The King James Only Controversy

I think that the King James Only theory is bizarre and I know this opening won't win me any friends in that camp! I grew up with the venerable King James Version of the bible, for which I have great admiration. The verses in my head are mostly in that version and when I'm trying to track down a verse, I often have to set my BibleWorks program to KJV to find a particular verse. There is much to admire in this version, but it is not the bible, but a good translation of it.

I recently bought James White's book The King James Only Controversy and have enjoyed what I read of it. Don Carson's The King James Version Debate: a plea for realism is 25 years old, but still helpful.

I especially enjoyed One Bible Only? , which is edited by Roy Beacham. This book is written by fundamentalists to fundamentalists. It is well-written and gives an excellent defence of the eclectic approach to textual criticism. It shows clearly that the idea that the King James Version is the only inspired one is unbiblical and illogical.

The authors of the various articles show that all of the arguments for KJV-Onlyism are based on false information.

But the book also contains insights into bible translation and lots of useful information about the manuscripts from which we got our bible, both Old and New Testaments.

The writers write respectfully, with due praise for the King James Version and with courtesy to those who hold different points of view to them.

The three books mentioned are all useful and all should help anyone who is puzzling over this issue.

One Salient Oversight: Moments in Reformed Theology (lots of pics)

One Salient Oversight: Moments in Reformed Theology (lots of pics)

These Moments in Reformed Theology are fun. But I wonder if I'm really understanding the author's humour, or missing his point on some of them?

A little bit pregnant?

Having just completed reading the bible through in the TNIV translation, I'm now reading it through using my Reformation Study Bible. I find the articles, study notes and references helpful, but am finding that the ESV in some places is harder to read.

But what I'm also finding is that the ESV seems to use a lot of the translation methods which its champions deplore in translations such as the TNIV. For example, in Hosea [which I read through yesterday and today], the translators change the person and number in the original Hebrew to make the meaning clearer.

Hosea 2 verse 6 is rendered
I will hedge up her way with thorns,
but the footnote says that the Hebrew text says your way.
In chapter 4 verse 19 the Hebrew original
A wind has wrapped her in its wings
is changed to
A wind has wrapped them in its wings.

Now this is not a problem to me, but the apologists for the ESV say that when the TNIV changes 3rd person to 2nd or from singular to plural, they are changing the Word of God. When the RSV revisers [which is a more accurate description of the ESV translation team] alter the original are they not also changing the Word of God?

Reading the Bible by Genre

I am continuing to read through my ESV Reformation Study Bible, using Michael Coley's 52 week bible reading plan, which divides the bible up into an epistle reading for Sunday, Law for Monday, History for Tuesday, Psalms on Wednesday, other Poetry on Thursday, Prophecy on Friday and Gospels and Acts on Saturday.

I'm doing it eclectically, and now on the second week I've read, 1 John, Hebrews, Galatians in the Epistles column, Genesis 1-7 from Law, Psalms 1-8, Proverbs 1-4, Matthew 1-4, but so far, no History or Prophecy.

The ESV Reformation Study Bible is nicely produced, has a clear typeface, larger than many bibles I've used, and usually has helpful notes. Having just read through the bible using the TNIV bible, it is interesting to compare the two.

At times the language in the TNIV is unnecessarily politically correct: the translators tried to avoid the use of masculine language, and where this language has been imposed on the bible, or where it obscures the meaning, I welcome the use of inclusive language. But, at times, the change to the plural or the rewording of the traditional English rendering is not needed.

I appreciate the way the RSV revisers [which is what you may more properly call the ESV translators] have reworded its masculine language where there is inclusive language in the original Hebrew, Aramiac and Greek. This is a common feature of the ESV and TNIV.

But certain words, such as ADELFOI, are consistently rendered as masculine, despite the revisers inserting footnotes to the effect that the word is intended to be inclusive. This should have come out in the text, perhaps with a footnote that the original word is masculine, but is intended to have an inclusive meaning.

