Why the AV1611 Cannot Be the "Final Authority"

[illinoisguy]

Some "King James Only" proponents advocate that the 1611 "Authorized Version" or AV1611 should be considered the "Final Authority" for all renderings of Scripture in the English language, and that all foreign language translations of the Bible should be based on the AV1611, not on the original Hebrew and Greek. However, the KJV translators, in their introduction to the AV1611, specifically repudiated the notion that there should be no mention of "variety of senses" or different renderings of the original text. Not only that, but they included hundreds of proposed alternate readings in the margin of the original AV1611. Here are just a few examples:

NUMBERS 21:14: "What he did in the Red Sea." Margin, "Waheb in Suphah."
JUDGES 6:26: "In the ordered place." Margin, "Or, 'in an orderly manner.'"
1 SAMUEL 30:21: "He saluteth them." Margin, "Or, 'he asked them howe they did.'"
2 SAMUEL 1:9: "Anguish is come upon mee." Margin, "Or, 'my coat of mail,' or, 'my embroidered coat hindereth mee.'"
JOB 19:26: "And though after my skin, wormes destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God." Margin, "After I awake, though this body be destroyed, yet out of my flesh shall I see God."
JEREMIAH 51:59: "And that Seraiah was a quiet prince." Margin, "Or, 'prince of Menucha,' or, 'chiefe chamberlaine.'"
EZEKIEL 39:2: "And leave but the sixth part of thee." Margin, "Strike thee with sixe plagues,' or, 'drawe thee backe, with a hook of six teeth.'"
MATTHEW 1:11: "Josias begate Jechonias." Margin, "Some read, 'Iosias begate Iakim, and Iakim begat Jechonias.'"
MARK 10:52: "Thy faith hath made thee whole." Margin, "Or, 'saved thee.'"
LUKE 4:7: "Suffered them not to speake." Margin, "Or, 'to say that they knew him to be Christ.'"
LUKE 10:22: Margin, "Many ancient copies adde these words, 'And turning to his disciples he said.'"
LUKE 17:36: Margin, "This 36 verse is wanting in most of the Greek copies."
JOHN 3:6: "Ye must be born again." Margin, "Or, 'from aboue.'" [above]
ACTS 1:4: "And being assembled with them." Margin, "Or, eating together with them.'"
ACTS 27:40: "And when they had taken up the ankers, they committed themselves unto the sea." Margin, "Or, 'Cut the ankers, they left them in the sea.'"

"King James Only" proponents would denounce any study Bible published today which contained such proposed alternate readings, but they endorse the AV1611 and say that the AV1611 translators were the greatest scholars of their time. It seems to me that it is inconsistent to denounce anyone nowadays who proposes an alternate rendering of the text as a "Bible corrector," while simultaneously endorsing and lionizing the translation work of the KJV translators who did just that.

 

[AverageJoe]

Haymen. I have an original introduction to the AV, reprinted in more modern font for readability. They absolutely repudiated the idea that this translation was infallible.

NO translation is infallible...yet, the 'Onlies" won't admit this.

 

[Ransom]

Haymen. I have an original introduction to the AV, reprinted in more modern font for readability. They absolutely repudiated the idea that this translation was infallible.

KJV-onlyism: The geniuses and scholars who translated the KJV were morons when they tried to explain how they translated the KJV.

 

[illinoisguy]

Yes, the introduction to the original "AV 1611" by the King James Version translators should be widely reprinted and circulated. Here are some good excerpts:

"We do not deny, nay we affirm and avow, that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English . . . containeth the Word of God, nay, is the Word of God. . . . No cause therefore why the word translated should be denied to be the word, or forbidden to be current, notwithstanding that some imperfections and blemishes may be noted in the setting forth of it." (pp. 6-7)

"Therefore as St. Augustine saith, that variety of Translations is profitable for the finding out of the sense of the Scriptures . . . so diversity of signification and sense in the margin, where the text is no so clear, must needs do good, yea, is necessary, as we are persuaded. . . . They that are wise, had rather have their judgments at liberty in differences of readings, than to be captivated to one, when it may be the other." (p. 13)

And now, how about this quote from "God Wrote Only One Bible" published in 1955 by Jasper James Ray and considered the "Bible" of the King James Only movement: "Greek reveals more than English. How to find the meaning of Greek. First learn the Greek alphabet given below. Then find the root Greek word in Young's Analytical Concordance. Turn to this root word in Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon, and in English you can easily read the fuller meaning of any Greek word in the Textus Receptus." (p. 111) If the "AV 1611" really is the "Final Authority" and should be used to correct the original Greek, as taught by Peter Ruckman, then what need is there for anyone to learn Greek, and why did Ray refer his readers to the Textus Receptus which is in Greek? Even the books recommended and promoted by Ruckmanites expose the total folly of their extreme "King James Only" fanaticism. (This book by Ray is offered for sale by Bible Baptist Bookstore, a ministry of Ruckman's Bible Baptist Church in Pensacola, Florida).



store.kjv1611.org
God Wrote Only One Bible - Bible Baptist Bookstore

 

[AverageJoe]

Yes, the introduction to the original "AV 1611" by the King James Version translators should be widely reprinted and circulated. Here are some good excerpts:

"We do not deny, nay we affirm and avow, that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English . . . containeth the Word of God, nay, is the Word of God. . . . No cause therefore why the word translated should be denied to be the word, or forbidden to be current, notwithstanding that some imperfections and blemishes may be noted in the setting forth of it." (pp. 6-7)

"Therefore as St. Augustine saith, that variety of Translations is profitable for the finding out of the sense of the Scriptures . . . so diversity of signification and sense in the margin, where the text is no so clear, must needs do good, yea, is necessary, as we are persuaded. . . . They that are wise, had rather have their judgments at liberty in differences of readings, than to be captivated to one, when it may be the other." (p. 13)

And now, how about this quote from "God Wrote Only One Bible" published in 1955 by Jasper James Ray and considered the "Bible" of the King James Only movement: "Greek reveals more than English. How to find the meaning of Greek. First learn the Greek alphabet given below. Then find the root Greek word in Young's Analytical Concordance. Turn to this root word in Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon, and in English you can easily read the fuller meaning of any Greek word in the Textus Receptus." (p. 111) If the "AV 1611" really is the "Final Authority" and should be used to correct the original Greek, as taught by Peter Ruckman, then what need is there for anyone to learn Greek, and why did Ray refer his readers to the Textus Receptus which is in Greek? Even the books recommended and promoted by Ruckmanites expose the total folly of their extreme "King James Only" fanaticism. (This book by Ray is offered for sale by Bible Baptist Bookstore, a ministry of Ruckman's Bible Baptist Church in Pensacola, Florida).



store.kjv1611.org
God Wrote Only One Bible - Bible Baptist Bookstore

Yes...we were force fed this crap in Bible college. Too bad it isn't factual but more a mans opinion of what the Bible teaches.