The 1611 translators wrote, "Therefore as St Augustine saith, that variety of translations is profitable for the finding out of the sense of the Scriptures".
Where they, or Augustine of Hippo talking about modern versions? No. Were they actually recommending that many different translations were needed for us to find out the sense of the Scripture? No.
The KJB translators looked at many different sources, it is true, but they selected or identified that there was one true reading and one true translation at every place. If you point to the margins, they are evidence in favour of having one true reading and one true translation. The marginal matter is not "alternative", but "variant". It is other information which may either be false, erroneous, half true, inaccurate, semi-factual, etc., but it is never the exact, inspired truth.
It is completely wrong for people today to be consulting a variety of translations (except in a believing mode) because we must start from the foundation of having ONE REPRESENTATIONAL AUTHORITY. The modernists put anything else there, such as their own opinion, but we must put God's Word there. We put the KJB as the foundation. We recognise that it is the standard which God has supplied. And from that point, we have already accepted that the variety of translations was profitable for rendering the sense as is presented in the King James Bible, and by studying the KJB, we are finding out the sense of the Scripture without having to consult the "originals".
Thus, if ever a believer was to look at anything other than the KJB, it must be with the view that what he is looking at is imperfect/not aligning exactly to the truth. Therefore, we do not use the Greek to correct the KJB, but rather, should be viewing anyone who is trying to do so with extreme suspicion in that regard. This is because we already have the sense of the Scripture, and anything otherwise now serves only for the confuting, except that if we look at such things as former things, or things to be laid behind, or things scattered, incomplete or otherwise not set up by God as the final authority, though having some residual secondary authority (e.g. the Geneva Version or a Textus Receptus edition).
|