At times the ESV sounds like biblish [biblical English, a throwback to the King James Version and even the versions which preceded it]. A few days ago I read through Hebrews and found some renderings quite awkward. So far I've found the Old Testament passages read more smoothly. But I admit that in looking up a couple of passages, they are difficult to read in many English versions. Hebrews 2:10 is one of those.

Calvin on Sola Scriptura

“Let us not take it into our heads . . . to seek out God anywhere else than in his Sacred Word, or to think anything about him that is not prompted by his Word, or to speak anything that is not taken from that Word.” Cited by Brian Hedges at his terrific Mere Theology blog.

After Darkness, Light

After Darkness, Light is a Reformation motto (originally Post Tenebras, Lux), but it is also the title of a great book of essays on the Five Points of Calvinism and the Five Solas of the Reformation.

The whole book is worth reading, but I particularly appreciated the discussion on Sola Scriptura (the bible alone). Keith Mathison points out that this teaching does not imply that there is no role for tradition and the Church, but that the bible is our supreme authority. It is the only ongoing source of God's revelation (which he did by speaking to humankind through the ages in many and various ways such as by sending prophets and especially through our Lord Jesus Christ and finally inspiring holy men of God to set down this revelation in writing). The bible is perfect (in its original autographs) and thus completely reliable.

The Church submits to the bible's authority, and does not pronounce it to be God's Word, as if the Church were above the bible, but simply recognises it as from God.

But, sitting under this divine Word, the Church has a role to play in teaching us to understand it, as the Scriptures themselves declare. Her historic creeds help us to understand what the Scriptures say. These creeds are helpful and trustworthy, but not infallible. In this limited sense, there is a role for tradition, but it is inferior to the one supreme authority of Scripture.

I found this articulation challenging, thought-provoking and helpful.

Mathison shows that if we say that there is no role for Christian tradition or for the Church, Sola Scriptura degenerates into my interpretation of the bible alone is authoritative, which leads to chaos.

But Don't All Religions Lead to God?

Michael Green's But Don't all Religions Lead To God? is a great book if you are interested in thinking about the differences between the various religions on offer today [well ... at least the most popular ones], and the unique claims of Christ.

In this book he helps us to think through these popular misconceptions:
1. All religions are much the same.
2. All religions lead to God.
3. It doesn't matter what you believe, as long as you are sincere.
4. Jesus Christ is only one of many great religious teachers.

Having helped us to see that each of these views is not logical, Green then shows us the greatness of Jesus who:
*was the only great religious leader who claimed to be able to bring us to God.
*was the only great teacher who claimed to be able to deal radically with human wickedness.
*came back to life, showing us that what he said is true.
*promises to live within us, empowering us to live fulfilled lives which please God.

Keep in Step With the Spirit

Keep in Step with the Spirit is a terrific book. If you are puzzled by the Holy Spirit, or by all the different slants in various Christian circles on his ministry, you will find this book enlightening. Packer writes in a forthright, yet fair way. He does not seek to knock other views for the sake of it, but often shows how they have valuable insights, though they may be emphasising some things too greatly, or omitting other essentials.

His book is not only about the Holy Spirit, and also features important teaching on the trinity, holiness, Christian living and bible reading. I think this book is every bit as good as Knowing God. I'm sorry that I have only recently discovered this book, originally published in 1984.

The new edition includes a 2005 "Preface to the Preface" and a short chapter on assurance, entitled "Heaven on Earth -a Pentecost Exposition." They are worth reading, but maybe not worth the cost of a new book if your copy is still in good nick.

The Race Set Before Us

The Race Set Before Us is one of the most helpful Christian books I've read, and it is terrific that Ardel Caneday has set up a blog to discuss it with his readers. There have been some great posts at this blog so far: if you haven't read the book yet, it is well worth your time to read and re-read.

Helpful guide to all those Christian books

I have just completed reading a book that has been helping me to make sense of the many Christian books I read. I began in September, and completed about 15% of it by Christmas, then plowed through the rest from February to the end of May.

