The
King James Bible And The Doctrine of
Verbal Plenary Preservation
Lesson 7
|
I. |
INTRODUCTION
What is the relationship
between the King James Bible and the doctrine of Verbal
Plenary Preservation of God’s Word? The answer is simple.
The King James Bible accurately preserves God’s divine words
in the Hebrew and Greek languages by accurately translating
these words into the English language.
To avoid confusion and
misunderstanding of the matter, it is necessary to clarify
that VPP proponents believe God has preserved for His people
His 100% Perfect Hebrew and Greek words. And these are the
Hebrew and Greek words that underlie the King James Bible.
The King James Bible is only a translation. No translated
words can be better than the inspired Hebrew and Greek words
given by God.
When using the KJB, it is
necessary to go back to the words in the original languages
for clarity and fullness of meaning. By way of illustration,
the words in the original languages underlying the KJB are
like the perfect platinum ruler of the Smithsonian
Institute, inerrant, infallible, and authoritative. The KJB
and other accurate and reliable translations are like the
common ruler, though not perfect, are good and safe enough
for use.
In this study, we shall
look at how we got our King James Bible and how the King
James Bible is superior in four areas (Texts, Translators,
Techniques, Theology) as compared to all the other modern
English Bible translations today.
|
|
II. |
THE BOOK OF BOOKS … HOW WE
GOT THE KING JAMES BIBLE 1
No book is like the Bible:
it is the BOOK of books. Its words are “God-breathed,”
inspired. “All scripture is given by inspiration of God .
. .” (2 Tim 3:16). God was the unseen Author; the men
who wrote were amanuenses. 2 Peter 1:19–21 says,
For we have also a more
sure word of prophecy; . . .. Knowing this first, that no
prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man:
but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy
Ghost.
In old time God spoke, and
holy men wrote. To John the Apostle it was given to “bare
record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus
Christ . . .” (Rev 1:2). Our Lord, the One that sat upon
the Throne, said to John: “Write: for these words are
true and faithful” (Rev 21:5). The spoken words
are preserved for us through the ages, as the written
words in the Bible, a sure record that withstands the
ravages of time and decay.
The original records of
God’s words, the
AUTOGRAPHS, were written in Hebrew (almost all of the Old
Testament) and Greek (New Testament). Today the
autographs are long gone through years of hard usage.
But copies of God’s words are still with us. Thanks be unto
God for preserving His words in the thousands of Hebrew and
Greek manuscripts by the hands of faithful men. God has not
left Himself without a witness.
The Word of God is not to
be bound, but must be published to all people, that they may
obtain salvation by Jesus Christ. For this purpose God
raised up godly men of wisdom and learning, to translate His
Word into many languages. Our discussion here focuses on the
English translations, not the non-English translations.
John Wycliffe
was the first to give the English people a translation in
their own tongue (1382), but it was based on the Latin
Vulgate (a Latin Bible translated from Hebrew and
Greek). William Tyndale was the first to produce an
English translation from the original Greek and Hebrew texts
(1525), for which he suffered martyrdom. Other translations
followed, based on the same Hebrew and Greek texts:
Coverdale (1535), Matthew (1537), Taverner
(1539), the Great Bible (1539), the Geneva
(1560), the Bishops’ (1568).
These translations
were useful as forerunners of the King James Version
(KJV) or Authorised Version (AV) of 1611. Within a
short time of its appearance, the KJV was acknowledged as
the superior and unrivalled translation. This was due to the
superior scholarship of the translators: a team of the best
scholars from Oxford and Cambridge, who were godly men with
a high view of the Scriptures, fully committed to the
accurate and faithful rendering of God’s eternal Word from
the original languages into the best classical English. The
KJV or Authorised Version (AV) is the Twenty-First Century
English Reader’s Bible. We present this Book to our readers
as THE one English translation which, above all other
English Bibles, is the most complete, accurate and faithful
English translation of the original inspired words of God.
