Perfection and Preservation: A Conversation about Translations

speaker-1: Faith Baptist Church in Taylors presents This Week in the Word.

speaker-0: Well, welcome back to This Week in the Word at FBC Taylors. We're so thankful for this podcast format that we introduced now just about a month ago that allows us to have conversations about things that are happening here locally at Faith Baptist and Taylors. This week, we are pleased to have George Stauffer with us. George is one of our supported missionaries and has served as his Lord and God for many years in now seven different countries. George, tell us a little bit about your ministry and yourself.

speaker-1: I'm a teacher. Right. And I have had missionary come and say, look, we need you because we don't have a teacher. I would teach some Greek and some Hebrew and some other things. and I said, sure, I know you need me. But I did finally go as with Chandrashaker and after those three weeks I just was convinced those fellas almost pulled me and made me stay. Because they didn't have a teacher. Right. And I I said, how many other churches? Right. How many other schools around the world don't have the teachers? Right. And so as I did some checking around and and visiting those seven different countries, I realized, yeah, the need is great for American teachers there. And so that's what we've been doing and settling in one place for the most part since 2010.

speaker-0: And I'm so glad to have a teacher on the topics that we're having, because really the last month, this month of August, here at Faith Baptist and Taylors, we've been going through a series of messages unique to our normal Sundays. we've called it the most powerful book in your hands. It's a it's a top level of the Bible itself. I I think two weeks ago I said we're gonna go 30,000 feet, and it sometimes we'll dip down to 28,000. but it's a big topic. And we're t we've covered things like transmission of scripture into the from the original text into our languages. We've talked about the canonization of scripture. Last night we introduced the topic of translations as well. And you as a teacher have taught on this over the you know, across the pond, so to speak, and it's an important topic for a missionary to cover. And One of the things that I wanted to delve into with you today is and recognizing your teaching prowess and your missionary hat that you've worn that God has woven into you is that matter of translation. And the Bible translations into English we can all acknowledge have been a hot button issue. Have you noticed that?

speaker-1: Yes, I have.

speaker-0: And it's unfortunate that way. I have not noticed that as much with mission work because your frontline translation work predominantly. Now you've been in the country of

speaker-1: of India for the most part.

speaker-0: Yeah. How many languages?

speaker-1: On campus, languages and dialects, they were 60, 60, spoken

speaker-0: Six zero.

speaker-1: by the students. Okay. So we dealt with language all the time. Right. And they were supposed to speak English. Right. The teachers were supposed to speak English. Right. But many people here would have had a hard time understanding what they were saying.

speaker-0: This might be true. Right. I mean, i in some sense, that was why I two weeks ago on something that I introduced and said we're talking about transmission at that time and then to translations. And I said it's a it's a difficult field for us to cover as Americans because we're predominantly monolinguistic culture. Most of the audience that I was speaking to and even maybe listening to right now speak English and that's it. How in the context that you were serving in. Most of them spoke more than one.

speaker-1: well. Yeah. Almost all of them, more than one. Usually they were up three, four, five, and I've had six different languages that they could talk in.

speaker-0: Six different and that's a wonderful gift. And now I don't want to take away the fact that we have a gift, because in English, whereas they speak multiple languages and they're just wanting a Bible that's readable in their language. Yeah, right. English, money our cult contexts speak one language, and yet we have multiple Bibles in our language. Therein lies the controversy. So why do some pastors insist That the word of God is found only in one translation.

speaker-1: There are six, seven things that I have heard.

speaker-0: Okay.

speaker-1: And the one and most of them makes sense, and that's why it is so understandable by people. first they would say everything that God makes is perfect. The law of the Lord is perfect. Perfect. Psalm nineteen. And the scripture cannot be broken in John ten thirty-five. So Everything that God makes is perfect. His word is perfect. All right. Perfect means perfect. That was one point. Number two, they would say not only was it made perfect, but God determined that it would stay perfect. And for that, they go to Psalm 12. Okay. And they read six and seven. And I'll bring that up here.

speaker-0: And I love, by the way, the use of your tools. George is one that comes to church with his laptop. And it's an intimidating guy to preach to, because I know when I'm in a Greek text, he's got the Greek text in front of him, and if I'm in the Hebrew, he's got it in front of him. And I say that only to say I'm I'm thankful for that, George, your example. Good. And I I I hope others are noting that and and and taking up the same cause. So here's your resource library, and you're bringing up Psalm 12.

speaker-1: Bringing up Psalm 12, verse 6 and 7. The words of the Lord are pure words as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O Lord. Thou shalt preserve them from this generation forever. that's impressive. Thou shalt keep them. What's the them? well, that's the words back in the previous verse. The words of the Lord are pure. And so in English I find myself agreeing with them. Okay.

Psalms 12:6

speaker-0: Right. Right.

speaker-1: Third point.

speaker-0: You may want to hold that thought. In English I find myself agreeing with them. Yes. Okay, okay. We'll hold that thought. We'll radio tease there. Right. Yeah, yeah.

speaker-1: Yeah, wait what I'm doing is just giving what I've heard people say

speaker-0: You're answering the question, why do some people insist there's only one translation? There you go.

speaker-1: Yeah. And then they would point out, well, look, the the King James has been around for 400 years. I mean it's been tried and true. it must be the Word of God for English speaking peoples. But then some would say, the fact that it's perfect, you have to accept by faith. And I appreciate that, because they they're honest. Right. by faith, yeah. Well that God has kept his word all through the centuries. And now we have it in the King James. And you know, presumably other people have had it for centuries. That's their thing. And so it's by faith. number five. the Bibles down through the ages all agree with the King James. And I'll go to a lot of effort to demonstrate the similarity down through the years.

speaker-0: Of other translations.

speaker-1: Then number six, they would say, well, if there's a standard that we'd go by, and if that standard is perfect, well then we can't accept anything else. We can't add to it. We can't subtract to it. And I think people recognize that that's That sounded like Revelation twenty two plus other places. Right.

speaker-0: Right. And and they almost even analogize that. You you mentioned to me even before a carpenter.

speaker-1: Yes.

speaker-0: It and they'll say, Well, you know, you have to have a measuring rod to know where to cut and the word of God to King J and that's a lot of it we're talking King James. Yeah. And and we've all seen those

speaker-1: Charts.

speaker-0: where it's got the King James over here and then the modern translations over here. And look where the modern translations changed. Yeah. And of course their measuring rod is The King James in that case. And that's your sixth reason why some would say only one translation. You got another one though. You seven here, or more than seven here. Well.

speaker-1: Yeah, so people that use a different Bible, therefore, are sinning because God has given us this perfect Bible. We can't add to it, we can't subtract from it.

speaker-0: So based on the fact that they believe it's perfect, it's continued to be perfect, it's the divine measuring stick against which all other translations should be measured. If you don't use this one, you're sinning. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And they I you know, you could even say some up you probably heard say, well, it you you this is even more extreme. If you're not saved from

speaker-1: That's right.

speaker-0: this, then you aren't saved. Yeah. They'll even go as far as to refer to all the others as corruptible seed. Right. Right. I've actually seen video clips, though not in person, of churches who will stack other versions of the Bible that they disagree with before their congregation, point to them and call them sinful. I've seen others that actually will I saw a clip once where someone actually stacked other modern translations on the Bible before, like a VBS platform and And in front of all the children jumped up and down on them, stepped on them, stomped on them to say these are sinful. So there's some extreme on that. Yep. Now in any case, and I want to recognize before we go any further, there's a spectrum. There's a there's a wide spectrum, and I wanna be careful that we don't paint everybody into one corner, and it's hard in a you know thirty, forty minute conversation for people to not grasp our hearts. So I wanna just kinda wanna explain it here. George and I were talking ahead of time. There there are people that we love deeply that have probably only ever read from the King James. And I'm not questioning their salvation. George is not questioning their salvation. We're not questioning their sincerity to the Lord. In fact, in many cases there's a lot about those kind of ministries that are commendable, that are respectable, that I would find great comfort in. So we're not attacking that in that sense. That that's not the purpose of this conversation. That's how we ended. Sunday night last with a recognition of well, how does the weaker treat the younger? How does this the or the weaker treat the stronger? And vice versa. Right. We ended that way this night Sunday night before that, the same kind of conversation. We can have these conversations as brothers and sisters in Christ. So there's a spectrum there. Now there is within that spectrum some that would go as far as heresy that would say, if you're only s you can only be saved from this one translation, I would call that a heretic. If I'd say you can only be saved from the King James Version, I'd say, I I'm sorry. That's that's hora heresy. And it goes beyond the pale of even normal conversation, you know, especially talking now to a missionary. Were you using the King James in India to lead the fella to the Lord that doesn't speak English? You know, that's crazy.

speaker-1: Crazy. Right.

speaker-0: But you listed here seven arguments. And I want to review them for our listeners because then I'm going to ask you, George, to kind of respond to these arguments. So let me review. Here's the argument. So I asked George, why do some pastors insist the word of God is only found in one translation? And here's seven arguments that are commonly used. And there may be more, but for sake of time, you've limited to seven. Number one, everything they'll say that God makes is perfect. God wrote the Bible, He said the Bible is perfect. That's why. Number two. It is it continues to be perfect to this very day. Psalm 12, 6, and 7 is a passage that they'll commonly use. Number three, the King James has been around for 400 years. It's been tried and true for 400 years. Why do we need to change it now? That is proof positive that it is perfect. Number five, the King James perfection is a doctrine that you agree with by faith. So if you ask me why do I believe it's perfect, it's by faith that I accept it. And so there's that's kind of the end of the conversation, I guess, at that point. Number five, the Bibles all down through the ages that we can look at all agree with the King James Version, and so that's why this one. Number six, there has to be a perfect standard. So there's gotta be a perfect standard. A carpenter measures a board, uses a perfect standard, whether it's a tape measure or a two-foot square or a four-foot square. We gotta have a perfect measuring, and that's why the King James Version, any new Bible which added to the King James Version. Or takes away from the King James Version is therefore from the devil. And finally, people who use different versions of the Bible are actually sinners. That would be the seventh reason. I want to walk through those, because those are a lot. And I'm there may be listeners that have probably heard those arguments before. I

speaker-1: Imagine.

