Home
Page
Our
Heritage
Our
Faith
Our
Worship
Church Life
Directions
Full-Text
Literature
Bulletins
Links
|
The
King James Version Of The Bible
by Rev. Steven Houck
Minister in the Protestant Reformed Churches
Published
by:
Peace Protestant Reformed Church
18425 Stony Island Ave. o Lansing, IL 60438
(PRC Internet homepage - http://www.prca.org)
Preface
The Bible is no ordinary book. It is not a human
book. The Bible is God's inspired and infallible Word - God's Book. It
is the Book which God has given to His people to teach them the Truth
which they must believe and the godly life which they must live. That
is why the Bible is so important for every believer. Without the Holy
Scriptures the believer has no Word of God. He has no standard of what
is the Truth and what is the lie, what is righteous and what is wicked.
It is, therefore, imperative that every child of
God takes great care that the Bible version which he uses, defends, and
promotes in the world is a faithful translation of the Word of God.
On this point, however, there is much confusion.
There are many versions available today and they are all promoted as
the best. Some are advertised as the most accurate. Others are advanced
as the easiest to understand. All of them are justified by the supposed
inferiority of the King James Version.
The truth of the matter, however, is quite
different. The King James Version, although it is almost 400 years old,
is still the best translation available today. It was translated by men
who were both intellectually and spiritually qualified for the work.
The great version which they produced is faithful to the originals,
accurate, incomparable in its style, and easily understood by all those
who are serious about reading and studying God's Word.
The King James Version of the Bible is the version which we ought to
use both in our churches and homes. It is my prayer that God will use
this history of the King James Version to give the reader a better
appreciation for this Bible.
Rev. Steven Houck
Table of Contents
THE INCEPTION OF THE NEW
VERSION 1
-A Puritan's Petition
-Bishops and King
-God's Bible
THE TRANSLATORS OF THE KJV 4
-Their Organization
-Their Learning
THE SPIRITUAL CHARACTER OFTHE TRANSLATORS 7
-Protestant Men
-Godly Men
-Believing Men
THE RULES AND METHODOLOGY 9
-The Rules
-The Procedure
-Other Contributors
-A Careful Work
-An Accurate Translation
-A Majestic Translation
THE SOURCES USED IN TRANSLATING
13
-Original Languages
-Previous Translations
A BIBLE OF THE REFORMATION 15
-Stephanus and Beza
-The Received Text
-Tyndale and Rogers
-Coverdale and Cranmer
-Geneva and King James Versions
-God's Grace
A BIBLE FOR WHICH MEN DIED 20
-The Greek Text
-John Wycliffe
-William Tyndale
-Rogers, Cranmer, and Coverdale
-Geneva and King James Versions
-GOD'S WORD TO HIS CHURCH 23
-Authorized Bible
-The Best Version
-An Admonition
The Inception Of
The New Version
Many times God uses the incidental, the unexpected,
and even the seemingly evil things of life to perform mighty wonders
for His Church. Who would have ever expected that the words of a little
Jewish maiden would lead to the conversion of Naaman the Leper? Who
would have ever thought that the evil deeds committed by Joseph's
brothers would have resulted in the preservation of Israel in the time
of famine? But so it was in the wondrous providence of God.
In like manner, it was only the good providence of
God that brought the King James Version of the Bible into existence.
This version, which has played such a large part in the life of the
English-speaking Church, had its beginnings in a very unexpected and
incidental way-yea, in the midst of great disappointment on the part of
some of God's people.
A Puritan's Petition
Four Puritans along with fourteen representatives of the Church of
England were gathered together at Hampton Court for an ecclesiastical
conference in January 1604. The Puritans had many objections concerning
the English Church as it was then established. They were hoping that
their new king, James I, would so guide the Church of God in England
that there would be further reformation of the Church. They wanted to
make the Church of England more like the Reformed Church of Geneva and
the Presbyterian Churches of Scotland. They had already met James on
his way to London where he was to receive the English crown and had
presented him with a petition stating their grievances. The petition
was signed by about a thousand clergyman and therefore called the
Millenary Petition. It was on account of that petition that James had
called the conference to hear and determine things pretended to be
amiss in the Church.
It did not go so well for the Puritans, however.
Not only were they in the minority at the conference, but King James,
rather than sympathizing with them, supported the cause of the High
Churchmen or Conformists who did not want the Presbyterian form of
Church government. In the midst of their struggle Dr. John Reynolds,
the Puritan president of Corpus Christi College, suddenly petitioned
the king, that there might be a new translation of the Bible, because
those which were allowed in the reigns of Henry VIII and Edward VI were
corrupt and not answerable to the truth of the original. This motion of
the Puritan leader evidently was not something which he had planned but
something that was introduced incidentally in order to keep from losing
all ground at the conference.
This is confirmed by the preface to the readers entitled The
Translators To The Readers which was found in the first edition of the
King James Version. There we read, ...the very historical truth is that
upon the importunate petitions of the Puritans, at his Majesties coming
to the crown, the conference at Hampton Court having been appointed for
hearing their complaints; when by force of reason they were put from
all other grounds, they had recourse at the last, to this shift, that
they could not with good conscience subscribe to the Communion Book,
since it maintained the Bible as it was there translated, which was as
they said, a most corrupted translation.
The Puritans did object to the translations of the
Great Bible and the Bishops' Bible which were quoted in the Prayer
Book, but they did not zealously demand a new translation. They were
content with their Geneva Bible and its Calvinistic notes. The motion
for a new translation was incidental to them. In fact, if it were up to
them, there probably would not be a King James Version of the Bible.
