All posts by bibleprotector

David Daniels’ confusion about pure words


INTRODUCTION

David Daniels, from Chick Publications, made a video (8 April 2021) where he discussed the Pure Cambridge Edition of the King James Bible. Daniels has made various good videos and his ministry has been generally helpful. He also wants to stick with the King James Bible, which is laudable.

WHAT IS PURITY?

Daniels begins by asking whether people should throw away their King James Bible if it is not a Pure Cambridge Edition.

My answer is that no one should be throwing out the King James Bible. Of course, we should use the Pure Cambridge Edition.

Would anyone use a book with typographical errors when they have another printing of that same book which doesn’t?

What Daniels does is confuse the purity of the version and translation of the KJB and then apply that standard as if someone is saying that the KJB printed by Oxford or wherever is not a pure version and translation. No, the King James Bible is a pure version and translation in all its normal historical editions.

Typographical errors don’t invalidate the version and translation of the KJB. But you wouldn’t want to use unstandard and bad printing when you have the option for good. The word “pure” in “Pure Cambridge Edition” is talking about correct spelling and typography. It is a different measure or kind of purity than when talking about one version/translation versus another.

WHAT ARE EDITIONS?

Daniels says that the Pure Cambridge Edition is one that matches up to 12 particular verses having particular lettering or spelling. While this is fine for detecting what is a Pure Cambridge Edition, the reality is that there are whole lists of specific differences between current editions. See bibleprotector.com/editions

There are many editions of the King James Bible since 1611, and so on analysis there are many variations is spellings, punctuation and so on. And if you start by comparing the first King James Bible ever printed in 1611 with any other edition, you will always find variations here and there.

None of these are causing the loss of God’s words, but obviously correcting typographical errors and the standardising of the spelling and grammar has been a good thing.

There are a line of corrections from 1611, 1629, 1638 to 1769 and beyond. The Pure Cambridge Edition is an approximately 20th century correction of the Cambridge adoption of the 1769 editorial corrections (which took place in the 1830s under Thomas Turton).

DO CAPITAL LETTERS MATTER?

Daniels goes on to have a look at some of the examples, particularly around the fact that the Pure Cambridge Edition is getting the word “Spirit” right when it is capital or lower case. A difference in capital or lower case has a difference in meaning.

In fact, in general, changing a word in any document may change some sort of meaning. Not that the actual word of God is changed, but the potential for misunderstanding arising from an editorial inconsistency is the issue.

It is obvious we wouldn’t accept a typo like “Jesus” for “Judas” or vice versa.

Doctrines or doctrinal precision matters, and that is why words, lower case and capital matter.

Saying that the case of letters does not matter, or that because in Greek the Bible was written in all capitals (uncials) or all lower case (minuscules) … the Bible has been translated into English, and clearly capitals do matter.

Would Daniels accept a King James Bible printed without capitals? Would he accept one that always put “god” instead of “God”? I don’t think so.

SOME OTHER EXAMPLES

Daniels is not understanding the differences in words, so when he comes to the examples of “flieth” versus “fleeth”, “further” versus “farther” and “bewray” versus “betray”, he thinks there is no real difference.

But there is. I have written about these before, and information is also in my booklet “Glistering Truths”.

Simply, the word “flieth” means both to flee and to fly away, as the cankerworm turns into a flying insect. Whereas “fleeth” does not have the meaning about the flying insect.

Again, “further” means more far, whereas “farther” simply means a choice out of two options, the nearer and the farther. Correct grammar dictates proper usage.

And as for “bewray” this is a word from Anglo-Saxon meaning to convey inadvertently. Whereas “betray” if from French, and means to trade for. Very evidently these are two different words with two different meanings.

Daniels needs to recognise that distinct words have distinct meanings. To ignore or deny this is simply anti-intellectualism.

IS DANIELS SERIOUS THAT HE WON’T USE AN EDITION CALLED PURE?

Daniels said, rather strangely, that he wouldn’t use an edition called “pure”.

Would he use an edition with no name?

Would he use a mid-twentieth century printed Cambridge KJB?

Conversely, would he use a grossly misprinted edition? What if it was called “The Grossly Misprinted Edition”?

Many Christians who love and use the King James Bible have realised that words and letters do matter, accuracy matters, and there is everything good about everyone using the same edition and knowing that it has every editorial choice right.

CONCLUSION

The answers here address any concerns, clear misconceptions and really explain why it is good to use a particular standard edition of the King James Bible.

Ecclesiastes 12:10, 11

10 The preacher sought to find out acceptable words: and that which was written was upright, even words of truth.

11 The words of the wise are as goads, and as nails fastened by the masters of assemblies, which are given from one shepherd.

The accusation that there are dead words in the KJB

Modern translation advocates often argue that the King James Bible has hard words or doesn’t make sense, and that people should use newer translations. One modernist supporter said that there were dead words in the King James Bible.

I responded to him saying:

The underlying premise that there are words which are essentially “meaningless” in the King James Bible is false. Words have meanings, and those meanings are understood by believers as they study properly. Seeing as Scripture is God’s word, then of course there are some difficult words, but the special thing about “hard” words in the King James Bible is that they are needed and communicate exactly the message of the original. To smear the King James Bible with these fabrications that its words are misunderstood is unfair, and is a blatant attempt to demote the truth.

He replied that nobody is saying words are meaningless. He said that to a modern speaker, words like “let”/”letteth” are perceived as meaning allow, because that is how that word is used today. He said that there is nothing to indicate to the modern speaker any other meaning. He said that the KJB translators use the word “let” to mean prevent, which, he said, is the total opposite. On this basis he argued that the wording of the KJB should be updated.

Here is my lengthy reply:

Your argument still is that the words of the KJB should be changed because they are on occasion meaningless or misleading in meaning to modern speakers. However everything about your view is refutable. Here’s a correct and logical approach:

1. The King James Bible is not confusing if you understand it

2. You can understand it because:

a. God helps you

b. You can learn

3. God’s will is to make His truth known and he has given people capacity to receive it

4. The standard of truth or measure of goodness is not “modern readers” but God

THEREFORE “modern readers” need to be transformed in their thinking

On one side you are exalting the modern reader’s inability to understand properly, while on the other side I am exalting God’s ability to have the willing understand properly.

Like the “woke” people, you set yourself to speak on behalf of the poor ignorant folk who don’t know what “let” means, yet are you unwilling to help people understand so they can keep the King James Bible? Why would God, whose knowledge is high, have supplied you as the best teachers and conveyors of His truth by supplying new and simplified translations, when the conceptual accuracy and communication of God is so high, particular and exact? Your Bible teaching must therefore be equivalent to keeping doctrine at explanations for three year olds, rather than at the precision of every word, syllable and letter of the KJB. You simply don’t know what nuances and depths of doctrines you are missing out on. The worst thing about this is most of the leading people of your side want it that way. Too often as well it is convenient to claim to adhere to the “real” truth in Hebrew/Greek because that allows the translator/interpreter to massage the meaning. Whatever happened to God having His actual meaning, absolute truth?

By the way, the word “let” does mean something like allow, as in 1 Cor. 10:12 “Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.” What you meant to say was, there are occasions where the same looking word may have other meanings. That’s called homography. What you seem to be saying is that homography must be eliminated because “modern readers” may not know when it is happening.

SOLUTION: Turn modern readers into Biblical readers/hearers.

Checking a second hand KJB is PCE before purchasing

HOW TO KNOW THE PURE CAMBRIDGE EDITION OF THE KING JAMES BIBLE

It is important to have the correct, perfect and final text of the King James Bible, since there are correctors (e.g. publishers) who have changed some aspects of King James Bible texts. The final form of the King James Bible is the Pure Cambridge Edition (circa 1900), which conforms to the following:

