home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
Bible Heaven
/
Bible Heaven.iso
/
1611_kjv
/
msg-ejg.05
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1994-02-11
|
5KB
|
88 lines
>>> Continued from previous message
reason, what the necessity of the employment: Hath the Church been
deceived, say they, all this while? ... Was their Translation good
before? Why do they now mend it? Was it not good? Why then was it
obtruded to the people? ..."
Without these trenchant sentences, people are left with the impression
that the King James translation descended like the gentle dew from heaven,
amidst universal acclaim. The silencing of the controversial note of the
Preface puts a false face upon the version, for which its original makers
are not to blame.
A third objection raised by the publishers to restoring the Preface
is its obscurity, and the confusion it would create, in the mind of the
ordinary reader. If this confusion means that the reader would be made
aware that there had been and might be other versions of the Bible, it
might better be called clarification. Confusion is the ordinary reader's
present condition of mind, as I have tried to show. Left without the
translator's guidance, he now believes the King James to be the "original"
divinely inspired, unique, not made with hands, final, and definitive.
To break in upon this false assurance with the clear statements of the
Preface may produce a temporary confusion, but the confusion will be due
to the disastrous practice of omitting the Preface, not to the healthful
one of including it.
As for obscurity, is the Preface any more obscure than the version
it introduced? This is the strangest of all reasons for the King James
printers to adduce, yet I have it before me in writing from one of the
greatest of them.
"The words of the wise are as goads, and as nails fastened by
the masters of assemblies, which are given from one shepherd."
- Ecclesiastes 12:11
So reads the King James Version. Is there anything in the Preface that
approaches this in obscurity? Yet publishers justify the omission of
the Preface on the ground that it is "obscure." There is not a sentence
in it as obscure as this one, or as hosts of others in the King James
Version. No, if obscurity is the criterion, the publishers might have
omitted the version and printed the Preface, but hardly the other way.
It must be that the publishers are quite unaware of the marked obscurity
of great areas of their own version.
A recent advocate of the King James Version says of the English
Bible: "Much of the writing is inferior. .... Whole sections of the
historical narratives are written in an immature and inferior manner. ...
Some of the prophets have only a single verse that arrests attention.
Only occasionally did Paul reveal his tremendous capacity to express
thought in a memorable manner?" What does this mean, but that the writer
does not understand his version? The simple truth is, the obscurity of
the King James Version is its outstanding trait. When a man says things
like this about Paul and the prophets, he is indicating, not the Bible
at all, but his version of it. He reveals the fact that he is using a
version he cannot understand.
It may require some patience for the modern reader to peruse the
King James Preface. But think of the patience he is called upon to
exhibit in reading long obscure areas of Paul and the prophets! He is
by no means unaccustomed to reading his Bible in the midst of obscurity.
And it is an admirable idea to have a genuine piece of first class
Jacobean prose before him, side by side with the Jacobean revision,
to show him how these revisers actually wrote when not translating
but expressing their own thoughts. Here their real literary standards
appear, in an authentic sample. If to their modern publishers their
style appears obscure, it may in part explain the greater obscurity of
their version. And at all events, it shows how they thought one should
write. This affords their readers an example of what they considered
clear and forceful English, and the value of this to any serious reader
of King James, as a measuring rod, a standard of style, is unmistakable.
Anyone who can understand the Preface can understand the version.
Especially for students, the Preface, with its wealth of contem-
porary materials and attitudes, is indispensable. In a humanities
survey course for college Freshmen, a western university recently
purchased 43 copies of the King James Bible without the Preface. In
no other field of study would such a course have been dreamed of. To
approach that version historically, and as any student should, without
the Preface, is simply impossible. What has been said of the importance
of the Preface to the general reader is even more true of the student,
and it is high time our teachers of the English Bible in colleges awoke
to the fact. But how can they be expected to awaken to it, when very
few of them have ever seen a Bible containing the Preface? For the
past hundred years, from the point of view of everyone -- ministers,
professors, students, general readers, pious readers -- the Preface
has been virtually suppressed.
>>> Continued to next message