The book is the TNIV translation of the Bible. I read the NT using Greg Oliffe's handy guide to reading through the New Testament in 91 days, then simply used the reading plan in the back of my bible for the Old Testament.

I must admit, though, that reading the bible answers some questions, while raising lots of others. But I bore in mind Moses' words in Deuteronomy 29 verse 29:

The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may follow all the words of this law.

I enjoyed this read-through so much, I'm doing it again, but it may take longer this time, as I am attempting to read through my ESV Reformation Study Bible, and this time I'm using Michael Coley's 52 week bible reading plan. This innovative plan divides the bible up into 7 genres: one for each day of the week. You have an epistle reading for Sunday, Law for Monday, History for Tuesday, Psalms on Wednesday, other Poetry on Thursday, Prophecy on Friday and Gospels and Acts on Saturday.

I can't promise I'll keep to Michael's exact order, but I hope to use his chart to tick off what I've read somewhat eclectically.

Reading theology

Every so often, I get stuck into reading some systematic theology. The best books I've found include Wayne Grudem's
Systematic Theology in which he discusses most issues an evangelical would be interested in, and he fairly presents the views of those he disagrees with.

I like his questions and hymns at the end of each chapter. It is also helpful that he tells you explicitly where he is coming from in his introduction.

This book is a terrific start if you want to explore Christian theology. There is also a shorter version of the book, but I think you would be cheating yourself if you didn't buy the whole shebang. [You don't have to read it all!]

Grudem's theology is Reformed and Baptist, but also lightly Pentecostal and Premillennial.

His views on bible translation, with which I have some concerns, do not get a hearing in this book. I find his views on women's ministry to be scriptural, though he can be a little too enthusiastic to press the point on this issue, at times.

But I have also been finding Robert Reymond's
A New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith very helpful. Both Reymond and Grudem write clearly and simply. The section on the cross and all its implications is worth the cost of Reymond's book.

Comparing English bible versions

This is a copy of my response to a question about the English language bible versions, included in BibeWorks.

The venerable King James Version, actually an 1800s edition of the original 1611 bible. This one has had the widest influence, both on the English language and its spread, and on Christian thinking.

It is based entirely on versions of the Hebrew-Aramaic Old Testament from around 1000 AD, and on a few late manuscripts of the New Testament available in the 1500s.

The New King James Version is easier to read, but is mainly based on these same manuscripts.


The New American Standard Bible is based on the same OT manuscripts, but the New Testament is based on a wider and older range of manuscripts. This version aims to bring out the form of the original, as much as possible. It is not easy to read in big chunks.

The English Standard Version is an update of the RSV, which you are familiar with. These versions use the same variety of NT manuscripts as the NASB, but also look at ancient versions of the OT in other languages, such as the Septuagint, the first Greek translation of the OT.

The ESV changes a few renderings in the RSV which some folk saw as unorthodox, in passages such as Isaiah 7:14 and 1 John 2:2, but it also sometimes modernises the English by using more contemporary language, and by using generic language where the original does not contain masculine language.


If you compare the New Revised Standard Version with the ESV, you will see that the translators have more frequently updated the language to be inclusive of both sexes. But some people feel that the NRSV has at times done this inappropriately, and possibly with a feminist agenda. But it does not go bananas like the few feminist versions which are squeamish about calling God "Father" and Jesus "Son" for fear of being sexist!


The New Jerusalem Bible was originally French and is interesting to compare, because it is independent from the KJV/RSV/NASB/ESV tradition. One example of this is its use of "Yahweh" where these versions have "the LORD."


The New Living Translation began as an attempt to make the rather loose Living Bible more accurate. It is based on the same variety of texts as the NRSV/ESV [and most modern translations], but the language is more conversational and contemporary. If you have downloaded the update to the NLT, known as the NLT2, you will have a version which has distanced itself even further from the Living Bible. It is a substantial revision of the NLT and is much more different from the NLT than the TNIV, the upgrade to the NIV, is different from its predecessor.