speaker-0: would imagine so. So let's start with the first one. Someone tells me, why and I ask, why do you only insist on using the King James Version? And they tell me. Everything God makes is perfect. God wrote the Bible, therefore it is perfect. And they'll use passages like Psalm 119. How do you respond?

speaker-1: I would say yes, I'm in agreement.

speaker-0: Okay.

speaker-1: God wrote it, and that it is perfect. I I mentioned most church constitutions that I'm that we would recognize, use the terms plenary, verbal inspiration, and many of them say in the original text, in the original manuscript, the autograph they call. There's you have to agree to that.

speaker-0: I agree.

speaker-1: Yeah. but then we go to number two.

speaker-0: Okay. Well let's review number two. Number two is they'll take it a step further. Yeah. So first one you'd say, Do you agree that the word of God is perfect? Yep. Answer Yes Yes. Yes. And and I in our message two weeks ago, by the way, you introduced verbal plenary inspiration. Right. And I said, Some of this conversation comes down to jargon, fancy words. Yep. Jargon can be used inappropriately or appropriately. Right. If it's appropriate, it allows informed people to have conversations around the same topic. if it's used inappropriately, it's used by those who wield the big jargon words to, you know, show off their intellectual prowess and allow people that don't know those words to think that they're smarter than them and then influence their thinking. So I don't want you to trip over verbal plenary inspiration. It's a jargon word, but it's an important jargon word. We want you to know what it means. So verbal meaning.

speaker-1: T to the very word.

speaker-0: To the very words and plenary complete complete and inspiration

speaker-1: God breathe.

speaker-0: God breathed. And so we're saying we believe that verbal plenary inspiration, perfect word of God. But they've taken it a step further. Here's where they take it step further. It continued perfect to this very day. Now how do you what do you mean? It's how is that taken it a step further?

speaker-1: Okay, if I look at those passages in Psalm twelve in English, I can agree with them because we have a pronoun in verse seven, the word them. Thou shalt keep them. In English, we look to what that refers to, sometimes called the referent, and we look in the context. what did we just Have that's been plural. there in verse six, the words of the Lord are pure. So God is going to keep the words. as he said, thou shalt preserve them from this generation forever. And so the originals must have been preserved down through the years. And what we have is just the one of the end results of that. That makes sense in English. However, as you pointed out, this was not written in English.

speaker-0: It wasn't. What language was it written in?

speaker-1: The English of the year five hundred and six hundred and seven hundred AD would be unrecognizable today. Right. Unser Fater something and so forth anyway for the Lord's prayer. It's it sounds more like German. All right. English was not around, fr Hebrew was. Mm-hmm. And so in Hebrew there's grammar, like we have grammar in English. Wow. Believe that or not. And in in Hebrew, the grammar demands that them refer to something that's masculine. Right.

speaker-0: So you're not looking for the plural so much as you're looking for the masculine.

speaker-1: The gend the gender of it. Okay. Thou shalt keep them, which is plural. Now you can say them feminine in Hebrew, which we can't in English. Right. But it's not feminine them, it's masculine.

speaker-0: Masculine then.

speaker-1: So then we have to look to the context, what is around there that would be what's gonna be kept forever. And if you look for in verse five, there it is. Yeah, it's introduced to poor people and to those who are oppressed, and that the Lord is actually going to look over them and be care and watch over them so that they will be cared for forever.

speaker-0: The poor and the needy.

speaker-1: Poor and the needy. And we can in our mind think heaven, yes, God's keeping his word. Right. So that then we come to verse six. Well then how do you t deal with verse six? The words of the Lord are pure words as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. It's as much as to say, Do you doubt God? God said He's going to take care of you forever. Right. Don't doubt God. His words are pure. Right. And He speaks. And when He speaks, obey, you know, trust Him. Right. And so then you come to verse 7. Thou shalt keep them, the poor and the needy, O Lord. thou shalt preserve them from this generation forever. Mm. So the whole psalm is one of comfort for people who are downtrodden in this world. Right. Right.

speaker-0: But how many times have we heard this argument? But they've been tried seven times, and there's seven revisions of the King James Version, and that's what Psalm twelve was talking about. And that's what makes it perfect. I've heard that. Okay. That well it was, you know, revised seven times and we're using the seventh one, and that's why this King James Version is perfect. Because seven is the number of perfection. You know, obviously. Obviously. Obviously. It's in the white spaces, but it's there. But i I I I want folks to realize, 'cause somebody s may hear what you just said, George, and go, Okay, well I don't speak Hebrew. Yeah. So I how was I supposed to get that?

speaker-1: It would be good if you could have gotten it from your translation. Some translations make a point. They actually, and I don't know whether we can go into this, or it has to be for some other time. But there are differences among the Hebrew manuscripts. Some of them say thou shalt keep us. No, thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve us. Making it very clear that we're that God's preserving humans, not the words that he spoke.

speaker-0: Right, and some the the one primary example of that would actually be the Septuagint. So the Septuagint uses us. Now that's significant even in New Testament context, because tell people a little bit about the Septuagint.

speaker-1: Yeah, I didn't want to introduce that until I had time to introduce. Here

speaker-0: Well we're here we are.

speaker-1: we are. Hebrew has been translated into Aramaic, but that was an unusual translation. That was to be a paraphrase par excellence, if you please. It would be a paraphrase that was more of an interpretive paraphrase. Useful because we get an idea of what people Between the testaments, who were Jewish people, what they thought verses meant. And quite often we can pick out, we thought this was a messianic verse, but they understood it as a messianic verse. And they they bring it right out. It's an interpretive translation. So you have our Aramaic. and I'll just mention now in case we don't have time at the end, the Aramaic shows up one a couple times in the New Testament. Janus and Jambres out of Second Timothy. It's not in the Hebrew text of Exodus, but it is in the Hebrew text, in the Greek text of the Septuagint. And let's see that would be No, that would be in the t the Aramaic. Right. So, okay. Yeah. that's I get off and I shouldn't.

speaker-0: We dipped down to twenty-eight thousand just a second. We're coming back up to thirty thousand. But I appreciate you're telling this because this I it at least allows people to know this is a big conversation. Yeah. This is a big conversation. But the Septuagint itself.

speaker-1: Yeah. Yeah. So the these the Hebrew was translated into into the Greek actually several times. But right now I'm forgetting which ones were pe before Christ, which ones were after. But I think there were several Greek translations before Christ. but in the Septuagint, this this would be this way. thou shalt keep us. Right.

speaker-0: Right. And that's a powerful thing. There there are other mother modern translations. King James says thou shalt keep them. Septuagint says thou shalt keep those. CSV, thou shalt keep us. New Living Translation actually says, Therefore, Lord, we know you will protect the oppressed. So it goes back to that masculine word that you were referring to earlier, the poor and the needy, to make that clarifying.

speaker-1: The the New Living translation is almost like a Targum. When they Aramaic what could it's called Targums, it's a interpretive translation. So the New Living is doing that. It's actually bringing the word, the referent back into the verse, but that they aren't there in Hebrew.

speaker-0: So there's an argument though. Some would say, Well, it's because the words of the Lord are perfect, therefore the King James is perfect. So where did the King James come to that passage? And you're saying that's not what that passage is referring to. It's not referring to those words, it's referring to something else.

speaker-1: The King James is literal. And that's what it says in Hebrew. Thou shalt keep them. Right. But the King James doesn't have a way to show that it's a masculine them and not a feminine them.

speaker-0: English doesn't have a masculine or a feminine then. Yeah. As we're learning in the di in a different debate today and age. But yes, yeah.

speaker-1: Yeah. And it doesn't have a way of showing that the word words of verse six is feminine. And so it just translated literally and it's expecting someone going to dig a little deeper to figure that out. Right. So

speaker-0: There's still other arguments though. You listed seven of them.

speaker-1: Yeah.

speaker-0: I don't know if you picked seven because it was the perfect argument list. Maybe so. okay.

speaker-1: Yeah.

speaker-0: Well, here's another one though. Some would say, well, yeah, but George, or anyone else, the King James Version has been around for 400 years. And it has. And therefore, because it's been around for 400 plus years, it's perfect. How would you respond to that?

speaker-1: that again sounds feasible, but if we look at a little bit of history, there was another translation which lasted for 900 years or better. And that is the translation from Hebrew into Latin, used all through the Middle Ages, was accepted as the Word of God. and it differs from the King James. One of the points I'll make coming up is there isn't anything before the King James that's exactly like the King James. How can you say it is there's a long line of this perfect translation? I've asked, show me one, just one. If you have understood Psalm 12 correctly, there ought to be thousands of examples of the King James, maybe in different languages, maybe in different styles or different types, times, periods of language, but there should be stacks of them.

