Church of Christ, Seremban

“...the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.” – 1 Timothy 3:15
	\| Home \| About Us \| Archive \| Articles \| Comment \| Directory/Churches \| Links \| News \| Youth \|
HOW WE GOT THE BIBLE series... 1. The Bible: A Brief Introduction 2. Revelation Communicated 3. The Canon and Text of the Old Testament 4. The Canon and Text of the New Testament 5. Obtaining the Text of the Bible 6. Inspiration and Canonicity 7. The English Bible Prior to the KJV 8. The English Bible: The KJV to the Present ESCHATOLOGY series... 1. Christian Eschatology 2. Realized Eschatology 3. When Did Christ Establish His Covenant? 4. When Was the Book of Revelation Written? 5. What and When Is the Resurrection? 6. New Heaven and New Earth and the Second Coming 7. A Summary Chart Comparing Realized Eschatology with Biblical Eschatology PROVERBS series... 1. Proverbs: A Brief Introduction 2. Doing What Is Right, Just and Fair 3. Love, Faithfulness and Trust 4. Woman Wisdom vs. Woman Folly 5. Devotional Thoughts on Proverbs (Week 1) 6. Devotional Thoughts on Proverbs (Week 2) 7. Devotional Thoughts on Proverbs (Week 3) 8. Devotional Thoughts on Proverbs (Week 4) 9. Devotional Thoughts on Proverbs (Week 5)	THE ENGLISH BIBLE: THE KJV TO THE PRESENT by Ong Kok Bin The King James Version The Great Bible, the Bishops’ Bible and the Geneva Bible were in circulation in their time: but none of them received any wide acceptance from all parties in the English church. The Puritans, who were the early reformers of the Church of England, in particular, were not quite satisfied with any of these translations. They petitioned the king of England, King James I, for a new translation to be produced effectively. In the petition, they contended that ‘they could not with good conscience subscribe to the Communion [Prayer-] booke, since it maintained the Bible as it was there translated [in the Great Bible], which was as they said, a most corrupted translation’ (cited in Wegner, p. 308). Although the king was not sympathetic to the Puritans, he, nevertheless, convened a council at Hampton Court in 1604. Not much came out of this council except ‘[t]hat a translation be made of the whole Bible, as consonant as can be to the original Hebrew and Greek; and this to be set out and printed, without any marginal notes, and only to be used in all churches of England in time of divine service’ (F. F. Bruce, in Wegner, p. 308). Dr. John Rainolds (1549-1607), president of Corpus Christi College, Oxford, and a Puritan, moved for a new translation to be made. He received support from a good many others. King James, too, favoured the idea if only because he disliked the Geneva Bible, which he thought to be partial against the divine rights of kings. Thus, a committee of fifty-four men were appointed to produce a new translation. These translators were divided into six panels: two met in Oxford, two in Cambridge and two in Westminster (London). A number of guidelines were established to assist the translators in their work, among which was that the 1602 edition of the Bishops’ Bible would act as the base for the translation, but the Greek and Hebrew manuscripts would be examined as well. The translation, which was styled as the Authorized Version (AV), but which became more popularly known as the King James Version (KJV), took five years to complete. The first edition, a 1,500 page codex, came out in 1611. It was dedicated to King James and ‘Appointed to be read in Churches’ (as it appeared in its title page). The 1611 Authorized Version included the Apocrypha (much to the disapproval of the Puritans). Though not without its critics, it soon gained wide acceptance among the faithful and for a good two hundred years or so it stood quite unchallenged as the Bible of the English speaking world. In fact, for some, the KJV was the only acceptable Bible, even till today. S. L. Greensdale observes: “its text acquired a sanctity properly ascribable only to the unmediated voice of God; to multitudes of English-speaking Christians it has seemed little less than blasphemy to tamper with the words of the King James Version”. The KJV Faulted The original 1611 version underwent a number of revisions down the years - some authorized, others not. These revisions were necessary because of the many flaws in the translation (printing errors notwithstanding). The revisions were done as early as 1629 and then again in 1638. Individuals like John Wesley (1768) also produced their own revisions of the KJV. Even as the KJV was being revised , the revisions could not stem the increasing tide of dissatisfaction which came towards and in the 19th century. The English language was evolving at a rapid rate. Words were dropping out of the common vocabulary; some though in continued usage had changed in their meanings, new words came into existence. All these were not reflected in the static KJV language. Moreover, advances had been made in the fields of Greek and Hebrew scholarship and biblical manuscripts much closer to their autographs were being discovered (e.g., the Sinaiticus and the Vaticanus). These developments in textual studies and the changes in the English language made it compelling for a more thorough revision of the KJV. Revisions of the KJV In 1870 a resolution to revise the KJV was passed in the Upper House of Convocation of the Province of Canterbury, England. The aim of this revision was