Baptist missionary Christopher Yetzer has been doing some review and critique of the KJV Parallel Bible website. This project was “conceived,
designed, and organized by Mark Ward,” who is the author of Authorized: The Use
and Misuse of the King James Bible, Blogger, YouTuber, and ubiquitous “Apostle”
to King James Onlyists. Brother Yetzer has found that the number of errors on
the website makes it an unreliable witness for its so-called purpose – for
those who do not read Greek to “know for [themselves] what these differences
are” and so that they do not “have to take someone else’s word for it.”
To my way of thinking there is an underlying and unspoken
purpose that aligns with Mark Ward’s ongoing effort of praising the King James
Bible while trying to get people to convert to newer translations.
The creator hopes his readers will conclude that they should
change from using the KJV and instead use a modern translation. To lead to this
conclusion, the site attempts to show (1) that there is not much difference
between the texts behind the KJV and modern translations so that there will not
be much actual change, and (2) that there is enough difference between the
texts behind the KJV and modern translations that folks should change to a
modern translation.
When Mark Ward first told me about this site, I thought it sounded like a very good idea that could be widely useful in the Bible versions debates. Now, even if I were not aware of the problems Christopher Yetzer has found (some of which I have inspected and seen myself), the site’s endorsement by Daniel Wallace and Peter Gurry, eager advocates of the Critical Text and ardent opponents of the Traditional Text, is enough to give me pause. “Take my word for it,” if you use this site, you will still be taking someone else’s word for it.
Note: I do not mean the site cannot be useful to some folks. However, with its mistakes, it is not and cannot be useful to those for whom it is supposedly designed.
2 comments:
well said. and more could be.
it is a deceptive site with deceptive intent.
i noticed Christopher did not mention the "reco's" from the Wall-Gur, because that is enough to cause concern.
What is also telling is that they endorsed such a shoddy product without really examining it like you, Yetzer, Sayers, etc. and uncovering it's numerous errors.
kudos, brother Vaughn.
Thanks, brother. Christopher Yetzer has done some detailed work on this (and Nick, too). I have not looked at it as much in detail as they have. However, I have myself looked at verses Brother Yetzer pointed out, and have the same opinion of those as he does. A corollary to this, though not mentioned above, is that he has informed them of errors on the site -- and they still appear there as errors.
It is my opinion that Wallace and Gurry were just gleeful to see such a site, not that they actually examined it carefully before they endorsed it. Just my opinion.
Post a Comment