speaker-0: Well it's even inconsistent within its own thing. That's what I was pulling up from our two Sunday nights ago. That that it was, of course, originally edited by Erasmus in fifteen eighteen, the T R at least. And afterwards, this is the text receptus, the text family that the King James was based on. So that one would have to be perfect as well, I would imagine. And but it was revised in fifteen nineteen. 1522, 1527, 1535, 1546, 1549, 1550, 1565, 1576, 1589, 1598, and 1633. It was last revised 22 years after the original King James was published. So when you buy a TR, which is the text family, and and I would like to do another podcast with you, George. We can even do those of the Greek text today. You're not buying the TR of the King James from then. And then the King James itself, are we holding and reading a sixteen eleven when we study? No. No, we're not. And so there's even then there's a a a a misnomer that well four hundred years, that's why it's perfect. Yeah, but even within its own body, right, that's not true.

speaker-1: Right.

speaker-0: Pastor Fisher here, his dad used to do lecture series on Bibles in English, and he had copies and things and Talked about some of the King James Bi versions that were famously not good. Okay. Like the Naughty Bible. Yes. You've heard of that one? Yes. Which had a printer error that said, instead of thou shalt not commit adultery, it actually said, Thou shalt commit adultery. I think we can all agree that was not perfect. So there are there is a sense in which, well, that's that the length of time doesn't prove Anything. And I I love the inclusion of that. I began last time we were together, even talking about all the other English translations that we can look back to. I don't know many people that are bringing them to church with them. Yeah. but they're there. The Matthew Bible of 1537. of course the Geneva Bible is quite landmark. the Coverdale Bible, the Bishop's Bible. I can't remember which one the pilgrims were using. Was it the Coverdale or the Bishops? I can't remember. I have to look it and We can put it in the notes later, I guess, if we don't give them to you. But the Wycliffe Bible, there are others that were out there, but length of time is not an argument, is what you're saying. Now,

speaker-1: Right.

speaker-0: there's another one that you made, and that that was, well, you know, the the teaching of Psalm 12 in particular, we we or sorry, Psalm 12, we talked about that. But the King James perfection is a doctrine that I agree with by faith, because some but this point. We've kind of reasoned through, we've looked at the languages and they said, Well, yeah, but it's just a by faith I accept it to be true.

speaker-1: What we call that is a man made doctrine, not a biblical doctrine. And I would like people to honestly ask themselves where in the King James Bible did you see the word King James Version? Those words appear nowhere in the text. And yet, if the King James is the perfect Bible, It should say in there at some time in the future there's gonna be a Bible called the King James Version and it will be perfect. Otherwise, I'm just trusting somebody told me it was perfect and the Bible isn't telling me. We need to stick to the scriptures, not what people are saying. And if that were the case, we would need one of several different kinds of statements in the scriptures. You'd either have to make the point, God would have to make the point. Everyone copying the scriptures will do it per do it perfectly. And there's no there's no promise to that. Or you'd need a statement that there's going to be a line of copyists and they will preserve it down through centuries perfectly. But there's no promise for that in the scriptures. Or you'd have to, like we said there earlier, have to conclude that There'd have to be a verse that mentions sometime in the future there's going to be a Bible and it will be perfect. But none of those are there. So when someone says you have to believe the King James Bible is the perfect representation of the original, in fact, as some have concluded, you can correct the originals by the King James.

speaker-0: Yeah.

speaker-1: Yeah. that one That's just showing that all of these are just this is a man made doctrine. And Jesus spoke to that. And I think I'd like to go to there. Okay. That would be in Matthew fifteen, nine. Right.

speaker-0: And even as you're turning there, y what you're saying is there's no chapter and verse that is going to resolve this. So you really when you enter into debates about this, you're entering into something that is concluded based on your view of history. And it's a it and that's where Jesus speaks to this. So here you got that passage.

speaker-1: Okay, so in New Testament times we have various groups. The one most notably fought against by Jesus would be the Pharisees. They accepted the Old Testament. That's better than the Sadducees, who just took to the law. But they accepted the the Old Testament, but they wanted to add all kinds of other things to it. The traditions of the fathers. And Jesus condemned them because by their tr their tradition they valid they invalidated the scriptures. So in in conversation with him in Matthew fifteen, nine, Let me see, I didn't click that correctly.

speaker-0: I love the tools. I I don't you guys don't get to see all of what George is pulling up, but it's pretty amazing. He's got the Hebrew here, he's got the parallel text. Anyways, Matthew nine. Yeah.

speaker-1: 15. In vain, but in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. Now that would be his argument to a Jewish crowd that knew the Psalms and the different passages in the Old Testament. They would recognize, if they knew the Hebrew, that this is different. In fact, Jesus is quoting the Septuagint.

speaker-0: we referenced that.

speaker-1: Yeah, he's quoting the Septuagint, not the Hebrew. Could Jesus have quoted the Hebrew? Sure. Obviously. he in discussion with these experts in the law said, Have you never read? Ooh,

speaker-0: Mm-hmm.