With the KJB, the reader will not be deceived in any matters
that God has chosen to reveal to us through His inspired
words. |
|
III. |
A FOUR-FOLD SUPERIORITY OF
THE KING JAMES BIBLE 2
|
A. |
Superior Original
Language Texts
The textual
foundation of the King James Bible is the best
compared to that used by all other English Bibles
that exist today. The King James Old Testament is
translated from the Traditional Masoretic Hebrew Old
Testament text (Ben Chayyim). The Masoretes handed
down this text from generation to generation,
guarded it and kept it well. The majority of the
modern English versions, however, were translated
from other Hebrew texts like Rudolph Kittel's Biblia
Hebraica, Samaritan Pentateuch, etc., which are
different from the Traditional Masoretic Text. If
the Hebrew foundation of the modern English versions
and the King James Bible are different, how can
their translated English words be the same? Surely,
they cannot be the same. They are different. Why is
the Old Testament Hebrew Text of the King James
Bible superior? It is superior because: Firstly, it
was preserved by the Jews. Secondly, the traditional
text of the Jews was authorised by Jesus. He has
never refuted any text, any word or any letter in
the Hebrew Old Testament. He stamped His
authorisation on the Masoretic Hebrew Text. He did
not give His approval on the Septuagint, the Latin
Vulgate, some scribal tradition, Josephus, Jerome,
the Syriac version or any other document present at
that time! In Matthew 5:18, Jesus said, "Till
heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall
in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."
This proves that our Lord believes in the
preservation of the Scripture to the extent that
every word of it has been kept intact.
The King James
Bible is also based on a superior Greek New
Testament, the Textus Receptus. The chief opponent
of the Textus Receptus is the Nestle/Aland Greek New
Testament 26th edition, which is used in most
colleges, universities, and seminaries today (even
conservative and/or fundamental ones). The editors
of this corrupt Greek Text were made up of a
committee comprising unbelievers, a Roman Catholic
Cardinal, and apostates. Basically, it is this same
Greek Text that underlies almost all modern English
versions.
The Textus Receptus
that underlies the King James Bible, however, was
received by the Church for almost 1,800 years until
1881 when Westcott and Hort’s Greek Text came into
the scene. Since then, almost all preachers studied
this corrupt Greek Text, but still preached out of
the King James Bible (which was based on a different
Greek text). Later, even the King James Bible was
kicked out in favour of English Bibles that are
based on the “preferred” corrupt Greek text.
|
|
B. |
Superior
Translators
The King James
translators were men of great spiritual insight.
They believed that people need to read the Bible,
and therefore, there was a need for proper
translation of the Scripture.
There were
fifty-seven translators, divided into six teams.
They met in three cities, namely, Cambridge,
Westminster and Oxford. They began their work in
1604 and completed it in 1611. In both Westminster
and Oxford, the translators focused on the Old
Testament and New Testament. In Cambridge, they had
a team working with the Old Testament and Apocrypha.
Even though the translators included the Apocrypha
in the original King James Bible, they did not
believe it was inspired. Therefore, they translated
it as history between the Old and New Testaments.
Dr. John Reynolds, a devout puritan, led this great
work of translation from the beginning to the end.
Many of them
possessed superb language skills and were known for
their expertise in Hebrew, Greek and English. They
applied their skills and did excellently in the
translation. With all these fifty-seven superior
translators, we can be assured of the superiority of
their product.
|
|
C. |
Superior Technique
There are two
aspects to the superior technique used by the
translators of the King James Bible: Superior Team
Technique, and Superior Translation Technique.
The King James
Bible was translated differently from other modern
English versions. Each translator had to translate
the books on his own, unaided by anyone else. Every
translator on the six teams, fifty-seven of them,
had to be so skilled in the Hebrew or Greek books
assigned to him that he had to translate all of them
by himself in his own handwriting. In addition, they
had a total of fifteen rules to govern their
translation work.
They had a team
technique that is unequalled by any modern
translators. This is how they do it. They had about
seven translators in a team. One translator is
assigned to one book. For each completed book, it
had to be examined by the other six translators
individually, and one more time meeting together to
go over it to decide which translated words would
stand – in total eight times. Then it will be sent
to the other five teams for vetting – that is five
more times and at the end they had a joint meeting
of two men from each of the six teams – twelve men.
That makes a total of fourteen different times for
one book. That was how they translated, analysed and
corrected in their translation from Genesis to
Revelation. This technique was a team effort and
certainly superior without any doubt!
The translation
technique adopted by the King James translators
is the verbal and formal translation technique. This
method is the translation of Hebrew and Greek words
as closely as possible into English. Every noun,
adjective, preposition, participle and so on in the
Hebrew and Greek text is brought into the English in
the same way. That includes the structure and form
as well. Dynamic equivalence is directly opposite of
the verbal and formal equivalence technique. It is
not a word-for-word translation. The words were
either added, changed or subtracted in the English.
