The King James Translation

The King James translation of the Bible is to say the least a topic of discussion. Today in the twenty first century we have debate after debate concerning its authority, why? I personally accept this translation as authoritative and accurate, why shouldn’t others? But, have we ask ourselves why do we accept it, is it because someone has told us too, or because we know beyond a shadow of a doubt it is exactly what we are told. After recently witnessing a very lengthy debate on the authority of translations I decided to check out some things for myself and not leave anything to chance. This commentary is the result of my research.

Around the year 1603 as the reign of Elizabeth came to an end a recommendation was placed before the English parliament requesting a new translation of the Bible. The recommendation was quoted to say "An act for the reducing of diversities of bibles now extant in the English tongue to one settled vulgar translated from the original." The original, one of my first questions is what is meant by the original? We today understand it to mean the actual writings of what we know to be scripture. In reality the original (of the 1603-1604 English statements) is speaking of the Aramaic, Greek and Hebrew writings known and accepted by the church fathers to be canon. To anyone’s knowledge there is not a surviving original of either the Old or New Testament. Does this take away from the authenticity of the King James Translation? Absolutely not. King James was convinced by the Puritans that the Bible in use at that time was incorrectly translated and thus contained errors.

In 1604 there were forty seven scholars selected from three universities these men included Anglican churchmen, Puritans, and laymen. Their task was to organize into six groups; two at Westminster, two at Oxford, and two at Cambridge. Each group was assigned a specific group of scripture to work on; the Westminster group translated Genesis through II Kings, and Romans through Jude. The Oxford group translated Isaiah through Malachi, the Gospels, the Acts, and the Revelation. The Cambridge group translated I Chronicles through Ecclesiastes, and the Apocrypha. In order to maintain consistency among the groups there were fifteen rules of translation established, they were.

1. The ordinary Bible read in the Church, commonly called the Bishops Bible, to be followed, and as little altered as the Truth of the original will permit.

2. The names of the Prophets, and the Holy Writers, with the other Names of the Text, to be retained, as nigh as may be, accordingly as they were vulgarly used.

3. The Old Ecclesiastical Words to be kept, viz. the Word Church not to be translated Congregation &c.

4. When a Word hath divers Significations, that to be kept which hath been most commonly used by the most of the Ancient Fathers, being agreeable to the Propriety of the Place, and the Analogy of the Faith.

5. The Division of the Chapters to be altered, either not at all, or as little as may be, if Necessity so require.

6. No Marginal Notes at all to be affixed, but only for the explanation of the Hebrew or Greek Words, which cannot without some circumlocution, so briefly and fitly be expressed in the Text.

7. Such Quotations of Places to be marginally set down as shall serve for the fit Reference of one Scripture to another.

8. Every particular Man of each Company, to take the same Chapter or Chapters, and having translated or amended them severally by himself, where he thinketh good, all to meet together, confer what they have done, and agree for their Parts what shall stand.

9. As any one Company hath dispatched any one Book in this Manner they shall send it to the rest, to be considered of seriously and judiciously, for His Majesty is very careful in this Point.

10. If any Company, upon the Review of the Book so sent, doubt or differ upon any Place, to send them Word thereof; note the Place, and withal send the Reasons, to which if they consent not, the Difference to be compounded at the general Meeting, which is to be of the chief Persons of each Company, at the end of the Work.

11. When any Place of special Obscurity is doubted of, Letters to be directed by Authority, to send to any Learned Man in the Land, for his Judgment of such a Place.

12. Letters to be sent from every Bishop to the rest of his Clergy, admonishing them of this Translation in hand; and to move and charge as many skilful in the Tongues; and having taken pains in that kind, to send his particular Observations to the Company, either at Westminster, Cambridge, or Oxford.

13. The Directors in each Company, to be the Deans of Westminster, and Chester for that Place; and the King's Professors in the Hebrew or Greek in either University.

