Introduction. No matter what is said about any of today’s “literal” translations, we stand on a solid foundation with them. Jesus promised “heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away” (Mt. 24:35). Though the “grass withers and its flower falls away, the word of the Lord abides for ever, “the word of good tidings preached to you!” (1Pet. 1:23-25).
The King James Version (KJV). In 1611, English-speaking people began using the King James Version. This was a monumental work that created a masterpiece. Some affirm we made a mistake replacing it, but there were two important reasons to do so.
First was the natural growth and changes of a living language. The “Early Modern English” of 1611 was different than the Modern English we speak today. We no longer use the pronouns “ye,” “thee” and “thou,” or the verb endings “do-eth,” “say-est,” or the verb “art.” Some words became vulgar and make us blush to read: “pisseth”(1Sam. 25:22) “ass” (1Sam. 15:23) and “bastard” (Heb. 12:8). Other words changed completely such as “prevent” (1Th. 4:15) which today is “precede / go before.” Such natural events led to a need for a new translation.
The second issue was a little more complicated, but worth the effort to understand. The KJV was translated from the "received text" (Latin “textus receptus”), which at that time was the very best compilation of available Hebrew and Greek manuscripts. But additional extensive scholarship since then has created some “minor” textual issues. I say “minor” because the changes are tiny and doctrinally insignificant.
The King James Version (KJV). In 1611, English-speaking people began using the King James Version. This was a monumental work that created a masterpiece. Some affirm we made a mistake replacing it, but there were two important reasons to do so.
First was the natural growth and changes of a living language. The “Early Modern English” of 1611 was different than the Modern English we speak today. We no longer use the pronouns “ye,” “thee” and “thou,” or the verb endings “do-eth,” “say-est,” or the verb “art.” Some words became vulgar and make us blush to read: “pisseth”(1Sam. 25:22) “ass” (1Sam. 15:23) and “bastard” (Heb. 12:8). Other words changed completely such as “prevent” (1Th. 4:15) which today is “precede / go before.” Such natural events led to a need for a new translation.
The second issue was a little more complicated, but worth the effort to understand. The KJV was translated from the "received text" (Latin “textus receptus”), which at that time was the very best compilation of available Hebrew and Greek manuscripts. But additional extensive scholarship since then has created some “minor” textual issues. I say “minor” because the changes are tiny and doctrinally insignificant.
No Originals. Since we have no originals, many scholars spend their lives categorizing individual passages in an unending quest for truth and accuracy. Entire books, large and small fragments, Bible quotations from books written in the first and second century and discovered since 1611 have all been categorized and compared to the Textus Receptus. With each new excavation or exploration, more are added.
When we compare the text created by the new evidence (sometimes called the "Wescott and Hort" text) with the Received Text, nothing of import has occurred. Even with the thousands and even tens of thousands of sources, we still have 27 books in the NT. These additional witnesses have brought some variations to light, but they are insignificant. Reading the KJV while listening to a preacher using the ASV or NASB (using Wescott and Hort) creates no real issues for the hearer.
We still haven’t and may never find an original book. We only have copies and copies of copies. Although this creates the charge that we can never know if we have the truth, it is a foolish charge. God did not design the gospel to cater to human wisdom. “God chose the foolish things of the world, that he might put to shame them that are wise; and God chose the weak things of the world, that he might put to shame the things that are strong” (1Cor. 1:27). From man’s wisdom, it would be better to have the original documents. Yet God chose a different method, forcing us to trust His promises.
Omitted Portions. That doesn’t mean that there is nothing to stretch this trust. A careful assessment led “Wescott and Hort” to leave out portions of the Textus Receptus (Jn. 5:4; Acts 8:38; 1Jn. 5:7-8, etc.). There was credible evidence that someone’s personal notes, written in the column may have been copied into the main text. Before we become concerned, these verses do not contradict, add to, or remove any truth.
New King James Version (NKJV). The debate continued when the NKJV was translated again from the Textus Receptus. Is it a reliable text? After all my research I still use the NKJV. Multitudes still read the KJV/NKJV, and many Bibles have been translated directly from the KJV into foreign languages. Has any issue of textual criticism proven it to be in error? Absolutely not! The KJV/NKJV leaves nothing out and the things included are taught elsewhere. Nothing was gained and nothing was lost.
Conclusion. I think our biggest danger is in the extremes. No translation is “inspired”. No translation is flawless. The KJV or NKJV are neither superior nor inferior. As usual, truth is found between two extremes. The truth is simple. “Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away.” God’s word is still “living and active and sharper than any two edged sword.”
When we compare the text created by the new evidence (sometimes called the "Wescott and Hort" text) with the Received Text, nothing of import has occurred. Even with the thousands and even tens of thousands of sources, we still have 27 books in the NT. These additional witnesses have brought some variations to light, but they are insignificant. Reading the KJV while listening to a preacher using the ASV or NASB (using Wescott and Hort) creates no real issues for the hearer.
We still haven’t and may never find an original book. We only have copies and copies of copies. Although this creates the charge that we can never know if we have the truth, it is a foolish charge. God did not design the gospel to cater to human wisdom. “God chose the foolish things of the world, that he might put to shame them that are wise; and God chose the weak things of the world, that he might put to shame the things that are strong” (1Cor. 1:27). From man’s wisdom, it would be better to have the original documents. Yet God chose a different method, forcing us to trust His promises.
Omitted Portions. That doesn’t mean that there is nothing to stretch this trust. A careful assessment led “Wescott and Hort” to leave out portions of the Textus Receptus (Jn. 5:4; Acts 8:38; 1Jn. 5:7-8, etc.). There was credible evidence that someone’s personal notes, written in the column may have been copied into the main text. Before we become concerned, these verses do not contradict, add to, or remove any truth.
New King James Version (NKJV). The debate continued when the NKJV was translated again from the Textus Receptus. Is it a reliable text? After all my research I still use the NKJV. Multitudes still read the KJV/NKJV, and many Bibles have been translated directly from the KJV into foreign languages. Has any issue of textual criticism proven it to be in error? Absolutely not! The KJV/NKJV leaves nothing out and the things included are taught elsewhere. Nothing was gained and nothing was lost.
Conclusion. I think our biggest danger is in the extremes. No translation is “inspired”. No translation is flawless. The KJV or NKJV are neither superior nor inferior. As usual, truth is found between two extremes. The truth is simple. “Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away.” God’s word is still “living and active and sharper than any two edged sword.”