This is also known as “paraphrasing.”
Should not God's
Word be read in English exactly as we would find in
the Hebrew and Greek texts? We can see this in the
King James Bible which has been translated by the
verbal and formal equivalence technique, but not in
other modern versions which used the dynamic
equivalence technique that mixes God's words with
man's words. Indeed we can confidently trust that
the King James Bible is God's Word accurately
translated into English.
|
|
D. |
Superior Theology
There are those who
say that no vital doctrine is affected in the modern
English versions. This claim is clearly false. There
are two possible ways theology (or doctrines) can be
affected in the modern English versions:
(a) through the
translators’ paraphrasing in the modern English
versions,
(b) through the
corrupt Greek text used.
Theology is
affected in the modern English versions when
important words in the Greek text are changed or
omitted. The followings are just some examples how
theology has been affected:
|
a) |
The
Doctrine of Holy Trinity
1 John 5:7
(KJV based on the TR): “For there are three
that bear record in heaven, the Father,
the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these
three are one.”
1 John 5:8
(KJV based on TR): “And there are three
that bear witness in earth, the spirit,
and the water, and the blood: and these
three agree in one.”
1 John 5:7
and 8 are one of the clearest biblical
support for the Doctrine of the Holy
Trinity.
Yet, the
italicized portions are eliminated
from the corrupt Greek texts (Codex
Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus) and are
therefore not found in the modern English
versions that are based on these corrupt
Greek texts. Egs of such English versions
are the NIV, NASV, and NKJV.
This is
certainly a matter of doctrine and theology.
The corrupt Greek texts and their subsequent
English translations are theologically
deficient, whereas the Textus Receptus and,
subsequently, the King James Bible are
theologically superior.
|
|
b) |
The
Doctrine of the Judgment
2 Peter
3:10 (KJV based on the TR): “But the day of
the Lord will come as a thief in the night;
in the which the heavens shall pass away
with a great noise, and the elements shall
melt with fervent heat, the earth also and
the works that are therein shall be
burned up.”
The
italicized portion is altered in the
corrupt Greek texts (Codex Vaticanus and
Codex Sinaiticus) and their subsequent
English translations (NIV, NKJV). Instead of
the words “burned up,” the words “laid bare”
are used. There is a vast difference between
“burned up” and “laid bare.” The word “laid
bare” is an entirely different concept and
word picture. This is no clear description
of how hell is to be like.
This is
certainly a matter of doctrine and theology.
There corrupt Greek texts and their
subsequent English translations are
theologically deficient, whereas the Textus
Receptus and, subsequently, the King James
Bible are theologically superior.
|
|
c) |
The
Doctrine of the Christ
Luke 2:22
(KJV based on the TR): “And when the days of
her purification according to the law
of Moses were accomplished, they brought him
to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord.”
The
italicized portion is changed in the
Greek texts (Codex Vaticanus and Codex
Sinaiticus) and their subsequent English
translations (NIV, NASV, NB). The word “her”
is changed to “their,” thus making the Lord
Jesus Christ One who needed “purification,”
and therefore a sinner! This is unthinkable!
This is
certainly a matter of doctrine and theology.
These Greek texts and their subsequent
English translations are theologically
deficient, whereas the Textus Receptus and,
subsequently, the King James Bible are
theologically superior. |
Other theological
doctrines affected that are either eliminated,
altered or changed are the doctrine of
the church (Revelation 2:15), the doctrine of angels
(Luke 22:43), the doctrine of Satan (Luke 4:8), the
doctrine of the Bible (Mark 16:9-20; John 7:53-8:11;
etc.), the doctrine of last things or prophecy
(Matthew 25:13; Mark 12:23; etc.), the doctrine of
salvation (Revelation 21:24; 1 Peter 2:2; etc.), and
the doctrine of Christ (John 3:13; 1 Corinthians
11:24; etc.).
Theology is indeed
affected and undermined in the modern English
versions today. How can the whole counsel of God be
faithfully taught in these modern English
perversions? |
|
|
IV. |
THE GREEK SOURCE TEXT OF
MODERN ENGLISH BIBLES 3
The subject has been well
researched and documented by the Trinitarian Bible Society
of England in “The Divine Original.” We can do no
better than quote from it:
The Vatican and Sinai
Manuscripts
In the mid-nineteenth
century the Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus became
available to Biblical scholars, and in 1881 Westcott and
Hort advanced the theory that the New Testament text was
preserved in an almost perfect state in these two fourth
century manuscripts.
