| Ian Paisley comments on the KJV|
I know that a lot of people on SI have a tremendous amount of respect for Ian Paisley... and rightfully so. God has used him incredibly.
I thought it would be interesting to post Ian Paisley's comments about the KJV (and these are but only a few of his comments on this topic).
Read and enjoy...
PS, the uppercase lettering is not mine...
THE AUTHORITY OF THE SCRIPTURES VS. THE CONFUSION OF THE TRANSLATIONS
[b]IAN PAISLEY[/b], 1983
But HE WHO WROTE THE BOOK PROVIDENTIALLY IN KEEPING WITH HIS PROMISE GLORIOUSLY PRESERVED IT UNTIL THE TIME OF REFORMATION CAME. THEN THERE AROSE A GLORIOUS COMPANY OF TRANSLATORS WHO SET TO WORK TO GIVE THE NATIONS THE BIBLE IN THEIR MOTHER TONGUE. ... I HAIL THIS BOOK THIS DAY. IT REMAINS AMID THE PASSING AND INJURIES OF TIME A HOLY TEMPLE, UNPROFANED BY THE FOOT OF THE ENEMY. IT REMAINS AN INVINCIBLE BUILDING OF GOD AMIDST THE CRUMBLING RUINS OF THE CENTURY. GOD HAS PRESERVED HIS BOOK AND WILL PRESERVE IT.
And now we come to the Bibles Translation. ... The Reformation of the sixteenth century was the greatest revival the church had known since the day of Pentecost. It was brought about by the translation of Gods Word, and its propagation and preaching. The Reformation did not give us the Bible. The Bible gave us the Reformation. ... This is a dynamic book. The devil fears it. The pope fears it. I was arrested for giving out copies of it in Vatican Square some years ago, so I just stepped across the border into Italy and continued to give out the dynamite of Gods Word. ...
And now I say lovingly to my fundamentalist brethren who will differ from me in this: I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT IT WAS AN ERRONEOUS TEXT THAT BROUGHT ABOUT SUCH A SUPERNATURAL INTERVENTION OF ALMIGHTY GOD. NOR CAN I ACCEPT THAT THE MOST RELIABLE TEXTS WERE NOT THEN DISCOVERED. In fact, they werent discovered, we are told, until the nineteenth century when one was found in the trash can of a monastery and the other in the Popes library. Because of that I can accept what is known as the Majority Text. And I believe that this is the text which originated the line of what we might call our English translations. They were all based on that text. The line through which the King James or Authorized Version has comeit comes to us via Tyndale, Coverdale, Matthew, the Great Bible, and the Geneva Bible. ...
Let me state again emphatically that no translation is given by inspiration of God. Inspiration applies only to the original autograph. Inspiration has to do with the giving of the Scriptures, not their translation. And those who speak otherwise deceive those that they address.
But what is more, the King James Version is a revision rather than a completely new translation. It is unique and special because it comes to us providentially as a direct result of the great Reformation and its line of Bibles. ... SO THE KING JAMES VERSION WAS THE APEXTHE CLIMAX OF THE REFORMATION ENGLISH BIBLES AND CAME WITH A SPECIAL SEAL OF HEAVEN UPON THAT GREAT REFORMATION WORK.
The King James Version is based on the Majority Text, on the Traditional Text, or the Received Textreceived by the believers right up to the Reformation period. Again the King James Version was produced by men absolutely dedicated to the verbal inspiration of the Biblehence, their use of italics to indicate an English word for which there is no equivalent in the original Hebrew and Greek.
The language of the King James Version is terse and reverent and is in timeless English that a child can read, learn, and understand. Its very rhythm has led to sanctity of thought, holy awe, and a worshipful approach to God. It is equally suitable to both private and public reading. THE KING JAMES IS SPECIAL AND UNIQUE, NOT BECAUSE IT IS OLDER, BUT BECAUSE OUT OF MORE THAN 100 ENGLISH VERSIONS OFFERED, IT IS IN MY OPINION THE BEST TRANSLATION. We cannot and will not exchange it for an inferior version. Its excellence, its faithfulness, its power, and its witfulness have been proved in our own hearts and in the hearts of millions more.
Now the question is asked, Have I got Gods inspired Word in my hand? I want to answer it. YES, I HAVE GODS INSPIRED WORD IN MY HAND. THE AUTHORIZED VERSION IS A RELIABLE AND ACCURATE TRANSLATION OF THE VERBALLY INSPIRED WORD OF GOD, and I can pin my hopes on its promises knowing them to be the Word of a God that cannot lie. I CAN ABSOLUTELY DEPEND ON THIS BOOK. IT BRINGS TO ME ACCURATELY AND CLEARLY THE INSPIRED WORD OF THE LIVING GODthe word eternally begotten in Heaven, and thank God, eternally settled in Heaven. ...