14. These translations to be used when they agree better with the Text than the Bishops Bible: Tyndale's, Matthew's, Coverdale's, Whitchurch's, Geneva.

15. Besides the said Directors before mentioned, three or four of the most Ancient and Grave Divines, in either of the Universities, not employed in Translating, to be assigned by the vice-Chancellor, upon Conference with the rest of the Heads, to be Overseers of the Translations as well Hebrew as Greek, for the better observation of the 4th Rule above specified.

The labor of penning the work was undertaken by two men from each group, upon completion their work was to be handed over to the printer of choice, Robert Barker. His task was to print the first edition of this new translation. In 1611 The King James Bible was printed in a large folio volume which resembled in appearance the Bishops’ Bible. The typeset, chapter, and verse divisions, charts and tables, titles, and chapter summaries were similar as well.

As I have researched this subject I have uncovered some very interesting statements made by some of the scholars working on the King James Bible. I would like to share them with you as well as my comments on them.

"Truly we never thought from the beginning, that we should need to make a new Translation, nor yet to make of a bad one a good one,...but to make a good one better, or out of many good ones, one principal good one, not justly to be excepted against, that hath been our endeavor." "We are so far off from condemning any of their labors that travailed before us in this kind, either in this land or beyond sea, either in King Henry's time, or King Edward's...or Queen Elizabeth's of ever renowned memory, that we acknowledge them to have been raised up of God, for the building and furnishing of his Church, and that they deserve to be had of us and of posterity in everlasting remembrance."

These men were not commissioned to discredit anyone’s work; they were simply translating God’s word into one common language which could be read in any church. The title page of the first King James Bible confirmed this by the following statement. "The Holy Bible, Contayning the Old Testament and the New: Newly Translated out of the Original tongues; & with the former Translations diligently compared and revised by his Majesties special Commandment. Appointed to be read in Churches."

There have been revisions of the 1611 King James Bible, our King James Bible today is actually a revision of the 1769 revision. I am not suggesting the King James Bible is no longer accurate, to the contrary, I believe it is God’s Word written in contemporary style while maintaining the integrity of the 1611 English language and scholars. The forty seven men who undertook this task done so from conviction and I believe divine appointment. God needed to progress His word through mankind, He chose to use King James and this group of scholars to do so. This translation has many unique consistencies, too many to address in this short commentary. These consistencies have yet to be equaled in any modern translation. I am not discrediting any modern translation, my research has shown me that is not a wise thing to do. God has allowed these translations to stand, in order to teach us something, either what to do or what not to do.

The King James translation is essentially a free translation; to my knowledge the families of these scholars do not receive any royalties from the sale of the translation. Something that does bother me personally about the scholars of the modern translations, causing me to ask, did they participate in the modern translations because of conviction or personal gain. Only God knows the answer to these questions, I must trust Him to provide in my heart the convictions and guidance to direct my decisions and steps.

As I close this commentary I must confess to you, I cannot solve this debate, I hope I haven’t misled you to think I can. I can only present to you information I have found to be consistent from many sources. If I lay open several translations and begin comparing scripture and this scripture is consistent in interpretation it is safe to say they are equally accurate. However, if they don’t agree, I must say one is right and the others are wrong. God is not the author of confusion; therefore all inconsistencies are the work of man. We will give an account for everything we say, included in this I believe will be the information or misinformation we spread concerning the scriptures. We should pay close attention to the translation or translations we use, what we communicate could have eternal impacts.

Again this commentary is based on my research and understanding of that research. I do use and intend on using the King James translation because of consistency, accuracy, dependability and longevity. This translation seems to be the translation others are trying to improve upon, telling me it is something special and a mark for other translations to attain.

God Bless you is my Prayer.

Terry Cheek

Works Cited

Rev. Ronald D. Lesley, Th. M., D.D.; Facts From History About Our

King James Bible. http://www.fbinstitute.com/engbible/10.html

Dr. Laurence M. Vance; A Brief History of the King James Bible. http://www.av1611.org/kjv/kjvhist.html