Bishops And King
On the other hand, the bishops were not immediately
in favor of a new translation either. Bishop Bancroft of London (who
was appointed by the king to oversee the translation work) expressed
his opposition this way, If every man's humor should be followed, there
would be no end of translating. Indeed, the bishop made a very good
point. That is exactly what we have today with all of the new versions.
There are so many new translations that it seems as if every man is
making a translation to his own liking. Thus neither party in the
Church of England was zealous for a new translation.
It was the king's zeal and enthusiasm for the
project that caused the work to be undertaken and that saw the work
through to the end. In the Dedication to the King, found in most of our
King James Version Bibles, we read this concerning the king, ...your
Majesty did never desist, to urge and to excite those to whom it was
commended, that the work might be hastened, and that the business might
be expedited in so decent a manner, as a matter of such importance
might justly require. Indeed, the king seems to have been the driving
force behind this grand undertaking.
Yet we make a mistake if we attribute his zeal to
good motives. It may have been that he had an interest in the
Scriptures. He is said to have done some translating of the Bible of
his own. Most, however, attribute his zeal to an ambition to advance
his own cause and glory. He greatly disliked the marginal notes of the
Geneva Bible because he thought they encouraged disobedience to kings
and therefore wanted a new translation to replace it. He was shrewd
enough to see that a new translation, which was acceptable to all,
would do much to unite the church and thus enhance his own glory.
God's Bible
We must conclude from all of this, that the King
James Version of the Bible is not a Puritan Bible, nor an Anglican
Bible, and not even a King James Bible. A Bible which has been used of
the Lord for hundreds of years can not be merely the product of an
incidental suggestion or the zeal of bad motives. No! The King James
Version is the product of God's great love for His English-speaking
Church. God so ruled in the hearts and lives of finite men that He
caused this new translation of the Bible to be made. He provided this
Bible for His English-speaking Church so that His Word might be
preserved in her midst. Even the translators acknowledge that it was
God who had put the zeal for a new translation into the heart of the
king. They exhort us, Let us rather bless God from the ground of our
heart, for working this religious care in him, to have the translations
of the Bible maturely considered of and examined. God in His providence
took the incidental remarks of a Puritan, the zeal of a king for his
throne, and in the midst of the opposition of bishops, gave to His
Church a Bible that has been her blessing and strength for almost four
hundred years.
Some men praise it for its pure English and
forceful style, others for its beauty and majesty, and still others for
its accurate translation. It is all of that and more. But even more
important, we must recognize that the King James Version is the Word of
God which God has graciously and lovingly given to His English-speaking
Church. It is a faithful translation of the inspired originals which
have been providentially preserved by God in the thousands of
manuscripts which have come down to us. Thus we can be assured that
with the King James Version of the Bible we have the authoritative Word
of God.
The
Translators Of The KJV
Their Organization
In the providence of God, although all others
seemed little concerned about a new translation, the suggestion of Dr.
Reynolds was fixed in the mind of the king. In due season that
suggestion ripened into personal enthusiasm on the part of the king and
also on the part of those whom he appointed to take charge of this
great undertaking. Conformists and Puritans alike with great zeal and
dedication were ready to begin their tasks. By June 30, 1604 (six
months after the Hampton Court Conference), fifty four men had been
approved as translators of the new version (Evidently only forty seven
men actually took up the labors.) and a plan of procedure had been set
down. Bishop Bancroft, entrusted with the general management of the
work, was busy making all the necessary preparations.
The translators were formed into six companies: two meeting at
Westminster, two at Cambridge, and two at Oxford. Genesis through II
Kings was translated by the first Westminster company, I Chron. through
Ecclesiastes by the first Cambridge company, and Isaiah through Malachi
by the first Oxford company. The second Oxford company translated the
four Gospel accounts, Acts, and Revelation. The Second Westminster
company did Romans through Jude. The Apocrypha was done by the second
Cambridge company.
The Apocrypha, however, was not considered a part of the inspired
Scriptures. It was translated and bound with the Bible, but the King
James Version translators did not count it as God's Word. In that they
differed from the Roman Church. The fact that the Apocryphal books were
separated out of the Old Testament and put after it indicates that they
did not consider it equal with Holy Scripture. In later editions it was
dropped altogether.
Their Learning
In these six companies of translators were gathered
together the most learned men of the age. Today it is charged that the
King James Version is obsolete, for we have learned so much more and
have men who are much greater scholars than those of the 17th century
and who, therefore, can do a much better job of translating the Bible.
Indeed, we have gathered much general knowledge in the past three
hundred and eighty years. It is NOT true, however, that the King James
Version translators were inferior scholars. They were men of great
learning.
Who today is skilled in fifteen languages as was
Launcelot Andrews, the head of the Westminster company which translated
Genesis through II Kings? It is said of him that he might almost have
served as an interpreter general at the confusion of tongues, he was so
proficient in the languages. Others spoke of him as that great gulf of
learning. He was so knowledgeable that the world wanted learning to
know how learned this man was.
William Bedwell of the same company was well known as the greatest
Arabic scholar of the day. To him belongs the honor of being the first
who promoted and revived the study of the Arabic language and
literature in Europe. He authored the Lexicon Heptaglotten, which
included Hebrew, Syriac, Chaldee, and Arabic. He also worked on a
Persian dictionary, an Arabic Lexicon, and an Arabic translation of the
Epistles of John.
Dr. Smith, the author of The Translators To The Readers and one of the
final editors, is said to have had Hebrew at his fingers' ends. He was
so conversant in Chaldee, Syriac, and Arabic that they were as familiar
to him as English. His knowledge of the Greek and Latin fathers was
exceptional. He was so versed in literature that he was characterized
as a very walking library.
John Harmar of the Oxford company, was a noted
scholar in Greek and Latin. He translated Calvin's sermons on the Ten
commandments, several of Beza's sermons, and some of the Homilies of
Chrysostom.
