|
Please notice the DATES on the
following quotes! QUOTE #1a –
“We
must never leave out of sight that for a GREAT MULTITUDE of readers the English Version [AV, ed.] is not the
translation of an inspired Book, but IS ITSELF THE INSPIRED BOOK ... The English Bible [AV, ed.] is to them all which the
Hebrew Old Testament, which the Greek New Testament, is to the devout
scholar. It receives from them the same UNDOUBTING
AFFIANCE [confidence, pledge of fidelity, ed.]...”
On the AUTHORIZED VERSION
of the NEW TESTAMENT in Connection With Some Recent Proposals for its Revision, Richard Chenevix
Trench, D.D., Dean of Westminster, 1858, pg. 174 Comments: Ø
The author said, “great multitude of readers”? This is no small sect! This quote is taken before 1858! Didn’t someone offer $1,000 for finding
anyone who believed the AV to be “inspired” before 1950? Who were these people that held the AV to be
an inspired book? JW’s? Mormons? Ruckmanites”? I’ll tell you who they were: They were COMMON BELIEVERS of a COMMON BIBLE which had
been recognized as the FINAL AUTHORITY in all
matters of faith and practice! Ø
Notice that before 1858 there was a great multitude
that held the AV to be INSPIRED! Ø
Notice also that with the same FAITH, FIDELITY, and CONFIDENCE “devout scholars” had for the originals – they had for the
AV! Quote #1b - “The
Roman Catholics and the Unitarians [Old time JW’s,
ed.] are, I believe, the only bodies who have counted it necessary to make VERSIONS
OF THEIR OWN.
With the exception of these, the Authorized Version is COMMON
GROUND for ALL in England who call themselves
Christians...is alike the heritage of all.”, ibid., pg. 176 Comments: Ø
Before 1858 there were three
types of Bibles – Roman Catholic, Unitarian and the Bible of ALL
CHRISTIANS – the Authorized Version. Ø
This was “common ground” for all. Since then, those who have IMPOSED new versions on the common people have CAUSED division in the Quote #1c - In
speaking about the proposed revision and problems that it would cause: “Two
things then might happen. Either they
would adhere to the old Authorized Version, which is not, indeed, very probable;
or they would carry out a revision; it might be two or three, of their
own. In either case the ground of COMMON
SCRIPTURE, of an English Bible which THEY and WE hold EQUALLY
SACRED, would be TAKEN
FROM US; the SEPARATION and DIVISION, which are now
the sorrow, and perplexity, and shame of England, would BECOME
MORE MARKED, more deeply fixed than ever...Thus,
the issue might only too easily be, that we should LOSE in respect of them also the common ground of ONE AND
THE SAME SCRIPTURE, which WE NOW POSSES [emphasis mine]”, ibid, pg. 176 Comments: Ø
There was a “common Scripture” recognized and held as SACRED by two fractional parties.
This Scripture was the Authorized Version. Ø
Someone was going to “TAKE” away that common Scripture and cause “separation and
division” and this would become “more marked” and “more deeply fixed than ever.
This all before 1880! In fact some time before 1858! Ø
Now, who caused the “division” in the church? Here is a man accurately predicting “division
and separation” not by those holding to the AV but by those who would try and
take the AV away from the common people and replace it with two or three of
their own. Quote #1d “Another
most serious consideration presents itself, Will one revision satisfy? ... Is
it not inevitable that after a longer or shorter period ANOTHER
REVISION, and on that ANOTHER, will be called for?
Will not in this way ALL SENSE OF STABILITY pass away from our ENGLISH SCRIPTURES?” Ibid. pg. 176 Comments: Ø
The revision did not satisfy!
It only brought another revision upon another! Ø
All stability is LOST! Why? Because we now have over 100+ “revisions”
since then! QUOTE #2 – I got this off of the Pilgrim
Internet site. HENRY ALFORD
Hebrews Comments: Ø Henry Alford in his attack on the AV acknowledges
before 1860(!) that there were some “which would have us regard as INFALLIBLE,
and RECEIVE as the WRITTEN WORD OF GOD” the Authorized
Version. So, this is a 2nd
witness that BEFORE 1860 people BELIEVED the AV to be
“infallible” but much more, it is to be RECEIVED as the WRITTEN WORD
OF GOD! Ø Notice that my receiving the AV also as
“infallible” and the “written word of God” was not something “new” and
“cultic”! It is the SAME FAITH
that that great numbers of COMMON believers held before 1860 Quote #3 –
again from the Pilgrim site.
“What is the Correct
Principle on which Translations of the Holy Scriptures should be made? To
this I reply, that they should be conformed, as nearly as possible, to the
inspired originals. Let it be remembered, that the Bible which we possess is a
translation. The words of our English version are invested with Divine
authority, only so far as they express just what the original expresses.
