Tuesday, February 09, 2021

W. W. Simkins and KJVO

The English Version of the New Testament, Compared with King James’ Translation, in Use by All Protestants, by William Washington Simkins

Remarks, pp. 37-43

Having often heard of a New Version coming out, I was anxious to see it, expecting to see something in good form, nicely improved in versification; strictly grammatical, and worthy the notice and reading of all classes who read and speak the English language. But, to my astonishment, I found it to be miserably poor in form, ingrammatical, and in some cases amounting to almost nonsense—i. e., in the new construction of texts.

Now, as I have been an extensive reader in the theological works of all churches, have thoroughly studied the Christian Bible, and have read several versions of the New Testament, the Mormon Bible, the Spiritual Bible, the Mohammedan Bible,—Alcoran, with extracts from the Hindoo Bible,—Shaster, all commentaries on the Scriptures, all theological writers, the Age of Reason and near all other infidel works, the Grecian philosophy, and all the parts of science, together with the widespread book of Physiological Nature, I think I am able to compare the New Version with King James’ translation; to give credit where credit is due, and to detect mistranslations and interpolations, especially when not in accordance with Divine Writ—Holy Bible, from whatsoever source they may come.

I have carefully compared the two versions, given the manner of phraseology, changes of words to make the same meaning, words, phrases and verses left out, etc., in a plain and fair way, so that every reader may understand to what extent one version is inferior or superior to the other.

In the New Version there are words amounting to the same meaning, but in some cases a very inferior class to those of the Old Version; therefore, nothing better, no improvement—and, with former versions, gotten up with the same intent, it falls beneath the notice of enlightened Christians, and of those wishing to be. In its form it is not well adapted to be used in the pulpit, the family circle, nor the Sunday-school.

It corrects very few ingrammatical expressions of the Old Version; indeed, it is much more ingrammatical than the Old. And instead of being a help to the other and to the world, it acts as a club in the hands of the infidels to destroy, if possible, the influence of the Holy Scriptures.

The Old Testament was written in Hebrew, and the New Testament was written in Greek. The Vulgate is a translation into Latin directly from the Apostles’ manuscripts and from the Hebrew manuscripts as compiled by Ezra, and from the Septuagint, and held most sacred by the Catholics, and always will be; so the English Version will be to them as King James’ was and yet is.

King James’ translation is the Protestant Bible, and always will be, being the best adapted to all evangelical purposes, agreeing perfectly with the Divine revealment, whether in the Bible or in nature; and as a matter well understood by enlightened ministers and people, to have come out with the Divine sanction in the days of peril when the glory of God was the consideration, not money.

The New Version in meaning as to its theology differs but little from the Old one, except in the doctrine of tri-unitytrinity—which doctrine by the general church has always been considered the leading doctrine in Divine theology, and held most sacred; and which considers Jesus in his pre-existence co-equal and co-eternal with the Eternal Deity—whom Jesus called the Father. And as Arianisin has made much trouble in the church, it should not be cherished now by those who believe Jesus to be equal in the God-head.

True, the Old Version is ingrammatical in much of its reading, but in no case does it clash with theological science, nor with physiological metaphysics. No contradiction in the theological department. True, in the historical department of the Old Testament there are some discrepancies, but it amounts to no difficulty.

Considering the New Version, and knowing the condition of the world and the falling state of the general church in her three grand divisions—as to their outer circles, it is easy to determine as to the chaotic style in which it is gotten up. The

has for its source Jesus of Nazareth, the Apostles and the Holy Ghost. The

has for its source Arius, Socinus, Dr. Priestley and the spirit of the age. The

is a Trinitarian Testament, and held most sacred by the true church of Christ. The

with its sister—the American Bible Union Version, are Unitarian Testaments, because they, both, have expunged the seventh verse of the fifth chapter of I. John. The

teaches that “there are Three that bear record in heaven—the Father, the Word and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one.” The

throws that verse away; therefore, teaches an inferiority of Christ to the Father, and which is noticeable in certain other parts of the work.

harmonizes the fifth chapter of I. John with the twentieth chapter, twenty-eighth verse of Acts; and in fact harmonizes the entire Bible with universal nature in all its departments, which also consists of a tri-unity—three in one—co-equal in their created—infinite existence.

God’s ministers and their people should be careful how they swallow Tom, Dick and Harry’s notions without comparing them with the Bible and with nature. The Bible and the visible creation, and their theological and metaphysical trend is the standard by which all doctrines and all translations are to be measured.

It is right to translate the Holy Scriptures into the different languages and tongues; but it is wrong for any man or set of men to be bringing out different versions in the English, (after the translation of the entire Bible into it, and after it has been carried to all nations, tongues and people)—only to make a jargon, and to bring the whole Bible into disrepute; to cause bitter envy, strife and divisions, and to drive millions into skepticism, because of the purported discrepancy.

I unhesitatingly say, that the same Holy Ghost who gave inspiration to the Apostles to write out the New Testament, presided over and inspired those men in the translation and bringing out of the entire Bible in the English language. And I also say, that no version since, brought out in the English language, has the Divine sanction.

King James’ translation came out when the English language was becoming the vernacular of the world— all countries—and was adapted to the high-toned English, and the varied dialects of it, in all parts of the world. Now, why would God cause at this age and in these trying times, versions in the same language to be brought out, to conflict and to batter down the influence of that of his instigating? He would not.

I furthermore say, that King James’ Translation of the Bible is the only Divinely Inspired translation directly, since the compilation of the ancient manuscripts by Ezra, and the giving of the New Testament by the Apostles; and this fact is sustained by the fact of the several Theological Historic Periods of Divine Revealment, which are,
1. The giving of laws and rules to Adam, directly by the Deity.
2. The giving of the law by Moses.
3. The Inspired New Testament by Jesus and the Apostles; and
4. The confirmation of the Gospel at the revealment of the Shiloah, second coming of Christ, and ushering in of the Millennium.
Now, the intermediates are,
1. The Abrahamic covenant, between the Theocratical reveal ment and the law by Moses.
2. The compilation of the manuscripts by Ezra, between the Mosaic Law and its ratification by Jesus of Nazareth; and
3. The translation of the Old and New Testaments into the English language, by King James, between the giving of the Gospel and its ratification by its Chief Good—the Shiloah—the fullness of the Gentiles; and these are the only dispensations, and the only intermediates in the run of time, and which will close up all active scenes from not only the days of Adam, but also that of all materiality as materiality, since the beginning, in the completement of the New Creation, when all action will be immortal action.

These facts are backed up by the inscriptions in the great pyramid of Egypt, written there by order of Shem, the son of Noah—the Melchisedec—the Job of the land of Uz, in the reign of Cheops, king of Egypt; wherein are the regular dispensations, with their intermediates, together with the theological metaphysics of Divine revealment; the twelve signs of the zodiac and other astronomical revealments, which are to be in the last days “as a witness unto the Lord in the land of Egypt.”

No comments: