Thoughts on life, leadership and the movement called the church by Brian C. Hughes, Senior Pastor

by Brian C. Hughes, Senior Pastor

Tuesday, June 16, 2009

myquestion: Why not King James?

I'm working through the myquestion answers. Here's the one I want to tackle today:

Why not King James?

I have gotten this question in various forms many times. The issue comes out of a church tradition that teaches that the only real, true Bible is the King James Bible and that all other Bibles are lesser translations. Some churches teach that any translation other than King James is evil and an attempt to alter scripture. This is simply untrue.

In order to grasp the truth, you have to know a little history...

Until the Protestant reformation of the 1500's, the all Christians in the world essentially were a part of the same church: The Catholic Church. There were no denominations. There were no non-denominational church. Everybody was Catholic if they were a Christian. And, if you were born in a Catholic state (like England), you were born Catholic. Essentially, everyone was considered a Christian because they were born into that church.

In the Catholic Church to that point, there was only one Bible language: Latin. You speak German? Too bad, the Bible was in Latin. French? Sorry, Latin Bibles only. Only priests had Bibles and every Bible was in Latin.

Once the Reformation came, though, protestant denominations formed, like the Lutheran Church and the Church of England (the Anglican Church). In 1611, the King James Bible (that's not what it was called at the time) was finished. It was, among other things, an attempt to introduce a solid, accurate translation in the language that was spoken in England at that time. People in England spoke King James English (Old English), not Latin, so a Bible was produced that was in the vernacular.

The reason I don't use the King James English Bible is because I don't speak King James English. Further, archeology continues to uncover truths that give us a better handle on language interpretation, making the modern English translations generally better (in the opinion of many scholars) than one that was developed 400 years ago.

To argue that the King James Bible is the only Godly Bible is to prompt the question: What did the church use, then, for 1600 years before the KJV came to be? Was there no good Bible? The answer is that there was a good and Godly Bible...it was in Latin.

The King James Bible is a good translation, but I don't speak that language. We don't tell someone in France to use the KJV. We tell them to get a Bible in French. Likewise, I want a Bible that is a good, solid translation in modern English - the language I speak.

For more information on which Bible to get if you want a new one, go to a post I wrote a while ago by clicking on this link: http://powhatancommunitychurch.blogspot.com/2008/08/which-bible-should-i-get.html

No comments: