Robert Truelove

"To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them."

King James Bible

Is the Received Text of the Protestant Reformation “Infallible”?

By 6 Comments

Chapter 1, Section 8 of the  Westminster Confession declares the Biblical text the framers possessed is the infallible word of God. This is what is meant by “authentic”. We only have to look back to the Council of Trent to see that this is a counterclaim to Rome for Rome used the same language regarding the Latin Vulgate. Rome was declaring the original language texts to be corrupt. The Roman church being the authenticating authority declared the Latin Vulgate to be “authentic”. Protestants declared the original language texts to be “authentic”—authoritative and infallible. Protestants made this claim not based upon the authority of the church, but the Holy Spirit Himself as the authenticating authority (See Westminster Confession, Chapter 1, Sections 4-5).

Put another way, God inspired the text in a verbal plenary fashion. In His providence he preserved it in “essential purity” so that the full power and authority of the text remains. Whatever scribal issues may have been allowed to creep in (which are all debatable), God has so preserved the text that what we have in the corpus of the Received Texts of the Protestant Reformation is “infallible” (it does not err because it cannot).

On the other hand, if we say it merely represents the original, we are claiming no more authority for our Greek text than we do for a reliable translation of it. This is “mediate inspiration” and means it is only infallible to the degree it is in accords with the original autographs which we do not have. This would mean there is no edition of the New Testament that we may properly call “infallible” and no amount of critical studies will ever be able to make this claim.

This is both a teleological (misunderstanding the purpose of the Scripture) and epistemological (misunderstanding the authority of the Scripture) error of epic proportions if you believe the Bible is God’s infallible word. To claim the original language text as the ultimate, infallible authority but deny that we actually posses the full authority of that text creates a great inconsistency when it comes to our appeal to the Scripture as the ultimate authority for all faith and practice.

I hold that the full power of immediate inspiration is found within the Received Text. Not because God inspired scribes, but because He preserved the full power of the text by special providence. What I mean by the words “full power” is that the text has been so preserved in the Received Text as to contain all the force and authority of the original autographs (warning: a barbarian will miss the nuance in what I am saying).

A precedent for this is found in canon 2 of the Helvetic Consensus Formula (1675) which was chiefly framed by Francis Turretin. There we find…

“But, in particular, The Hebrew original of the OT which we have received and to this day do retain as handed down by the Hebrew Church, “who had been given the oracles of God” (Rom 3:2), is, not only in its consonants, but in its vowels either the vowel points themselves, or at least the power of the points not only in its matter, but in its words, inspired by God.”

The issue there is very similar to the one regarding the preservation of the Greek text in the Received Text of the Reformation. For the Old Testament Hebrew text, the question was whether or not the vowel points were originally inspired or if they were added later.

The Helvetic Consensus Formula declared “in its vowels either the vowel points themselves, OR AT LEAST THE POWER OF THE POINTS” were “inspired by God””. That is, if the vowel points were added later by scribes, God so directed it as to actually be a part of the preservation of the original since the vowel points are important for a proper understanding of the text (and especially so as Hebrew would be a dead language).

In like fashion, God has so preserved the Greek New Testament as to render the full power of the originals in the Received Text of the Reformation.

Take up a sound translation of our Received Text and read, for there you read a translation of the covenant of the King of Kings, God Almighty!

Updating the King James Version

By 4 Comments

As an experiment, I updated Psalms 1-5 of the King James Version in order to revise archaic words. Verb endings and 2nd person singular and plural (thee, thy, thou, thine, ye) have been retained as they have never been the problem with understanding the KJV and are necessary to retain the cadence and beauty of the text.

What I am looking for is the plausibility of revising the King James Version to update archaic words with the following goals:

  1. Retain the beauty, liturgical value, and cadence of the KJV.
  2. Make an update that can be read along with the 1769 in a virtually seamless fashion.
  3. Retain the original meaning of the archaisms unless a reading in one of the previous English editions (Coverdale 1535, Matthews 1537, Great Bible 1539, Geneva 1560, & Bishops 1568) contains a reading that is not archaic.