John Boys of the Cambridge group was one of the
most distinguished scholars of all the translators. His father taught
him Hebrew when he was five years old and he was admitted to St. John's
College, Cambridge when he was fourteen. He was a most exact Greek
grammarian who had read no less than sixty grammars.
Dr. John Reynolds, the Puritan who first suggested
a new translation, had a reputation as a Hebrew and Greek scholar. He
had read and studied all the Greek and Latin fathers, as well as the
ancient records of the Church. Those who knew him held him to be the
most learned man in England. It is said of him, that He alone was a
well-furnished library, full of all faculties, all studies, and all
learning. His memory and reading were near to a miracle. He worked on
the translation of the Prophets until his death in 1607.
Henry Savile of the New Testament Oxford company
was one of the most profound, exact, and critical scholars of his age.
He became famous for his Greek at an early age. He is chiefly known as
the first one to edit the complete works of John Chrysostom. Some have
styled him, that magazine of learning, whose memory shall be honorable
among the learned and the righteous forever.
No, these men were not ignorant. They were not even
average. They were exceptional in their various areas of knowledge. The
first half of the seventeenth century, when the translation was made,
was the Golden Age of Biblical and oriental learning in England. Never
before, nor since, have these studies been pursued by English scholars
with such zeal and success. It is very doubtful that all the colleges
of Great Britain and America could even bring together the same number
of men who are equally qualified by learning and piety as the King
James Version translators.
The
Spiritual Charactor Of
The Translators
But scholarship is not everything. A translation of
the Bible is always affected by the spiritual character and faith of
the translators. An unbeliever does not translate the Bible as does a
believer. Martin Luther wrote, Translating is not an art that everyone
can practice, as the mad saints think; it requires a right pious,
faithful, diligent, God-fearing, experienced heart. Therefore, I hold
that no false Christian, or sectarian can be a faithful translator. No
false Christian, no sectarian-that is, no unbeliever can be a good
translator of the Bible. This is the problem with many modern versions.
Some of the translators were not qualified spiritually for the work,
even though they might have been intellectually.
Protestant Men
What about these translators? Did they have this
heart which Luther describes? The answer is a most emphatic, yes. These
men where, indeed, pious men of God, who were committed to the Truth.
Gustavus Paine, in his book The men Behind the King James Version,
tells us that there were among the translators no Roman Catholics, no
Jews and no women. That little statement says much. They were all
Protestants who belonged to the Anglican Church. Some were High
Churchmen. Some were Puritans. Others were somewhere in between the
two. But they were all members of a church that was Protestant, a
church of the Reformation. The church was not as Reformed as Geneva,
not even as Reformed as it had been in the days of Edward VI, but it
was nevertheless a church that had adopted many of the Truths of the
Reformation. In a few years (1647), under the leadership of the
Puritans, this church would produce the Westminster Confession and
Catechisms. These Creeds are standards of the Reformed Faith.
Although some of the translators were more or less
Arminian, many of them were Calvinists. One authority tells us that
Calvinistic doctrine was the prevailing doctrine of the day. Lawrence
Chaderton was one of the strong Calvinists among the translators. At
his conversion from the Roman Church to Calvinism his father had
written him, Son Lawrence, if you will renounce the new sect which you
have joined, you may expect all the happiness which the care of an
indulgent father can assure you; otherwise, I enclose a shilling to buy
a wallet. Go and beg. This was no idle threat. His father was a very
wealthy man. Without his aid life would be very difficult for the young
Chaderton. But he refused to give up his Calvinism and became an
outspoken anti-Arminian preacher. Thomas Holland, a thorough Calvinist,
is said to have opposed Rome with more force than any other. Whenever
he went on a journey his farewell to his fellows at the College was
this: I commend you to the love of God, and to the hatred of popery and
superstition.
Godly Men
Miles Smith in the translators' preface to the
readers describes the spiritual character of these men. He asked, And
in what sort did these assemble? In the trust of their own knowledge,
or of their sharpness of wit, or deepness of judgment, as it were in an
arm of flesh? At no hand. They trusted in him that hath the key of
David, opening and no man shutting; they prayed to the Lord the Father
of our Lord, to the effect that St. Augustine did; "O let thy
Scriptures be my pure delight, let me not be deceived in them, neither
let me deceive by them." They were godly men who did not trust in their
own strength, but sought guidance and help from God. They knew that if
their work was to be a success, it had to be the work of God. They
believed that, even after the translation was completed, it would be
meaningless to the people of England without the enlightening power of
God's grace. Thus they remind the reader, It remaineth that we commend
thee to God, and to the Spirit of his grace, which is able to build
further than we can ask or think. He removeth the scales from our eyes,
the veil from our hearts, opening our wits that we may understand his
word, enlarging our hearts, yea correcting our affections, that we may
love it above gold and silver, yea that we may love it to the end.
Believing Men
Unlike many who translate the Bible today, they
believed that they were dealing with the inspired Word of God.
Concerning the Scriptures they could exclaim through Miles Smith in the
Preface, And what marvel? The original thereof being from heaven, not
earth; the author being God, not man: the enditer (prompter), the Holy
Spirit, not the wit of the Apostles or Prophets; the Pen-men, such as
were sanctified from the womb, and endowed with a principal portion of
God's Spirit; the matter, verity, piety, purity, uprightness; the form,
God's word, God's testimony, God's oracles, the word of Truth, the word
of salvation; the effect, light of understanding, stableness of
persuasion, repentance from dead works, newness of life, holiness,
peace, joy in the Holy Ghost; lastly, the end and reward of the study
thereof, fellowship with the Saints, participation of the heavenly
nature, fruition of an inheritance immortal undefiled, that never shall
fade away; Happy is the man that delighteth in the Scripture, and
thrice happy that meditateth in it day and night.
