Become a Creator today!Start creating today - Share your story with the world!
Start for free
00:00:00
00:00:01
019 | Is The KJV The Best Bible Translation? | Understanding the Canon
400 Plays5 years ago
The King James Version has been well-loved for over 400 years. But is it the ONLY Bible version we can read? This episode breaks down the history of how the KJV was commissioned, what went into its translation, the Textus Receptus, and how to talk to friends who believe the KJV is the only way.
Recommended
Transcript
Introduction to Verity Podcast
00:00:00
Speaker
Welcome to Verity. I'm your host, Felicia Masonheimer, an author, speaker, and Bible teacher. This podcast will help you embrace the history and depth of the Christian faith, ask questions, seek answers, and devote yourself to becoming a disciple of Jesus Christ. You don't have to settle for watered-down Christian teaching. And if you're ready to go deeper, God is just as ready to take you there. This is Verity, where every woman is a theologian.
Misconceptions about the King James Version
00:00:30
Speaker
Welcome back, friends. I am so excited to continue the Canon series today with our episode exclusively about the King James Version of the Bible. But before we begin, I want to make a very important caveat. I am not doing this episode to be against any specific version of the Bible, especially not the King James. But we do have many people in my audience who have family members or come from churches that believe that the King James Version is the only viable version of the Bible.
00:01:00
Speaker
And in this episode, we will talk about why that argument really can't be made from the history and the facts. This does not make the King James Version any less important, any less of a valuable translation, but we do need to be sure that we're not adding on to the truth of Scripture and saying that this particular version is the only one that God endorses.
00:01:26
Speaker
And so I want to make sure that I set that out from the beginning, that I am not anti-KJV, but I will not support the idea that it is the only version that God has endorsed. There is a difference between those two things. So as we begin, we're going to look at a little history of how the King James Version was first commissioned.
Translation History of the King James Bible
00:01:47
Speaker
To understand this you need to understand what progress had already been made on the translations of the Bible and that there were already five or six English translations that had been in existence before the King James Version was translated and so if you have not listened to the previous episode on English translations I would encourage you to do so before listening to this one because we're going to pick up where we left off in the history of the English Bible
00:02:14
Speaker
After the Geneva Bible, the Great Bible, Taverners and Matthews had been created based on William Tyndale's work. So we're going to start with a little story, history lesson.
00:02:29
Speaker
Queen Elizabeth has died. And when Queen Elizabeth died, the Church of England was really kind of in a limbo because while Elizabeth was Protestant, she did allow for the remnants of Catholicism that were still in the Church of England to remain. There were some theologians of the time who felt like she really wasn't Protestant enough
00:02:56
Speaker
be Protestant. And she also wasn't Catholic enough to be Catholic, but she was a lot better than Mary, Queen of Scots, who was Catholic. And we have Elizabeth here who at least advocated for the Protestants, even if, you know, she wasn't as Protestant as they would like. So Elizabeth has passed away and in her stead, James of Scotland is being coordinated as King.
Puritan Requests and Church of England Tensions
00:03:21
Speaker
And so where we're starting in the story, he's actually traveling South from Scotland to his coronation in London. And as he is traveling South, he gets interrupted. A group of Puritans bring him a petition.
00:03:38
Speaker
Now, why would these Puritans bring James a petition on his way to be coronated? Well, James was inheriting a very divided church. The Church of England had many powerful bishops and the model was a hierarchical model mimicking really the Catholic Church because they broke off from the Catholic Church. The Puritans had a very different way.
00:04:01
Speaker
of structuring the church and different views on worship and how the church should be run. And they were dissatisfied with how much Catholicism the church was still retaining. In their mind, certain things represented Catholicism and they did not want them as a part of the Church of England. So as James is headed south, he's interrupted by these Puritan clergy who present him with something called the millenary petition. And you can read this right online still.
00:04:27
Speaker
It had over a thousand signatures on it, which was about 10% of England's clergy. I mean, that's pretty significant. And in this petition, they appeal to the King to pay attention to their case that addressed issues of church service, worship, livings of pastors, and church discipline. They objected very strongly to Catholicism.
