John Clarke’s Bible

In the Baptist History Preservation group on Facebook, Jonathan Burris asserted that early Baptist churches in America used the Geneva Bible rather than the King James Bible. He invoked the name of John Clarke.[i] He “substantiated” his claim by simply declaring that the Geneva Bible is what came over on the Mayflower, not the King James; and that “All of this is easily verifiable.” Let’s see what we can verify.

Mayflower.

First, I have previously reviewed the claim that the Pilgrims would have only brought and used the Geneva Bible (see HERE). Briefly, the Pilgrim Hall Museum in Plymouth, Massachusetts possesses two Bibles they are “reasonably sure” came over in the Mayflower – a Geneva Bible belonging to Governor William Bradford and a King James Bible belonging to John Alden. The carefully stated position of the museum is that they do not have “absolute proof” that there were any Bibles on the Mayflower. This is not quite the substantial evidence against the King James Bible that Jonathan Burris proposed.

John Clarke.

As I remember it, Burris wished us to take the matter of John Clarke’s Bible “on credit” rather than his presenting evidence to prove his claim.

It can be shown that John Clarke, pastor of the Baptist Church at Newport, Rhode Island, owned a Geneva Bible. In 1978, when Edwin S. Gaustad wrote Baptist Piety,[ii] he stated that this Bible then was “now in the possession of the Rhode Island Historical Society.” He described it as “a 1608 edition of the Geneva Bible, printed in London by Robert Barker.” He adds “it apparently first belonged to John Clarke’s father, Thomas (1570-1627)” and “contains vital statistics pertinent to the Clarke family.” The fact that John Clarke owned a Geneva Bible (which may have survived to the present primarily because of its Clarke family information) does not prove that he did not own or use a King James Bible.

To test the claim of Jonathan Burris, I reviewed John Clarke’s Ill News from New-England; Or, a Narrative of New-Englands Persecution in order to get a sense of what Bible Clarke used – especially hoping to find Bible verses quoted in his book by which to identify a particular translation. There is a lot of scripture in his book, but often times he is likely quoting from memory – just writing and not looking in a Bible to get it exact. In some places it seems like he adjusts Bible verses to fit in the form of the sentence he is writing. Nevertheless, my initial conclusion is that John Clarke’s Bible references favor the King James as the primary Bible he was using in 1652 when he wrote Ill News from New England. Consider this.

Review.

On the cover page of this book, Clarke excerpts from three verses in Revelation: 2:25; 3:11; 22:20. Two are the same in both Bibles, but 3:11 has “behold I come shortly” in the Geneva Bible – which is not what Clarke has.

John Clarke refers to part of Romans 8:2, and that reference does not match either the Geneva or KJV. When he mentions part of Hebrews 12:14, it is the same in both the Geneva and KJV. When he writes “the word that in the 5 Rom. 11. is rendered attonement, is in 2 Cor. 5. 18, 19. and in all other places translated by the word Reconciliation,” he could be speaking of either the Geneva or the KJV.

There are several lengthy quotes at the bottom of page 33 and top of page 34. These seemed to be for the purpose of quotation rather than just worked into writing a paragraph. What Bible or Bibles do these match? 

“Revel. 13. 10. He that leadeth into Captivity shall go into Captivity, he that killeth with the Sword must be killed with the Sword; here is the patience and faith of the Saints.” [Matches the KJV.]

• KJV: “He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints.”
• Geneva: “If any lead into captivity, he shall go into captivity: if any kill with a sword, he must be killed by a sword: here is the patience and the faith of the Saints.”

“Rev. 12. 11. And they overcame him by the bloud of the Lamb, and by the Word of their Testimony, and they loved not their lives unto the death.” [Matches the KJV]

• KJV: “And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.”
• Geneva: “But they overcame him by that blood of that Lamb, and by that word of their testimony, and they loved not their lives unto the death.”

