I love the KJV, but I have a question. We are all English-speaking people in this forum, but what about translations into foreign languages? If we believe the KJV is the only inspired version of the Bible available today, how can we be sure that people of other languages will have access to the pure Word of God, since they can't read the KJV? Will a translation into Russian, Dutch, Swahili, etc., be as reliable to them as the KJV is to us? How do we know that there are reliable translators in the present day who can make a KJV equivalent available in foreign languages to others?

[bibleprotector]

How do we know that there are reliable translators in the present day who can make a KJV equivalent available in foreign languages to others?

None are equivalent, but some translations are better than others, i.e. Reformation ones into German, Dutch, French or Italian. I would rather support the teaching of people English and then have them use the KJB.

[stephanos]

Originally Posted by bibleprotector

None are equivalent, but some translations are better than others, i.e. Reformation ones into German, Dutch, French or Italian. I would rather support the teaching of people English and then have them use the KJB.

Yeah I agree here. If we can give people of another tongue a translation in their own language that is based on the KJB, then good. But this should only be something that gets them by until they are able to learn English and read the KJB. If we cannot offer them a faithful translation based on our KJB, then I don't see the point in labouring to make another translation when it would take far less time to teach people English and have them reading the true authoritative Bible.

Peace and Love,
Stephen

Originally Posted by bibleprotector

None are equivalent, but some translations are better than others, i.e. Reformation ones into German, Dutch, French or Italian. I would rather support the teaching of people English and then have them use the KJB.

Thanks. I understand your point. However, I think that if the church is to be obedient to our Lord's command in Mark 16:15-16, those whom He calls to take the Gospel message to foreign lands must be prepared to learn their languages and translate, or provide a translation of, the Word of God into those languages. It seems to me that if God calls a man to proclaim the Gospel to those whose native language is not English, He will also equip him to provide an equivalent translation of the Word of God that they can read and understand in their native language. I suppose the answer to my question must be that a sovereign God who is in absolute control of His creation, "who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will" (Ephes. 1:11), will call out His elect from "all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues" (Rev. 7:9), and in order to do that, He will equip His people with the ability to accurately translate and proclaim His Word to them! It will not be the KJV, but it will be an equivalent translation into their language. Is not this the goal of the Trinitarian Bible Society, which is a faithful supporter of the KJV?

[stephanos]

Originally Posted by sovereigngrace

Thanks. I understand your point. However, I think that if the church is to be obedient to our Lord's command in Mark 16:15-16, those whom He calls to take the Gospel message to foreign lands must be prepared to learn their languages and translate, or provide a translation of, the Word of God into those languages. It seems to me that if God calls a man to proclaim the Gospel to those whose native language is not English, He will also equip him to provide an equivalent translation of the Word of God that they can read and understand in their native language. I suppose the answer to my question must be that a sovereign God who is in absolute control of His creation, "who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will" (Ephes. 1:11), will call out His elect from "all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues" (Rev. 7:9), and in order to do that, He will equip His people with the ability to accurately translate and proclaim His Word to them! It will not be the KJV, but it will be an equivalent translation into their language. Is not this the goal of the Trinitarian Bible Society, which is a faithful supporter of the KJV?

The Trinitarian Bible Society does not stand for the King James Bible, but rather the so called 'originals' which of course we don't have (nor do we have a difinitive; "look here, finally the argument is over, I have the the faithful copies of the originals", copy of said originals) and therefore they do not believe in Biblical preservation. Here is a quote from wikipedia on the TBS:

Some, owing to the Trinitarian Bible Society’s support of the King James Version of the Bible, have assumed that the Society is a part of the King-James-Only Movement. However, as the Society has publicly stated,

‘The Trinitarian Bible Society does not believe the Authorised Version to be a perfect translation, only that it is the best available translation in the English language’.[4]

Indeed, unlike those in the King James Only movement, it is the firm belief of the Society that ‘The supernatural power involved in the process of inspiration, and in the result of inspiration, was exerted only in the original production of the sixty-six Canonical books of the Bible (2 Peter 1:20-21; 2 Peter 3:15-16).’

‘Translations from the original languages are likewise to be considered the written Word of God in so far as these translations are accurate as to the form and content of the Original.’

‘Translations made since New Testament times must use words chosen by uninspired men to translate God’s words. For this reason no translation of the Word of God can have an absolute or definitive status. The final appeal must always be to the original languages, in the Traditional Hebrew and Greek texts’.

