Born in the fervor
of the Reformation, tried in the fires of adversity, and brought to its
final form by Bible believing Christians our English Bible has stood
for centuries as God’s Word to the English-speaking people.
Known as the “King James Translation” only because it was brought to
its final form during his reign, a full ninety-percent of the New
Testament, and much of the Old, is the work of William Tyndale, a
dedicated Christian martyr who gave his life so that we might have
God’s Word in our own language.
Because that
translation is a masterpiece of English literature, Lord Macaulay once
referred to it as, “The book which if everything else in our language
should perish, would suffice to show the whole extent of its beauty and
power.” Yet, even though some are now dissatisfied with that
translation and would like to see it replaced, I am convinced that that
would be a mistake. It would be wrong to lightly cast aside a Bible
that men died to give us, only to replace it with a commercial
translation that has been sold to the public by modern advertising
techniques.
In saying this I
want to make it clear that I am not averse to revising the King James
Translation as long as the changes reflect a legitimate change in the
English language, rather than an innovative spirit or ideological bias
on the part of those making the change. However, I am opposed to
replacing it with an entirely new translation. Aside from the fact that
many of the newer translations are controversial, radical change opens
the door to change for the sake of change. And, uncritical acceptance
of change tends to legitimatize innovation at a time when social
pressure to change or reject the fundamental truths of our faith must
be resisted.
In contrast to the
spirit of innovation that seems so prevalent today, the committee that
produced the King James translation allowed ninety percent of William
Tyndale’s original work to stand. Since that committee included
England’s greatest language scholars, they could easily have made a lot
of unnecessary changes. However, they knew that unnecessary change
engenders controversy and they were trying to heal controversy, not
cause it. As a result, the King James translation was not a negation of
the translations that preceded it, but their fulfillment. It was not a
beginning but a climax. It was a realization of the goal sought so
laboriously by the translators who had gone before. And, that is one of
the things that sets it apart from many of the newer translations.
GOD’S
WORD IN ENGLISH
We need to remember
that our English Bible is more than a commentary. It is (or should be)
the Word of God, for God speaks to the translator through the original
Greek or Hebrew text, and tells him exactly what to write down.
Therefore, even though God does not directly inspire the translator,
his message is from God, his translation is the Word of God, and if he
says anything other than what God told him to say, he will answer to
God (Proverbs 30:6).
For that reason,
those who produce cult “translations,” or any translation that doctors
the wording of the text, are exalting their word over God's Word. The job of a
translator is to accurately convey what God has said, not replace
it with what he wants God to say. And, he has a responsibility to do
that job in a way that inspires confidence in what is written, not in a
way that allows inaccuracy to undermine the credibility of what is
written. God wants us to have a translation that we can have confidence
in, base our faith on, and mold our world-view to (2Corinthians 10:5).
However, there are
some well-meaning but misguided people who undermine confidence in our
English Bible by claiming that it is impossible for any translation to
be error free. Nevertheless, that claim contradicts the inerrancy of Scripture, because much of the Greek New Testament is a translation of words
that were originally spoken in Aramaic. And, we know that that
translation is error free (Mark 5:41, Mark 15:34). [Note: The issue is
not about mistakes, but about the possibility that any translation can
be free of mistakes.]
Those who regard
every little difference between the meaning of a Greek or Hebrew word,
and the word used to translate it, as an error, have been sold a bill
of goods. Those who think that way would have us believe that if we
translated the statement, “I bought a car” as “I purchased an
automobile” that translation would contain error because the word “car”
denotes a wheeled vehicle while the word “automobile” denotes something
which moves on its own. However, it should be obvious to any thinking
person that both statements are saying the same thing. Those who make such claims
have a totally unrealistic standard for judging the accuracy of a
translation, and Satan is using that impossible standard to undermine
confidence in our English Bible.
There are two
things that they fail to understand. First, because the meaning that
God intends for us to get from the text is nothing other than what we
“read or acknowledge,” that meaning can be accurately translated into
any language (2Corinthians 1:13). Second, God has designed the Bible to
interpret itself. For example: The faith by which we are justified is
defined by the words “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him
for righteousness” (Galatians 3:6). Furthermore, the words of our
English Bible share the same context as their Greek or Hebrew
counterparts, and it is the context that determines the specific
meaning of words. Finally, because the words of our English Bible are
being used to translate Greek or Hebrew words, their use in translation
conditions their meaning. Therefore, their intended meaning is exactly
the same as the meaning of the Greek or Hebrew word they translate.
Some time ago I
viewed a BBC series on maps, which referred to maps as a “tissue of
lies.” The reason that the narrator gave for that statement was that
maps are small but the world is large, maps are flat but the world is
round. However, such reasoning is absurd because maps do not claim to
be an exact replica of the world at large, they only claim to describe
it. Therefore, to call an accurate map a lie because it is not as large
as the land it claims to describe is ridiculous. Likewise, saying that
a good translation is full of errors just because each English word
does not share every shade of meaning that that might be ascribed to
the Greek or Hebrew word it translates, is equally ridiculous.
SOME
FINAL THOUGHTS
Because God
intended for our faith to be faith in the promises of His Word, those
who undermine faith in those promises by criticizing, belittling, and calling into
question what the Bible says are doing the devil’s work (Galatians
3:6-22, Romans 10:17, 2Timothy 2:14).
Furthermore,
because every believer has a responsibility to beware of false
prophets, those who lead people to think that they cannot be certain of
what the Bible says unless they understand Hebrew and Greek rob
believers of the confidence that they need to judge what is being
taught and oppose false doctrine (Acts 17:11).
Since the purpose
of every legitimate translation is to say the same thing as the
original, we need to understand that different translations are saying
the same thing in different words, and compare them in the same way
that we compare Matthew and Luke. Those who assume that every
translation is saying something different, or that one must be right
and the other wrong, leave people totally confused not knowing which
one to believe.
The “King James
Translation” has endured for as long as it has, and been accepted by as
many denominations as it has, because it is a good translation. If I
had been on the committee that produced the King James translation
there are verses that I would have translated differently. However,
that does not mean that there is anything wrong with the way it is
translated! That just means that my own English usage differs from
those who were on the committee. The translation they gave us is a gift
of God, and I have a very low opinion of teachers who talk about how
this or that verse “should have been translated” as if they are the
world’s expert.
“We
do not need the new Bibles which a score of publishers are endeavoring
to foist upon the church in the form of modern translation and special
edition.” [Doctor Walter A. Maier, from a 1931 sermon on Jeremiah
6:16.]
CONCLUSION
The King James
translation has been revised several times, and if it is to be kept
readable will need to be revised in the future. However, I would like
to see that done in a way that builds on the foundation that was laid
at the time of the Reformation, instead of destroying that foundation
by starting over with a new translation. In other words, we want to
preserve our English Bible (by keeping its language current), not
replace it. For that reason, I am willing to endorse “The 21st Century
King James Version.” That version is a judicious revision of the King
James that brings it up to date without unnecessary innovation.