Essay 15
A Translation that God Approves
by Dr. L. Bednar
Christ said in Mat.4:4, mankind is to live by every word from the mouth of God, referring to dictation-type inspiration, and mandating that the inerrant Word from God be preserved in languages that His people understand.* No opinion of scholars can be imposed in the slightest degree on God's ordained Word, yet modern English versions present many renderings based on mere opinions of scholars, sinners like all others. With so many people preferring modern versions today, a way is needed to show people that our traditional English version, derived from the traditional Hebrew/Aramaic & Greek texts, is the only one ordained by God to present His inerrant Word in English. We make a case for this as we prove that criticism of the KJV by scholars is wrong consistently, indicating that the KJV shows a consistent accuracy character- izing inerrancy. Now verifying accuracy of every word in a translation would take a lifetime of concentrated study. What is needed is evidence of God's Hand on the KJV, which is apt to be subtle and likely to be misjudged by humanist scholars, but the present writer offers the items below as uniquely indicative of a touch of God's Hand on the traditional KJV.
*We
are to live by all that God teaches us, so living by every word means
we are to observe what every word of God contributes to the context
of the teaching of each scripture passage.
1. Ultimate word sense in the KJV: Gen.1:28 God said (to Adam & Eve) multiply, and replenish the earth. Gap-theory advocates say Adam & Eve were told to refill earth with people, humanoid beings supposedly having lived and perished in a period of millions of years transpiring between Gen. 1:1 & 1:2. But in 1611 England, the established sense of replenish was fill, and KJV translators would view replenish as a synonym for fill. Indeed, fill was still the primary meaning of replenish in Webster’s 1828 dictionary.
In the KJV Gen.9:1, God gives the same replenish command to Noah after the Great Flood, producing an odd coincidence since now the modern refill sense of replenish applies, refilling of earth with people being needed. In Genesis of the KJV, replenish appears only in verse 1:28 associated with the Creation and 9:1 associated with the Flood early post-deluge period, as if to link the two. In another odd coincidence, they do link as two beginnings of population growth, one at Creation, and one in the early post-deluge period.
In yet another odd coincidence, wording of the Creation commands applies also to very different processes occurring in the early post-deluge period.
1:9 Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place; let the dry land appear; Let the dry land appear applies to an early post-deluge falling water level. Post-deluge waters…gathered together unto one place are seawater mixed with rainwater from a vapor canopy above the atmosphere and water of underground reservoirs, all contributing to the Flood.
1:11 Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed…Plant life would begin to grow again after the post-deluge waters drained away.
1:14 Let there be lights in the firmament of heaven to divide the day from the night…During the Great Flood, a very thick dark rain cloud would hide the sun & moon, so division of day and night would be slight, but would again become very evident as the dark cloud was dissipated by rainfall.
1:24 Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind…and beast of the earth… As the ark rested on Mt. Ararat, and thus on the earth, animals leaving the ark would be brought forth from the earth in a figurative sense.
1:26…God said, let us make man in our image…Here the application will become clear as we conclude the topics below. (at Gen.1:26 ^)
Further, the Gen.1:22 Hebrew for replenish is rendered fill, despite this fill being in the same context as replenish in 1:28 and despite term equivalence, suggesting the two terms are being contrasted, and the only likely reason is that fill in 1:22 contrasts with a subtle refill sense of replenish in 1:28, sug- gesting verses 1:28 & 9:1 both have this sense. That these two can be the only cases of a refill sense in Genesis correlates with the fact that the Hebrew for replenish occurs in like sense 7 other times in Genesis, and the KJV has fill each time, a refill sense not applying contextually in 6 cases, and unlikely to apply in the 7th. In Genesis both 1:28 & 9:1 seem to have a refill sense.
Finally, KJV translators were instructed to follow the Bishops’ Bible as far as the original languages permitted, and both versions have replenish only in 1:28 & 9:1 in Genesis. Bishops’ translators preferred fancy terms like replen- ish, to simple ones like fill, and KJV translators retained accuracy, using re- plenish as a synonym for fill. But why did Bishops’ translators limit replenish in Genesis to the two verses, ignoring 7 others where it can apply in a fill sense? Does a refill sense really apply to verse 1:28, as well as 9:1?