The discovery of these MSS
betrayed many Biblical students into a lamentable infirmity
of critical judgement. Tischendorf himself, the discoverer
of the Sinai Codex, amended his eighth edition in at least
3,505 places in conformity with new readings which he found
in this document. The Codex Vaticanus exercised a similar
mesmeric influence on the minds of many 19th and 20th
century scholars. The Revised Greek Text underlying the
modern versions has the support only of that very small
minority of the available MSS which are in some respects in
agreement with the unreliable text of the Sinai and Vatican
codices.
An Elaborate Theory
Westcott and Hort devised
an elaborate theory, based more on imagination and intuition
than upon evidence, elevating this little group of MSS to
the heights of almost infallible authority. Their treatise
on the subject and their edition of the Greek NT exercised a
powerful and far-reaching influence, not only on the next
generation of students and scholars, but also indirectly
upon the minds of millions who have had neither the ability,
nor the time, nor the inclination to submit the theory to a
searching examination.
Doctrinal Deficiencies of
these MSS
These two MSS and a few
others containing a similar text present in a weakened form
many passages of Holy Scripture which speak most plainly of
the deity of the Son of God. The trend of Biblical
scholarship in the 19th and 20th centuries has been towards
a “humanitarian” view of the person of Christ. It is not
surprising that many modern scholars should welcome the
support of these two ancient documents, but it is sad to see
so many earnest evangelical Christians ready to accept
without question a theory so destructive of the faith once
delivered to the saints.
The True Text
The Sinai and Vatican
manuscripts represent a small family of documents containing
various readings which the Church as a whole rejected before
the end of the 4th century. Under the singular care and
providence of God more reliable MSS were multiplied and
copied from generation to generation, and the great majority
of existing MSS exhibit a faithful reproduction of the true
text which was acknowledged by the entire Greek Church in
the Byzantine period A.D. 312–1453. . . . This text is
represented by the Authorised Version and other Protestant
translations up to the latter part of the 19th century.
4
The foregoing revelation by
the Trinitarian Bible Society is simply devastating!
In the critical assessment
of ancient Bible texts, we must rely on trustworthy experts
in the fields. No one was better qualified than the
brilliant linguist and Bible scholar John William Burgon
(1813–1888). A man of rare integrity and fidelity to Holy
Scripture, he was alarmed by the rising wave of antagonism
against the Word of God.
Burgon, determined to
unravel the truth about the newly discovered texts, went to
Rome in 1860 to examine the Codex Vaticanus and to
Mount Sinai to acquaint himself with St. Catherine’s
monastery where the Codex Sinaiticus was found.
A meticulous student,
Burgon gave himself wholly to extensive study of Greek
manuscripts, to research in the textual field, in order to
be adequately equipped to defend the Bible under attack.
We quote from David Cloud’s
publication, Modern Bible Versions:
Of the Sinaiticus and
Vaticanus and the textual theories which exalt these
manuscripts, the brilliant John Burgon, after decades of
lonely, vigilant toil in the dim corners of Britain, Europe,
and Egypt, testified:
“On first seriously
applying ourselves to these studies, many years ago . . .
turn which way we would, we were encountered by the same
confident terminology: ‘the best documents,’ ‘primary
manuscripts,’ ‘first-rate authorities,’ ‘primitive
evidence,’ ‘ancient readings,’ and so forth: we found
that thereby codices א [Sinaiticus] or B [Vaticanus],
codices C or D [two similar manuscripts] were invariably and
exclusively meant. It was not until we had laboriously
collated these documents for ourselves, that we became aware
of their true character. Long before coming to the end of
our task (and it occupied us, off and on, for eight years)
we had become convinced that the supposed ‘best documents’
and ‘first-rate authorities’ are in reality among the worst.
“A diligent inspection of a
vast number of later copies scattered throughout the
principal libraries of Europe, and the exact collation of a
few, further convinced us that the deference generally
claimed for B, א, C, D is nothing else but a weak
superstition and a vulgar error, that the date for a MS is
not of its essence, but is a mere accident of the problem,
and that later copies . . . on countless occasions, and
as a rule, preserve those delicate lineaments and minute
refinements which the ‘old uncials’ are constantly observed
to obliterate. And so, rising to a systematic survey of
the entire field of Evidence, we found reason to suspect
more and more the soundness of the conclusions at which
Lachmann, Tregelles, and Tischendorf had arrived: while we
seemed led, as if by the hand, to discern plain indications
of the existence for ourselves of a far ‘more excellent way’
(Revision Revised, pp. 337, 338).
