Subject: KJV Only Radicals |
Bible Note: Dear Janae - Such an exercise in which you invited Kalos to engage involves a great deal more than makiing a comparison of a single verse between one translation and another. In your example of Matthew 18:11 for instance, it seems fair enough to ask why it appears in the KJV and not in the NIV. Without knowing and examining the facts, one could jump to any number of conclusions which have a high probability of being wrong. One could say that the NIV translators took a nap or went on coffee break after translating Matthew 18:10 and when they returned to their work they inadvertently skipped v.11 and went to v.12. Or attribute it to printer error. Or one could even accuse them of sabotage, which is the radical view that some KJV Onlyists take. The matter involves none of these things. It involves the enormously complex and often controversial subject of textual criticism on which a large number of specialized scholars have labored so much for so long and have not as yet arrived at total unaninimity. But to say that the NIV translators have deliberately tampered with the text by omitting Matthew 18:11 is no more valid than to say that the KJV translators tampered with it by adding it. The textual basis of the KJV New Testament is known as Textus Receptus. The NIV used an eclectic one. In either case, both teams followed texts which they considered the most reliable available to them at the time. It is therefore as absurd to hurl the curses of Revelation 22:18 at the KJV translators for adding words to Scripture as it is to hurl those of Revelation 22:19 at the NIV translators for taking them away. ..... If you'd like to read more posts -- many more I might add -- on this topic, use Quick Search and type in the words Textus Receptus. I'd like also to recommend a book you might enjoy. It's called "The King James Version Debate: A Plea for Realism" by D. A. Carson. It's readily available in inexpensive paperback on-line and at bookstores. ..... By the way, the NASB includes Matthew 18:11, but puts it in brackets and notes marginally "Early mss. do not contain this v." For what it's worth, I will note that I use the 1995 NASB Update about 90 per cent of the time for my reading and study and am trying to update my Scripture memorization from KJV to NASB. In this effort I find it tougher to "unlearn" than to learn :-). ...... And here's an exercise for you. Let someone who is unfamiliar with the KJV read Psalm 5:6 and ask him to tell you what it means to speak leasing. Blessings. --Hank |