The answer relates to links of the Creation account to the early post-deluge period. We consider Hebrews 7:9,10 that says Levi in Abraham’s loins paid tithes to Melchizedec, speaking of the unborn as if he were an active person. From this perspective, the verse 1:28 replenish command to Adam to fill the earth can also be a prophecy to Noah in Adam's loins to refill it after the Flood. The Hebrew sense here is usually limited to fill, but an Adam + Noah context justifies a simultaneous fill + refill dual sense. A word can change its meaning as context changes, but the dual sense applies to a fixed context.
God's Hand on the KJV Gen.1:28 & 9:1 is indicated. Inerrancy is preserved, as a veiled common purpose applies to the same command wording in the two verses. In Gen.9:1, Noah’s family is to fill the earth to fulfill veiled Gen. 1:28 prophecy, known only in English, and only after 1828 A.D. when refill became the primary sense of replenish. Such prophecy and its fulfillment, long after the 1611 KJV was published, originate with God. Evidently, He ordained the unnatural replenish to link a perfect beginning at Creation to a prophecy to righteous Noah about a new post-Flood population beginning at that time, but applying mainly to one in the far future, as we’ll now see.
A link of the Creation to the early post-deluge period relates also to a far- future fulfillment of Gen.1:28 prophecy. Gen.5:28,29 says Noah will bring comfort over the sin curse, speaking of the temporary post-deluge end of sin as relating to a far-future eternal end of sin noted in Zec.8:7-13. This applies to the Millennium as sin is suppressed, and to the Eternal State as sin ends forever and God renews His Creation-era fellowship with His people, upon whom the image of God endowed in Creation is renewed, (Gen.1:26 ^) applying to redeemed ones of Christ in the kingdom.* Indeed, God revealed the eternal end of sin, even as it appeared in Eden in Gen.3:15.**
*Zec.8:11,12 notes a future when God’s people no longer face the sin curse of living by hard labor, crop failure occurring at times due to lack of rainfall & moisture. It speaks of a natural supply of dew in that day, a return to the initial state in Eden when dew nurtured the garden. This would apply in the Millennium & Eternal State.
**Gen.3:15 Seed of the woman is the Virgin-born Savior. His bruised heel signifies death by the Cross caused by satan the serpent, but overcome by Resurrection. The serpent's head bruise signifies a fatal wound as Christ destroys satan, the author of sin, in the lake of fire after the Millennium. Replenish the earth ultimately applies to sinless redeemed ones of Christ in eternal fellowship with God.
2. John Baptist: This name appears exclusively in Mat.14:8 & Lk.7:20 of the KJV. It derives from language irregularity, and mistranslates the Greek, yet exhibits various unexpected textual properties supportive of inerrancy.
John Baptist originated ~1382 A.D. as Wycliffe translated the Latin Vulgate that has no article, so he rendered John Baptist consistently. The Greek has only John the Baptist, and later English versions tended to follow this, but the Bishops Bible favored John Baptist mainly. KJV translators were to follow this version as far as original languages allowed, yet retained John Baptist, but only at Mt.14:8 & Lk.7:20. Scholars reject this use, but to say John the Baptist can't be rendered John Baptist is to say Jesus the Christ can’t be rendered Jesus Christ. Baptist in John Baptist is a surname based on John’s role as a baptizer, (1) and the Baptist in John the Baptist is a title.
Jesus & John linked in closing the Old Testament order, to introduce the New, and the links are exclusive to John. 1. Other prophets foretold Christ, but John introduced Him, by miraculous birth partly like the Virgin Birth, (his mother was too old to bear children – Lk.1:18), and by baptizing Jesus. 2. As a unique earthly kinsman, John linked to Jesus (John’s mother was a cousin of the virgin Mary - Lk.1:36). 3. In a link of the Spirit, Jesus had God’s Spirit beyond measure (Jn.3:34), and John was filled with the Spirit from before birth (Lk.1:15). 4. Mal.4 links Jesus as the Sun of righteousness with healing in his wings (4:2) to Elijah, John as an Elijah-type prophet introducing the day of the Lord (4:5) at the 1st Advent (Mt.17:9-13). 5. John Baptist in his baptizer role links to Jesus Christ in His superior baptism role.
