Online Text Sermon - Trinitarian Bible Society Meeting
| Date | 02/11/2000 |
|---|---|
| Time | 19:30 |
| Preacher | Mr. Tony Horne, Stonehaven |
| Sermon Title | Trinitarian Bible Society Meeting |
| Text | Meeting |
| Sermon ID | 216 |
Links to Bible chapters open in a new window.
I would like to express my thanks on behalf of the Trinitarian Bible Society for the opportunity of speaking to you this evening. I am one of two representatives for the Society in Scotland. It is a privilege to be a representative of such a society as the TBS. It has been my pleasure to travel most of the length and breadth of Scotland - from Dumfries in the south up to Helmsdale in the north; and from Aberdeen in the east to Lewis in the west.
Possibly, many here this evening are acquainted with the Trinitarian Bible Society. You may know something of the history upon which it stands.
I would like to take up just one point this evening. My remarks shall address why the TBS only publish the Authorised Version of the Bible in English. We are criticised for this in many quarters because, as you well know, today is a day of a multitude of modern versions of Scripture. It has been said that in the last century well over a hundred different versions of Scripture were published. For a society, such as the one I represent, to only publish the Bible in one particular version - and that in many people's opinion a very archaic version - seems odd indeed. I wish tonight to defend that position which the Society takes on the Authorised Version.
By way of comment, may I first of all say that the Society is not against modern versions, as such. People get that impression but it is not true. The Trinitarian Bible Society would happily publish another version, or other versions, of the Scriptures in English, if a version appeared which the Society felt was as accurate, or more accurate, and more reliable, than the existing Authorised Version. At the present time the Society considers that the Authorised Version is the finest, most accurate and most reliable version in English in existence. That is the reason for our publishing in that version only.
Let's take up one or two of these points. First of all, people say three things about the Authorised Version. They may say many more but we will just comment on these.
Firstly, they say its language is outdated and archaic.
Secondly, they say it doesn't appeal to the modern man: modern man can't understand it. This comes across particularly when we go to schools and offer, free of charge, Bibles and Testaments. Teachers say it is no good giving them to modern children - modern children can't understand the Authorised Version.
Thirdly, and this is the most serious criticism that is made of the Society's position; they say the Authorised Version is based upon unreliable manuscripts. That is a serious accusation and I shall comment on it further in due course.
There is one other thing I would say by way of introduction. It does seem to me - a purely personal observation - quite significant, that we live in days that can be described as nothing less than apostate. I don't need to comment upon that because it is so obvious to us all. We don't live in days of great spiritual blessing. At this time and in this condition of the church, there have appeared these vast multitudes of modern versions of Scripture. We are asked to take them up in place of this version which is time-honoured, I believe God-honoured, accurate and reliable. If we had been living in a time of revival, if our churches were full to the door of folk coming to hear the Gospel, if we were seeing conversions every week of the year then, I believe, there would be a case for considering if God at this time was using modern versions of Scripture in order to bless His people. The point I am making is that all these modern versions have appeared co-incident with a time of apostasy; and that to me is quite significant.
I would like to make seven points this evening about the excellence of the Authorised Version.
1. THE SPIRITUAL AND SCHOLARLY STANDING OF THE TRANSLATORS The first of these is the spiritual and scholarly standing of the translators - the men who translated the Authorised Version.
They lived such a long time ago. As you may or may not know, the Authorised Version first appeared in the year 1611. Most of the men would have been born in the 1500's - the sixteenth century; it was a very long time ago. Many, if not all, of these men are forgotten and dismissed and, of course, we are aware in contrast of modern Bible scholars, so called.
