The KJV 1611 Translators Preface
Series Part Two Series Part One
This one is rather interesting. Much damage has been done by Bible publishers for not including this translators preface in their English translations. I highly recommend a Cambridge edition that includes the translator's preface. You can google it if needed to read a copy. It is rather interesting for modern users of an English translation to take a position on this particular English translation which even the translators themselves did not hold to. I challenge anyone to read a modern copy of the translator's preface. The simple process of educating yourself on what they actually taught and practiced should bear insightful.
So what exactly was the position of the translators of the KJV? Since most people will never purchase a KJV containing the original Translators preface I will list out by category pertinent categories and quotations take from the original preface. Again, you can find a simple free copy on www.google.com and read it for yourself (in its entirety).
Since multiple English translations already existed, what did they think of producing new translations,
"It is welcomed with suspicion instead of love, and with emulation instead of thanks: and if there be any hole left for cavil to enter, (and cavil, if it does not find a hole, will make one) it is sure to be miscontrued, and in danger to be condemned."
What did the translators believe about multiple Bible translations in English (or any other language),
"Now to the latter we answer; that we do not deny, nay we affirm and avow, that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English, set forth by men of our profession, (for we have seen none of theirs of the whole Bible as yet) containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God."
What did the translators believe about word for word translations and modern translations,
"For is the kingdom of God to become words or syllables? Why should we be in bondage to them if we may be free, use one precisely when we may use another no less fit, as commodiously?"
"Some peradventure would have no variety of senses to be set in the margin, lest the authority of the Scriptures for deciding of controversies by that show of uncertainty, should somewhat be shaken. But we hold their judgment not to be sound in this point."
"...it hath pleased God in his divine providence, here and there to scatter words and sentences of that difficulty and doubtfulness, not in doctrinal points that concern salvation, (for in such it hath been vouched that the Scriptures are plain) but in matters of less moment, that fearfulness would better beseem us than confidence..."
"There be many words in the Scriptures, which be never found there but once, (having neither brother or neighbor, as the Hebrews speak) so that we cannot be holpen by conference of places."
"doth not a margin do well to admonish the Reader to seek further, and not to conclude or dogmatize upon this or that peremptorily?"
"For as it is a fault of incredulity, to doubt of those things that are evident: so to determine of such things as the Spirit of God hath left (even in the judgment of the judicious) questionable, can be no less than presumption."
"Therefore as S. 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."
"...we have not tied ourselves to an uniformity of phrasing, or to an identity of words, as some peradventure would wish that we had done, because they observe, that some learned men somewhere, have been as exact as they could that way."
What did the translators believe about English translations without errors or English translations that are beyond the reach of correction,
"Yet before we end, we must answer a third cavil and objection of theirs against us, for altering and amending our Translations so oft; wherein truly they deal hardly, and strangely with us. For to whomever was it imputed for a fault (by such as were wise) to go over that which he had done, and to amend it where he saw cause?"
"But the difference that appeareth between our Translations, and our often correcting of them, is the thing that we are specially charged with; let us see therefore whether they themselves be without fault this way, (if it be to be counted a fault, to correct) and whether they be fit men to throw stones at us: O tandem maior parcas insane minori: they that are less sound themselves, out not to object infirmities to others."
Finally, what did the translators believe about the need to have English translations in the modern tongue and vocabulary of the people, not in an archaic language from the past,
Indeed without translation into the vulgar tongue, the unlearned are but like children at Jacob's well (which is deep) without a bucket or something to draw with; or as that person mentioned by Isaiah, to whom when a sealed book was delivered, with this motion, "Read this, I pray thee," he was fain to make this answer, "I cannot, for it is sealed."
"But we desire that the Scripture may speak like itself, as in the language of Canaan, that it may be understood even of the very vulgar."
"The holy Scriptures viz. the Originalls Hebrew & Greek are given by Divine Inspiration & in their first donation were without error most perfect and therefore Canonical...no translation can possibly express all the matter of the holy originalls, nor a thousand things in the Grammar, Rhetoric, & character of the tongue."
(The Works of John Smyth, fellow of Christ's College, ed. W.T. Whitley, vol. I, pp. 279-280; Quotation format borrowed from Trusted Voices on Translations, Mount Calvary Baptist Church, Greenville, SC).
"Translations contain the word of God, and are the word of God, perfectly or imperfectly, according as they express the words, sense, and meaning of those originals. To advance any, all translations concurring, into an equality with the originals, ... much more to propose and use them as means of castigating, amending, altering any thing in them, gathering various lections by them, is to set up an altar of our own by the altar of God, and to make equal the wisdom, care, skill and diligence of men, with the wisdom, care, and providence of God himself "
(Of the Integrity and Purity of the Hebrew and Greek Text of the Scripture, in Works of John Owns, vol. XVI, p. 357; Quotation format borrowed from Trusted Voices on Translations, Mount Calvary Baptist Church, Greenville, SC).
So as you can tell a modern movement that claims God chose both the underlying Greek and Hebrew texts was not held by the translators themselves. In addition, claiming that God will only use (or has only chosen or blessed) one English translation is not correct now nor was it believed by the translators of the King James Version.
We must still address where doctrine, history, and charity meet.
Read. Be educated. Comments as always encouraged.
