language of Alexandria was Greek so over the years many Jews had either grown rusty or had forgotten their Hebrew and wanted a translation so they could understand the Scriptures.
-------------------------------------
The Old Testaments of our day are taken from the Masoretic text which was written in Hebrew. It differs from the Septuagint in many ways. Yet, in the New Testament, when the Old Testament is quoted, it is almost always from the Septuagint.
The early Christian Churches loved the Septuagint and thought it to be divinely inspired. Therefore several of the Church Fathers claimed the Septuagint presented the word of God more accurately than the Hebrew Bible. Almost all early Christians after the first century had no understanding of Hebrew so the Septuagint was their only source for the Old Testament. The Jews over time came to hate the Septuagint and believed the day it was made was similar to the day the golden calf was made.
Over the next few centuries there were other translations made into other languages because Christians desiring to read The New Testament in their common languages. For example: Egyptian Christians...Coptic, Eastern Germanic...Gothic, Armenia...Armenian Version, Georgia...Georgian Version, Ethiopians...Ethiopic Version, Arabia...Arabic Versions, Nubia...Nubian Version, Syria...Syriac Version, The Latin Versions. Copies were made and copies of the copies and they were spread through out the lands. The original language of the New Testament was Greek.
-------------------------------------
The bottom line is extremely important to understand, all of these translations including the Septuagint had many problems and inaccuracies resulting from the repeated copying. We can determine that by simple comparisons.
Yet all of these translations proved to be invaluable in the proclamation of the Gospel. It appears just as God uses imperfect people to carry forth his perfect message, he has also allowed imperfect translations to carry forth his perfect message.
-------------------------------------
The Septuagint became confusing and unreliable because of the many differing copies that were made. This caused confusion and strife. Origen, in the third century, attempted to purify it by making what is called the Hexapla.
During the first few centuries many of the Christians that spoke Old Latin translated the New Testament manuscripts from Greek into Old Latin.
For the same reason Origen made the Hexapla, Pope Damasus, in 383, called upon Jerome, the most learned Christian scholar of his day, to produce a uniform and dependable New Testament In Latin. Jerome took into consideration the Septuagint but placed a much higher value on the Hebrew text. This resulted in the Latin Vulgate.
Jerome's new translation was not accepted immediately. Many were angry and criticized him for making it. Augustine thought the Septuagint was the inspired version of the Old Testament and superior to the Hebrew text. He was not pleased with Jerome for using the Hebrew over the Greek as his source of translation. Nonetheless, Jerome's Latin Vulgate became the standard for nearly a thousand years throughout Western Europe.
-------------------------------------
John Wycliffe [1330-1384] desired to make a translation into English that the ordinary reader could use. Of course the traditionalist of the day thought his new translation should be condemned and tried him for heresy.
In 1488 the first Hebrew Bible was printed in its original language. {By moveable type that had just been invented.}
Also in 1516 a Roman Catholic priest named Erasmus made a Greek New Testament and it was first ever published. Erasmus's Greek New Testament came from what is called the majority manuscripts there are appoximately 3900 of them, Erasmus used less than six of the manuscripts available, all from the [Byzantine text-type]. They all were dated twelfth century or later and none of them were complete copies of the New Testament. In addition He used sections from the Latin Vulgate that he translated into Greek. Erasmus dedicated his New Greek New Testament to Pope Leo X.
William Tyndale [1492-1536] conceived the idea of making an English Bible based on the original languages. But again the traditionalist objected to his new Bibles and convicted him of heresy and October 6, 1536 strangled him to death and burnt his body.
Tyndale influence spread to others like Miles Coverdale who printed the first complete English Bible in [1535]. Then John Rogers printed The Matthew's Bible [1537]. Others followed; Taverner's [1539], The Great Bible [1539], Edmund Becke's Bibles [1549; 1551], Geneva Bible [1560], The Bishops' Bible [1568] and The Rheims- Douay Bible [1582-1610].
-------------------------------------
The KJV 1611 Bible N.T. is based upon the newest copies of the Greek which are referred to as the [Received Text] or the [Textus Receptus]. The KJV 1611 Bible N.T. came from Erasmus's 1516 Greek Scriptures of the New Testament.