Listen to what the great Reformer Martin Luther had to say with regard to a Bible translator, bearing in mind a person who produces a version of the Bible - whether in English or in any other language - has to translate the Scriptures from the original languages of the Old Testament Hebrew and the New Testament Greek. Luther made this comment: "Translating is not every man's skill as the mad saints imagine. It requires a right, devout, honest, sincere, God-fearing, Christian, trained, informed and experienced heart. Therefore I hold that no false Christian or factious spirit can be a decent translator." The men of the Reformation had a quaint way of expressing themselves very often and Luther certainly was amongst that company. However, it is very true what he says, that no false Christian can make a good translator. It is interesting to note that two of the most well known Bible scholars were men whose names were Westcott and Hort. They lived in the nineteenth century - that's the middle part of the eighteen hundreds. They were High Anglican churchmen. They worked in Cambridge University for much of the time and were responsible for producing a text of Scripture which became the Revised Version Bible. The Revised Version is almost forgotten today in the light of so many recent versions but that was the very first version which we could call a modern version. It was published in 1881 and was very popular at that time.
Listen to what is being said about these two men - Westcott and Hort - who produced the Revised Version. "Both Westcott and Hort were worshippers of Mary and they travelled here and there to attend Mariolatry events. Hort wrote to Westcott, "I have been persuaded for many years that Mary worship and Jesus worship have very much in common." Hort believed in evolution. He did not believe in the substitutionary death of Christ. He talked of a ransom having been paid to Satan. He believed in a second chance in Purgatory. He definitely did not believe in the infallibility of the Scriptures. He denied our guilt for Adam's sin. He considered Genesis 1-3 to be a parable. He denied the depravity of man by nature, denied the truth and the history of the fall, and so on.
Compare that with one of the translators of our Authorised Version. At this point I would commend to you this booklet; it is called The Learned Men: the translators of the Authorised Version of the Holy Bible in English AD1611 You will find in there, this comment about Dr. Lancelot Andrewes: "Dr. Andrewes was a man of deep piety." King James - that's King James VI of Scotland who became King James I of England - had such a respect for him that in his presence he refrained from the levity in which he indulged at other times. A sermon preached at Andrewes' funeral in 1626 paid tribute to his great scholarship; his knowledge in Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Chaldee, Syriac and Arabic - besides fifteen modern languages - was so advanced that he may be ranked as one of the rarest linguists in Christendom. A great part of five hours he spent every day in prayer. In his last illness he spent all his time in prayer. When voice, eyes and hands failed in their office, his countenance showed that he still prayed and praised God in his heart until it pleased God to receive his blessed soul to Himself. I think that testimony speaks for itself. That is the first point I would like to make: the scholarly and spiritual standing of these men. The others you will find in this booklet are of like character.
2. THE ACCURACY OF THE TRANSLATION
The second point, which I have already mentioned, is the accuracy of the translation.
We believe that this is the most accurate translation in English available at the present time. Why do we say that? Because a principal is involved here, and that is that the Scriptures - whether you are translating into English or any other language - the translation should be made as near as possible word-for-word. That is the only faithful way of dealing with a volume like the holy Scriptures. It may be permissible if you are translating some other book, to translate in a more loose fashion, but when you're dealing with Scripture, what right have you or I or anyone, to insert words which the Holy Spirit did not put there in the first place - or, to take away words that the Holy Spirit has put in His Word. "The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times" (Psalm 12, 6). It is one thing to say the Scripture - the whole, the Word of God - is inspired; but the Scripture claims that the very words of the Lord are pure and inspired.
You might say that is all very well, but surely the Bible needs to be explained to us; we need to understand what it means, not just to read something which doesn't make a great deal of sense. That is very true. God has provided a special office in His Church for the explanation of Scriptures - the explanation of His Word. There is a place for comment upon the Word. There is a place for interpretation of the Word. It is not out of place for a preacher to say, "I believe the translator hasn't made the best translation at this particular point. In my opinion a better translation is so and so." It is not out of place; it is right that he should do so because the office that God has provided for the exposition of Scripture is the preaching office. It is the duty of the preacher to explain Scripture to the congregation, to comment upon it and to interpret it - but, it is not the place of the translator. The translator's job and calling is simply to translate Scripture faithfully from one language - Hebrew, Greek - into another language - English, German, African or whatever. We stand very firmly on this - that the Bible should be translated as accurately as possible. The technical term for this is 'translation by formal equivalence'. The opposite method, which is used almost universally, is called 'dynamic equivalence'. When you translate something by dynamic equivalence you read a passage of Scripture and ask yourself what God is saying there. Then you write down in your own language what you think God is saying. That sounds fine - but, you see, you may have got it wrong; you may not have put down what God said; you actually put down what you think God said. We say that is tampering with the Word of God.
