Minister in the Protestant
Reformed Churches
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
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
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
Four Puritans along with
fourteen representatives of the Church of England were gathered together at
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
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.
On the other hand, the bishops
were not immediately in favor of a new translation either. Bishop Bancroft of
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.
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.
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
The translators were formed
into six companies: two meeting at
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.
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
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
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
John Boys of the
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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 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
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.
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
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.
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.
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
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
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.
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
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.
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
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
The Geneva Bible which
influenced the King James Version more than any of the others was produced in
the Reformation city of
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
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.
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.
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
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
John Wycliffe, translator of
the first complete English Bible, was one of the first to feel the wrath of
William Tyndale,
who so greatly influenced the King James Version, was so persecuted that he was
not even allowed to translate the Bible in
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
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.
The very existence of the Geneva
Bible was due to religious persecution. Queen Mary sought to stamp out
the Word of God in
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.
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.
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.
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.