The Psalms in the KJV, with all of their literary and liturgical beauty, should present the most challenge. It’s a good place to start to see how it goes.

With no further ado, I commit to you Psalms 1-5 with NO archaisms. If you know English, you will understand every single word.

P.S. There are a total of 10 revisions. Can you find them? Tell me in the comments below…

Psalm 1
1 Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly,
nor standeth in the way of sinners,
nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful.
2 But his delight is in the law of the LORD;
and in his law doth he meditate day and night.
3 And he shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water,
that bringeth forth his fruit in his season;
his leaf also shall not wither;
and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper.

4 The ungodly are not so:
but are like the chaff which the wind driveth away.
5 Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment,
nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous.

6 For the LORD knoweth the way of the righteous:
but the way of the ungodly shall perish.

Psalm 2
1 Why do the heathen rage,
and the people imagine a vain thing?
2 The kings of the earth make their stand,
and the rulers take counsel together,
against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying,
3 Let us break their bonds asunder,
and cast away their cords from us.
4 He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh:
the Lord shall have them in derision.
5 Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath,
and afflict them in his sore displeasure.
6 Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.

7 I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me,
Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.
8 Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance,
and the ends of the earth for thy possession.
9 Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron;
thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel.
10 Be wise now therefore, O ye kings:
be instructed, ye judges of the earth.
11 Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling.
12 Kiss the Son, lest he be angry,
and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little.
Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.

Psalm 3
1 LORD, how are they increased that trouble me!
many are they that rise up against me.
2 Many there be which say of my soul,
There is no help for him in God. Selah.
3 But thou, O LORD, art a shield for me;
my glory, and the lifter up of mine head.
4 I cried unto the LORD with my voice,
and he heard me out of his holy hill. Selah.
5 I laid me down and slept;
I awaked; for the LORD sustained me.
6 I will not be afraid of ten thousands of people,
that have set themselves against me round about.
7 Arise, O LORD; save me, O my God:
for thou hast smitten all mine enemies upon the cheek bone;
thou hast broken the teeth of the ungodly.
8 Salvation belongeth unto the LORD:
thy blessing is upon thy people. Selah.

Psalm 4
1 Hear me when I call, O God of my righteousness:
thou hast given me liberty when I was in distress;
have mercy upon me, and hear my prayer.
2 O ye sons of men, how long will ye turn my glory into shame?
how long will ye love vanity, and seek after lies? Selah.
3 But know that the LORD hath set apart him that is godly for himself:
the LORD will hear when I call unto him.
4 Stand in awe, and sin not:
commune with your own heart upon your bed, and be still. Selah.
5 Offer the sacrifices of righteousness,
and put your trust in the LORD.
6 There be many that say, Who will shew us any good?
LORD, lift thou up the light of thy countenance upon us.
7 Thou hast put gladness in my heart,
more than in the time that their grain and their wine increased.
8 I will both lay me down in peace, and sleep:
for thou, LORD, only makest me dwell in safety.

Psalm 5
1 Give ear to my words, O LORD,
consider my meditation.
2 Listen unto the voice of my cry, my King, and my God:
for unto thee will I pray.
3 My voice shalt thou hear in the morning, O LORD;
in the morning will I direct my prayer unto thee, and will look up.
4 For thou art not a God that hath pleasure in wickedness:
neither shall evil dwell with thee.
5 The foolish shall not stand in thy sight:
thou hatest all workers of iniquity.
6 Thou shalt destroy them that speak lies:
the LORD will abhor the bloody and deceitful man.
7 But as for me, I will come into thy house in the multitude of thy mercy:
and in thy fear will I worship toward thy holy temple.
8 Lead me, O LORD, in thy righteousness because of mine enemies;
make thy way straight before my face.
9 For there is no faithfulness in their mouth;
their inward part is very wickedness;
their throat is an open sepulchre;
they flatter with their tongue.
10 Destroy thou them, O God;
let them fall by their own counsels;
cast them out in the multitude of their transgressions;
for they have rebelled against thee.
11 But let all those that put their trust in thee rejoice:
let them ever shout for joy, because thou defendest them:
let them also that love thy name be joyful in thee.
12 For thou, LORD, wilt bless the righteous;
with favour wilt thou defend him as with a shield.