3. SUPERIOR TEXTUAL BASIS
The third reason why we believe in the excellence of the Authorised Version is its superior textual basis.
You will remember one of my comments on the criticisms of the Authorised Version: people say it is based upon an unreliable text. We take issue with that, very strongly. We believe that the Authorised Version is based upon the finest texts that are available. The Old Testament of Authorised Version was based upon the Massoretic Text of the Hebrew and the Greek of the New Testament was based upon what has been called the Received Text. Both those texts were developed and formulated at the time of the Reformation. Not only the Authorised Version but many of the great continental versions - Dutch, German, French, Italian, Spanish and others - were all based upon that textual basis: Massoretic Text of the Old Testament and the Received Text of the New Testament.
What has happened since - in the last one hundred and fifty years - is that scholars, and in particular Westcott and Hort who I mentioned earlier on, these men discovered in particular, two very rare manuscripts. A few others have been added to them but, in the main, the two were found. One was found in the Sinai desert in a monastery near Mount Sinai - hence it is called Sinaiticus; the other, surprisingly enough, in the library of the Vatican in Rome. These two manuscripts have formed the basis for a modern textual basis which is a Critical or an Eclectic Text and forms the basis of most, not all but most, modern versions of Scripture.
Why do scholars say that those two texts, and a few others, are better manuscripts than the ones that form the basis of the Authorised Version? The reason is that they are deemed to be older. They are deemed to be third century whereas the oldest text that we know about, which forms the basis for the Authorised Version, are fourth century at the earliest. A lot of dispute and discussion has arisen over the years on this point of which is the best of these manuscripts. Oldest is not necessarily best. We defend that view because both Sinaiticus and Vaticanus - that's the other document - are in fair or very good condition. You don't find old things in good condition normally. Old things are decaying away; they are rusty and rotten. These, however, are in good condition relatively speaking. We believe, therefore, they were not used by the early church; they were discarded by the early church because they were known to be unreliable documents.
What happens when Scripture is used? We know today. We have our Bibles, which I hope are a bit dog-eared at the corners - curled up with pages coming out. What does that tell us? It tells us that you are a Bible-reader, you love the Word of God and you use your Bible. If you find a Bible in pristine condition - absolutely perfect with nothing out of place - you say that Bible has never been read. When the early church used its documents, used its Bibles and used its manuscripts, copies were made of them and then the originals were discarded. Therefore, we believe that 'oldness' is not necessarily best. There is a tremendous amount of evidence to support the textual foundation for the Massoretic Text of the Old Testament and the Received Text of the New Testament. There are over five thousand documents which bear witness to the Received Text of the New Testament - over five thousand! You may wonder where these texts and manuscripts are. They are held in museums and universities in different parts of the world. The British Museum has some in London; there are some in Germany, some in Moscow, and others in America and so on.
Another point is the way that God has preserved these things for us. It is interesting to compare what we have of our New Testament in particular with what is left to us of the writings of the ancient Greek philosophers. We have heard of these great Greek philosophers - men like Plato, Socrates and Aristotle. The Greek Empire existed many hundreds of years before Christ - about 500BC. We are told that Aristotle, for instance, wrote numerous documents which were called 'treatises' but only twenty-two are known to exist today. Sophocles wrote one hundred and twenty 'plays' but only seven have survived. Plato wrote numerous 'dialogues' but only thirty are known to have survived. Thirty, twenty, seven - yet, God has given to His Church and preserved for us, over five thousand copies of the New Testament. I have to qualify that: they are not all complete New Testaments, some are only partial New Testaments - but there are five thousand different manuscripts, the vast majority of which agree with the Received Text of the New Testament which underlies our Authorised Version.
4. DOCTRINAL DISTINCTIVENESS
The fourth point I would make with regard to the excellence of the Authorised Version is its doctrinal distinctiveness.