Indeed, these men considered the Scriptures to be the inspired Word of
God. To them, the Bible was a very special book and they handled it
accordingly. Yet, they knew too that this special book could be
properly translated and profitably read and studied only when God in
His sovereign grace worked in the hearts of its translators and readers.
The
Rules And Methodology Followed
The Rules
Great care was taken to give the translators
guidelines to follow in their work of translating. If all these men
were going to work together as a harmonious whole, they would need some
very strict rules to follow. The scheme for the entire work was set
down in the form of fifteen specific rules. To name a few: 1) The
Bishops' Bible, the official version of the Church, was to be as little
altered as the truth of the originals permitted. 2) There were to be no
marginal notes with the exception of explanations of Hebrew and Greek
words. 3) There also were to be Scripture references in the margins.
According to F. H. A. Scrivener (Born in 1813 and an editor of several
editions of the Greek New Testament), there were 8,422 marginal notes
in the 1611 edition of the King James Version. In succeeding editions,
thousands more were added. 4) Proper names were to be as near to the
common usage as possible. 5) Old ecclesiastical words such as Church
were to be used. 6) Words of varying interpretations were to be
rendered in accordance with patristic tradition and the analogy of
faith. 7) Other translations were to be consulted such as Tyndale's,
Matthew's, Coverdale's, the Great Bible, and the Geneva Bible.
The Procedure
Along with such rules as these, the procedure that
was to bring together into one work the translations of all these
various men and companies, was strictly set down for them. First of
all, each translator was to individually work on a translation of the
section. After that was done each man's work was brought to his company
as a whole. Evidently the head of the company would read the passage
from the Bishops' Bible. Whenever one of the translators wanted
something changed or had something to say about the translation, he
would present his own work. In this way the work of each was compared
with the others and the company as a whole worked out one translation.
When each book of the Bible was finished, they would send it to each of
the other five companies to be reviewed. If the later companies found
anything objectionable, they would note such places and send it back to
the originating company with their reasons. If there was a
disagreement, it was to be settled by an editing committee later. If
there was a passage that was especially difficult, all the learned men
of the land could be called upon to make a judgment.
According to England's delegates to the Synod of Dort., after each
company had finished their work they sent it to a committee comprised
of two men from each company which reviewed and revised the whole work.
Last of all Thomas Bilson and Miles Smith put on the finishing touches
and had it printed.
Other contributors
Besides those who were appointed to the companies,
there were many others who contributed to the work. The king had
instructed Bishop Bancroft to move the bishops to inform themselves of
all such learned men within their several dioceses, as, having especial
skill in the Hebrew and Greek tongues, have taken pains in their
private studies of the Scriptures... This was to be no private
translation, no Bishops' Bible either. It was, so to speak, public.
Anyone with the proper qualifications, could make suggestions as to how
to translate a certain passage. There were many who were qualified too.
England not only had many learned men at that time, but their learning
had turned largely to theology. Theology rules there, said Grotius.
Another declared that he found both King and people indifferent to
letters in the ordinary sense, but that there was a great abundance of
theologians in England. The King James Version took advantage of this
learning and this theological atmosphere.
How very different was this open policy of
translation from the secret policy of the revision of 1881(the first
revision of the King James Version done by such men as Ellicott,
Trench, and Westcott)! No one knew what that revision would be like
until it was done. With the King James Version, however, each bishop
kept the clergy of his district notified concerning the progress of the
work so that if anyone felt constrained to send in their observations
on a passage, they could do so.
A Careful Work
It must be noted in particular, that the work was
done very carefully. They did not rush themselves. They say in the
preface, Neither did we run over the work with that posting hast that
the Septuagint did, if that be true which is reported of them, that
they finished it in 72 days; neither were we bared or hindered from
going over it again having once done it, like St. Jerome... These men
were not afraid to go over their work again and again until they were
satisfied that they had attained the best possible translation. If they
followed the procedure which was laid down for them, each part of the
work must have been closely scrutinized at least fourteen times.
They understood very well the nature of the book
they were translating and therefore took great pains to do it right.
Some of the translators began their work, as soon as they were
appointed in 1604. The entire body was engaged in the work by 1607. The
new version was finally published in 1611 from the press of Robert
Barker who retained the right of printing for nearly a hundred years.
Thus you can see that some men diligently labored for six or seven
years, while the main body worked for three or four.
An Accurate Translation
It must be noted further that the King James
Version translators were very concerned to have an accurate translation
of the originals. They proclaim on the title page, Holy Bible,
containing the Old Testament and the New: newly translated out of the
original tongues... That proclamation is true. For these men have given
us, for the most part, a word-for-word translation of the originals.
They did not follow the principle of dynamic equivalence as do most
translators today. Most modern versions are not word-for-word
translations. One English word is not translated for one Greek or
Hebrew word. Rather the ideas expressed in the originals are put into
English. Dynamic equivalence is the method of translation whereby one
translates the ideas but not necessarily the words. The King James
Version translators did not use such a method. They translated word for
word. Thus they have produced a very accurate and faithful translation
as far as the original words are concerned.
They were so concerned about it that they even took over the very
phraseology of the Hebrew and Greek. We find in our Bibles, all kinds
of Hebrew expressions and concepts that are not natural to the English
way of speaking. In fact, it can even be said that the English of the
King James Version is not the English of the 17th century, nor of any
century. It is an English that is unique, for it is Biblical English-an
English formed by the Hebrew and Greek of the Bible. It is Biblical
English because the translators were more interested in being faithful
to the originals than in making their translation in the street
language of the day, as do translators today.