1. “or Sheba” not “and Sheba” in Joshua 19:2
2. “sin” not “sins” in 2 Chronicles 33:19
3. “Spirit of God” not “spirit of God” in Job 33:4
4. “whom ye” not “whom he” in Jeremiah 34:16
5. “Spirit of God” not “spirit of God” in Ezekiel 11:24
6. “flieth” not “fleeth” in Nahum 3:16
7. “Spirit” not “spirit” in Matthew 4:1
8. “further” not “farther” in Matthew 26:39
9. “bewrayeth” not “betrayeth” in Matthew 26:73
10. “Spirit” not “spirit” in Mark 1:12
11. “spirit” not “Spirit” in Acts 11:28
12. “spirit” not “Spirit” in 1 John 5:8

This is the list to use to identify the PCE. A fuller list can be seen here which compares editions: bibleprotector.com/editions

Now, what about something like where some PCEs have “Zarah” and some “Zerah” at Gen. 46:12? Copies of the PCE have both spellings of that, it’s a variation within PCEs. The quick answer is that the correct form can be seen by checking bibleprotector.com, that is, “Zerah”.

A PCE is defined as a KJB edition text which follows a small set of criteria, e.g. 1 John 5:8 lower case “s” on “spirit”, etc. (The list of 12 criteria above.)

There is also a “critical” correct exemplary PCE text, i.e. that which is supplied on the bibleprotector.com website.

Thus, a PCE copy you might own might have some printing mistake somewhere, like a full stop missing or something somewhere, for example, a copy printed by Collins, from 1959 Iona Octavo let’s say.

Here we are defining Edition (with a capital “E”) as conformity to the set of editorial choices (i.e. the PCE) while an edition (I.e. a print run in a style for a certain publisher in a certain size a certain year) may exhibit some variation unique (an erratum like a missing full stop) or in minority (like the variation in the spelling of the word “Zarah” which goes across various printings). Remember, the PCE by Bible Protector resolves and presents what is actually standard, but yes I have used Collins Bibles a lot in Church, because they are PCE, not because their printing is “immaculate”.

(I now use Church Bible Publishers printed Bibles at Church, personally, I use a Large Print Turquoise Reference, they are PCE and they are well bound.)

Now, to get onto the quick way I might check a Bible. Say I visit a book sale, a second hand book store or whatever. To make a quick check, I will see the publisher, if it is Collins or Cambridge, I am expecting it likely to be correct. For a quick check, I don’t go through a huge list, I just do this:

1. Front Page is King James Bible
2. Ezra 2:26 says “Geba” not “Gaba”
3. 1 John 5:8 says “spirit” not “Spirit”

Yes? Then I will likely purchase. (Hopefully you can get a person to check for you if you are buying online.)

The Cambridge Standard Text is a different edition, it was made by Cambridge after it purchased Eyre and Spottiswoode, and it does not have italics. Cambridge also has some other editions, like Concord, French Morocco Large Print, Windsor and post-PCE Cameo. Those printings from the 1980s onward will likely fail the test at least at 1 John 5:8.

In the past, the Trinitarian Bible Society (TBS) Bibles, and British & Foreign Bible Society Bibles (BFBS) were PCEs printed by Cambridge, often at their Pitt Press, which is distinct from their University printing location. Because of this, Pitt TBS and Pitt BFBS copies can differ to other Cambridge printings of the PCE in a few places, like making into small capitals “ELI ELI LAMA SABACTHANI” etc.

Now to actual indications of types of printings and presentations of the range of 32mo, 24mo, 16mo, 12mo, 8vo (Octavo), 4to (Quarto) and if you can ever find Folio sized Cambridge printed KJBs from 1928 to 1984 are likely PCE. These also come in a series of names like gemstones, i.e. Ruby, Amethyst, Diamond, Sapphire, Emerald, Turquoise, etc.  And also the beloved Cameo. Further, Pitt Press has its Pitt Octavo (Brevier), Pitt Brevier (no italics) and Pitt Minion Bold Figure Reference styles.

Likewise Collins, and sometimes World, and sometimes known as HarperCollins, have a similar array of PCEs in those sizes, 32mo etc. up to Family Bible (quarto) and Lectern Bible (Folio) size. These will include Iona, New Brevier, Fontana, Popular (from their Clear-Type Press) etc. These will be dated from approx. 1932 to 2007 at least. Not every single Collins printing was PCE, but most were.