to produce a translation acceptable to both England and America. As it turned out the American committees could not agree with their British counterparts on the strict guidelines set up for the revision. They wanted to have more of the archaic words removed. For example, on the designation of the third person in the Godhead, the Americans were uncomfortable with the term ‘Holy Ghost’; they preferred ‘Holy Spirit’ instead, which the British objected. The revised New Testament came out in 1881 and the entire Bible in 1885. The New Testament text evidenced the influence of the two newly discovered manuscripts - the Sinaiticus and the Vaticanus. The Old Testament was largely a literal translation of the Masoretic Text. The English Revised Version (ERV), however, did not gain the same popularity of its predecessor. This was due to the fact that it was a literal rendering of the text, making it less readable. ‘Strong in Greek, weak in English’ was how Charles Spurgeon had put it. Over in America, the American revisers had to wait fourteen years after the publication of the Revised Version to come out with their own. This came in 1901 and was known as the American Standard Version (ASV). In 1952, the Revised Standard Version (RSV), a revision of the ASV, was published. The objective of this new revision was to ‘embody the best results of modern scholarship as to the meaning of the Scriptures, and express this meaning in English diction which is designed for use in public and private worship and preserves those qualities which have given to the King James Version a supreme place in English literature’ (cited in Wegner, p. 321). There were several other revisions to come: the New American Standard Bible (NASB) in 1971, the King James II Version (KJII, 1971), the New King James Version (NKJV, 1982), and the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV, 1989). The KJII is rather interesting. It is the work of a single reviser, Jay Green, who was dissatisfied with the other revisions (which were the works of committees of scholars). Green accused these revisers of ‘Having tilted the foundation in their theological direction, they then paraphrased, interpreted, deleted and added to God’s words without regard to the evidencial [sic] facts available in all the manuscripts, the versions, and the fathers of the first centuries’. However, it was Green himself who took liberties with the text. For example, he rendered Isaiah 7:14 as ‘they shall call His name Immanuel’, so as to make it identical with the Greek text in Matthew 1:23. This is a modern-day example of scribal harmonization. But Isaiah 7:14, in its own right, should be rendered ‘...a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel’ as in the KJV. Modern Translations in the 20th Century With so many revisions of the KJV, one would think that they would be sufficient for the English-speaking Christians. But this is not the case. The twentieth century was to see a surfeit of new and independent translations numbering in the hundreds. Some were commissioned by Bible societies, some done by individuals, some were paraphrases rather than translations and still some reflected the doctrinal bias of a sect or a cult. In general, the impetus to have new translations comes from the desire to produce an accurate text in a language which is clear and lucid to all. Of the more notable translations done by individuals are Weymouth’s New Testament (1903-1929), the Moffatt Version (1924), Philips Version (1958, r. 1972), and The Living Bible (1971). Moffatt’s and Philips remain popular versions even today. The Living Bible is actually a paraphrase of the ASV done by an individual named Kenneth N. Taylor. Taylor wanted to produce a Bible which was easily understood by children who, otherwise, had to struggle with the KJV. The Living Bible found a niche among the young people; but as a paraphrase it is not accurate textually and thus should not be depended on solely by the serious student of the Bible. A translation which should be avoided altogether is the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures (1961, r. 1981). This is a flawed translation published by the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of the Jehovah’s Witnesses. The Jehovah’s Witnesses do not believe that Jesus Christ is truly God and thus, they produced their own translation to reflect this doctrinal bias. The Jerusalem Bible (1966) is the first Roman Catholic Bible translated from the original texts. Prior to it, translations of the Catholic Church were required to be based on the Latin Vulgate. Among the commissioned translations, two in particular, stand out if only because of the interdenominational participation in the translating process. The New English Bible (1970) had the participation of the Church of Scotland, the Church of England, the Methodist, Baptist, Congregational and other denominations. The New International Version (1978) had an even wider interdenominational representation. About 34 different denominations were represented in the various committees that translated this version. < prev \| next >
\| Home \| About Us \| Archive \| Articles \| Comment \| Directory/Churches \| Links \| News \| Youth \| _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No part of this page may be reproduced, in any form or by any means, without permission, oral or written, from the Church of Christ, Seremban, Malaysia.