That they sought an accurate translation is further
indicated by the fact that they italicized every word that did not have
a corresponding word in the original. How many modern Bible versions do
that? Moreover, to insure the fact that the reader understands the
meaning of certain original words, they added 4,223 marginal notes that
gave the literal meaning of the original words, and 2,738 notes with
alternate translations. The result is that in the King James Version we
have an accurate translation that puts the others to shame.
A Majestic Translation
In the third place we must note the fact that the
translators gave the King James Version a majestic quality that raises
it high above all other translations. They recognized God to be GOD-a
God of glory and majesty. Therefore, they were careful to translate His
Word in such a way that it would be filled with His majesty. That is
another reason why the English of the King James Version is not the
English of the 17th century. The translators deliberately chose words
and phases that were no longer used in general conversation even in
their day in order that they might set this book apart from all others.
All you have to do is compare the language of the dedication to King
James in the front of your Bible with the Bible itself and you will see
the difference immediately.
Many tell us that the King James Version is no
longer useful because its language has become obsolete, but what they
do not realize is that its language is not a type of English that was
ever spoken anywhere. Oh, it was such that the people could understand
it, but it was, nevertheless, a particular language deliberately chosen
to make the King James Version a version that reflects the reverence
and respect which is due unto its Divine Author. In that respect, they
succeeded too, for there is no version that even comes close to the
beauty and majesty of the King James Version.
The
Sources Used InTranslating
Original Languages
The particular English of this version is also due
to the fact that the King James Version is at the same time both a new
translation and a revision of previous translations. It is indeed a new
translation which goes back to the original languages. The translators
had editions of both the Hebrew Old Testament and the Greek New
Testament available to them. Miles Smith writes, If you ask what they
had before them, truly it was the Hebrew text of the Old Testament, the
Greek of the New. The age in which they lived was bursting with
knowledge. Since the fall of Constantinople (1453), the West had been
flooded with scholars and knowledge had increased tremendously. There
was renewed interest in the ancient tongues and as a result the
originals were there for them to use.
The Hebrew text had been remarkably preserved by
God. At the time the translators were ready to begin their work, they
had no less than ten printed editions of the Hebrew Old Testament
available to them. There was the Complutensian Polyglot of Cardinal
Ximenes published in 1517 which contained the Hebrew text (the fifth
complete O. T.) as well as the Latin Vulgate and the Greek Septuagint
translations of it. They had four editions by Daniel Bomberg (1516-17,
1516-17, 1521, 1525-28). The last of these was popular with the
Reformers. The standard edition was considered to be that of Jacob ben
Chayim-the Second Rabbinic Bible. Besides these, there was the Antwerp
Polyglot (1572) with the Hebrew text of Arius Montanus and the Latin
interlinear translation of Pagninus.
The Greek text was readily available in the
Complutensian Polyglot (1514), the five editions of Erasmus
(1516-1535), the four editions of Robert Stephanus (1546-1551), and the
ten editions of Theodore Beza (1560-1598). They also consulted the
editions of Aldus (1518), Colinaeus (1534), and Plantin (1572).
There can be no doubt, therefore, that the King
James Version translators went back to the primary sources. Thus they
could ask the reader, If truth be (is) to be tried by these tongues
(the originals) then whence should a translation be made, but out of
them. They recognized the fact that the final authorities in this work
were the Hebrew and the Greek texts.
Previous Translations
Yet the King James Version is not a totally new
work. In terms of literary units-phrases and clauses-the King James
Version is about thirty nine percent new translation. Sixty one percent
of the phrases are taken over from older English versions. In fact, the
King James Version can be considered the fifth revision of the work of
William Tyndale who first translated the New Testament into English
from the Greek. Before Tyndale there was the translation (1380) of John
Wycliffe (An English Reformer often called the Morning Star of the
Reformation) and the translation of John Purvey (A Colleague of
Wycliffe), but they were translated from the Latin Bible. Tyndale was
the first to go back to the original languages.
The first revision of Tyndale was done by John
Rogers (Rector of a London church and later chaplain to the English
merchants in Antwerp) and is called the Matthew's Bible (1537). Under
the auspices of Thomas Cromwell, Myles Coverdale (Tyndale's assistant)
revised the Matthew's Bible to produce the Great Bible (1539). In 1560
the Protestants in exile at Geneva produced the Geneva Bible which was
the third revision of Tyndale. Finally in 1568 the English bishops
prepared what is known as the Bishops' Bible, which was the version
from which the translators were to make their revisions, according to
the command of King James.
In actuality they used all of these versions plus
many other translations such as the German and French Bibles as well as
many commentaries such as Calvin's and Beza's. In their own words,
Neither did we think much to consult the translators or commentaries,
Chaldee, Hebrew, Syrian, Greek, or Latin, no nor the Spanish, French,
Italian, or Dutch (German)... Of all the English versions used, more of
the phrases and clauses found in the King James Version come form the
Geneva Bible than any other-about 19 percent. While it is said that
five sixths to nine tenths of the general literary style comes from the
translation of William Tyndale.
A Bible
Of The Reformation
If we carefully consider these sources of our
Bible, then it becomes clear that there is something very special about
it. Of all the English versions available today, the King James Version
is the only one which can be called a Reformation Bible. This Bible
came out of the Reformation of the 16th century.
Stephanus And Beza
This is true first of all from the point of view of
the Greek text. The Greek text which underlies this Bible is the text
which was recognized and used by the Reformers. In fact, it was even
edited by them. Robert Stephanus (Estienne), whose forth edition of the
Greek New Testament was very influential in the translation of the King
James Version, was a strong adherent of the Reformed Faith. Forsaking
Rome and embracing the Faith of the Reformation, he gave up his
position as royal printer in order that he might publish Reformed
literature. He fled from Paris to Geneva, that great Reformation city,
where he printed his 4th edition of the Greek New Testament. He also
published several of the writings of John Calvin.
