DMLJ was always at pains to warn
Christians against becoming slaves to anything, not even to a particular
translation of Scripture. While he
used, I think exclusively, the KJV in his pulpit work, and spoke very highly
of it as a translation, he did not shy away from criticising it as a
translation when he thought it was either weak or poor or even wrong. With 2011 being the 400th anniversary of the KJV of the Scriptures, we are
finding a lot of noise from the ‘AV only’ people about the features of this translation;
yes, it is good, but it is hardly the best translation, and is capable of
improvement. Improvements have undoubtedly been made in scholarship
and in translation work, and
this is good. The frequency with which AV-using ministers have to re-translate the text to make it intelligible to the
people of the 21st century is in itself a commentary on its antiquity
and obscurity.
DMLJ
was no different. He had to depart from
the AV in favour, very often, of the RV, in order to have a more accurate
translation of a particular text from which to preach.
Nor
did he accept that Paul is the author of the epistle to the Hebrews. He
simply refers to a statement in Hebrews, or simply that Hebrews describes Him
as... While he appreciated scholarship,
he did not accept the “assured results” of scholarship that does not take the
Bible’s own self-designation as “the word of God” seriously.
No comments:
Post a Comment