[b]What is the devil doing now? Hes flooding the markets with a rash of counterfeit and corrupted Bibles. ...[/b]
I trust this night that sinners shall find a way to heaven, that backsliders shall be restored to their Lord, and that Gods people will have a holy fire set alight by God the Holy Ghost within their hearts that were going to read this book, were going to obey this book, were going to preach this book, were going to defend this book, and were going to propagate this book. May God make the fundamentalists men and women of the one book for Jesus sake. Amen (Ian Paisley, The Authority of the Scriptures vs. the Confusion of Translations).
| 2005/8/28 9:52|
| Re: Ian Paisley comments on the KJV|
I'm laughing. Never a disappointment... Praise God!
| 2005/8/28 10:01|
I'm not sure I follow you...
| 2005/8/28 10:19|
I mean, I'm delighted by what Ian Paisley said. 8-)
| 2005/8/28 10:39|
Yea, I'm learning to not jump to conclusions so quickly. You're first post could have gone either way. :-D
I gave ya the benefit of the doubt (and I'm glad I did!).
| 2005/8/28 11:11|
I think I have to agree with everything here.
I should also point out that the emphasis was on assuredness rather than on falacy. I cannot say specifically that it is in my minor opinion the best translation, but I do know that I can depend on it.
| 2005/8/28 13:26||Profile|
I like to read and study the KJV of the Bible.
| 2005/8/28 20:38||Profile|
| Re: Ian Paisley comments on the KJV|
There is an obvious contradiction:
"I can pin my hopes on its promises knowing them to be the Word of a God that cannot lie."
According to this statement, he is pinning his promises on "it" referring to the King James Version of the Bible.
Does God's promise come from the bible, or does God's promise come through Jesus?
The King James Bible itself says this:
2 Timothy 1:1 (KJV)
"Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, according to the promise of life which is in Christ Jesus,"
And it says,
Galatians 3:22 - (KJV)
"But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe."
And so, if this man believes the bible is true, then he believes that the promise of God is "in Christ Jesus" or "by faith of Jesus Christ" as the above text says.
If he believes the promise is in Jesus or by faith of Jesus, then why is he pinning his hopes on the bible?
Additionally, there is no proof that any bible is accurate. We don't have the original texts written by the authors themselves. We have several different texts of different ages without any proof of which is the "correct" text. We have historical evidence of the bibles that date back to the reformation. However, we have no record or history of what occurred during the dark ages. (Which is why they are called the dark ages.)
And so, how do we know if the bible is accurate? We don't. There is no proof. We have to believe in the bible by faith.
The question is, does our faith in the bible come from Jesus? Or does our faith in Jesus come from the bible?
If our faith in Jesus comes from the bible, then it immediately contradicts itself. The bible says we should place our faith in Jesus. If we put our faith in the bible, then we are disagreeing with the bible, for the bible says to put our faith in Jesus.
(Unless of course, you are saying that the bible is Jesus. Is the bible God?)
The only way the bible becomes valid is to first put your faith in Jesus. Once we do, then the bible really begins to speak and become true.
If we put our faith in Jesus, we would not seek "THE BEST TRANSLATION" of the bible, because we would not depend on a book. We would depend on God who is Jesus Christ. If Jesus is truly our shepard, truly our God, will He not direct our paths if we seek Him? Will He not guide us in truth if let Him?
Lastly, what has more authority, the scriptures or Jesus?
| 2005/8/28 21:21||Profile|
I also prefer KJV. I don't worship my Bible, but I worship the God that wrote every single word. He has a few things to say about His individual words, too:
Psalm 12:6 "The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times."
Proverbs 30:5 "Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him."
Matthew 4:4 "But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God."
Matthew 5:18 "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."
Mark 13:31 "Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away."
Luke 16:17 "And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail."
John 6:63b "the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life."
Revelation 22:19 "And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life"
If I tell you the truth, then that is love, so I say this out of love: believe the Bible or not, but we will all be judged by it.
| 2005/8/29 1:27||Profile|
hmmm? Krispy perhaps you don't know that the vast majority of evangelicals over here would not touch Ian Paisley 'with a barge pole', as the saying goes. (It means they would keep their distance) I would personally disassociate myself from almost all that he has represented over decades. His fierce tirades and implacable attitudes have caused enormous offence to many. The fact that it is his voice which opens the compilation on revival means that I, and I suspect many others, could never use it in the UK.
| 2005/8/29 4:20||Profile|