“...the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.” – 1 Timothy 3:15
	\| Home \| About Us \| Archive \| Articles \| Comment \| Directory/Churches \| Links \| News \| Youth \|
HOW WE GOT THE BIBLE series... 1. The Bible: A Brief Introduction 2. Revelation Communicated 3. The Canon and Text of the Old Testament 4. The Canon and Text of the New Testament 5. Obtaining the Text of the Bible 6. Inspiration and Canonicity 7. The English Bible Prior to the KJV 8. The English Bible: The KJV to the Present ESCHATOLOGY series... 1. Christian Eschatology 2. Realized Eschatology 3. When Did Christ Establish His Covenant? 4. When Was the Book of Revelation Written? 5. What and When Is the Resurrection? 6. New Heaven and New Earth and the Second Coming 7. A Summary Chart Comparing Realized Eschatology with Biblical Eschatology PROVERBS series... 1. Proverbs: A Brief Introduction 2. Doing What Is Right, Just and Fair 3. Love, Faithfulness and Trust 4. Woman Wisdom vs. Woman Folly 5. Devotional Thoughts on Proverbs (Week 1) 6. Devotional Thoughts on Proverbs (Week 2) 7. Devotional Thoughts on Proverbs (Week 3) 8. Devotional Thoughts on Proverbs (Week 4) 9. Devotional Thoughts on Proverbs (Week 5)	THE ENGLISH BIBLE: THE KJV TO THE PRESENT by Ong Kok Bin The King James Version The Great Bible, the Bishops’ Bible and the Geneva Bible were in circulation in their time: but none of them received any wide acceptance from all parties in the English church. The Puritans, who were the early reformers of the Church of England, in particular, were not quite satisfied with any of these translations. They petitioned the king of England, King James I, for a new translation to be produced effectively. In the petition, they contended that ‘they could not with good conscience subscribe to the Communion [Prayer-] booke, since it maintained the Bible as it was there translated [in the Great Bible], which was as they said, a most corrupted translation’ (cited in Wegner, p. 308). Although the king was not sympathetic to the Puritans, he, nevertheless, convened a council at Hampton Court in 1604. Not much came out of this council except ‘[t]hat a translation be made of the whole Bible, as consonant as can be to the original Hebrew and Greek; and this to be set out and printed, without any marginal notes, and only to be used in all churches of England in time of divine service’ (F. F. Bruce, in Wegner, p. 308). Dr. John Rainolds (1549-1607), president of Corpus Christi College, Oxford, and a Puritan, moved for a new translation to be made. He received support from a good many others. King James, too, favoured the idea if only because he disliked the Geneva Bible, which he thought to be partial against the divine rights of kings. Thus, a committee of fifty-four men were appointed to produce a new translation. These translators were divided into six panels: two met in Oxford, two in Cambridge and two in Westminster (London). A number of guidelines were established to assist the translators in their work, among which was that the 1602 edition of the Bishops’ Bible would act as the base for the translation, but the Greek and Hebrew manuscripts would be examined as well. The translation, which was styled as the Authorized Version (AV), but which became more popularly known as the King James Version (KJV), took five years to complete. The first edition, a 1,500 page codex, came out in 1611. It was dedicated to King James and ‘Appointed to be read in Churches’ (as it appeared in its title page). The 1611 Authorized Version included the Apocrypha (much to the disapproval of the Puritans). Though not without its critics, it soon gained wide acceptance among the faithful and for a good two hundred years or so it stood quite unchallenged as the Bible of the English speaking world. In fact, for some, the KJV was the only acceptable Bible, even till today. S. L. Greensdale observes: “its text acquired a sanctity properly ascribable only to the unmediated voice of God; to multitudes of English-speaking Christians it has seemed little less than blasphemy to tamper with the words of the King James Version”. The KJV Faulted The original 1611 version underwent a number of revisions down the years - some authorized, others not. These revisions were necessary because of the many flaws in the translation (printing errors notwithstanding). The revisions were done as early as 1629 and then again in 1638. Individuals like John Wesley (1768) also produced their own revisions of the KJV. Even as the KJV was being revised , the revisions could not stem the increasing tide of dissatisfaction which came towards and in the 19th century. The English language was evolving at a rapid rate. Words were dropping out of the common vocabulary; some though in continued usage had changed in their meanings, new words came into existence. All these were not reflected in the static KJV language. Moreover, advances had been made in the fields of Greek and Hebrew scholarship and biblical manuscripts much closer to their autographs were being discovered (e.g., the Sinaiticus and the Vaticanus). These developments in textual studies and the changes in the English language made it compelling for a more thorough revision of the KJV. Revisions of the KJV In 1870 a resolution to revise the KJV was passed in the Upper House of Convocation of the Province of Canterbury, England. The aim of this revision was to produce a