I present this thought because there is, in the minds of many, a
superstitious reverence for the words and phrases of our English version (KJV).”, [Baptists: The Only
Thorough Reformers (1876), pg. 128-129,
http://members.aol.com/pilgrimpub/quotesbt.htm Comments:
Ø Again, before 1876 there were “MANY”
who revered the WORDS AND PHRASES of our English Versions [AV]. Now,
Ø One would do well to recognize the faith of this
“great multitude” and “many” believers without flippantly rejecting their faith
or worse DENYING that it ever existed.
If nothing else you could at least acknowledge it as real faith without
salving your consciences with snide remarks like: “superstitious”,
“uninformed”, “non-scholarly”, “ignorant”, etc. Quote #4 –
BASIL MANLY, JR. “Why so strenuous of exact inspiration of the words, when you admit there may be errors of transcription? What do you gain? We answer, we gain all the difference there is between an inspired and an uninspired original; all the difference between a document truly divine and authoritative to begin with — though the copies or translations may have in minute particulars varied from it — and a document faulty and unreliable at the outset, and never really divine... There is even now, with some ignorant persons, an assumption of the infallibility and equality with the original of some particular translation, as the Vulgate, or King James, or Luther’s.” [The Bible Doctrine of Inspiration (1888) pg. 84] Comments: Ø Notice again how before 1888 people believed
the AV as “infallible” and “equal with the original”! Ø Notice the hatred and the belittling language being
used: ignorant and assuming from the side of those
who opposed the AV as the word of God. Quote #5 –WILLIAM CATHCART “The Baptists of America had withdrawn from the American Bible Society because it refused aid to the Bengalee and Burmese translations, made by Baptist missionaries, in which the Greek term baptizo and its cognates had been rendered by words signifying "immerse," "immersion," etc. The English translation had been made the standard to which all other translations should conform and not the inspired originals, and the founders of the (American Bible) Union felt compelled by consistency to demand that on the principle of fidelity, translations in all languages should be conformed to the Hebrew and Greek texts.”, [The Baptist Encyclopedia (1881), pg. 98] http://members.aol.com/pilgrimpub/quotesbt.htm Comments: Ø Again, notice that William Cathcart
before 1881 recognized that there were “Baptists” who took the “English
translation [AV] as the standard to which all other translations should conform
and not the inspired originals”. All this before 1881! My, my, my!
Wow! Ø Baptists recognized the AV as the standard before 1881. Ø Translations should conform to the AV not to the
“inspired originals”. Remember NO ONE
HAS THE ORIGINALS! Therefore, how anyone
could DEMAND conformity to the “originals” is beyond me! Ø Someone
was translating into Bengalee and Burmese from the
AV.
Note: As the above is unclear to me as to who is referring to whom one might want to replace “Baptists” with “American Bible Society”. The argument stands either way “people” were translating the AV in to foreign languages before 1881. They recognized the AV as the Standard before 1881. Conclusion: Ø Before
1880 there was a great multitude of common people who BELIEVED
the Authorized Version was equal in authority to the “original”. They believed the AV to be thus inspired. Ø Before and after 1880 there was a “smaller”
group of people who violently opposed this faith and derided these common BELIEVERS
as being “ignorant”, “superstitious”, “not-scholarly”, etc. Ø By
imposing revision after revision since 1880 this non-believing group
caused “division” and great “separation” amongst the people of God. They have taken away the STANDARD,
which had held all sides together on COMMON ground – THE SCRIPTURES! Ø There
was “vehement” hatred for the AV before 1880 and this brought about a
desire for REVISION!!! Notice
this! Faith in the Authorized Version
was “resented”, “hated”, and “belittled” way before 1880! Those who went into the REVISION
committee went in with PREJUDICES AGAINST THE AV!!!! In other words they were BIASED
against readings in the Authorized Version before doing an alleged revision of
the AV! Ø This
was not an “update” of the AV in order to help “understand” the English. It was a movement pushed forward by those
already BIASED against the AV.
What they gave us – the common people – was not an update Authorized
Version but a completely NEW VERSION!!! Ø Based
partially on this “common faith” of the common man in the recognized Standard –
the Authorized Version – I by holding a similar stand do not believe a “new
doctrine”. Nor am I a member of a “sect”
which divides. It is the other side that
divides and I hold the faith of my fathers.
I am of course not to expect anything LESS than what my fathers
received: ridicule, derision, mocking, disrespect, etc. Thank God they aren’t burning us at the stake
any more! Praise God for that!
Please do write if you have any questions or comments!
|