Incidentally, Cambridge printed for SGM Publishing House, the Mormons (as well as through their Baker Books branding in the USA) and Collins printed for the Freemasons, Presbyterian Church, etc. Thus, you can find PCEs with those brandings on them, of course, I like to re-cover those Bibles.

At the back of Cambridge-printed Bibles are little letter and numbers, on the last page, which gives the print run amount, the printing press letter and the year in the 20th century, e.g. 120 F 57, one of my many Ruby Sunday School style 24mos, meaning, 120,000 printed at machine F in 1957, while another is 150 G 58.

Collins have a Licence printed in the front just after the title page, the date at the bottom just before the signed name will indicate the year, e.g. nineteen forty-five, and also tell you how many were to be printed. It seems that the 1950s was especially a high volume printing period.

Mark Ward: false friend of the KJB

Mark Ward has been making videos which pretend to explain what words in the King James Bible mean.

The problem is that his starting point is not to respect the King James Bible, nor to uphold Biblical English, nor to discern the correctness of its “glistering truths”. Rather, Mark Ward’s real agenda is to undermine the KJB, to put it in a bad light, and to present new translations as better.

In Mr Ward’s mission to attack the King James Bible, he argues the following: “I want to teach you what language is like, the ways language changes. I want you to see how random and varied those changes are. Language change is a fog that creeps over a landscape, leaving some bushes in full clear view, and other obscured, or half obscured, or 32.8% obscured. Language change is gradual and nebulous. We aren’t likely to wake up one day and discover that, oh, English has taken a great leap forward, or backward. Not unless there’s some major geo-political catastrophe that alters our linguistic situation considerably.” (Video on Moisture.)

Notice, now, that his doctrine is not a Biblical doctrine, but a doctrine of men. His view on language, or what he thinks about the King James Bible’s language, is entirely natural, unspiritual and in opposition to the truth.

Let’s begin with a few Biblical truths.
1. God is in control.
Who declares the end from the beginning in Isaiah 46?
Who raises up kings? Daniel 4:32b states, “the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will”. Daniel 2:21 says, “And he changeth the times and the seasons: he removeth kings, and setteth up kings: he giveth wisdom unto the wise, and knowledge to them that know understanding”.
2. God is in control of language.
God divided the languages at Babel.
The Spirit gave the tongues on the day of Pentecost and beyond.
The fact that English was raised up as a receptacle for the Gospel and evangelistic is a truth shown in Historicist Prophecy, and by Providence.

Mr Ward’s starting point is Infidelity. He has accepted the logical outcomes of Enlightenment philosophy. They had a deistic view, that God is like a watchmaker who made the clockwork universe, and now things continue in their own cycles without His direct input. Even worse, such people will reason that the natural processes are somehow the work of God, and they see errors, random chaos, uncertainty, perplexities everywhere. This, they think, is the work of God.

“With the pure thou wilt shew thyself pure; and with the froward thou wilt shew thyself froward.” (Psalm 18:26). Because such people expect to see mistakes and errors, and think God is essentially choosing to outwork in that fashion, they only see mistakes and errors, and never a pure Bible or a divinely raised up and guided English language. They do not see Biblical English. So, of course, people like Mark Ward will mock and scoff at the King James Bible’s language, they will smugly make their little pronouncements against it. But such attacks are dangerous, and in fact invoke divine retribution. Teaching little ones to offend was seen as a heinous sin in the teachings of our Lord and Saviour.

The Cyrus prophecy

King Cyrus is one of the most important figures in Bible history, and yet he was a Gentile.

We know from Jeremiah that the Medo-Persians with their allies were to take Babylon, of which we see practically in the Book of Daniel. However, one of the most startling prophecies is in Isaiah, where it mentions Cyrus by name long before he was ever born.

“THUS saith the LORD to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden, to subdue nations before him; and I will loose the loins of kings, to open before him the two leaved gates; and the gates shall not be shut; … For Jacob my servant’s sake, and Israel mine elect, I have even called thee by thy name: I have surnamed thee, though thou hast not known me.” (Isaiah 45:1, 4).