We who do believe God and His promise to preserve His Word have heard this garbage before and do not stand with those that spread this sort of nonsense.

So back to the original subject; I do think it is good to translate vital portions of the KJB when going to foreign lands (namely Pauls epistles). But you've got to realize that this takes tremendous work, and in comparison to teaching people to read english, it just doesn't seem to be a good investment of time, considering how much less time it takes to teach people to read English. Thank the Lord, that the gospel isn't complicated, and can be preached with a minimal understanding of another language. So it is my belief that the missionary should focus on preaching the simlicity that is in Christ Jesus, and then work on seeing people learning English in order to read God's Word.

Peace and Love,
Stephen

[bibleprotector]

Also, I think that Bible prophecy indicates that before the return of Christ, there is to be one Gospel "form".

"And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people" (Revelation 14:6).

That particular form of the Gospel, I think, is the King James Bible going forth to everyone. And that in English, despite what "mother tongue" the people belong to.

[MC1171611]

Originally Posted by bibleprotector

That particular form of the Gospel, I think, is the King James Bible going forth to everyone. And that in English, despite what "mother tongue" the people belong to.

While that Gospel (Rev. 14:6-7) is in fact something different from that taught in Paul's Epistles, and also different from that preached by John the Baptist and Jesus Christ, I agree about the English language. More people around the world learn English as a second language (ESL) than perhaps any other two or more languages combined. I myself speak halfway passable Spanish, so I understand the difficulty in learning two languages, but the language of trade, aviation, tourism and even the internet is English (or Latin character-using UTF-8 encoded languages ). It makes sense that God would have propagated His perfect word in English for distributing It in the end time; even now we see His infinite wisdom in giving us His word in English.

[Just_A_Thought]

I think the Bible should be translated into foreign languages. If I went to a foreign field I would think it better to translate the Bible than teach English. If the Bible is translated then everyone can read it. If I chose to teach English to a tribe than thousands around would not have a chance to learn. Plus, after I am long gone they can keep printing the Bible in their tounge and spreading the Word instead of having to try to teach other tribes/areas to speak English and how to read in English.

If I only spoke their tounge and English I would trnaslate from the KJV, Geneva, and Tynsdale NT but if I knew Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic I would use these and reference the KJV, Geneva, and Tynsdale.

[stephanos]

Originally Posted by MC1171611

While that Gospel (Rev. 14:6-7) is in fact something different from that taught in Paul's Epistles, and also different from that preached by John the Baptist and Jesus Christ, I agree about the English language. More people around the world learn English as a second language (ESL) than perhaps any other two or more languages combined. I myself speak halfway passable Spanish, so I understand the difficulty in learning two languages, but the language of trade, aviation, tourism and even the internet is English (or Latin character-using UTF-8 encoded languages ). It makes sense that God would have propagated His perfect word in English for distributing It in the end time; even now we see His infinite wisdom in giving us His word in English.

Amen! We serve a righteous God!

Romans 11:33-36 (KJV) O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out! For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor? Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again? For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen.

Peace and Love,
Stephen

Excerpts from William Lyon Phelps' book "Human Nature in the Bible, copyright 1922, he was a professor at Yale:



1. "Priests, atheists, sceptics, devotees, agnostics, and evangelists are generally agreed that the Authorised Version of the English Bible is the best example of English literature that the world has ever seen. It combines the noblest elevations of thought, aspiration, imagination, passion and religion with simplicity of diction."

2. "Everyone who has a thorough knowledge of the Bible may truly be called educated; and no other learning or culture, no matter how extensive or elegant, can, among Europeans and Americans, form a proper substitute." "I thoroughly believe in a university education for both men and women; but I believe a knowledge of the Bible without a college course is more valuable than a college course without the Bible."

3. "We Anglo-Saxons have a better Bible than the French or the Germans or the Italians or the Spanish; our English translation *is even BETTER THAN the original Hebrew and Greek*. There is only one way to explain this; I have no theory to account for the so-called "inspiration of the Bible," but I am confident that the *Authorised Version was INSPIRED*.

4. "We ought invariably in the church and on public occasions to use the Authorised Version; *all others are inferior*. And, except for special purposes, it should be used *EXCLUSIVELY* in private reading. Why make constant companions of the second best, when the best is available?