Rev. 6. 9, 10, 11. I saw under the Altar the Souls of them that were slain for the Word of God, and for the testimony which they held; And they cryed with a loud voice saying, how long holy and true wilt thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwel on the Earth, &c. [Not an exact match for either, but closer to the KJV.]

• KJV: “…I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held: and they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth? ....”
• Geneva: “…I saw under the altar the souls of them that were killed for the word of God, and for the testimony which they maintained. And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, Lord, which art holy and true! dost not thou judge and avenge our blood on them, that dwell on the earth? …”

Rev. 20. 4. And I saw the Souls of them that were beheaded for the Witness of Iesus, and for the Word of God, and which had not worshiped the Beast, neither his Image, neither had received the marke upon their foreheads; or in their hands, and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. [Matches the KJV]

• KJV: “…and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.”
• Geneva: “and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which did not worship the beast, neither his image, neither had taken his mark upon their foreheads or on their hands: and they lived, and reigned with Christ a thousand years.”

Conclusion.

The Mayflower/Geneva Bible legend is overworked and needs a rest (or at least a very thorough and unbiased review). Jonathan Burris’s claim that John Clarke preferred and used the Geneva Bible will not withstand scrutiny. The results of my initial test yields the conclusion that the Bible quotes in 1652 favor John Clarke’s using the King James Bible rather than the Geneva Bible.[iii] 

My conclusion is tentative and needs to be tested more carefully. For example, retest with a greater sample of the work of John Clarke and other early Baptists in the American colonies. Compare using actual scans of Bibles printed in that period to check the quotes. I used the AKJV and 1599 Geneva on BibleGateway (which should be relatively trustworthy, but still not the truest test; it is what I had time to do while discussing this on the Facebook forum). Nevertheless, this test gives an idea how we can begin to verify such claims rather than just make them up!

---

[i] John Clarke was born in England in 1609, the son of Thomas Clarke. He arrived in British America in 1637. Clarke pastored the Baptist Church in Newport, Rhode Island, and was instrumental in gaining Rhode Island’s charter favoring freedom of religion. He died in 1676. A well-researched book on the life of John Clarke is John Clarke (1609-1676): Pioneer in American Medicine, Democratic Ideals, and Champion of Religious Liberty, by Louis Franklin Asher (Dorrance Publishing Company, 1997).
[ii] Gaustad’s book is primarily about Clarke’s co-labourer at the Baptist Church at Newport, Obadiah Holmes. Gaustad concludes that it is difficult to determine from his biblical quotations which Bible Holmes was using. This is due to the similarities of the Geneva and King James Bibles, that writers and speakers often quoted from an inexact memory (and therefore might not exactly match either of these Bibles), and that sometimes verses alluded to are not intended as quotations.
[iii] Burris switched his horses mid-stream, after seeing it could be proven that John Clarke used the King James translation, saying that maybe Clarke switched to the KJV later in his life. That is possible. It would not be unlikely that any Englishman living in this period started his life with the Geneva Bible and ended his life with the King James Bible. However, what “may be” as conjecture falls short of verifiable facts. Burris said his claim regarding the first Baptists in America and the Geneva was “easily verifiable.” Under its own weight, this easy verification must needs have devolved into speculation. John Clarke may have never (as a preacher) used the Geneva Bible and only used the KJV. That is also unproven conjecture (though there is proof of his use of the KJV in his life.) We know that Clarke owned a Geneva Bible which had belonged to his father. Whether he brought it when he came to America, or obtained it after his father’s death when he was back in England is a matter for further research. His father died in 1627. (For example, I own an old Scofield Bible which belonged to my father; that does not make it the Bible I preached from.) We know Clarke quoted from the King James Bible in 1652. How these facts fit together with what Bible John Clarke used in 1638 is currently unknown to me. For now any claim of John Clarke of Newport, Rhode Island preferring the Geneva Bible must be placed on a “Christian urban legend” shelf alongside such claims regarding John Bunyan and John Milton.