00:04:52
Speaker
So things like the vestments of the clergy, wearing wedding rings and ceremonies, and even the sign of the cross. So they ask for things like shorter services and changes to the worship music. They ask for honor for the Sabbath, a more specific honor on the Sabbath day for the canonical scriptures only to be read in the church. And if you're unsure what that means, go back to the Apocrypha episode because it likely had to do with the Apocrypha books being read in services.
00:05:22
Speaker
also restrictions on when married couples could have sex. This is because the church copying the Catholic church, there were certain festivals or holidays when they would say that couples should refrain from sexual intercourse. So the Puritans are asking to have that lifted. I did get a little bit of a kick out of that because we tend to see the Puritans is a little bit pinched and perhaps prudish, but I mean, at least clergy, it was on the priority list.
00:05:52
Speaker
This is a few examples of what the millinery petition was trying to do. They wanted to make significant changes to the Church of England and they wanted King James to do it. And so this petition led James to call the Hampton Court Conference, which included the king, a council of nine bishops and deans who would have been with the Church of England, and then four Puritan representatives.
00:06:19
Speaker
Now it's important here to note, as far as the theological-political climate that's going on here, the Church of England does not like the Puritans. And the Puritans are strongly objecting to the Church of England. A little more background is that James, as a Scot, was familiar with Presbyterianism.
00:06:37
Speaker
And while he as a brand new leader was trying to negotiate between these two sides of the church, with one the Church of England being much more powerful than the other, he was not a fan of Presbyterianism.
King James's Opposition to Presbyterianism
00:06:51
Speaker
In fact, this is evidenced in his response to one of the Puritan representatives, John Reynolds. Why would he not like this? Because of the threat to the absolute power of the king.
00:07:06
Speaker
And this will come up when we're talking about the commissioning of the KJV because at that point, the Geneva Bible, which you can still read today, I believe it's even in your YouVersion app, the Geneva Bible was very popular with the Puritans, primarily what they used, the Scottish Presbyterians, and the Geneva Bible's notes were all written by John Calvin.
00:07:26
Speaker
Well Calvin's notes did not support the idea of the absolute power of the king and this bothered King James for obvious reasons so he Definitely did not like the Geneva Bible and neither did the Anglican Church authorities They openly opposed the Geneva Bible even bought the Bibles and burned them and it was no longer printed in England after 1618 so
00:07:55
Speaker
Clearly there's some drama surrounding this whole thing and there's a political aspect here in King James, though he definitely seems to have been a believer, definitely seems to have upheld inerrancy and important facts about scripture. He did have his own best interest in mind in this regard too. So as they come to this council,
00:08:18
Speaker
Reynolds comes as a representative with his three other Puritan representatives hoping to make some progress on church government, but he makes a big mistake and he brings up the word presbytery, saying, why shouldn't the bishops of the Church of England govern jointly with the presbytery of their brethren, the pastors, and the ministers of the church?
00:08:44
Speaker
Seems like a fair request. He's basically asking for an elder board instead of the hierarchy of the Church of England to keep them accountable. Well, King James, being, again, not a fan of Presbyterianism, responded, if you aim at a Scots presbytery, it agreeeth as well with monarchy as God and the devil. Then Jack and Tom and Will and Dick shall meet and censure me and my counsel. No bishop, no king.
00:09:13
Speaker
He's basically made that his motto, no bishop, no king. So unless they're willing to, you know, give sway to the allegiance of the church of England, they're not going to have any say with the king.
00:09:25
Speaker
So Reynolds didn't get very far with the Puritan case as far as the structure of the church and reframing the Church of England, but he did do something very interesting.