John Baptist links exclusively to one event in our two verses, the time of John’s fatal imprisonment,* so it seems to have a purpose (He’s in prison in Mt.11:2, and thus as his disciples talk to Christ in Lk.7:20). A purpose is in- dicated, for John was the final prophet whose death ended the Old Testament order (The law and the prophets were until John - Lk.16:16). Further, John Baptist in the two subject verses endured all KJV language up-dating and criticism by scholars, indicating Providential preservation for a purpose.
*Mk.6:24,25, speaking of John the Baptist, repeats events on John’s death in Mt. 14:8, which can seem to deny that John Baptist exclusively marks the end of the Old Testament order at John's death. But the verses in Mark summarize events of John’s death spoken by Herod well after the death, while Mt.14:8 & Lk.7:20 relate to the actual time of his death and the true end of the Old Testament order.
(1.) Jesus assigned surnames signifying traits/roles; e.g. James & John Boanerges, (sons of thunder - Mk.3:7) Simon Peter signifying Simon the stone (Jn.1:42), and John Mark signifying John the hammer. (Acts 15:37 - Jesus alone could know the later traits of Peter & John). His disciples would continue assigning surnames, Joseph Justus signifying Joseph the just, (Acts 1:23) Simon Zelotes, signifying Simon the zealot’ (Acts 1:13) and Mary Magdalene, signifying a resident of Magdala, etc. (what Judas Iscariot signifies is uncertain).
John’s repentance baptism was a major step into the New Testament order. Repentance marks death to the old man as a first step in forgiving sin, so John’s baptism was transitional. Jesus ordained repentance as a first step in salvation, so His baptism links the two types to signify death to the old man joined to resurrection to eternal life in the new man.* (baptism fullness)
*John’s water baptism of repentance by immersion signified only death to the old man, so rising up from the water would lack significance in this baptism. Water baptism unto Christ by immersion emphasizes the rising-up to signify death to the old man for the purpose of resur-rection in the new man.
Linking of baptizer roles would begin very early at John’s baptism of Jesus, as John Baptist linked to Jesus Christ, and John’s baptism was a first step into the fullness of Jesus’ baptism. This, and very early timing of John’s ministry, reveal believer's baptism as the first result of the New Testament order super-seding the Old.* Further, in the link of surnames, John Baptist would provide the first of all surname links ordained in relation to Jesus Christ, as the New Testament order began to supersede the Old.**
*John Baptist should be the first surname term assigned by Jesus, John being the first major figure linked to Jesus by a calling to prepare the way for Him, (Mal.3:1) bringing souls to rep- entance of sin and baptism as an evidence of repentance. The above-noted surname pattern would indicate John Baptist was the original form. Later, John the Baptist would become the unique standard in the Greek text, likely because John was the baptizer, the one unique pro- phet pivotal to the end of the Old Testament order and the birth of the New Testament order.
**Baptist doctrine links to earliest New Testament days in matters such as believer's baptism, death to our depraved old man, and baptism as an ordinance signifying salva- tion, not a sacrament endowing it (Acts 8:37 - very early in New Testament days, an Ethiopian eunuch needed a heart belief in Christ to be baptized, and this still applies today in true Baptist churches).
John Baptist: a unique purpose. John died young, being born to die and end the Old Testament order, to introduce the New Testament order of Jesus Christ, who died young, being born to die to defeat death, as the author of eternal life. John Baptist, directly joining his given name to his surname, emphasizes death to the old man to signify his consecration unto death, that later gave him the title John the Baptist, the baptizer pivotal to the end of the Old Testament order and birth of the New. John linked to Jesus in ways that never applied to others. Indeed, John’s baptism of Jesus signified the future death of Jesus, but the Holy Spirit descending on Him represented His purity and power nullifying any lasting effect of death on Him, and the Father in heaven told us to hear His beloved Son, thus ordaining Jesus to the most vital of all ministries, directing mankind to the path to eternal life.
Conclusion
How can John Baptist, deriving from nothing but language irregularity, and mistranslating the Greek, sustain accuracy of the Greek and also extend it to the KJV, and also mark John’s death and the end of the Old Testament order and birth of the New, and also resist KJV language up-dating and criticism by scholars, and also follow an original surname pattern excluding the article, and also be able to initiate that pattern in history? God’s Hand on the KJV is indicated, for there’s no other way to account for such unique effects.