speaker-1: that stunk. Yeah. Because they prided themselves on being able to work with the Hebrew, even as Paul said, I'm a Hebrew of the Hebrews. My parents spoke Hebrew. I speak Hebrew. I'm a I'm a scholar at it. But he actually went back and quoted the Greek, which wasn't the same. Right. and they and this happened quite a bit. I'd I'm just gonna skip ahead here just for a little bit. In the New Testament, we have no verses that say that one translation is to be picked. Right. They had the Hebrew, they had the Greek, they had the Aramaic, they had several versions of each of these. He never said that only one was perfect. Nothing is ever said that some translation should be excluded. They never never demanded that one translation be used. Instead of condemning these Bibles, they quoted them. Right. I find that very significant. It would have to wait three hundred years or better till we got something like a King James onlyism starting to come in the church. And it happened when the Pope told Jerome, I want you to make one good common Latin version. There were too many differences. And he decided. To translate the Vulgate, which would be his version, from Hebrew. And one of the Christian men argued with him and said, You shouldn't do that. You should translate from the Septuagint. The Septuagint is inspired. And so you have these letters going back and forth between this Christian man and Jerome until finally the Christian man was convinced, okay. I guess maybe the Septuagint isn't totally inspired. And you can if you want to translate from the Hebrew, you go ahead. Which is what he did. so that is a that's where we're at when it comes to translations. they use different translations and they quoted from them as if they were Bible. Right. Right.

speaker-0: Well, and I I I I know there's a lot more we can cover, but I do want to touch on something because we're gonna I hope to bring this up again, but I don't want people to cut us off on this episode and and think, well, you just introduced you know the fact that there's variant readings, and and that will imperil people's faith. Like if you tell people that there's no perfect one English translation. That will cause people to doubt God's word, so I can't do that. I think that may be the motivating factor for some when it comes to one translation, and I keep it by faith. That way I don't have to think about any of what we just discussed. Right. But I'm gonna read from Erasmus. This is a quote I gave to our church family. Yeah. Erasmus, this is the year 1518, and then we'll talk about who that is just a second. But I want to read his quote. This is in the year 1518, talking about the various Translations, he was looking at Jerusalem, he was looking at other manuscript families as he's compiling one. And he says, To relieve your mind of any possible misgivings, I will briefly explain the principles upon which I worked. After comparing my copies of the Greek and following the ones which seem the most accurately, accurate rather, I have endeavored to see that passages which previously puzzled the reader by their ambiguity or obscurity of their expression. Or by faults and awkwardness of language should now be rendered smooth and lucid, diverging most sparingly from the form of words and never from the sense. So he's trying to compile a Greek manuscript that's easily read, right?

speaker-1: Yeah.

speaker-0: The reading of the Greek is the basis of my version everywhere, but I do not everywhere accept it. In other places I prefer our own, referring to even some portions where he took Latin and translated it back into Greek.

speaker-1: Right.

speaker-0: Here's the important one. Besides which, variant readings are not merely no obstacle to the study of Holy Scripture. They are a great help.

speaker-1: Mm-hmm.

speaker-0: And he says, as Saint Augustine avers, himself being a Catholic, so he's gonna argue that Augustine agreed with him. But nowhere is the degree of variation great enough to imperil the Orthodox faith. Amen. So what is he saying about these variants that we kind of touched all over? And I think that's the argument some would have when they say, Well, I accept it by faith so that I don't have to deal with the variant readings. My conclusion would be, no, variant readings do not affect orthodoxy. Right. In no place do they affect orthodoxy. Right. Now who is Erasmus?

speaker-1: Okay. there have been some brilliant men. Sure. And Erasmus would be one of those. Catholic. I think he remained Catholic the whole time. Right. And the Pope asked him to give us a a good Greek text.

speaker-0: Specifically Pope Louis Louis the Tenth.

speaker-1: Okay. Yes. As if I would know him.

speaker-0: You never met the guy.

speaker-1: And he took what was available. I think at first he had only about five or six manuscripts. Right. And that might have been added later on. But he took those and picked what he thought was the best reading out of those five. So he made some choices. And but he he stayed a Catholic the whole time.

speaker-0: And he compiled them into a manuscript called the Textus Receptus, which becomes the basis of the King James Version. So the guy who compiled or the guy who compiled the k the translation of the Greek that the take King James is based on is saying to us, I could look at variant readings. And it did not affect my orthodoxy. I was willing to have this conversation. If in fact it actually strengthened my faith to do that, why is it that now all these years later, people reading an English version based on that guy's work are unwilling to have a conversation? Why is that?

speaker-1: Well, I I wish people could see that these different versions and different variant readings are are minor when in the in the scope of the big picture. Right. as you say, they touch no major doctrine. Right. They don't add anything, don't they detract from anything major in the scripture.