Translation Philosophy of the King James Version
00:09:36
Speaker
He secured a new translation of the Bible. The reasons for getting a new translation may have been very different. James very well may have had his own best interest in mind. He did not like the Geneva Bible. He would like it to be removed. And he would like to have none of Calvin's notes about kingship anywhere near his
00:09:55
Speaker
written words. But the Bible was ordered and it had a particular note again supporting what we're saying about King James here saying that no marginal notes at all were to be affixed but only for the explanation of the Hebrew and Greek words. So no commentary. This is not a study Bible. So through this process, this counsel, the King James Version is commissioned
00:10:20
Speaker
And it was staffed by several committees, including a committee, if you remember, from the Apocrypha episode that worked on the Apocrypha books. And 47 scholars total were working on this. And these scholars were a combination of theologians, clergymen, and academics who are working together to translate the text.
00:10:41
Speaker
Now, looking back to the episode on English translations, the King James Version was a functional equivalent translation, also called word for word, also called essentially literal. So wherever they could literally translate the word into English in a way that made sense, they would do it.
00:11:01
Speaker
but then if they needed to paraphrase a word to make the sentence functional, they would do so. The goal of the kingdom's version was to be God's book to God's people in a tongue they understand. In fact, it's repeatedly said by the translators that the goal of this Bible was to be for the vulgar people,
00:11:23
Speaker
the people who weren't as literate as the academics to be able to understand it and comprehend it and use it. A little more about the translator's intent, in the preface to the King James Version, which has since been removed and is no longer printed with the King James Bibles, the translators note that they are not the first Bible translators. In fact, they commend the work
00:11:51
Speaker
of people like Jerome and their own English predecessors, the people who translated English Bibles before them. This is important for a couple reasons. First, it acknowledges the church history, the rich history behind canonization and translation of the holy words of God. But it also undermines a common argument from the King James only camp
00:12:17
Speaker
that the King James was the original English version or like we joked about in the last episode, if it was good enough for the Apostle Paul, it's good enough for me. When in fact, we know that this was a series of English translations and the King James was the final in that series prior to further revisions and further developments in translation, which we'll talk about in a little bit here.
00:12:45
Speaker
And so they acknowledged, the translators themselves acknowledged that they were not the first to translate the word of God, and they commended other translators for doing so. In fact, they said, we are so far off from condemning any of their labors that travailed before us in this, recognizing that nothing is begun and perfected at the same time.
00:13:08
Speaker
So they not only believed that the other translators had done good work that they were building on, but they also recognized that their work wasn't perfect and would probably need continual revision. So they're not making any claim to the specific verbal inspiration of their work.
00:13:25
Speaker
And so when we're talking with people who are King James only, this may be something to gently bring up because this preface can still be read. It's just not published with King James Bibles today, which is kind of a kind of a shame if you ask me.
00:13:42
Speaker
I wanted to read a little bit more about this from the book, the English Bible, KJV to NIV by Jack Lewis, which talks a little bit more about the translator's intent. He says, the translators were aware that their translation would encounter strong opposition from Catholics and from non-conformists, that they themselves would be tossed upon tongues, more gossiped about.
00:14:09
Speaker
To the anticipated critics, they said, The very meanest translation of the Bible in English, set forth by men of our profession, containth the word of God, nay, is the word of God. They stated that the fear of weakening the authority of Scripture did not deter them from setting variant meanings in the margin. They said, Doth not a margin do well to admonish the reader to seek further, and not to conclude or dogmatize upon this or that, peremptorily?
00:14:36
Speaker
Unfortunately, these variant readings are often omitted in current printings of the KJV. The translators felt that a variety of translation is profitable for finding out of the sense of the scriptures. They recognize the necessity of some paraphrase, uniformity and
00:14:51
Speaker
translation of phrases appeared to them to seem more of curiosity than of wisdom. Therefore, they used a variety in renderings which in current opinion creates confusion for the reader. They claimed to steer a middle course between the practices of the Puritans who abandoned the old ecclesiastical words and those of the Catholics who held to Latin phraseology.
00:15:12
Speaker
I love this because thinking to modern English translation, they were really doing the exact same thing that we do today with all of the manuscripts we have available. They were trying to do their very best to strike that middle ground of translating the words accurately, but in a way that was understandable to the people without a specific bias toward Puritanism or towards the Catholic tradition.
