The King James Version of 1611
The Myth of Early Revisions
By Pastor David F.
Reagan
(Posted with a permission from Pastor David
F. Reagan)
©
Copyrighted by David F. Reagan.
INTRODUCTION
Men have been
"handling the word of God deceitfully" (II Cor. 4:2) ever
since the devil first taught Eve how. From Cain to Balaam,
from Jehudi to the scribes and Pharisees, from the Dark Age
theologians to present-day scholars, the living words of the
Almighty God have been prime targets for man’s corrupting
hand. The attacks on the Word of God are threefold:
addition, subtraction, and substitution. From Adam’s day to
the computer age, the strategies have remained the same.
There is nothing new under the sun.
One attack
which is receiving quite a bit of attention these days is a
direct attack on the Word of God as preserved in the English
language: the King James Version of 1611. The attack
referred to is the myth which claims that since the King
James Version of 1611 has already been revised four times,
there should be and can be no valid objection to other
revisions. This myth was used by the English Revisers of
1881 and has been revived in recent years by fundamentalist
scholars hoping to sell their latest translation. This book
is given as an answer to this attack. The purpose of the
material is not to convince those who would deny this
preservation but to strengthen the faith of those who
already believe in a preserved English Bible.
One major question often arises in any attack such as this.
How far should we go in answering the critics? If we were to
attempt to answer every shallow objection to the
infallibility of the English Bible, we would never be able
to accomplish anything else. Sanity must prevail somewhere.
As always, the answer is in God’s Word. Proverbs 26:4-5
states:
Answer
not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be
like unto him. Answer a fool according to his folly,
lest he be wise in his own conceit.
Obviously,
there are times when a foolish query should be ignored and
times when it should be met with an answer. If to answer the
attack will make you look as foolish as the attacker, then
the best answer is to ignore the question. For instance, if
you are told that the Bible cannot be infallible because
so-and - so believes that it is, and he is divorced, then
you may safely assume that silence is the best answer. On
the other hand, there are often questions and problems that,
if true, would be serious. To ignore these issues would be
to leave the Bible attacker wise in his own conceit. I
believe that the question of revisions to the King James
Version of 1611 is a question of the second class. If the
King James Version has undergone four major revisions of its
text, then to oppose further revisions on the basis of an
established English text would truly be faulty. For this
reason, this attack should and must be answered. Can the
argument be answered? Certainly! That is the purpose of this
book.
I. THE
PRINTING CONDITIONS OF 1611
II THE FOUR
SO-CALLED REVISIONS OF 1611 KJV
III THE
SO-CALLED THOUSANDS OF CHANGES
PRINTING
CHANGES
Please realize
that a change in type style no more alters the text of the
Bible than a change in format or type size does. However,
the modern reader who has not become familiar with Gothic
can find it very difficult to understand. Besides some
general change in form, several specific letter changes need
to be observed. For instance, the Gothic s
looks like the Roman s when used as a capital
letter or at the end of a word. But when it is used as a
lower case s at the beginning or in the middle
of a word, the letter looks like our f.
Therefore, also becomes alfo and
set becomes fet. Another
variation is found in the
German v and u. The Gothic
v looks like a Roman u while the
Gothic u looks like the Roman v.
This explains why our w is called a
double-u and not a double-v. Sound
confusing? It is until you get used to it. In the 1611
edition, love is loue, us
is vs, and ever is euer.
But remember, these are not even spelling changes. They are
simply type style changes. In another instance, the Gothic
j looks like our i. So
Jesus becomes Iefus (notice the middle
s changed to f) and Joy
becomes ioy. Even the Gothic d
is shaped quite differently from the Roman d
with the stem leaning back over the circle in a shape
resembling that of the Greek Delta. These changes account
for a large percentage of the "thousands" of changes in the
KJV, yet they do no harm whatsoever to the text. They are
nothing more than a smokescreen set up by the attackers of
our English Bible.
SPELLING
CHANGES
What kind of
spelling variations can you expect to find between your
present edition and the 1611 printing? Although every
spelling difference cannot be categorized, several
characteristics are very common. Additional e’s
were often found at the end of the words such as feare,
darke, and beare. Also, double vowels
were much more common than they are today. You would find
mee, bee, and mooued instead
me, be, and moved. Double consonants
were also much more common. What would ranne, euill,
and ftarres be according to present-day
spelling? See if you can figure them out. The present-day
spellings would be ran, evil, and stars.
These typographical and spelling changes account for almost
all of the so-called thousands of changes in the King James
Bible. None of them alter the text in any way. Therefore
they cannot be honestly compared with thousands of true
textual changes which are blatantly made in the modern
versions.
TEXTUAL
CHANGES
IV. CHANGES IN
THE BOOK OF ECCLESIASTES
V. THE
SO-CALLED JUSTIFICATION FOR OTHER REVISIONS
In conclusion,
the New King James is not a revision in the vein of former
revisions of the King James Version. It is instead an
entirely new translation. As stated in the introduction, the
purpose of this book is not to convince those who use the
other versions. The purpose of this book is to expose a
fallacious argument that has been circulating in
fundamentalist circles for what it is: an overblown myth.
That is, the myth that the New King James Version and others
like it are nothing more than continuation of revisions
which have periodically been made to the King James Version
since 1611. There is one problem with this theory. There are
no such revisions.
The King James
Bible of 1611 has not undergone four (or any) major
revisions. Therefore, the New King James Version is not a
continuation of what has gone on before. It should in fact
be called the Thomas Nelson Version. They hold the
copyright. The King James Version we have today has not been
revised but purified. We still have no reason to doubt that
the Bible we hold in our hands is the very word of God
preserved for us in the English language. The authority for
its veracity lies not in the first printing of the King
James Version in 1611, or in the character of King James I,
or in the scholarship of the 1611 translators, or in the
literary accomplishments of Elizabethan England, or even in
the Greek Received Text. Our authority for the infallible
words of the English Bible lies in the power and promise of
God to preserve His Word! God has the power. We have His
Word.
To Purchase this book, contact by an email to
Sales Dept. |