The Reformer, Theodore Beza, was even more
influential than Stephanus. Scrivener in his Parallel New
Testament-Greek and English, demonstrates that the King James Version
translators primarily used Theodore Beza's 1598 edition of the Greek
New Testament. He indicates that out of the thousands and thousands of
words in the New Testament, they deviated from Beza only about one
hundred and ninety times. Moreover, they not only used his Greek text
but relied heavily upon his Latin translation of it. Therefore,
Theodore Beza, the successor of Calvin at Geneva, a great Reformer
himself, was a leading influence upon our King James Version.
The Received Text
It must be noted on the other hand that with but
two exceptions, there is not another English version available today
which is based upon the text of Stephanus and Beza, commonly called the
Received Text. All others, except the New King James Version and the
Modern King James Version, are based on the critical text of Westcott
and Hort which omits and changes thousands of words. For instance, in
all other versions you will find the following passages either omitted
or questioned: 1) the descent of the angel into the pool of Bethesda
(John 5:3b-4), 2) the conclusion of the Lord's prayer (Matt. 6:13b), 3)
the woman taken in adultery (John 7:53-8:11), 4) the last 12 verses of
Mark 16, 5) the appearance of the angel to Christ and the sweating of
the great drops of blood (Luke 22:43-44), and many more. The critical
text used by modern versions departs from the Received Text in over
5000 places. But the text of the King James Version is the text used by
Martin Luther, John Calvin, Theodore Beza, and the fathers of the Synod
of Dort.
It is not true either that these Reformers did not know of the
existence of this rival text. We are told that they used the Received
Text because it was all that they had. That is not true. While they did
not have the thousands of manuscripts which we have today, they did
know of this corrupt text as it was represented in some of the
manuscripts that were available to them. They, however, rejected that
text for the Received Text-the text which is supported by 80 to 90
percent of all the manuscripts we have today. That is the text of the
King James Version. This gives us strong incentive to use the King
James Version rather than the modern versions. Modern versions are not
reliable with regard to the true text of the New Testament. They are
based on a text which is the result of man's manipulations. The King
James Version, on the other hand, is based on a faithful and reliable
Greek text.
Tyndale And Rogers
The King James Version is a Bible of the
Reformation also from the point of view of the English versions of
which it is a revision. William Tyndale, whose translation is reflected
in nine tenths of the King James Version, was a child of the
Reformation. He had embraced the faith of the Reformation and may have
even met with Luther and Melanchthon at Wittenberg. In fact, Tyndale
also made use of Luther's German New Testament (1522) in his
translation work. Thus Martin Luther influenced him greatly. It is no
wonder that he could reply to a Roman Catholic priest, I defy the pope
and all his laws... if God spare my life, ere many years I will cause a
boy that driveth the plough to know more of the Scriptures than you do.
Tyndale's own enlightenment had come from the Word of God and,
therefore, he desired others to see that same light of the Gospel.
John Rogers, who is responsible for the Matthew's
Bible is another who embraced the doctrines of the Reformation. We read
concerning him, that he cast off the heavy yoke of popery, perceiving
it to be impure and filthy idolatry and joined himself with them two
(Tyndale and Coverdale) in that painful and most profitable labour of
translating the Bible into the English tongue. Rogers moved to
Wittenberg and there he associated with the Lutheran divines,
particularly Melanchthon. He even translated four of Melanchthon's
books into English. In harmony with his convictions, he added to the
Bible prefaces and notes out of Martin Luther's works. These notes were
strongly anti-papal.
Coverdale And Cranmer
Myles Coverdale, who influenced the King James
Version through his own Bible (1535), the Matthew's Bible to which he
contributed one third, and the Great Bible which is a revision of his
own work and that of Tyndale, was a strong supporter of the Faith of
the Reformation. He moved from England to Germany where he was for a
while the minister of a Lutheran congregation. He corresponded with
John Calvin and later moved to Geneva where he was elder in the English
Church there.
Thomas Cranmer, the Archbishop of Canterbury who
supported Coverdale in his work, turned to the true Faith. Cranmer
especially supported the efforts of the Reformers in England. He was
strengthened by the council of such Reformers as Peter Martyr, Bernardo
Ochino, Martin Bucer, and Melanchthon.
Geneva And King James Versions
The Geneva Bible which influenced the King James
Version more than any of the others was produced in the Reformation
city of Calvin and Beza. Its translators were all exiles who had fled
England and Scotland because of persecution for their Reformation
doctrines. Associated with this version are such men as John Knox,
Myles Coverdale, Thomas Cole, Christopher Goodman, John Pullain,
William Whittingham, Thomas Samson, Anthony Gilby, Lawrence Tomson and
others. Thomas Samson, after his own conversion in London, was used of
the Lord to lead John Bradford (the English Reformer) to the Reformed
Faith. Anthony Gilby was a translator of the commentaries of Calvin and
Beza. He made these great men accessible to thousands of English
readers. Christopher Goodman was the life-long friend of John Knox. He
was also co-pastor with him of the English congregation at Geneva.
William Whittingham succeeded Knox as the pastor of the English
congregation in 1559. He was also a contributor to the metrical version
of the Psalms which accompanied many editions of the Bible.
Even the translators of the King James Version
itself had rejected popery. They were influenced greatly by the
Reformation both on the continent and in England. These men considered
Theodore Beza to be the chief authority in religious matters. They
relied upon his judgment in matters of exposition as well the Greek
text. Many of the translators were themselves very Calvinistic. Miles
Smith, who was a member of the third translation company, one of the
revisors of the whole, the final editor with Bishop Bilson, and the
author of The Translators To The Readers, was a severe Calvinist. His
influence upon the King James Version was great. Besides Smith,
Lawrence Chaderton, John Reynolds, Thomas Holland, Daniel Fairclough,
George Abbot, John Harmar, and Samuel Ward were all Calvinists. No
doubt there were more Calvinist among them, but we know little about
many of these translators.
