There is an old, snooty church joke that goes something like this: Miss Smith approaches her pastor, incensed that he has replaced the King James Bible with the New International Version. “Pastor, bring back the King James,” she says. “If it was good enough for Jesus, it’s good enough for me.”
Last week the joke was ignited””literally, at the Halloween book burning sponsored by Amazing Grace Baptist Church in Canton, N.C. The church’s Web site declared the burning to be “a great success.” Works thrown into the flames included those by supposed heretics Billy Graham, Mother Teresa and emergent church guru Brian McLaren. “It was a success because God’s Word was glorified and uplifted,” according to the Web site. Claiming scriptural warrant for the burning, the site quoted Acts: “And many that believed, came and confessed and shewed their deeds. Many of them also which used curious arts, brought their books together, and burned them before all men: and they counted the price of them, and found it fifty thousand pieces of silver. So mightily grew the word of God and prevailed.”
Most disturbing, Scripture itself was burned””onto the pyre flew modern translations of the Bible like those that the woman in the joke deplored. Amazing Grace is a self-proclaimed King James Only church.
A bit over the top, but I must confess, I wouldn’t shed a tear over the loss of some of the more recent translations/paraphrases. The KJV remains the gold standard.
So they get their panties all in a wad based on a somewhat flawed translation of the Bible into English, out of the Vulgate, which was itself a flawed translation?
I suppose that when Jesus proclaimed “I am the door,” these folks will look for hinges and a knob. Childish minds. And, apparently, nothing resembling a child-like heart.
Of course, the complete, original KJV contains the Deuterocanonical books. The versions of the KJV used by Baptist KJV-only types do not. They usually get a tad uncomfortable when this is mentioned.
not much different from ‘Gandalf’ ripping pages from Leviticus out of hotel Bibles though, is it?
I once asked a “King Jimmy-only” type about non-English translations…he was completely speechless.
No. 4: Good point, but not one that I expect to see Lauren Winner, assistant professor at Duke University, picking up on and making any time soon….
I wish the reporter had offered a little more context – for example mentioning that 99.9% of Christians find these KJV-only folks a little looney too.
When you read the Hebrew and Greek, and if you are familiar with Elizabethan English, the KJV is spot-on for the most part.
No. 8: “When you read the Hebrew and Greek, and if you are familiar with Elizabethan English, the KJV is spot-on for the most part.”
I’ve been teaching NT at the college level for 26 years, and frankly I need a text that is excellent for more than “the most part.” The KJV has numerous problems besides archaic language, one of which is that recent translations make use of more-ancient manuscripts than were available to KJV; a related problem is that KJV didn’t always have enough knowledge of ancient Semitic languages to guess accurately meaning of some Gr. and Heb. words. So I have never even considered using the KJV as a NT text. (There are still a few students and others who naively suppose that because KJV is older and recent translations are modern, the older ones are closer to the original.)
Nor have I considered using the NIV or the Message, though both are admirable in other contexts. I do sometimes use The Message in lecture to get a point across. For the students, I assign the RSV or the NRSV. I think that’s pretty, well, standard.
Strange that those who venerate our bible and sometimes our prayer book have so little regard for us in the Church of England.
No. 10: I think that Hooker would want to underscore your point. The Bible (Authorised Version) can be read by the solitary reader, of course, but its full meaning depends to some important extent on its setting within tradition, liturgy, and the historical community.
Back to my no. 9: I don’t mean I require the RSV or NRSV, come to think of it. I mean I always make one or the other of those available in the college bookstore but tell the students they may use whatever modern translation (and not a paraphrase) they prefer. And that always includes the NIV.
Davic, how about the ESV?
I’m sorry; I don’t know that one. But I’d be happy to learn more about it.
#11 Thank you David Hein – there is little doubt in my mind that the Authorised Bible and Prayer Books shaped both our church and our culture as well as being written in its context, particularly in their exquisite language. I think that one thing that tends to be forgotten is that the Prayerbook uses not the Authorised translation of the Psalms, but the earlier and wonderful version by Miles Coverdale in the Psalter.
I wonder – do you think that there is an argument that the texts used in the Authorised [KJV] Bible are those which were in regular use and had travelled West because they were well regarded and popular, whereas more recent discoveries which have been incorporated in later translations were those which were not so well regarded and therefore did not travel?
Is there an argument that we have been raking through the ancient waste paper basket and elevated what was previously discarded?