translation acceptable to both England and America. As it turned out the American committees could not agree with their British counterparts on the strict guidelines set up for the revision. They wanted to have more of the archaic words removed. For example, on the designation of the third person in the Godhead, the Americans were uncomfortable with the term ‘Holy Ghost’; they preferred ‘Holy Spirit’ instead, which the British objected. The revised New Testament came out in 1881 and the entire Bible in 1885. The New Testament text evidenced the influence of the two newly discovered manuscripts - the Sinaiticus and the Vaticanus. The Old Testament was largely a literal translation of the Masoretic Text. The English Revised Version (ERV), however, did not gain the same popularity of its predecessor. This was due to the fact that it was a literal rendering of the text, making it less readable. ‘Strong in Greek, weak in English’ was how Charles Spurgeon had put it. Over in America, the American revisers had to wait fourteen years after the publication of the Revised Version to come out with their own. This came in 1901 and was known as the American Standard Version (ASV). In 1952, the Revised Standard Version (RSV), a revision of the ASV, was published. The objective of this new revision was to ‘embody the best results of modern scholarship as to the meaning of the Scriptures, and express this meaning in English diction which is designed for use in public and private worship and preserves those qualities which have given to the King James Version a supreme place in English literature’ (cited in Wegner, p. 321). There were several other revisions to come: the New American Standard Bible (NASB) in 1971, the King James II Version (KJII, 1971), the New King James Version (NKJV, 1982), and the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV, 1989). The KJII is rather interesting. It is the work of a single reviser, Jay Green, who was dissatisfied with the other revisions (which were the works of committees of scholars). Green accused these revisers of ‘Having tilted the foundation in their theological direction, they then paraphrased, interpreted, deleted and added to God’s words without regard to the evidencial [sic] facts available in all the manuscripts, the versions, and the fathers of the first centuries’. However, it was Green himself who took liberties with the text. For example, he rendered Isaiah 7:14 as ‘they shall call His name Immanuel’, so as to make it identical with the Greek text in Matthew 1:23. This is a modern-day example of scribal harmonization. But Isaiah 7:14, in its own right, should be rendered ‘...a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel’ as in the KJV. Modern Translations in the 20th Century With so many revisions of the KJV, one would think that they would be sufficient for the English-speaking Christians. But this is not the case. The twentieth century was to see a surfeit of new and independent translations numbering in the hundreds. Some were commissioned by Bible societies, some done by individuals, some were paraphrases rather than translations and still some reflected the doctrinal bias of a sect or a cult. In general, the impetus to have new translations comes from the desire to produce an accurate text in a language which is clear and lucid to all. Of the more notable translations done by individuals are Weymouth’s New Testament (1903-1929), the Moffatt Version (1924), Philips Version (1958, r. 1972), and The Living Bible (1971). Moffatt’s and Philips remain popular versions even today. The Living Bible is actually a paraphrase of the ASV done by an individual named Kenneth N. Taylor. Taylor wanted to produce a Bible which was easily understood by children who, otherwise, had to struggle with the KJV. The Living Bible found a niche among the young people; but as a paraphrase it is not accurate textually and thus should not be depended on solely by the serious student of the Bible. A translation which should be avoided altogether is the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures (1961, r. 1981). This is a flawed translation published by the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of the Jehovah’s Witnesses. The Jehovah’s Witnesses do not believe that Jesus Christ is truly God and thus, they produced their own translation to reflect this doctrinal bias. The Jerusalem Bible (1966) is the first Roman Catholic Bible translated from the original texts. Prior to it, translations of the Catholic Church were required to be based on the Latin Vulgate. Among the commissioned translations, two in particular, stand out if only because of the interdenominational participation in the translating process. The New English Bible (1970) had the participation of the Church of Scotland, the Church of England, the Methodist, Baptist, Congregational and other denominations. The New International Version (1978) had an even wider interdenominational representation. About 34 different denominations were represented in the various committees that translated this version. < prev \| next >
\| Home \| About Us \| Archive \| Articles \| Comment \| Directory/Churches \| Links \| News \| Youth \| _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No part of this page may be reproduced, in any form or by any means, without permission, oral or written, from the Church of Christ, Seremban, Malaysia.