God's Grace
It is clear, therefore, that the King James Version
both as a revision of previous translations and as a new translation,
is the product of the Reformation. One is amazed by the fact that the
translators of this Bible and its predecessors were almost all involved
in the Reformation of the Church. The King James Version, therefore, is
the product of the mighty power of God's grace. For it was God's grace
alone that stood behind the Reformation. God, in reforming His Church,
put within the hearts of these men a longing to have the Holy
Scriptures in the native tongue. Thus the translators of the King James
Version exclaim, Translation it is that openeth the window, to let in
the light; that breaketh the shell, that we may eat the kernel; that
putteth aside the curtain, that we may look into the most Holy place;
that removeth the cover of the well, that we may come by the water.
Indeed, the King James Version is the product of a God-given desire to
see God's Word, in all of its reforming power, in the hands of the
people that they might know and experience the glorious light of the
gospel. Of all the English versions available today, the King James
Version alone has claim to the name Reformation Bible.
A Bible
For Which Men Died
It is not strange, therefore, that this Bible comes
down to us today stained with the blood of the martyrs. For the men
behind the English Bible were of such strong conviction, by the grace
of God, that they would suffer imprisonment and death rather than
renounce their faith in the Bible as God's infallible Word and as their
sole authority for life and doctrine. Indeed, the persecution was very
great. It is not strange that the Roman Church should seek to do all in
its power to stop the translation of the Scriptures. She recognized
that one of the leading causes of the Reformation was the translation
of the Bible into the language of the people. Therefore, she persecuted
the editors, translators, and promoters of the King James Version and
its predecessors.
The Greek Text
We see this antagonism already in connection with
the original languages. An ignorant and illiterate monk is reported to
have said, There was now a new language discovered called Greek, of
which people should beware, since it was that which produced all the
heresies; that in this language was come forth a book called the New
Testament, which was now in everybody's hands, and was full of thorns
and briers; that there was also another language now started up which
they call Hebrew, and that they who learned it were turned Hebrews.
This monk was by no means alone in his convictions. At this time, the
monks and priests were so ignorant that they could read no Greek,
Hebrew, or even Latin. Yet they considered the Latin Vulgate to be the
only true Bible.
The Roman Church did not look kindly upon the
editions of the Greek New Testament which began to come off the
presses. In 1514 Erasmus, the first editor of the Greek New Testament,
was told not to publish his Greek text. Some in the Roman Church
considered it an open condemnation of the Latin Vulgate. Robert
Stephanus, who gave us four editions of the Greek New Testament, had to
flee Paris and settle in Geneva because of persecution.
John Wycliffe
But even more than the Greek New Testament, the
Roman Church feared the translation of the Bible into the language of
the people. In The Translators To The Readers we find the following
reference to this attitude of the Roman Church, So much are they afraid
of the light of the Scripture that they will not trust the people with
it, no not as it is set forth by their own sworn men, no not with the
License of their own Bishops and Inquisitors. Yea, so unwilling they
are to communicate the Scriptures to the peoples' understanding in any
sort, that they are not ashamed to confess, that we forced them to
translate it into English against their will. Thus all the wrath of
Rome came down upon those who were involved in getting the Bible into
the hands of the people.
John Wycliffe, translator of the first complete
English Bible, was one of the first to feel the wrath of Rome, even
though he translated from the Latin. He translated the Bible with the
expressed purpose of promoting the reformation of the church. But the
circulation of his Bible was bitterly opposed by the Roman Church.
Those who read it and disseminated it were denounced as heretics.
Wycliffe himself was accused of being a master of errors and condemned
as a heretic. Even though they could not capture him in life because of
his powerful friends, forty years after his death they disintered his
body, burned his bones, and scattered the ashes in the Swift River.
William Tyndale
William Tyndale, who so greatly influenced the King
James Version, was so persecuted that he was not even allowed to
translate the Bible in England. He had to do it in Germany. But even
there he was not left alone. He was hunted down by both the emissaries
of Henry VIII and those of the Roman Church. In order to elude them he
was compelled not only to move with great secrecy, but to assume other
names. When his translation finally came off the press and was
circulated in England, it was branded as crafty, false, and untrue and
was forbidden to be kept and used in the land. Many copies were
confiscated and burned. Tyndale himself was slandered by his enemies.
They maliciously circulated the slander that his New Testament was only
an English translation of Luther's German Bible. Tonstal (an enemy of
the Reformation) preached against Tyndale's Testament and alleged that
it contained not less that two thousand mistranslated texts. His
enemies finally captured him in early 1535 and imprisoned him for
eighteen months in the castle of Vilvorde. All who talked with him in
the castle witnessed his purity of character. He was even instrumental
in the conversion of some. But on the 6th of October 1536 they led him
forth to the place of execution where they tied him to the stake.
Tyndale then cried with a loud voice and fervent zeal, Lord, open the
eyes of the King of England. That was his dying prayer. Then the
hangman strangled him to death and burned his body.
Rogers, Cranmer, And Coverdale
John Rogers, who completed and edited Tyndale's
version, found himself in great trouble when bloody Mary came to the
throne. It was not long before he was imprisoned by that enemy of God
and His Word. For half a year he remained a prisoner in his own house
and during all of 1554 he was confined to Newgate prison with thieves
and murderers. He was very harshly and cruelly treated. All that time
he was refused permission to see his wife and ten children. It was not
until he was led to the stake on Jan. 4, 1555 that they met him. There
he was burned alive to become the first victim of the wicked Mary.