Perhaps surname use begun by a John Baptist link to Jesus Christ applies also to the Millennium & Eternal State. Isa.62:4,11 says of Jerusalem, that historically rejected Christ, Thou shalt no more be termed Forsaken; neither shall thy land anymore be termed Desolate...thou shalt be called Hephzibah (my delight is in her – begins in the Millennium as Christ rules the world - Zec.14) and thy land Beulah: (married, Old & New Testament saints of New Jerusalem spiritually married to Christ in the Eternal State - Rev.21:2-7). Jerusalem and its land, once called Jerusalem the Forsaken and Israel the Desolate, will one day be Jerusalem Hephzibah and Israel Beulah. (the form of Jesus Christ & John Baptist) Hephzibah & Beulah will apply also to New Testament saints included in the marriage (In Eph.2:11-22 New Testament saints are one with Israel in God’s household).
John was the final Old Testament prophet, whose baptism of repentance put Hebrews on the path to salvation in Christ, and thus to the Millennium and Eternal State. John Baptist likely began surname links to Jesus Christ in the New Testament era, concluding them in the Eternal State. Surnames apply- ing to the Millennium & Eternal State may be an ultimate result of surname links begun by John Baptist, the final Old Testament prophet, to Jesus Christ, our Lord in the New Testament era and unto eternity. As expected in this final estate, John is not mentioned, fading into the background to join the crowd of many redeemed ones, while Christ is glorified.
Now we may wonder why John Baptist would appear only in the KJV. This can reflect God’s intent to mark the KJV as His only true English Word, to assure readers of the perfection of KJV text history. By contrast, the modern English versions have no claim to God’s favor, being largely based on the opinions of scholars that result in much error of language & history. Readers today would be wise to study KJV language, rejecting "up-dating" of it that scholars of more recent history have tried to impose upon it.
3. Jesus Christ, the Light of the World: A supposedly archaic term that preserves inerrancy
Eph.3:9
in the Received Text, not the critical texts, tells us God created all
things by Jesus Christ, but in the Creation account, as in all the
Old Test- ament, Christ is veiled, yet visible subtly. 2 Cor.4:6
relates the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ to God
who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, the Gen.1:3 Let
there be light signifying Christ. The glory of God in Christ is
eternal, so Let there be light is not a creation act. That the
Gen. 1:3 light signifies Christ is seen as God in Gen. 1:4 calls the
light good & divides it from darkness in a spiritual link to 1
Jn.1:5 God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. Gen.1:6
Let there be a firmament & Gen.1:14 Let there be lights
in the firmament refer to things said to be made by God,
but Let there be light has no reference to made,
indicating an introduction of Christ in His glory, by whom the Father
created all things, as in Eph.3:9. Christ is the light of the world!
The Dayspring: Light as day in Gen.1:5 relates to Lk.1:78,79 where the Dayspring from on High is Christ from heaven, who is the source of all light by creation power, for all day, or light, springs from Him, extending from the first light of His glory in Gen.1:3, to the light of our sun and that of endless trillions of stars. Dayspring also refers to spiritual light in the promises of God to the redeemed. In this latter sense, 1 Jn.3:2 we know that when he shall appear, (Christ) we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is, refers to the final estate of the redeemed as sinless & eternal from that point. Also in the latter sense, Paul in 1 Cor.13:12 says of this final estate, then shall I know even as also I am known, referring to a fullness of the mind of Christ in the redeemed for inerrant knowledge of all things in God’s creation and kingdom, which is knowledge fashioned after that of God! The Light of the world is Christ, in every possible way, and all throughout the universe!
Scholars say that Dayspring is archaic, substituting sunrise in Lk.1:78. The Greek here usually means sunrise/east, which is one sense of Dayspring, but it's only the tiniest part of the meaning, and no other term can begin to match Dayspring from on High. This magnificent name, the only one truly describ- ing the glory of Christ, was preserved beyond the end of language-convent- ion updating in the 1769 KJV edition, indicating God’s Hand on text history to ensure retention of the name. God created all things by the Dayspring, not by the sunrise, and it's the Dayspring, not the sunrise, by which the redeemed are made sinless & eternal, and are given knowledge patterned after that of God. Dayspring alone, as a name for Christ, fully preserves all senses of Christ’s light in the Greek and the English and in the related Hebrew, and it is inerrant since it can't be replaced. Dayspring will become archaic only when eternity comes to an end!