King James who had a personal interest in biblical study and translation endorsed the idea of a new English translation of the Bible. In 1604 a translation committee of fifty "learned men" and a list of rules of procedure had been provided. The rules of procedure specified that the Bishops Bible was to be followed and as little altered as the original will permit. And other translations should be used where they agreed better with the text. King James himself appears to have taken a leading role in organizing the work of translation.
The translators of the KJV 1611 Bible N.T. also used other Greek manuscripts that originated from Erasmus's Greek New Testament all of which were published less than one hundred years from Erasmus's first edition. They also used English translations that originated from Erasmus's Greek New Testament. For examples: The Great Bible, Tindoll's, Matthew's, Coverdale's, and Geneva.
The Old Testament of the KJV 1611 came from the Masoretic Text from 900 AD and beyond. The Masoretic Text existed prior to the writings of the New Testament and was considered as the official Hebrew Old Testament. The KJV 1611 Bible was not a new translation but only a revision of those translations that were already in existence. Evidenced by the original 11 page preface of the KJV 1611.
-------------------------------------
Translations like the New American Standard Bible and the New International Version of the Bible are based on Greek manuscripts that date from 100 AD TO 600 AD [Alexandrian" text-type] of which were unavailable to Erasmus.
-------------------------------------
It is quite amazing in that we do not have any of the original manuscripts {Autographs} but what we do have are two separate sources coming from the original autographs. One within 100-600 years from the original and the other coming from a pathway of translations covering 1600 years. When we compare the two they are almost identical. According to the preface to the New King James Version of the Bible, the Textus Receptus, the Alexandrian text-type and the Byzantine text-type are 85% identical.
-------------------------------------
The fact is, all manuscripts and versions have errors {mostly minor variances]. Yet the doctrinal positions of the Body of Christ are boldly seen in each translation and no doctrines have been done away with as a result of the differing translations or error within them. The question is, do we have the word of God without errors? The answer is... YES! The Question is, how can that be, if they all have errors?
Example: If 25 people tried to copy the Declaration of Independence and each when they had finished made no less than 20 errors and then someone lost the original copy, would it be possible to determine exactly what the original had said, without any errors?
YES ... How then?
They would not all have made the same mistakes in the same places. Therefore a careful comparison and correction could reestablish the original content.
-------------------------------------
2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness.
Paul was speaking to people about the original manuscripts {Autographs}. This can be simply known by applying the Law of Non-Contradiction, to all known non-autograph manuscripts. [With the only possible exception that God inspires imperfect manuscripts and translations as He does imperfect Christians.]
This is not to say the end result of all the translations, even with their minor differences, for the most part are still not part of God’s sovereign plan.
For example, compare the KJV - NASB - RSV
RSV John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. [ALL SAY THE SAME]
KJV 1 Corth 15:3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: [ALL SAY THE SAME]
NASV Rom 10:9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; [ALL SAY THE SAME]
I think the various translations are not only good, but point to the very fact that God has inspired all Scripture.
Think about it for a minute. You have a number of men from various geographical locations and various religious backgrounds, in various times in history, spanning 2000 years. All attempt to translate the Greek manuscripts and the copies of the copies and the end result is that not one doctrine of the Christian faith has been affected by a translation.
That shows that what we have, is what God wants us to have.
eVeNWITH ThE' VAReOUS mis steakes" with IN.
The above is an absurd example of errors that can still be understood, yet nothing in Biblical manuscripts in regard to error and variance come close to being as ridiculous as the above example.
-------------------------------------
Now that a foundation of truth has been laid, let me make the point of this paper. But first keep in mind I use the KJV of the Bible and like it as I do others. I will not lower myself to a rock-throwing contest of pointing out verse vs. verse problems within the translations since it should be obvious that the Gospel shines brightly thorough all translations to all that are not brain dead.
But what concerns me is the cultic mentality of some that hold to the King James 1611 Bible. They cause dissention within the body of Christ over which Bible is the best.
Most of these ignorant troublemakers that I have met are sincere straight shooters that conduct themselves as gentlemen. To the effeminate, modern Christian ears, their words sound harsh. Generally, they are bold witnesses for the Lord, having dogmatic doctrine. Most of them that I have met have a real heart for the things of the Lord.
But, many of them are ignorant, placing their faith in a few modern day deceivers. They, like any cult, "follow the leader", and are unable to consider any other information or opposing views.
This is coupled with the old satanic trick of acute paranoia. They think They are the only ones that hold the real divine truth and other Christians with other Bibles are enemies to the truth.
They actually believe there is some major conspiracy propagated by the various denominations to undermine the word by various translations.
These people wallow in fear and ignorance, not knowing Greek themselves, and often advocate that the English 1611 KJV is more inspired than the Greek.
-------------------------------------
The names and the faces have changed but it's the same old plot that has been used for 2000 years to cause disunity within the body of Christ.
This same kind of thinking is responsible for (almost word for word) the building of the various Cults. For example, think of Mormonism and what they have said about The Body Of Christ.
Also, consider the ones that used to worship the Septuagint, and the Latin Vulgate. Consider what they did to John Wycliffe, William Tyndale, and many others. That same hateful ignorant spirit is in many of the King James only bunch.
The KJV only bunch should be thankful to the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church because they were the Churches through their Pope's, Priests, Bishops and Monks that have been guided by God to copy and preserve the manuscripts the KJV 1611 came from. But most I have met hate the Roman Catholic Church and do not believe their Christians.
-------------------------------------
If you are a "KJV Only" and believe the KJV is Inspired Scripture, and all other translations are not.
I have a question for you! How do you know that?
If you say, "God told me", you must be Pentecostal, Or maybe you had an experience like Joseph Smith.
-------------------------------------
If you are a "KJV Only" and believe the KJV is Inspired Scripture, and the other translations are not.
I have a question for you! How do you know that?
If you argue, "It's been what God has used for four hundred years."
What about the Septuagint? It has been around for over 2200 years?
Or the Latin Vulgate, that has been around for over 1600 yrs?
Or the Greek Orthodox?
Or the many other English Translations before the KJV?
NOTE: It's interesting to see, the KJV 1611 VERSION has 49 books in the Old Testament, not 39 as our translations do. If the 1611 version was inspired by God, why delete 10 books contained with in it as many of the recent KJV versions do? Which part of the KJV 1611 is inspired, ALL OR PART?
KEEP IN MIND...
The KJV today looks very different than that of the 1611. Editions with changes in the text came out as soon as 1612, 1613, 1616, 1629, 1638, 1769.
If you say the KJV is the fulfillment of 2 Timothy 3:16, I have to ask the Question, which edition?
If you say 1611, then I say, why use the others?
If you say, the different editions are "advanced revelation", I say "O foolish Americans, who has bewitched you"?
Or, in a more contemporary way, what kind of a nut are you?
One guy quoted Ps 12:6 and said the KJV has gone through seven purifications. Then he was asked, "Are you saying the original 1611 was impure? If so, why would God inspire an impure translation."
Why do people believe in the infallibility of the Pope? Why do people believe in the infallibility of the KJV? That is where the answer is.
-------------------------------------
2 Timothy 2:14 Remind them of these things, and solemnly charge them in the presence of God not to wrangle about words, which is useless, and leads to the ruin of the hearers.
Why in 2 Timothy 2:14 were these words written?
Was God aware of potential problems that would occur?
Could God have systematically written the text of the Scriptures He wanted us to have in the sky above for all generations to see and end all future problems?
How many problems do we have with the translation of... Matthew 22:39 And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' NIV
-------------------------------------
Has our Perfect God used the imperfect Catholic Church over the years?
Has our Perfect God used imperfect humans over the years?
Can our perfect God use imperfect manuscripts and versions?
Can our perfect God work His perfection through imperfection?
-------------------------------------
Romans 10:14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?
It does not say how shall they believe without a 1611 KJV. What they hear from is an imperfect Preacher with imperfect doctrine as a general rule.
You show me two Preachers that agree on everything and I will show you a Biblical Miracle.
Nevertheless, this is the method God has chosen to work through. I am quite sure He is also able to work though variations within manuscripts and translations for His Glory. He has done this with the variations within Churches and believers for thousands of years.
|