This is, perhaps, the most important point of all. We claim for the Authorised Version the most accurate knowledge that we have of any Christian doctrine. In particular we think of the great cardinal doctrines of the virgin birth of Christ, of the resurrection, His atoning work at Calvary's cross and so on. What we find when we compare the Authorised Version with other versions is that some other versions are faulty at very critical points. Some people say it is only one text and doesn't really matter if it's not quite accurate, but it does matter. Everything that the Scripture tell us about our Saviour matters; you can't dismiss it and say that it's unimportant. Modern versions often weaken the testimony to the virgin birth of Christ; they do away with emphasis on the resurrection; they challenge the inspiration of Scripture and they cause you to question the doctrine of the atonement. Let me give you an illustration. In Romans 3, 25 we have that great theological word 'propitiation'. In some modern versions it is translated as 'atoning sacrifice'. That sounds all right to start with, doesn't it? Atoning sacrifice - that's true! At Calvary Christ carried out - performed - an atoning sacrifice. However, the word 'propitiation' includes the idea of the appeasement of God's wrath and that is an essential part of the doctrine of the atonement. The word 'propitiation', which we have in our Authorised Version, supports that idea; but if you just say 'atoning sacrifice' that doesn't bring out the idea of the appeasement of God's wrath.
5. PROVIDENTIAL PRESERVATION
The fifth evidence, I believe, for the superior authority and excellence of the Authorised Version is its providential preservation.
I touched upon this already: "Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever" (Psalm 12, 7). We believe that God has preserved His Word down through the ages to the present day. The Trinitarian Bible Society believes that His preserved Word is to be found in the Authorised Version of Scripture.
We have a wonderful Confession as Presbyterians in our Westminster Confession of Faith. The opening chapter, as we are all aware, deals with the doctrine of Scripture. It is interesting that there are many other fine Confessions in the world but there are very few that make a statement about this particular issue. The Westminster Confession says: "The Old Testament in Hebrew, and the New Testament in Greek, being immediately inspired by God, and by His singular care and providence kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentical." The Confession is making two claims for Scripture. On the one hand it claims that Scripture is inspired - "The Old Testament in Hebrew, and the New Testament in Greek, being immediately inspired by God." I trust all Christians would say amen to that; but it goes on and says - "by His singular care and providence kept pure in all ages." What's the significance of the providential preservation of holy Scripture? Let me ask you the question - How do you know that the Bible you have in front of you bears any relation to what God revealed hundreds and thousands of years ago to Moses, David, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Peter, James, John and the Apostle Paul - writers of Scripture? How do you know that what you are reading in your Bible is the same thing that God revealed to these men? Bear in mind that the last book of the Bible - the Revelation - was written nineteen hundred years ago. The first books of the Bible - the books written by Moses - were written three thousand five hundred years ago; an immense amount of time. Humanly speaking, that gives opportunity for all sorts of things to have happened to the Bible - for it to have got altered and corrected, transformed and added to, torn up - you name it. We, as Evangelical and Reformed Christians take our stand on the fact that this is an exact copy of what God revealed to the original writers because He has preserved it down to the present day.
Remember that remarkable text of our Lord Jesus Christ in the Sermon on the Mount. You might read it often without appreciating the significance of what He says concerning Scripture: "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled" (Matthew 5, 17-18). What is a 'jot' or a 'tittle'? Without going in to great detail, they are some of the smallest components of the Hebrew alphabet. If we were to say the same thing in corresponding English, we would talk about 'dotting every i and crossing every t', or, 'every dot and comma'; that would be a corresponding translation. So our Lord is saying that heaven and earth will pass away before the smallest dots and commas of His Word pass away. Why? Because God Himself, God the Holy Spirit, is preserving and has preserved His Word, down through the years and generations until the present day.
6. UNDERSTANDABLE
The sixth point I would make is that the Authorised Version is an understandable version.
I am going to comment upon the language of the Authorised Version. Many people say that they can't understand it, it's archaic; it doesn't make sense to the modern man. Of course it doesn't! Of course the Bible doesn't make sense, in whatever version we may produce, to the modern man - unless the Spirit of God opens our understanding.