4. Providential Advantage in a Problem of Lost Knowledge
Leviticus 11:29, 30
NIV
Of
the animals that move about on the ground, these are unclean for you:
the weasel, the rat, any kind of great lizard, the gecko, the monitor
lizard, the wall lizard, the skink and the chameleon.
The
NIV has Leviticus listing the weasel, rat and six kinds of lizards as
unclean for the Hebrews, which is not credible since there would be
no need to list so many specific types of lizards, and doubtless
there would be be a broader range of creatures included in the list
of the unclean ones. The translators evidently had no idea of
identities of most creatures indicated by several of the Hebrew terms
noted in the Masoretic Text at our two verses. Modern translators
rely on lexicons, and the authors of the lexicons admit they are
uncertain about the identities of the six animals referred to as
types of lizards, the ident- ities offered being just guesses. The
inaccuracy of the guesses becomes evident when the animals are
grouped together in one context, as they are here in Leviticus. The
problem is that modern scholars must deal with lost
knowledge, some Hebrew terms being obscure today.
In
a case like this, one must rely on the oldest textual source to
resolve the mystery, and our KJV itself gives us a view of textual
history extending back for a period of over 4 centuries, and thus
might offer an accurate listing of the animals involved. It reads as
follows at the Leviticus passage:
KJV
These also shall be
unclean unto you among the creeping things that creep upon the earth;
the weasel, and the mouse, and the tortoise after his kind, and the
ferret, and the chameleon, and the lizard, and the snail and the
mole.
The KJV is far more logical in noting just two
references to lizards. The chameleon is a special type of lizard with
unique capabilities, so this name, along with the term lizard,
covers the full spectrum of lizards. Regarding the source of animal
identities in the KJV, it is rather close to that in the Brenton
Septuagint (LXX) published in 1851 in England, indicating a common
origin. Nonetheless, animal ident- ities in this LXX are a bit
different from those in the KJV, the tortoise & snail of the KJV
being called a lizard and a newt (a lizard-like amphibian)
respectively. This LXX refers to the lizard of the KJV as an evet, a
type of lizard, so this difference isn't significant. The order that
the animals are listed in this LXX is the same as that in the KJV.
Evidently, KJV translators consulted an LXX text much like that of
Brenton, but the two differences must be explained. The text of
Bren- ton emphasizes lizards notably less than the NIV does, so it
appears to derive from an earlier LXX better resembling our KJV, and
if there is a credible explanation for the two differences between
the KJV and the Brenton, we can conclude that the KJV in this Leviticus passage derives from a more original LXX, one that presents a
logical series of animal identities.
The original uncorrupted
LXX Old Testament of the early church was translated from a
Masoretic-type text, and the latter will contain most of the terms
for the animals we are interested in, enabling us to verify term
meanings. The key to resolving questions is the pronounced ten- dency
of the Hebrew text to assign the same name to things that are
inherently different, but show some type of literal or figurative
resem- blance. The KJV tortoise corresponds correctly to the
Hebrew term since the same term appears in two other places in the
Masoretic Text where it is rendered by English terms reflecting the
physical character of a tortoise. In Numbers 7:3 the KJV renders
covered wagons, the similarity to the tortoise being the
covering shell and slow motion common to both. In Isaiah 66:20, the
KJV renders the Hebrew as litters, in the sense of stretchers
bearing the sick or wounded, which is indicative of slow motion, in
common with the tortoise (the Hebrew term means, move gently). The
Hebrew term for snail appears no- where else in the Masoretic
Text, so it can't be checked this way, but a snail leaves a trail of
mucous as it travels, and would likely be con- sidered unclean by the
Hebrews, and thus amenable to inclusion in the Leviticus passage.
The available evidence indicates KJV render- ings of the subject
animal identities are the correct ones.
Evidently, KJV
translators had recourse to an LXX text now lost, but reflecting in
our Leviticus passage an accurate original text dating to the
beginning of the LXX in the 3rd century B.C. Availability of this
text to the KJV committee, and its subsequent loss, is some strong
evidence that the KJV is accurate in cases where modern versions
can't possibly be accurate, due to latter-day loss of knowledge of
some textual material. This is evidence of God's Hand on the KJV to
render it the one English Authorized Version.