“We suspect that these two
manuscripts [Sinaiticus and Vaticanus] are indebted for
their preservation, solely to their ascertained evil
character; which has occasioned that the one eventually
found its way, four centuries ago, to a forgotten shelf in
the Vatican library; while the other, after exercising the
ingenuity of several generations of critical correctors,
eventually got deposited in the waste-paper basket of the
convent at the foot of Mount Sinai. Had these been copies of
average purity, they must long since have shared the
inevitable fate of books which are freely used and highly
prized; namely, they would have fallen into decadence and
disappeared from sight (Revision Revised, p. 319).”
Thus we see that during the
1800s, one of the greatest missionary eras in history, while
godly men were carrying the preserved Bible to the ends of
the earth, unbelieving textual critics, enamoured by German
rationalism, went about searching the dusty libraries of
apostate institutions to rediscover the Word of God that had
never been lost! 5
These two MSS fell into the
hands of Westcott and Hort, two unregenerate professors in
Cambridge, who promptly elevated them to a place of
authority, lending the weight of their names to the texts.
|
|
V. |
TWO ANGLICAN CHURCHMEN FROM
CAMBRIDGE 6
Soon after the discovery of
the Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, two
learned professors, Westcott and Hort, Anglican Churchmen
from Cambridge, got to work on these defective manuscripts.
Out of them they published their edition of the Greek NT
which was then presented to the world as the most
accurate, authentic and trustworthy.
With their stamp of
authority, their Greek NT literally captured the imagination
of the scholastic community. Since then the Westcott-Hort
Greek NT has dominated the field of NT Greek scholars
and translators around the world. By one fell stroke the TR
(Textus Receptus or Majority Text) was dethroned, and
the Westcott-Hort (W-H) text was seated in the chair
of authority. While these two men and their followers exalt
their text as “the best,” another school (as we have seen)
rejects them as “the worst.” What does God’s Word say on the
matter? Our Lord’s teaching from the “Sermon on the Mount”
(Matt 7:15–18) applies:
Beware of false prophets,
which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are
ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men
gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every
good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree
bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth
evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good
fruit.
Then says the Apostle
James: “Doth a fountain send forth at the same place
sweet water and bitter? Can the fig tree . . . bear olive
berries? . . . so can no fountain both yield salt water and
fresh” (Jas 3:11–12).
What sort of “tree” and
“fountain” are Westcott and Hort? What are their doctrinal
beliefs and persuasion? These have been subjected to a
penetrating analysis in Heresies of Westcott and Hort by D A
Waite.
Behind their academic gowns
and “evangelical” façade, the real Westcott and Hort
harboured a secret affection for Rome and the Virgin Mary.
By their own writings the men reveal their true selves:
unregenerate, strangers to the saving grace of God, and
enemies of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Hereat we present
incontrovertible proof of the unbelief and anti-Christian
position of Westcott and Hort, summarised from Waite’s book.7
|
|
Denials of Basic
Bible Truth by Westcott and Hort
Whether jointly or individually, Westcott and Hort,
by their own pens, have denied or attacked the
following fundamental doctrines of “the faith
which was once delivered unto the saints” (Jude
3).
Westcott and Hort DENIED:
|
a) |
the
doctrine of the inspiration of Scripture, |
|
b) |
the Genesis
record of the Creation and the Fall of man, |
|
c) |
the Deity
of our Lord Jesus Christ, His eternal
pre-existence and Godhead, His Messiahship,
and His sinlessness, |
|
d) |
the
substitutionary atonement of Christ and
redemption by His blood, |
|
e) |
the bodily
resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, |
|
f) |
the Second
Coming of Christ, |
|
g) |
the
doctrine of Eternal Life, |
|
h) |
the reality
of Heaven and Hell, |
|
i) |
the
personality of the Devil. |
Westcott and
Hort BELIEVED IN:
|
a) |
the
inherent goodness and perfectibility of man, |
|
b) |
the
Darwinian theory of Evolution, |
|
c) |
the
Universal Fatherhood of God, |
|
d) |
the
ultimate salvation of all men, |
|
e) |
the
efficacy of water baptism for Regeneration. |
Westcott and Hort
were false prophets, ravening wolves in sheep’s
clothing (Matt 7:15) “deceitful workers,
transforming themselves into … ministers of
righteousness” (2 Cor 11:13-15). Their theories of
Textual Criticism are false and must be utterly
rejected. Their NT Greek Text is therefore also to
be utterly rejected as pernicious poison. And yet a
hundred new Bibles have flowed from this corrupt
source.
 |
|
|
VI. |
THE TRANSLATORS’ AWESOME
TASK 8
The translation of God’s
Word is an awesome task fraught with grave responsibility.
What mortal being is worthy to handle and translate the
words of the Almighty? Even as those who teach the Word of
God must exercise utmost care: “. . . the word of the
LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon
precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and
there a little . . .” (Isa 28:13), so must they who
translate God’s Word exercise the utmost care.
Those who handle God’s Word
are warned: “Every word of God is pure: . . . Add thou
not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found
a liar” (Prov 30:5–6). In repelling the tempter, our
Lord used only God’s Word, “It is written, Man shall not
live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out
of the mouth of God” (Matt 4:4). Every word in the
Bible is important! Every word must be faithfully and
precisely translated without distortion, without variation,
whether more or less.
Only with utmost reverence
then should one handle God’s Word. Such was the attitude of
the men who translated the KJV. Those godly men of rare
scholarship, holding a “high view” of Holy Scripture,
endeavoured to translate word for word and phrase
for phrase so as to capture the very spirit of the
original text, and thus express the mind of God faithfully.
This precise “word for
word” method (“formal equivalence” or “verbal
equivalence”) ensures that the KJV conveys God’s message
with a degree of literal and grammatical fidelity unrivalled
by any other modern English version.
One Translator’s Reckless
Methodology
Eugene Nida is an
unregenerate man who denies the blood atonement, the reality
of angels and miracles, and the infallibility of Holy
Scripture. Yet he occupied a key position in the
Translations Department of the United Bible Societies.
By the introduction of his
new translation methodology, “Dynamic Equivalence,” Eugene
Nida has become the most influential person in the field of
Bible translation. The theory behind Nida’s “Dynamic
Equivalence” goes something like this:
|
a) |
The message and
events of Scripture are bound in the culture of the
past. |
|
b) |
The strict “word
for word” translation being “static” does not
release the message of God. |
|
c) |
“Dynamic
Equivalence” unbinds the message which “leaps out”
at the reader in today’s language and culture. |
|
d) |
By this method the
translator is at liberty to express just how he
feels were the Author’s thoughts. |
|
e) |
Instead of “word
for word,” it is now “thought for word,”
ie, man’s thoughts in place of God’s Word. |
Eugene Nida’s theory is
theological liberalism, which is unbelief. It
reduces God to man’s level. It implies that God is unable to
communicate with His creatures in an intelligible manner
without man’s aid.
Nida is an infidel, a “corrupt
tree” which “bringeth forth evil fruit” (Matt
7:17).
The corrupted Modern
English Bibles have come by the “Dynamic Equivalence” method
of translation. A corrupt methodology gives rise to corrupt
versions: “by their fruits ye shall know them” (Matt
7:20).
Heed the warning of the
Scripture: “For my thoughts are not your thoughts,
neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD” (Isa
55:8). It is supreme folly and reckless presumption for any
man to venture to “think God’s thoughts” by wanton
manipulation of God’s inspired Word.
|
|
VII. |
THE DOCTOR’S PRESCRIPTION
9
|
1. |
A good doctor’s
prescription spells life and health to the patient.
It is written in exact and precise terms. With
words (and figures) the doctor expresses his
thoughts. |
|
2. |
The doctor’s
prescription must not be tampered with: nothing must
be added, nothing taken away. There must be no
variation or manipulation. |
|
3. |
A good pharmacist
dispenses the prescription exactly as written,
word for word, letter for letter, precise
to the minutest detail. Not even a “jot or tittle”
must be altered. (A dot moved one space to the right
increases a dose tenfold!) |
|
4. |
A good pharmacist
dispenses good, wholesome, effective, healthful
medicine. When taken, the patient recovers.
|
|
5. |
An enemy gets his
hands on the prescription and alters it. A deadly
medicine is dispensed. When taken, the patient dies.
|
Modern English Bibles are
deadly medicine.