speaker-0: And we'll talk about this in a different topic, but podcast, but I didn't want to leave this one without mentioning this because I didn't want people to think, well, you guys just are writing it off and and it's bad and you just don't want to deal with it. No, we will talk about it. Yeah. Th there are three major ones, the Johannian comma, the ending of the gospel of Mark, the women taken in adultery. We can talk about those. If you wanna check the homework that we don't have time to explore right now, I'd encourage people to go to kjvparallel.org. I find that to be a very helpful resource. the fellows that put that together took all the critical text and the TR text in English and they you can go through all the New Testament and they will highlight where there's ever a variant. And then if there's any of the major ones, those three being significant enough to be major, I think, they will actually give you a link where you can read both positions and and and make that decision.

speaker-1: The name of that that website again.

speaker-0: Is KJV parallel.org. It's it's a it's a helpful because a lot of people listening to our conversation aren't going to speak in Greek or Hebrew. You don't have to. You can go to that website, you can find it that way. I want to go to another argument that you've made, and I know this will be a little longer podcast. I hope you'll understand why. It's a big topic. You've said, well, all of the some people that are King James only will well, all the Bibles up to this point agree with me. That that they're all they all agree with the King James. And that's why I'm King Dreams only. What would you say to that?

speaker-1: There they cannot support that. And all I ask of them, show me even one.

speaker-0: Just one that

speaker-1: Just show me one that is exactly like the King James before the King James. There aren't any

speaker-0: So far, have you gotten anybody? No.

speaker-1: That because there aren't any.

speaker-0: But then what about that six argument? There's one perfect Bible. We have to have one perfect Bible. It's the measuring stick against which we measure all the others.

speaker-1: Yeah. I think at this point you have to conclude that among the manuscripts we have is the entire Word of God everywhere. so if we look at the variants, we are at least seeing all the places where there might be any disagreement, but one of those is part of the Word of God. And so you can actually look at it and say, okay, well that that's interesting, but it's not going to change much.

speaker-0: Mm-hmm. So it's okay to have multiple translations of the Bible?

speaker-1: I think.

speaker-0: Has it always been that way?

speaker-1: Well, with me, I'm

speaker-0: Yeah.

speaker-1: I'm checking ten different versions over everything. And like right now I have four or five windows open. Right. With the original. Right. And I would strongly recommend that. Right. Right. Because after all you get an opportunity you get a feel. Okay, the King James is gonna be very little, that's old English. The new American standard's going to be very little, but brought up the new English for the most part. The new King James is going to be somewhat close to that. ESB has been again very literal, but as you come up and move away from being literal, you have the Christian standard, which I I personally use quite a bit to look at. And you get to the NIV. There are couple of places where they take some liberties. But you get to know the translation.

speaker-0: The nineteen eighty-four NIV in the Old Testament tends to be pretty strong in the Hebrew text. I actually was making the argument the last two Sundays, trying to lead people to this way. One of the things I actually appreciate very much about the King James Version is the use of their italics. They're letting you know when the inter when the translators made interpretive choice. That that's a highlight for you. Hey, we made an interpretive choice to smooth out this language. This italicized word is not in the original, but for our purposes of an English reader. We thought it would help you. And sometimes they're in fact, not sometimes, but in the vast majority of those times, I find those italicized words added to be very helpful. There are times where I have a little bit of a needle to pick, you know, to poke with that italicized word, but they included that for me. And I'm thankful for that. And in their preface, they speak to that, that inclusion. There's also translations nowadays that I inc I am impressed by. I wish more continued that italicized usage, to be honest with you. I wish more did. I wish that more consistently we see the uses of footnotes. So there's a variant reading here. Let me let you know about that variant reading here. I'll give you an example at the King James. I wish there was a footnote. First Timothy. In First Timothy, Paul says, in the King James, for this cause we both labor and strive. Or labor and suffer reproach, excuse me. That's the King James. That word, suffer reproach, is only in the TR. In fact, and in the TR, it's only in that one use in the TR. Paul doesn't use it anywhere else. In every other, in every other manuscript family, it says, for this cause we labor an agonizomai. So in the modern versions, you see agonize. Well They give you that footnote. Like the ISV actually tells you the footnote tells you, well, King King James has this, we have that. Now now you got a choice. You gotta determine, well, which one is it? I I will tell you, since people are listening, I believe it's Agonizomai, because earlier in that text, Paul does talk about running an agon. And there is in that time, the the games, the Isthmian games, there was an Agon where they ran this very long race and we know p earlier Paul in that letter talks about running the race that is set before us. So now he says for this cause we both labor and agonize. It would make sense that he would talk of Agonizami, the same root of Agon, which was the game in the Isthmian games. So there's a footnote. I prefer a translation that tells me that. That's all I'm saying. I I I I think if you read broadly you get that. If you read limited, and and that's where some of our listeners maybe, I'm not King James only, but in all practical purposes you've become a you've become a one translation onlyist in a different way. I'm not King James only because I read the ESV. That's you that's still more of the same problem.

speaker-1: Yes, V only. Right. Yeah.