I don't suppose you need me to say much about the NIV. It stands between the RSV and NLT in its effort to be accurate, but also understandable, I think. You can download the update to the NIV, the TNIV from www.tniv.info . This version is only a little different from the NIV, but updates that 25 year old version with contemporary language, use of gender inclusive language [standing between the ESV and NRSV in its willingness to do this] and in the light of contemporary scholarship.


Going beyond BibleWorks, you can also access the Good News Bible and the Message in the free and terrific e-sword program, which you can download from http://www.e-sword.net .

Keeping Safe on the Net

Keep Your Kids Safe is not only a great site for parents: it has information that will help everybody enjoy the benefits of the internet, while being alert to the problems it poses. This website also tells you about Simon Johnson, its developer's brand new and up-to-date book, which will almost certainly give you some information and tips you had not previously been aware of, and he has generously given one of the book's most important chapters as a free download at the site.

Christian Book Summaries

If you would like to get the gist of some well-known, mostly current Christian books, check out Christian Book Summaries, which has maybe 30 summaries of books such as The Purpose-Driven Life, Boundaries in Marriage and What's So Amazing About Grace?

The summaries can be downloaded in very attractively laid-out pdf files, or you can read them online.

In view of Jim Beale's T-shirt
So many books,
so litle time
this site is a boon.

It is also helpful that you can read books that everyone's talking about, but about which you have reservations, without further increasing the author's bank balance.

Each summary is very well written, easy to follow and about 8 pages long.

But ... I'll still buy stuff!

The most valuable one I've read so far is the summary of

The Doctrines of Grace, by Boice and Ryken.

Interpretation article follow-up

Ahem [clears throat]. In the following issue of Interpretation Journal, Edgar Goodspeed, veteran bible translator, criticised the view of the writer in the previous issue, and also ticked him off for his intemperate language about hard-working bible translators. He argues that translating John 2:4 is not easy, and there is a reason for the variety in the translations.

Interpretation journal

I've taken up the offer from Interpretation journal to read it online for free for 7 days, and am enjoying ploughing through the more than 50 years of issues. It's a good thing I'm on holidays!

The very first issue has a great article by H H Rowley on The Relevance of Biblical Interpretation, and in another 1947 issue there is an intriguing article by R B Woodworth on Jesus' words to Mary at the wedding at Cana.

Most of us know that the way Jesus addresses Mary is not rude, though it sounds that way when woodenly translated into English.
But what about the puzzling words that he says to her?

It is translated various ways and here are a few:
King James Version: Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee?
English Standard Version: And Jesus said to her, "Woman, what does this have to do with
me? ..."
New American Bible: (And) Jesus said to her, "Woman, how does your
concern affect me?..."
NET Bible: Jesus replied, "Woman, why are you saying this to me?..."
New International Version: "Dear woman, why do you involve me?" Jesus replied.
New Jerusalem Bible: Jesus said, 'Woman, what do you want from me?..."
Contemporary English Version and Good News Bible: "You must not tell
me what to do..."

But R B Woodworth, in the very first Reader's Forum, has some interesting things to say. While commentators say that Jesus' words do not imply a rebuke, many of the translations above come out like one.

But the expression is common in the Septuagint [the first Greek translation of the Old Testament] and is found in Judges
11:12; 1 Kings 17:18; 2 Kings 3:13 and 2 Chron 35:21 and something
like it occurs 6 times in the New Testament in Matt 8:29; 27:4; Mark 1:24; Luke 8:28 and John 21:22.

Woodworth says that in every case the expression is used of the
relation of the speakers not to each other, but to some third person or thing. He says it should be translated "It's not our concern." In John 2:4 he thinks it should be understood as "What have you and I to do with the wine?"

