I find myself with mixed feeling (or as they say in the States "conflicted") regarding the growing hype over the 400th anniversary of the publication of the King James version or Authorised Version of the Bible. I do feel that this is an occasion that should be marked but I wonder whether some of the things that have already been said and written by Christian leaders might actually be shooting ourselves in the foot.
So far all that I have heard has been exalting it as a piece of literature - howbeit a special piece of literature. Could this be actually doing two negative things.
For many people Christianity is already seen as anachronistic and out of touch with today's society. Others are put off by the "wordy" nature of Christianity with its Bible, hymns and sermons. Thrusting a 400 year old version of God's word at them might just be reinforcing that negativity.
God's word is not confined to the text that codifies it. The Bible is a vital and unique collection of Scripture through which God is revealed and can be understood and discovered in a personal relationship. It is not enough to know that he is holy, almighty, merciful, just, etc; what is needed is to engage with those qualities - to come to know him.
Bible translations that communicate this revelation can help or hinder (though God will graciously use the most inept tool at times). Surely what we need to do is to use this anniversary occasion when a translation of significance was published to encourage people to read the Bible today in a version that uses the vernacular, which was one of the purposes 400 years ago.
I am occasionally asked which version of the Bible is the "best one for today". The problem with such a question is that I then want to ask what do you want to use it for? Some translations are the product of a scholarly committee. These tend to be very correct but can also use language that is less engaging. Some translations are the work of an individual scholar or a team taking different books of the Bible between them. These tend to be more engaging but personal prejudice might creep in. For serious study one translation might be better than others, while for personal reflection another might be more suitable. My default response to the question, "Which translation of the Bible is the best?" is to say that you should be reading a version through which God is speaking into your life today.
If God's word is hindered by the language or style of a translation then it is not serving his purposes.
For anyone who might be interested in thinking about how this anniversary can be used to advance the kingdom of God then I recommend you read the article at http://ruralevangelism.net/resources/Biblefresh+ideas.pdf. Other ideas might well appear on this website in coming weeks.
It remains my personal view that to simply extol the virtue of the KJV as a piece of literature could be to fall short of the mark. Some will revel in its language and some may hear God speak to them as they do so. For many more it would be more helpful to read or hear God's word in their own language.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Thanks! A big surprise tied into the 400th anniversary of the 1611 King James Version Bible:
Two scholars have compiled the first worldwide census of extant copies of the original first printing of the 1611 King James Version (sometimes referred to as the "He" Bible). For decades, authorities from the British Museum, et al., have estimated that “around 50 copies” of that first printing still exist. The real number is quite different.
For more information, you're invited to contact Donald L. Brake, Sr., PhD, at dbrake1611@q.com or his associate David Sanford at drsanford@earthlink.net
Post a Comment