 

Did God’s People in Antiquity Really Read the Bible in the Most Up to Date “Street Speak”?

By 5 Comments

If the point of Bible reading were Anglophilic enculturation or Early Modern English decoding practice, then giving people KJVs would be ideal. But if the point is understanding what God said, then people should be given the Bible in their English, not someone else’s.

Mark Ward, The Gospel Coalition

This sort of rhetoric is little better than the overblown statements of King James Onlyists. It’s just the opposite extreme. It is all too common to see people arguing against King James Onlyism fall into the opposite extreme in their rhetoric. We must always keep in mind that the problem with King James Onlyism is not that its adherents use the King James Bible. It’s the fact that they ascribe equal or greater authority to a translation over that of the original Hebrew and Greek texts.

People who demand the Bible they and others read be in the “street speak” of our day should consider the following…

The Greeks did not constantly update the Greek New Testament to conform it to the latest trends. They continued to use the Koine Greek of the New Testament in their Bibles and courts long after their language had shifted to Medieval Greek (and thusly preserved the original text down to the time of The Reformation).

The Hebrews likewise continued to educate themselves in the Hebrew tongue for the sake of the Scripture long after they were speaking Aramaic, else the Hebrew Old Testament would have been lost to us.

Now I don’t mean to say we need to always use the KJV after our language makes it incomprehensible, for we are not preserving the fontes (note: it is not incomprehensible to literate readers). However, this notion that God’s people read the Bible in their “everyday street language” was only true of the original language texts for 2-3 generations. After that, as the Greek and Hebrew changed with subsequent generations, they were reading a text that would have been “archaic” to them. If you look at the history of the texts, this means that well over 95% of believers who read from the original language texts were reading an “archaic” text.

All this to say, there is absolutely nothing wrong with reading from an older, archaic, well received text. Likewise, there is nothing wrong with reading from a reliable, contemporary translation. There are ample reasons to argue for either kind of translation. I would argue that the Christian who wants to be best read in Scripture study with BOTH.

I would also argue that there is reason for the English speaking church to desire a standard translation and that the King James Version remains the most well fit for that task, but that is a different post.

The King James Version is “Our Bible”

By 1 Comment

In light of my last post, I thought I’d share the following. I came across something like this on the Internet the other day…

The KJV is not a publisher’s Bible but our Bible. Millions of people have adopted the KJV, have come to love it, and have deep feelings for it. We’ve spent hundreds or thousands of hours reading it, pondering it, memorizing it. For many, the KJV is the Bible, the only Bible they have ever known. For others it is the Bible that led them to salvation or that led them to a theological awakening. This is especially true of people who have maintained a high view of Biblical authority in a time when it is under assault. In many ways and for many of us the KJV is inseparable from our convictions. We don’t just use the KJV, we are deeply connected to it, deeply invested in it. An outcry has been aroused by our love for the KJV and our desire to see it continue as our most trusted companion. It’s our Bible, too!

UPDATE: 2 hours after initial post…

The above is a slight tweak of Challies’ comments about the ESV here… For the most part, I’ve simply exchanged “ESV” with “KJV”.

I initially made this post without this clarifying section and posted it to several Reformed groups on Facebook. As one can imagine, there was a barrage of negative comments and some that were even bizarre in regards to how irrational they were.

For many in Reformedom, it is simply NOT okay to say anything good about the KJV but it is perfectly fine to say the exact same things about the ESV. When called on it they will deny that this is the case but anyone who advocates the KJV today knows this is an ever present reality. Why is that?

It is problematic and exceedingly ungracious that any positive statement regarded the KJV causes immediate strife and accusations or insinuations of King James Onlyism especially towards confessional, Reformed brethren who have publicly abominated KJVOism on a number of occasions. I can’t help but think there is more to it at this point than an overreaction to King James Onlyism.