Thomas Cranmer, who exerted a great deal of pressure to get the Bible
into the hands of the people, could not escape the wrath of Queen Mary
either. He was tried and convicted of heresy with others of like Faith.
Before he was executed, he was forced to watch the burning of Latimer
(Bishop of Worcester) and Ridley (Bishop of London) who were also of
the Faith of the Reformation. Mary thought that she had won the day
when Cranmer signed a recantation of his Protestantism. But when the
fire was put to him, he repudiated his retractions and held the
offending hand, which had signed the recantation, in the flame until it
was consumed. In his death he did not forsake the Faith.
Although Coverdale did not die at the hand of Mary,
he did suffer persecution with the rest. He was imprisoned for two and
a half years. Several times he was examined by the Inquisitors and was
in extreme danger of losing his life.
Geneva And King James Versions
The very existence of the Geneva Bible was due to
religious persecution. Queen Mary sought to stamp out the Word of God
in England and to destroy the faithful with fire and sword. As a result
hundreds of Protestants fled England to find refuge on the continent.
Many of them settled in Geneva and there translated the Bible into
English. Thus the Geneva Bible, in a very unique way, is a Bible that
came out of persecution.
Even some of the translators of the King James Version had to suffer
for the cause of the Holy Scriptures. They were dedicated to accurately
translating the Bible into the language of the people. Many of them
sacrificed much for the work and were rewarded with very little. The
translators make it very clear that there was much opposition to their
work. They write, Thus not only as oft as we speak, as one saith, but
also as oft as we do any thing of note or consequence, we subject
ourselves to every ones censure, and happy is he that is least tossed
upon tongues; for utterly to escape the snatch of them is impossible.
But none of this could keep them from doing their work. Like their
predecessors, they were willing to endure great hardship in order that
they might see the Holy Scriptures in the language of the people. Dr.
John Reynolds, the Puritan who petitioned the king for the new
translation, died before the work was finished. His death was caused in
part by his diligent study and work on the translation. But when urged
to cease his labors he replied that for the sake of life, he would not
lose the very end of living! The King James Version is a martyrs Bible
because the Word of God meant more to these men than the life of this
world.
God's
Word To His Church
Authorized Bible
The new translation did not immediately take over
all others. For some time there was a struggle with the Geneva Bible.
But in the end, the people of God recognized the superior qualities of
the King James Version so that it conquered all others. It has gone
through hundreds and hundreds of editions since it was first published
in 1611. Some changes have been made in the spelling, punctuation,
italicizing, and cross references. Nevertheless, the King James Version
which we have today is basically the same as that published in 1611. It
is still the choice of God's people too. Even with all the competition
from the modern versions, the King James Version is one of the most
popular of all versions.
As far as we know the King James Version, also called the Authorized
Version, was never authorized. Even thought it was appointed by the
King, it was never approved by Parliament nor the Convocation, nor the
Privy Council. Nevertheless, it is recognized by God's people as the
Authorized Bible-God's Authorized Bible. God has so worked in the
hearts of His people that it has been recognized as God's Word by
generation after generation of English-speaking Christians. It has been
recognized as the version which God has given to us in His good
providence. There is no other translation so universally regarded as
God's Word.
The Best Version
Even though the King James Version has its
weaknesses, it is an excellent translation and by far the best version
available today. We must not be taken in by the modern versions and
their claims. Our 400 year old Bible is to be preferred above all
others because it is better than them all.
1) It was translated by men who are unsurpassed in
their knowledge of Biblical studies.
2) The translators were pious men of God who
believed in the inspiration of the Holy Scriptures.
3) It is the mature fruit of generations of English
translations as well as the careful work of its translators.
4) The King James Version is based upon the
Received Text rather than the critical Greek text of modern versions.
5) It is a word-for-word translation which
faithfully and accurately reflects the originals.
6) The language is one of reverence and respect
which gives honor to the majesty of its Author.
7) Of all the English versions of today, it alone
is the Bible of the Reformation.
8) Our spiritual forefathers thought so highly of
it that they were willing to suffer and even die for it.
9) It is the version which has been recognized for
generations and generations as the Bible God has given to His
English-speaking Church.
An Admonition
The translators' admonition to the reader
concerning the new translation is certainly just as applicable to us
today, as it was in 1611. They exhort us, saying, Ye are brought unto
fountains of living water which ye digged not. Do not cast earth into
them with the Philistines, neither prefer broken pits before them with
the wicked Jews. Others have labored, and you may enter into their
labors; O receive not so great things in vain, O despise not so great
salvation! Be not like swine to tread under foot so precious things,
neither yet like dogs to tear and abuse holy things... If light be come
into the world, love not darkness more than light; if food, if clothing
be offered, go not naked, starve not yourselves... It is a fearful
thing to fall into the hands of the living God, but a blessed thing it
is, and will bring us to everlasting blessedness in the end, when God
speaketh unto us, to hearken; when he setteth his word before us, to
read it; when he stretcheth out his hand and calleth, to answer, Here
am I, Here we are to do they will, O God.
Indeed, we find fountains of living water in the King James
Version of the Bible. It is the living Word of the living God. Do not
despise it and reject it for the unreliable modern versions as so many
do today. Do not let anyone take this great Bible away from you. This
version is the Bible we ought to use in our homes and churches. It
ought to be the authority for both our faith and practice. We ought to
stand up for and defend this Bible which has been given to us by the
good providence of God.
|
Points of
INTEREST
Reformed
Witness Hour Broadcast
Protestant
Reformed
Churches in America
Reformed Free
Publishing
Association
The
Standard Bearer (Periodical)
Beacon
Lights (Periodical)
Protestant
Reformed Theological School
Heritage
Christian High
School
Protestant
Reformed Christian Grade School |