I don't know if you have ever thought about it but it is remarkable to me that the disciples themselves - two of whom were on the road to Emmaus when the Saviour drew near and, afterwards, when the whole eleven of them were gathered together in an Upper Room and again the Saviour came in to their presence - that the Saviour opened their understanding so that they could understand His words and He explained to them how He was to be found in the Psalms and in all the Scriptures. These were men who had accompanied the Lord all through His earthly ministry. They had been with him three years. They had rubbed shoulders with Him; they ate and drank with Him. They knew Him in a more intimate fashion than anyone has ever done since. Yet, those disciples needed their understanding opened in order that they should be able to understand the Scriptures. Our modern man needs the Holy Spirit to unlock his understanding.
That isn't all we might say on this point. Many people say that the Bible is written in seventeenth century English. That's not true! To explain what I mean let me give you a quotation from a man called Edward Hills. You may have heard of him, he wrote a very well known book: The King James Version Defended. Edward Hills says this: "The English of the King James Version is not the English of the early seventeenth century. To be exact, it is not the type of English that was ever spoken anywhere. It is biblical English which was not used on ordinary occasions even by the translators who produced the King James Version. Even in their use of 'thee' and 'thou' the translators were not following seventeenth century usage but biblical usage. At the time these translators were doing there work the singular forms - that's 'thee' and 'thou' - had already been replaced by the plural 'you' in polite conversation. The language of the King James Version is enduring diction which will remain as long as the English language remains; in other words, throughout the foreseeable future.
What is Hills saying here? He is saying that the Scriptures, as we have them in our Authorised Version, are written in biblical English: a direct translation from Hebrew and from Greek. If you want to know what seventeenth century English was like all you need do is pick up a copy of Shakespeare. We all had to read Shakespeare at school and we know what it is like. I would commend another little booklet we have: The Translators to the Reader - this was what we would say was the preface to the Authorised Version. Most books when they are written have a preface at the front, sometimes written by someone else other than the author. There was a preface written to the Authorised Version. The Trinitarian Bible Society includes the preface with one of its editions of the Bible but normally the Bible is printed without this preface. I would encourage you to take this booklet and read it. You will have difficulty in wading through this preface. You will find it considerably more difficult than to read your Bible. Why? Because these translators wrote this in seventeenth century English; they wrote in the English of their day but they didn't write as they did in the Authorised Version.
7. COMPLETE TRANSLATION
My last point is that the Authorised Version is a complete translation of the Word of God.
Modern versions, it has been estimated - some of them at any rate - leave out as much as two and half thousand words in comparison with the words contained in our Bible. Two and a half thousand words is equivalent to the whole of the two books of 1 and 2 Peter. Just imagine having a Bible without the epistles of Peter in it. That is the amount of Scripture that is left out of some modern versions. One example is the New International Version which omits fifteen complete verses in different places; doubt is cast on the veracity of the last eight verses of the Gospel of Mark; and of the first eleven verses of John 8, several verses are quite clearly wrongly translated. Many verses have words and phrases mistranslated or omitted.
I personally cannot understand why modern translators have not heeded, or refuse to heed, the terrible warning we have in the last two verses of our Bible; it is significant that these verses are found right at the end of Scripture as if it is a comment of the Holy Spirit upon the whole of Word of God. Those verses say: "For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book" (Revelation 22, 18-19).
8. CONCLUSION
There have been many attempts to replace the Authorised Version by a translation in more modern English but as yet none of these excels the Version which has held its place in the English speaking world for more than 350 years. God has preserved His Word through the centuries and continues to do so at the present time through the provision of a faithful translation in English. Today the Authorised Version is still the standard by which other versions are judged. It stands as a faithful translation of the true texts of God's Word and continues to proclaim God's message of salvation to a lost and dying world. It has the blessing of God stamped upon it and has been the source of salvation and sanctification for many thousands of people throughout its history. The Chief Subject of the Book is our Lord Jesus Christ and to Him all honour and glory is due for giving His people this priceless treasure.
Download This Text Sermon
This text sermon can be downloaded in HTML format so that it can be viewed off-line using an internet browser, and many other programs. (As you can read this page, you can view HTML format files on this computer.)
Download this sermon now - to download please right click and select "save target as" or "save link target as". Please note: It is strongly advised that you use this link to download a sermon, rather than simply saving the current page.