I suppose that modern scholars do however understand more about the ancient languages than was available to the translators of the authorised version and its precedents.
Yes these folks are nutty. But let’s not make the mistake of thinking all modern critical scholarship gets it right. I am reminded of this from a book review some time ago in [i]Touchstone[/i] by the ever-fascinating Fr Hunwick:
[blockquote]The only printings of the Greek Bible between 1927 and 1994 which allowed Junia [Romans 16:7] to retain her feminine gender were those which consciously reproduced the [i]Textus Receptus[/i], that is, the old “pre-critical†text based on “late†and “poor†manuscripts and used in Byzantine Christendom; a text long despised by most of the confident exponents of Modern Scholarship. (My own mentor in New Testament textual criticism, the great eclecticist George Kilpatrick, believed that “TR†was as useful a text-type as any other; and, back then in the 1960s, what a lonely furrow he seemed to be plowing in making even as modest a claim as that.)[/blockquote]
The whole thing may be found here.
No. 15:
“#11 Thank you David Hein – there is little doubt in my mind that the Authorised Bible and Prayer Books shaped both our church and our culture as well as being written in its context, particularly in their exquisite language. I think that one thing that tends to be forgotten is that the Prayerbook uses not the Authorised translation of the Psalms, but the earlier and wonderful version by Miles Coverdale in the Psalter.”
Yes, and come to think of it, I talk about that–borrowing from Rowan Williams, in Anglican Identities–in my recent article on Anglican identity in the Sewanee Theological Review.
“I wonder – do you think that there is an argument that the texts used in the Authorised [KJV] Bible are those which were in regular use and had travelled West because they were well regarded and popular, whereas more recent discoveries which have been incorporated in later translations were those which were not so well regarded and therefore did not travel?”
I don’t know. Will leave that to some real experts to comment on.
“Is there an argument that we have been raking through the ancient waste paper basket and elevated what was previously discarded?”
Not that I know of.
“I suppose that modern scholars do however understand more about the ancient languages than was available to the translators of the authorised version and its precedents.”
Yes, definitely.
#17 David – I was brought up with the 1662 Prayer book services and the Authorised Version Bible. I didn’t think much of them as a youngster as they went straight over my head. I now think it is a real privilege to be able to still go to a few churches here and see them used, just as they have been for hundreds of years. I am now 50 and the more I have got to know and understand them, the more impressed I am. We are very lucky.
Yours sounds a wonderful job to have.
I am told the New American Standard Version is good for studying. For anyone who wants to try the different versions they are here:
http://www.biblegateway.com
The earlier English translations, Wycliffe, Tyndale, Great Bible, Bishops Bible etc are available here which are interesting to see:
http://www.studylight.org/
The English Standard Version is an “essentially literal” translation. I view it is an improvement on the RSV, but more readable. Give it a try and I think you will like it. The Oxford University Press publishes an edition that has the Apocrypha.
Given the fact that “all translation is treason” I tell people to study multiple translations. I don’t even object to the New Living Translation for devotional or light reading and I certainly would not object to having the KJV as one of the translations in one’s library.
From Genisis
[blockquote]1:1 In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. 2 The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.
3 And God said, “Let there be light,†and there was light. 4 And God saw that the light was good. And God separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day.
6 And God said, “Let there be an expanse [1] in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.†7 And God made [2] the expanse and separated the waters that were under the expanse from the waters that were above the expanse. And it was so. 8 And God called the expanse Heaven. [3] And there was evening and there was morning, the second day.[/blockquote]
Here is a link: http://www.gnpcb.org/esv/browse/
If they are a “KJV only” church, where did they get these other versions? Is it a sin to own or read or inwardly digest anything but KJV?
And Billy Graham… I’m shocked!
and here is a fascinating interactive study site which I think is fairly recent: the Greek and Hebrew Reader’s Bible [type bible reference over the Romans text at the top and press go. Try passing cursor over the text]
http://bible.johndyer.name/
I am a fan of the KJV, but such destruction is unfortunate. The reference to Ian McKellan is timely.
Information about the ESV (my daily reader) may be found here.
OT: an interesting source on various Bible designs is Mark Bertrand’s Bible Design Blog. PM [18], I commend the Allan’s Longprimer, a treasure from your island.
😉
#23 Tired – Thank you – have just found it on google.
Picking up where #3 Fr. Greg left off. The 1611 KJV (besides the deuterocanonical texts) had
1. A Saints Day calendar. (goodness me!)
2. A long preface from the translation team which said explicitly that they were giving it their best shot, and to prove this they
3. included extensive marginal notes with variant readings.
4. For the NT the translators relied on Erasmus’ Greek text, which was assembled from only four or five late copies. And I believe he never had a Greek text for the last verses of Revelation – and so used the Latin text, which he translated back (sort of) into Greek.
The KJV is magisterial but not w/o flaws.
The KJV is beautifully poetic, but (as others have said) suffers from lack of later scholarship and textual discoveries. Another drawback is that it often requires even [i]further[/i] translation to be understandable to a modern audience.
No. 20: “I tell people to study multiple translations”
Yes, that’s a good point. I often have students read aloud from different translations of key passages to get a sense of the variations, nuances of difference, etc.
Pageantmaster, you are correct that the New American Standard Bible (NASB) is one of the versions that can be counted on for a literal translation based on up-to-date Greek and Hebrew scholarship. I used the KJV for most of my life, and during my ministry training at Victory Outreach, then switched to the NASB for my academic career toward a B.A. and M.A. Today I most often use the New Living Translation for reading, although I always have the NASB at hand for cross-checking. And on quite a number of occasions I have found that the NLT has felicitous translations that outshine even the more literal texts.
Mt name is Northwest Bob and I am a transaholic. 🙂 NW Bob has several translations around the house: KJV, RSV, NRSV, ESV, GNT, NEB, the Message. It helps me to look at more than one when reading a difficult passage. It is instructive to note the sometimes not so subtle change in meaning that comes from each translation’s rendering of isolated passages.
Even in translating say French to English, there is always an element of opinion involve in conveying subtlities. Not knowing anything about ancient languages, I can hardly imagine the difficulty in rendering phrases into English.
Nonetheless, my pray is that as many people as possible pick up any reasonably serious translation and read some every day. Over the long haul you won’t be too far off the mark with any of them.
The collect for a week from Sunday (NOv 15th) is fitting for this discussion:
[blockquote] Blessed Lord, who caused all holy Scriptures to be written for our learning: Grant us so to hear them, read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest them, that we may embrace and ever hold fast the blessed hope of everlasting life, which you have given us in our Savior Jesus Christ; who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. [/blockquote]
IHS,
NW Bob
Some very interesting sites on translations that I will try to explore further . Thanks to all who posted these resources!!
To be “fair” I went to their website. The depths of their confusion is stunning. In their list of heretics, they have Spong [i]and[/i] J.I.Packer. Not a big surprise, they are also virulently Anti -Catholic. If anything, they more closely resemble a cult, than a Christian gathering.
After a little web searching, I was able to find this tract that I remember running across some years ago. It helpfully explains how all English translations other than the KJV without the apocrypha are works of Satan and the Catholic Church, the two being essentially synonymous in the eyes of this writer.
For myself, the KJV has a poetry and a beauty that no other English translation I’ve found can match; but for study and day-to-day purposes I usually rely on a more modern translation. I have several, but the NRSV and New Jerusalem are probably the ones I go to most often.
Ross, sometimes I wounder if we shouldn’t require everyone to learn Hebrew and Greek. After all if the Jews think it important to study the Torah in Hebrew, maybe we should do the same. At least it would get folks to realistically think about the problem of translation. It also might help to teach people how our current textual apparatus came to be, both the Masoretic and the Greek.
Learning Hebrew and Greek is on my to-do list, because I agree — you can only go so far in studying Scripture if you have to read it in translation. Making it normative in our churches to study the original languages would require a vast number of teachers who already know Hebrew and Greek, and a commitment to making time — and expecting parishioners to make time — for both children and adults to do language study. That’s a pretty high hurdle, although I agree that it would be much for the better if we could pull it off.
In the meantime, I think the next best thing is to encourage people to remember that they are reading translations (and in some cases translations of translations; e.g., the Gospels themselves translate Jesus’ Aramaic into Greek), and that no translation can ever perfectly capture the nuance of another language. If you can’t afford the time to learn the original language you can at least consult multiple translations, preferably in editions with good annotations.
Whatever one’s understanding of the nature of Scripture — and I know that you and I have rather different views on that topic — ignoring the language and translation questions does nobody any good.