speaker-0: And I've even seen churches, maybe I'm I'm opening a lot of can of worms today, but but I've I've seen churches where they'll go, Well, we're not gonna be King James only, so we're gonna choose a pulpit Bible for our people, and then we're gonna be the ESV church, the new King James church, the Nasby church. I I I don't think I wanna lead my people in that direction. I want to lead our people towards a philosophy of translation that opens it because I don't have majority of our congregation doesn't speak Hebrew and Greek. I'm talking to the one guy in church that has his Bible open to Hebrew and Greek, you. Not many people do that. And so they're troubled by these things and they don't have to be. What a resource we have. We've got it in English.

speaker-1: Well I note and many of the Bibles I look at there are numerous footnotes.

speaker-0: Numerous.

speaker-1: And so the ones that don't do the italics will kind of signal some things. I don't know how often they do or whether they skip things, but I I do notice on a lot of footnotes. Right.

speaker-0: And if they do skip things, you read another one that doesn't, that's why that's why you should do that. I I I I got well you got one more that you had the seven ones, and and we've got a lot of material here. people say, well, people who use different Bible translations are sinning and we need to separate from them. Yeah. What do we say to that?

speaker-1: if everything they have said up to this point is true, and we do not, they would say anything that adds to the scripture takes away from it's of the devil. and then they go to all kinds of conclusions. Well then it would be sinful to do to use this. And if someone is sinning, that's where church discipline comes in.

speaker-0: It should be church discipline someone who holds an ESV if they're being logically consistent. Right.

speaker-1: Yeah. And and so there are many people who are being chased out, if you please, divided, condemned and sent away based on this issue that really shouldn't be.

speaker-0: It's a terrible thing and it it it's become so incredibly, incredibly divisive for for so many people. and and that's why I say this conversation about the Bible is actually waged logically, which by definition puts it in the category of doubtful things. Yeah. And we need to be careful that we're not dividing over such matter.

speaker-1: Yeah, we must keep the unity of the spirit and the bond of sp of peace. and we have seen people get so upset because this is their their faith. And we are we are we're calling them a liar or distrustful or something, and the tempers can get hot. very fast because we're touching a a nerve when they when we touch the King James. And that's a shame.

speaker-0: It is a shame. It shouldn't be that way, especially amongst Christians. We should be able to have I have good, in my estimation, godly friends, or or or at least acquaintances, who are more strong on the King James than I am. And I'm not here to doubt their sincerity as we began this conversation. There is a spectrum. Yeah. And I and I wanna be careful that we're not painting everybody into the same corner. Are there people that are ugly and wage this illogically and in a sense that I'd say, yeah, it's pretty much heretical? Yes, yes, there are. Are there some who just simply have grown up in and around the King James, that's what they know. And that's what they love, and that's what they're familiar with. They've memorized huge chunks of the scripture out of it, and they would like to keep using it. Yeah, and where my answer would be: frankly, the best Bible translation is the one you're actually reading. Right? So I'm glad for that. I don't want to shake that at all. But it's an important conversation. Yeah. It really is. We're going to end with this quote, and then I'm going to I'm going to invite you back again, and hopefully we can have more. This is Spurgeon. I ended it with this before on a Sunday night. The the Word of God can, this is Spurgeon in his sermon, The Lover of God's Law, Filled with Peace, that he preached January 1988. Or I'm sorry, 1888. Wow. That's 1988 would have been a real miracle. Yeah. Spurgeon said this. The Word of God can take care of itself and will do so if we preach it and cease defending it. Let the pure gospel go forth in all its lion-like majesty, and soon it will clear its own way and ease itself of its own adversaries. Sp Spurgeon must have loved this idea of a lion idea. Because he said it earlier, the word of God in a different sermon, the word of God is like a lion. And whoever thought of defending a lion? I'm so the word of God is quick and powerful, sharper than any two-edged sword. We're we're thankful for the word of God, but we also have been blessed with immense resources. And I do think that's where the devil is snuck in and recognize there's all these resources. I just need to make sure people aren't reading. And we're just trying to open our eyes and say, no, we you we want you to do. Thank you for joining us today. And

speaker-1: We do Yeah.

speaker-0: to be continued, I'm sure. Okay. Thank you for listening. If you've been listening to this conversation and you'd like to more information about we got what we've done, I encourage you to go visit our website and you'll find that we have been preaching through this topic in the month of August in our Sunday evening series called The Most Powerful Book in Your Hands. Last night, we looked at which Bible translation. The time before that, we talked about from ancient manuscripts to modern Bibles, the process of transmission. The time before that, we talked about canonization. And given the topics I just covered, of course, there's a lot more that you can talk about. So if you've listened to this, you'd like to hear more, I encourage you to go back and listen to those messages. Thank you for listening to today's podcast. I hope it's a help to thank you for joining us today. For more information about Faith Baptist Church, visit us at www.fbctailors.org.