A few translations seem to agree with Woodworth, but it is
interesting that these include the allegedly literal New American Standard Bible, and others which are reputed to be looser versions that are concerned with bringing out the meaning:
NASB Woman, what does that have to do with us?
New Living Translation: How does that concern you and me?
International Standard Version: How does that concern us, Woman?
The Message: Jesus said, "Is that any of our business, Mother--yours or mine? ..."

Comparing Religions

It is always interesting to compare religions, even if you are already convinced about one of them. I have been reading A Spectator's Guide To World Religions, by John Dickson. It is written in an engaging style that makes you want to keep reading. He seems to have done his homework, and I found I knew more about each of the 5 major religions, after reading the book.

His If I Were God, I'd End All The Pain is a great book to read and give away on the problems of evil and suffering. It is short, easy to read and not unbearably dogmatic. Dickson confesses that he also struggles, but he clearly shows how faith in Christ is the best way to deal with these issues. He looks briefly at Hindu, Buddhist, Islamic and Atheist explanations for suffering, and does this in a fair, dispassionate way. A later book, If I Were God, I'd Make Myself Clearer, is another short, thought-provoking look at several influential world religions, including Mormonism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism and Sikhism, through the eyes of a convinced Christian. In this book, Dickson attempts to give some ways in which the claims which Judaism, Mormonism and Christianity make may be tested.

You can purchase these last 2 books from Matthias Media

Holiness by John Charles Ryle

A group of Christians in Australia, the UK and the US [and maybe other places] have begun reading through Bishop J C Ryle's Holiness. You can download the chapters from Mount Zion Bible Institute and join us, if you are interested.

We are discussing the book at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/charisList/

Articles on Guidance

I have been thinking about how God guides his people, and have found several helpful articles at Stand To Reason. Greg Koukl, Christian radio broadcaster, has an interesting article which shows how divine intervention was even unusual in the Book of Acts. In Divine Direction and Decision-Making in the Book of Acts, he shows that God is said to give personalised direction only 16 times over the 30 year period of the Book of Acts, but people made up their own minds without special signs 71 times!

I also found his article on Hearing God's Voice stimulating. In this article he points out that you can't prove that God speaks to people directly today by sharing an experience in which you believe he did, because this is assuming what you are trying to prove! He also shows that God does speak today through his Word and through the inner voice of the Holy Spirit, but does not give us tips on future events.

Michael Spencer's The Internet Monk terrific site for interesting Christian articles. His friend, Bill McKinnon's No Voices in My Head is a humorous look at the way various Christians claim they obtain supernatural guidance. I love his subtitle, which is "God may or may not have told me to write this."

I hope you find these articles as helpful as I have.

Milk or Solids?

We are going through 1 Corinthians in our church, and last week we were in chapter 3, where Paul says:

Brothers and sisters, I could not address you as spiritual but as worldly— mere infants in Christ. I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. Indeed, you are still not ready. You are still worldly. For since there is jealousy and quarreling among you, are you not worldly?

I have been pondering over what Paul means by
milk and solid food. Some commentaries were not very helpful on this issue, but I found Anthony Thiselton's NIGTC commentary and Calvin's to be the most helpful.

The question I was musing over is whether 1 Corinthians only contains "the milk of the Word," which must be supplemented by the solid food in other New Testament books. But what teachings are not found in 1 Corinthians? I suppose you could argue that Ephesians and Colossians have some exalted teaching, not found there, but when Paul says throughout all his writings that the message is Christ, there seems to be a danger that you could think that we can leave behind the simple teaching about Jesus for something deeper, suitable only for spiritual Christians.

But Calvin says

Here it is asked, whether Paul transformed
Christ to suit the diversity of his hearers. I answer, that this refers to the manner and form of his instructions, rather than to the substance of the doctrine. For Christ is at once milk to babes, and strong meat to those that are of full age,the same truth of the gospel is administered to both, but so as to suit their capacity.

Fee, Thiselton and Garland seem to agree with this interpretation, and it satisfies this little black duck!