00:15:38
Speaker
This is a huge job, you guys. It is so impressive that this is happening in 1603, which is when this was commissioned. I'm just blown away by how these scholars did the very best they could to handle this in a time when they did not have the technology that we have today.
00:15:56
Speaker
Do you love theology? Do you also love cute graphic tees, bar necklaces, moleskin journals, or ebooks? If you do, I have the perfect combination for you. The Every Woman A Theologian pop-up shop is opening for the second time this year, June 25th through 28th.
00:16:16
Speaker
If you're wondering, what's a pop-up shop? Good question. It's a shop that opens and closes, allowing us to take your orders, print our custom designs, and ship them to you without holding stock in a warehouse. All of our designs are completely custom, ethically crafted, and sustainably made at small local businesses.
00:16:37
Speaker
We have 8 new shirt designs, a new sweatshirt, an exclusive necklace with Sel Rose Shop, a Moleskine Journal, and 3 new ebooks coming to the shop this time. You'll want to place your order between June 25th at 10am and June 28th at 10am when the shop closes. I'm so excited to get these products in your hands you guys. If you want to check them out and stay up to date, head to the blog at FeliciaMasonheimer.com slash shop.
00:17:06
Speaker
Okay, now one question that comes up a lot about the King James Version is, has the King James changed since its initial translation? And the answer is yes, many, many times. The King James has been changed and revised and edited.
00:17:21
Speaker
In the Apocrypha episode, we talked about how the Apocrypha books were in the King James at least until the 1800s when they were finally removed, but were for sure in it throughout the 1600s and then sporadically in the 1700s and 1800s. So that's one revision that we know of for sure. But as early as two years after the initial print in 1613, modifications were made.
00:17:46
Speaker
over 400 modifications to be exact. The Apocrypha, then, as we just talked about, was not omitted until 1629. In modifications to copy errors, spelling, obsolete words, and even flawed marginal notes were made consistently, all the way up through 1962.
00:18:05
Speaker
So again, kindly and with respect, if someone is arguing for a quote, original King James version, you kind of have to ask, which one are you talking about? Because there have been modifications to this Bible ever since its inception, ever since it was created 400 years, just like we would do with any other translation in order to ensure the most accurate version possible.
00:18:32
Speaker
So the next thing we need to discuss is something called the Texas Receptus. If you talk to anybody who's King James only, this will be a phrase that you will hear.
Origins of Textus Receptus
00:18:44
Speaker
And it's important to know what it is, where it comes from in order to have a productive discussion with our KJV only friends. So what is the Texas Receptus? This is a compilation of seven
00:18:57
Speaker
to eight, nine different Greek manuscripts, these were conated by Erasmus. So remember him from last episode, he is the one who compiled these Greek manuscripts, he edited them, the first version was pretty flawed, the second was a little better, and I believe Tyndale used that one, and then the third edition is what the KJV scholars were working from.
00:19:22
Speaker
This version was revised by Stephanus in 1551. He is who added the verses and the chapters to the text. And so it was already in those verses and chapters when the King James scholars took it over. So
00:19:37
Speaker
The interesting thing here is the five primary manuscripts we receive as authoritative today were not available to the King James scholars at that time. They were not discovered yet. Only one Codex Bizai was and were not confident that it was used in this process. So they were working from Erasmus' texts, which were what was available at the time,
00:20:05
Speaker
for the New Testament. For the Old Testament, what they had available was something called the Complutensian Polyglot. Yes, I think my intellect just went up a couple points saying that phrase. This is a 16th century Old Testament in Hebrew, Latin, and Greek. Another one that was available is the Antwerp Polyglot.
00:20:27
Speaker
So, when they worked from these texts, specifically the Old Testament ones, where these differ, there's differences between the two, the King James Version agrees with one or the other, except in about six places where it agrees with neither one.
00:20:44
Speaker
So they were working from some limited texts that were available at the time. But today we have access to approximately 5,300 manuscripts that can be cross referenced and checked against each other to help us translate accurately.