So we find that God called Cyrus, and we find in 2 Chronicles 36:22, 23, “Now in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, that the word of the LORD spoken by the mouth of Jeremiah might be accomplished, the LORD stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, that he made a proclamation throughout all his kingdom, and put it also in writing, saying, Thus saith Cyrus king of Persia, All the kingdoms of the earth hath the LORD God of heaven given me; and he hath charged me to build him an house in Jerusalem, which is in Judah. Who is there among you of all his people? The LORD his God be with him, and let him go up.”

The story is well known, the Jews returned from exile, and enjoyed what has been called their palingenesis.

Bible prophecy, as is shown even by this ministry (see bibleprotector.com/prophecy) can have more than one meaning. The prophecy about Cyrus is said by some people to have a meaning applicable to these days, and some even point to presidents of the USA as being modern or prophetic Cyruses. (See, for example, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTFjUY8KC20).

Now the Cyrus prophecy is in Isaiah 44:28, where it states, “That saith of Cyrus, He is my shepherd, and shall perform all my pleasure: even saying to Jerusalem, Thou shalt be built; and to the temple, Thy foundation shall be laid.”

While that occurred literally, the spiritual meaning is as follows: there is a spiritual and a natural Israel, and the spiritual Jerusalem means the Church and the spiritual foundation of the temple means the foundation to Christianity. Of course, this prophecy means that the Church is to be built, meaning, proper Church unity, and that Christianity is to have a proper doctrinal basis.

UNITY. Christ said He will build the Church and we know that it must come to the unity of the faith according to Ephesians 4. This means that Christians should come into the gifts and operate in love, and so come into a full unity of the brethren. This means that in the latter days, there must be a true Church in unity.

DOCTRINE. Having sound doctrine is important, and is actually attainable. This means that not only can people know the truth (as Jesus promised that we shall know the truth) but that we should be able to have full right doctrine held by multitudes of people.

This is the Cyrus prophecy, which is daring in its scope, and yet powerful in its promise.

The Gospel is all the freedom needed

Martyn Iles has been very active in in social media and with prominent causes around issues to do with expression of religion.

Iles used to head the Human Rights Law Alliance before taking on his current role as the front man for the Australian Christian Lobby.

He states that he wants Australia to have a Bill of Rights or legislation which enshrines freedoms as based on the United Nations Covenant of Human Rights.

As a quick history: the first declaration of human rights came in with the violent French Revolution. This and all ensuing declarations are based upon a secular humanist viewpoint.

Human Rights are obviously not based upon the Bible, church teachings or religious laws, but on a view that mankind, in an atheistic sense, is ascribing rights to himself.

Christians should understand that the basis of freedom is upon divine authority, not merely by some legislation. Alarm bells should be ringing at the idea of taking what is fundamentally an anti-Christian declaration of Human Rights to somehow use it to grant “rights” for the free pursuit of all religions and irreligion. In effect, it would be a subjugation of true religion to human controls. The truth is not just like any other religion.  

The Australian constitution and historical practice have been for the possibility for the pursuit of freedom of conscience and belief until this time. Just because the Left with their political correctness want to destroy traditional society and morality does not justify Christians embracing their “Human Rights” as ours, or as a shield for us; on the contrary, such an idea should be completely rejected.

If we say that we should be free by new laws, this same “freedom” is then available to be used as a weapon for anti-Christian belief systems to be “free” from any influence of the truth.

The battle is first spiritual, and secondly ideological, a public relations exercise and a numbers game. Iles therefore is misguided as he inadvertently could be using issues for an agenda which is intrinsically against Christianity.

The way forward for us and to fight extreme Left wing attacks on Christianity is to actually have the practical advancement of Christianity. Genuine conversions and meaningful transformation of society by the Gospel is the only way forward for Christian unity and advancing proper authority.

The Gospel itself is the program of the societal reign of Christ in Oceania through the hearts of Christian believers.

Having a proper Christian dominance brings true freedom and requires no meaningless legislative “solution” for some open ended “freedom”.

We should take the opportunity to pursue truth despite any current opposition. We should be promoting truth not putting our trust into “religious freedom”.

“Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.” (2 Timothy 3:12).

“Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened unto you:” (1 Peter 4:12).