The reality is there is among some a deep, inexplicable enmity against the Bible of the English Reformation and it would arguably exist if there were no such thing as KJVOism.

There is something very strange about all of this. There must be a spiritual dimension to it.

What’s the Deal with All the KJV Hate?

By 9 Comments

As a lover of the King James Bible, I am astounded at how many people respond with condemnation to any positive reference regarding this translation.

On the one hand I get it. There is that angst we all feel that is a reaction to some of the vitriolic King James Onlyists. I myself, even as an outspoken advocate of the KJV, have been called a “Bible denier” and many other similar epithets by these sorts of KJVOists. Then there is this guy.

But I am not one of “those guys”.

Over the last decade, a number of Reformed young men have begun moving over to the King James Version as their primary text for a number of reasons. Today it is becoming a tsunami. If you are missing this massive wave back to the Bible of the English Reformation among confessional, Reformed Christians you’ll soon see it because it is only picking up speed.

The thing is, this move to the King James Version among Reformed evangelicals is not a move to King James Onlyism. It is the rare exception where any of these guys are not also consulting modern translations and even referencing them where they think they have better captured the sense of the text than the KJV. Is there a concern among them with many aspects of the modern Bible movement? Yes. Does this mean they believe modern versions can never do anything right? No.

This has been the spirit of what I will call The Reformed KJV Resurgence. That said, the way many people respond to us is astounding. Simply going into a large Christian group on Facebook and saying, “I really like the KJV”, often leads to a flame war. I’ve had a number of people mention this to me over the last few weeks. Even going out of our way to qualify that we are NOT King James Onlyists and giving credit where credit is due to translations like the NASB and the ESV (also popular among the confessionally Reformed) doesn’t appear to douse the flames.

What we are seeing is the adoring little brother of King James Onlyism. This spirit can rightly be called Modern-Version Onlyism (MVOism). MOVism shares these things in common with KJVOism.

  1. An immediate negative response to the advocacy (of any sort) of the KJV. [just as KJVists respond negatively to any positive statement about another version]
  2.  An implicit trust in modern textual scholarship and translational methodology. While I often see MVOists attempting to engage in the scholarship, it is very rare to come across someone engaging in a flame war over the KJV who has even a rudimentary understanding that undergirds their favored translation though they will speak as if they are an expert.
    [just as KJVists implicitly trust in every decision in translation made by the KJV translation committee]
  3. A stubborn refusal to even attempt to understand where men in The Reformed KJV Resurgence are coming from or truly study the issues for themselves. [just as KJVOists label those they disagree with as “Bible deniers” and other such accusations when the truth is there are many people who make use of the modern versions who have a high view of Scripture AND many KJVOists don’t appear interested in really studying out the issues either but will go to the mat on the subject]
  4. An exaggerated position regarding the problems (real and imagined) inherent with the KJV. [just as KJOists exaggerate the problems with modern versions]
  5. A tendency to divisive behavior over this issue. (just as…ok, you get it 😉 )
  6. Conflating The Reformed KJV Resurgence with KJOism whether directly or indirectly. (just as KJOists slander and mischaracterize where many of their believing opponents are coming from]

I could go on and I could even expand the list to include how liberal “Christians” jump on the MVOism bandwagon because they absolutely hate the orthodoxy of the KJV on matters such as feminism and gender issues, the LGBTQ??? crowd, ‘patriarchal language’ and some key Christian doctrines. I’ll leave it here though because I’m addressing this problem from within the actual believing community. Yes, I count many of these Modern-Version Onlyists to be my brothers in Christ.

That said, it’s very bizarre behavior and I’m even seeing it from some very prominent teachers.

However, as an advocate of The Reformed KJV Resurgence, I am seeing a positive aspect to this. I have received quite a bit of correspondence from people who have been awakened to look into this subject BECAUSE of the irrationality of MVOism they are seeing online. They suspect there is something going on—on a spiritual level—and are beginning to suspect there may be something here worth looking into.

Modern-Version Onlyism is quickly becoming one of the chief means fueling The Reformed KJV Resurgence. How ironic 🙂