By Wayne Camp

Some time ago I published an article that was titled something like this one. In it I pointed out the fact that there was now a Korean King James Version of the Bible which is an oxymoron because even if the only manuscript consulted was a KJV of the Scriptures, any translation into another language cannot be a KJV. The KJV is an English version. I learned, also, that there is a Japanese KJV and a Spanish KJV. Again, both are oxymorons.

On another occasion I wrote an answer to an article that took seven different versions (the originals and translations totaling seven) up and including the KJV and advocated that in each translation the originals were purified until in the AV 1611 a pure version of the Scriptures was finally achieved. I called that article, The Word of God Pure but Never Purified. The article I was answering gave the following seven steps toward the purification of God's word:

A Hebrew O. T. Written in Hebrew (1500-389 B. C.)

Parts of the Hebrew O. T. Written in Aramaic (1500-500 B. C.)

A N. T. Written in Koine Greek street language (40-90 A. D.)

An Old Syriac translation of those texts into Syrian (120-150 A. D.)

An Old Latin translation of those texts into Latin (140-200 A. D.)

A German translation of those texts for the beginning of the Reformation (1500-1560 A. D.)

An English translation (A. V. 1611) for the end of the Reformation (1525-1611 A. D.)

Since there have been a number of other translations before the AV 1611 such as Tyndale's and the Geneva Bible, one wonders how the brother who came up with these seven versions as the seven purifying steps. How was he directed to these specific seven versions. Was he inspired to choose these seven?

I have no desire to be a part of the "higher criticism" group. I am not a KJV basher. I love the KJV and have never, in 41 years of preaching, ever preached from any other version. I read it and declare it to be the word of God with no qualms or doubts.

But, there are some who hold the KJV in such reverence that it is a little sickening to read some of their claims. In the first article mentioned above, I pointed out that if the AV 1611 is absolutely the only version that is pure, we ought to preach from the AV 1611, not a revision of it. I said that most of us preach from the 1769 revision of that AV 1611. A person, reading that article on the Internet recently, sent to me the following letter.

Yes we do use the 1769 revision of the KJV . . . know what? That was the SEVENTH and FINAL revision seven being God's number of COMPLETION the KJV is not the Bible for every language . . . it is the Bible for the ENGLISH speaking people God hold us responsible for the proper version given in our language. Most people around the world use English as a second language anyway. The revision we use is a revision only in spelling and grammar . . . the text was not messed with. I have study after study on this . . . you will answer one day for putting this in people's minds . . . for challenging the KJV. The other translations may be CLOSE to the truth but you want to know something? The closer Satan can get to the truth the better he likes it!!!!! It is harder to detect ... and he sure is getting the American people on here and he's sitting around laughing about it too.

This writer goes to a new extreme on this matter. He suggests that the 1769 revision of the KJV was "the SEVENTH and FINAL revision seven being God's number of COMPLETION." In other words, according to this writer, the AV 1611 was not complete or perfect. It had to go through seven revisions before it was perfect and complete.

These two KJV Only men do not agree on how the Word was allegedly purified. The first says it was purified in seven steps beginning with the originals and then became the pure word of God in the AV 1611. The one cited just above, says the AV 1611 was not complete or perfect when it was finished and presented to King James. It had to be revised seven times before reaching its complete state in the 1769 revision.

He mentions that the 1769 revision had to do with spelling and grammar. I wonder, if he is an authority on this perfection or completion of the AV 1611 which was achieved through seven revisions, could he tell us what each revision was to accomplish?

Now, I have no doubt the revisions were needful. The King James translators themselves declared that revision and correction would be necessary. In fact, they wrote: "If anything be halting, or superfluous, or not so agreeable to the original, the same may be corrected, and the truth set in place."

The writer also claims that the 1769 revision was the final revision. He wrote, "the SEVENTH and FINAL revision seven being God's number of COMPLETION."

Surely he must have been asleep. There have been at least one or two revisions since the 1769. How does he know there will not be future revisions? Maybe some future generation, if the Lord does not return soon, will see a need to revise some of the spelling and grammar.

I am not criticizing the KJV. I am critical of those who are extremists such as the two referenced in this article. They themselves do not agree with one another.

Click here to return to index of The Grace Proclamator and Promulgator


Updated Friday, March 04, 2011


free hit counters
free hit counters