00:21:02
Speaker
Now I'm going to read an argument for the Textus Receptus and then I'm going to read you an argument against the Textus Receptus because I think it's good to hear both sides. And again, the difference here is
00:21:17
Speaker
For people who are KJV only, they believe that the Texas Receptus is more accurate, or some believe it's the original manuscript, which is not true, but they may believe that.
Impact of Manuscript Families on Translations
00:21:30
Speaker
And as such, it creates a more authoritative base for this Bible.
00:21:38
Speaker
And so they would say the KJV or the NKJV are the most accurate translations because they utilize this particular base text. And so this argument says the New Testament of the KJV as with the NKJV is based on the Texas Receptus, a variety of the Byzantine family of New Testament manuscripts.
00:22:00
Speaker
Many popular translations like the NASB, NIV, ESV, HCSB are based on the Nestle-Aland text, which is based on the Alexandrian family of manuscripts. So, Texas Receptus is Byzantine, Nestle-Aland is Alexandrian.
00:22:18
Speaker
Translations based on these Alexandrian readings omit or cast doubt on many important words and verses—the ending of Mark, the story of the adulteress, the conclusion to the Lord's Prayer, the angel at the pool, the confession of the Ethiopian eunuch, and others. It is generally accepted, even by proponents of the Alexandrian texts, that the textus-receptus readings are doctrinally superior.
00:22:42
Speaker
Now, I'm not sure all of you are in my email list, but my email list, I sent out a newsletter a few weeks ago talking specifically about the conclusion of the Lord's Prayer and how the doxology, which is to the kingdom and the power and the glory forever, amen, at the end of the Lord's Prayer, is not original to the Greek manuscripts.
00:23:05
Speaker
In fact, doxologies were added on in both Hebrew prayers and in the early church, and this was just an addition to the text by a scribe that doesn't change the overall meaning of the prayer, but was an addition.
00:23:22
Speaker
When we see things like this that say, you know, the conclusion of the Lord's Prayer was cut out in this other manuscript, it can feel like, oh my gosh, they're editing this, you know, they're changing things drastically when that's truly not the case. You know, this was an edition by a scriber or copyist that doesn't really change the meaning of things to the prayer, but facts are the Texas Receptus
00:23:46
Speaker
know they we might be looking at other people saying hey you're cutting verses out well verses are being added in to the texas or septis so we got to be fair here we got to look fairly now if you look in your bible if you have an niv or an esv and you've read john 8 you might notice that there will be a certain passage in brackets and it will say in the margin or in the notes this
00:24:08
Speaker
section not found in all manuscripts. They will make a note. Certain parts of this book are not found in all manuscripts and that is how they compensate for differences in manuscripts.
00:24:21
Speaker
So I'm going to read you now the argument that's not necessarily against the Texas Receptus, but it offers a different viewpoint. Here are some examples of changes to versus added versus or removed versus that are caused by the Texas Receptus.
00:24:44
Speaker
The phrase, him that liveth forever and ever, Revelation 5.14, has no known Greek manuscript support. Neither the phrase, of our Lord Jesus Christ, in Ephesians 3.14, nor the phrase, who walk not after the flesh, but after the spirit, Romans 8.1, is in the better Greek text.
00:25:01
Speaker
In Luke 17.9, an answer, I trou not, is supplied. In Matthew 6.13, for thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever, is added. The words, and he trembling and astonished, said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Acts 9.6, occur in no known Greek manuscript,
00:25:20
Speaker
it came into the Texas Receptus when Erasmus translated it from the Vulgate in 1516. The added if of 2 Corinthians 5.14 makes doubt of that which has no doubt for Paul in Hebrews 11.13, and where persuaded of them is an addition. The word not, Romans 4.19, missing in the better text, makes in the KJV a negative of a positive statement.
00:25:43
Speaker
We love him because he first loved us, 1 John 4.19 adds him, and the addition changes the meaning of the statement. The so-called Kama Yohannam, 1 John 5.7, included in the 3rd edition of the text by Erasmus on a wager, is now dropped from almost all texts without the courtesy of a footnote.
00:26:03
Speaker
No known Greek manuscript reads Book of Life in Revelation 22.19. The manuscripts have Tree of Life. Colossians 1.14 carried the phrase Through His Blood, which is not supported by the manuscripts. The opposite side of the problem is that the text followed by the KJV revisers had lost certain phrases, which the discovery of earlier manuscripts has enabled scholars to restore to their rightful place.
00:26:25
Speaker
Examples of this are Matthew 24 36 it dropped nor the Sun acts 425 lost the words by the Holy Spirit acts 16 7 lost the spirit of Jesus and merely had the spirit
00:26:38
Speaker
Romans 8.28 had lost God as the subject, hence the KGV has, and know that all things work together for good to them that love God. In 1 Peter 2.2 in the phrase, grew up into salvation, unto salvation was dropped. So this is just an example, and this is again from Jack Lewis.
Textual Issues and KJV Modifications
00:26:55
Speaker
Just an example of some of the changes that were made in the KJV due to the manuscripts used. And this is not bashing the KJV, but we've got to be fair here. A lot of the accusations that are being made against modern translations by King James only churches sound very similar to what we're seeing here. And Jack Lewis has at least five, six, seven pages of things like this that
00:27:24
Speaker
we're in the KJV. Now with revisions, with updates, our modern KJVs, our modern NKJV, especially has been able to be more accurately presented. We have modern manuscripts that we can look at, but again, the NKJV is still working from the Texas Receptus and they're just modifying those margins and modifying the verses to make sure that they are accurate.
00:27:51
Speaker
Okay, last couple things about this before we apply these facts. What about interpretation and paraphrase? Were the scholars who were interpreting this and doing this work, were they not doing any kind of liberty with the text?
00:28:10
Speaker
like people today are accused of, translators today are often accused of taking too many liberties. Well, just like modern translations, the KJV scholars had to do some interpretation to make sense of the Hebrew and Greek in English. There are multiple cases where they chose a word that made more sense for the sentence than the more literal translation, just as any hybrid functional dynamic translation would do.
00:28:37
Speaker
So they were looking at the sentence and trying to bring it into the modern language of the time, understandable, not in Latin, you know, while still staying true to what was being said. So while it's word for word,
00:28:53
Speaker
it's functional equivalents, there's still some paraphrase, if you will, having to be put into place in order to bring the Hebrew and Greek into the English language. And so it's something to keep in mind when you are looking at translations, whether more modern or the King James Version, that all translators have to do this in order to communicate the truths of God effectively.
00:29:20
Speaker
Fortunately, most of the copy errors that we see in these manuscripts are very minor. They don't alter the meaning of the text at all. They're not changing the theology, but some of the errors like you saw with the Texas Receptus were changing, you know, whether God was mentioned, whether the Spirit was mentioned, specifics were needing to be clarified.
00:29:44
Speaker
as opposed to the whole doctrine of Scripture itself. So hopefully this gives you a little bit more to think about. I'm not here to convince you one way or the other, but I think that having the information about the entire story of the King James Version is very helpful when we're having conversations with
Importance of Understanding KJV History
00:30:05
Speaker
people. A lot of times in these conversations, people will throw out those big words and they'll throw us off, you know,
00:30:11
Speaker
If you say text us, recept us as somebody, you immediately sound way smarter and it's intimidating and it's like, well, I, I feel like I can't have this conversation.
00:30:20
Speaker
But if you know some facts about how translation works and how the KJV itself was translated, you can feel more confident to have a gentle and respectful conversation with somebody who does believe that this is the only version. And they never have to stop believing that, but they do have to understand, and you also, I think, should understand, the facts about Bible translation and the facts about
00:30:44
Speaker
why the King James was commissioned and what texts were used and how we have found older and many more texts that help us get the most accurate understanding of these beautiful words that we base our faith upon.
00:31:00
Speaker
Thank you for joining us for today's episode of Verity. You can connect with fellow listeners by following me on Instagram at Felicia Masonheimer or on our Facebook page by the same name. Also visit FeliciaMasonheimer.com for links to each episode and the show notes.