GOD’S WORD OUR PRESCRIPTION
|
1. |
Our God, the soul’s
Physician, has a Prescription for life: the Bible. |
|
2. |
It comes to us by
the hands of men of old inspired by the Holy Spirit,
copyists, and translators. The business of these
copyists and translators is to keep to the Bible
text exactly as written: word for word,
letter for letter, without alteration or
variation. |
|
3. |
The faithful “word
for word” method of translation is termed “Verbal
Equivalence.” |
|
4. |
The translators of
the KJV Bible appointed by King James used
the Verbal Equivalence method, word for
word, as originally given by God. |
|
5. |
The MSS they
used were faithful copies of the original, known as
the Received Text (TR) or the Majority
Text. |
|
6. |
The result of their
translation: a sound, accurate, faithful Bible, the
“King James Version” or “Authorised
Version” true to its Author in every vital
detail. |
|
7. |
We confidently
believe that the KJV or AV is God’s
Word kept intact in English, God’s perfect
Prescription for the English-speaking world. |
|
|
VIII. |
CONCLUSION
Our all-wise God has
ordained that His purpose in Creation and Redemption should
be accomplished by His Word. So highly has He esteemed His
Word that He magnified it above His name (Ps 138:2). God’s
Word is forever settled in heaven (Ps 119:89); it cannot be
broken (John 10:35), neither shall it pass away (Matt
24:35). Our Lord has confirmed, “For verily I say unto
you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall
in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled”
(Matt 5:18). Who, then, should dare to alter “one jot or
one tittle” of the Word of God? Such reckless daring
shall have its due reward: … “If any man shall add unto
these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are
written in this book: And if any man shall take away from
the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away
his part out of the book of life…” (Rev 22:18-19). God
has spoken, be warned!
If we reject the doctrine
of VPP, we effectively reject the faithful KJB as well. It
is such an irony that VPP opponents who hold in high esteem
the KJB and yet
(a) despise the KJB’s
underlying Hebrew and Greek texts, and
(b) believe that the
preservation of the inspired Greek words of God is also to
be found in the corrupt Westcott and Hort critical texts.
The battle today is the
battle for the Bible. It is the battle for the King James
Bible and its underlying Hebrew and Greek texts over the
many modern English versions and their corrupt texts. This
battle seeks to recapture for the Church the traditional
text and the doctrine of Bible preservation.10
God has certainly preserved His words for us today. But
where are His words? They are the Hebrew words found in the
Traditional Masoretic Hebrew Old Testament (Ben Chayyim) and
the Greek words found in the Traditional Greek New Testament
of Textus Receptus, the underlying original language texts
of the King James Bible. The KJB accurately preserves the
Hebrew and Greek words in the English language based on its
four-fold superiority: Texts, Translators, Technique and
Theology.
“When the enemy shall
come in like a flood, the spirit of the LORD shall lift up a
Standard against him” (Isa 59:19). “… Thy Word is Truth”
(John 17:17). “For we can do nothing against the Truth,
but for the Truth” (2 Cor 13:8). “But the Word of the LORD
endureth forever…” (1 Pet 1:25). “Nevertheless the
Foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, the Lord
knoweth them that are His. And, Let every one that nameth
the name of Christ depart from iniquity” (2 Tim 2:19).
Amen. |
NOTES
1
This part is adapted from chapter 1 of S H Tow’s In Defence of
The King James Holy Bible, a booklet published by Calvary
Bible-Presbyterian Church, Singapore.
2
This part is written with reference to D A Waite’s Defending The
King James Bible (Collingwood: The Bible For Today Press, 1994).
3
Chapter 6 of In Defence of the King James Holy Bible.
4.The
Divine Original (London:
Trinitarian Bible Society, nd), 6-7.
5
David Cloud, Modern Bible Versions (Oak Harbor: Way of Life
Literature, 1994), 28-30.
6
Chapter 7 of In Defence of the King James Holy Bible.
7
See D A Waite, Heresies of Westcott and Hort (Collingswood:
The Bible For Today, 1979).
8
Chapter 8 of In Defence of the King James Holy Bible.
9
Ibid, chapter 9.
10
Jeffrey Khoo, Kept Pure In All Ages (Singapore: Far Eastern
Bible College Press, 2001), 17.
|
