Authorized by a King

Two contrary ideas.

Ecclesiastes 8:4 Where the word of a king is, there is power…

An odd argument between some KJV defenders and some KJV detractors – either the King James Bible was or was not authorized by the King of England. Who knew this was important?

On the “pro” side, there are some KJV defenders who incorporate “authorized by a king” as part of their proof that the King James translation is the one true (authorized) Bible.

I am not sure when or where this argument originated, but Peter Ruckman used it in 1983 in Why I Believe The King James Bible Is The Word Of God. He writes:

“I believe the King James Bible is the word of God because it has no copyright on it. It may have the Crown Copyright, but you don’t have to ask the Crown for the right to print it. In Ecclesiastes 8:4 it says, ‘Where the word of a king is, there is power.’ If it had a Crown copyright, it was copyrighted under a king. If it was copyrighted under a king, it has the right copyright.”

The KJV Bible Truth web site states it this way:

“Another proof is that the King James Bible is the only Bible authorized by a king. The Bible says, Where the word of a king is, there is power. The king’s heart is in the Lord’s hand.”

Perhaps annoyed by such assertions, some KJV detractors strike back. The translation of 1611 was never authorized by James I King of England, say they. Hear Larry Wilson:

“For what it’s worth, the so-called ‘authorized’ version (KJV) was not authorized by King James or his government. King James gave translators permission to proceed with an English translation of the Bible, but he did not put ‘stamp of approval’ on their work.”

I do not know anything about Larry Wilson. However, it is not just little-known web contributors who assert this. Ryan Reeves, former professor at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, holding a Ph.D. from Cambridge University, writes at the popular Gospel Coalition web site that “The Bible Was Authorized by the King” is a myth.

“The Bible Was Authorized by the King

“This myth was created due largely to the title used today for the KJV. The King James Bible (in America) or the Authorized Bible (in Britain). Either name is not bad, but it often convinces people that the Bible was somehow the product of the king’s command.

“In fact, the king never formally authorized or endorsed the Bible directly. The last Bible in English to receive royal sanction was the Great Bible during the reign of Henry VIII.”

In King James, His Bible, and Its Translators (p. 233), Laurence M. Vance pointed out that such an assertion is at least as early as Brooke Foss Westcott in A General View of the History of the English Bible.

“…no evidence has yet been produced to shew, that the version was ever publicly sanctioned by Convocation or by Parliament, or by the Privy Council, or by the king.”[i] 

Two strikes and two outs.

The first assertion is poor biblical interpretation.[ii]  The second assertion is poor historical interpretation.

If the latter is a poor historical interpretation, what evidence is there that King James authorized the translation first published in 1611, which we know as the Authorized Version or King James Bible? I submit the following.

1. The authorization by King James I at the Hampton Court Conference.

“Whereupon his Highnesse wished, that some special paines should be taken in that behalf  for one uniform translation (professing that he could never, yet, see a Bible well translated in English, but the worst of all his Majesty thought the Geneva to be) and this to be done by the best learned in both the Universities, after them to be reviewed by the Bishops, and the chief learned of the Church; from them to be presented to the Privy Councel; and lastly, to be ratified by his Royal Authority. And so this whole Church to be bound unto it, and none other.”

In The Summe and Substance of the Conference…at Hampton Court, Jan. 14. 1603 (Clerkenwell, UK: Bye and Law, Printers, 1804, p. 35), William Barlow reported that Puritan John Rainolds (Reinolds/Reynolds) asked that the new translation of the Bible be made. James seized on the idea and set forth a plan to accomplish it. In 1603 English rule was under a monarchy. The King’s wish was a command, not a mere suggestion that it might be nice if they were to do what he said.

2. The title of this Bible.

“The Holy Bible: Conteyning the Old Testament and the New: Newly Translated out of the Originall tongues: & with the former Translations diligently compared and revised, by his Maiesties speciall Commandment. Appointed to be read in the Churches. Imprinted at London by Robert Barker, Printer to the Kings most Excellent Maiestie. Anno Dom. 1611.”

The title page of the Bible reflects that this translation was produced “by his Maiesties speciall Commandment,” as well as being one “Appointed to be read in the Churches.” “His Majesty’s special commandment” likely refers directly to the King’s decree or command at the Hampton Court Conference. And surely the King’s Printer would not have dared adding “Appointed to be read in the Churches” upon his own authority.

3. The Epistle Dedicatory.

“To the Most High and Mightie Prince Iames…There are infinite arguments of this right Christian and Religious affection in your MAIESTIE; but none is more forcible to declare it to others than the vehement and perpetuated desire of accomplishing and publishing of this Worke, which now with all humilitie we present unto your MAIESTIE. For when your Highnesse had once out of deepe judgment apprehended how convenient it was, That out of the Originall sacred Tongues, together with comparing of the labours, both in our owne, and other foreigne Languages, of many worthy men who went before us, there should be one more exact Translation of the holy Scriptures into the English Tongue; our MAIESTIE did never desist, to urge and to excite those to whom it was commended, that the worke might be hastened, and that the businesse might be expedited in so decent a maner, as a matter of such importance might justly require.”

The dedication of the work to King James (probably written by Thomas Bilson) indicates that the translators set about the work of creating a new and more exact translation according to the king’s desire, judgment, and urging.

4. The Translators to the Reader preface.

“Therefore let no mans eye be evill, because his Maiesties is good...And what can the King command to bee done, that will bring him more true honour then this? and wherein could they that have beene set a worke, approve their duetie to the King, yea their obedience to God, and love to his Saints more, then by yeelding their service, and all that is within them, for the furnishing of the worke?

“…hereupon did his Maiestie beginne to bethinke himselfe of the good that might ensue by a new translation, and presently after gave order for this Translation which is now presented unto thee.”

The preface to the new translation (probably written by Miles Smith) recognizes that the work originated from the king’s “command” and the king’s “order.”

5. The Royal Coat of Arms page.

Between “The names and order of all the Bookes of the Olde and New Testaments” and “The Genealogies of Holy Scripture,” a page reproduces the the Royal Coat of Arms over the words “Cum Priuilegio Regiae Maiestatis.”[iii]  The Latin “Cum Priuilegio” means “With Privilege” and is used especially in a book to indicate that its issue is duly licensed or authorized. The full “Cum Priuilegio Regiae Maiestatis” reveals by whom it is authorized – “With the Privilege of His Royal Majesty.”[iv] 

6. The Report to the Synod of Dort.

“Theologi Magnae Britanniae, quibus non est visum tantae quaestioni subitam et inopinatam responsionem adhibere, officii sui esse judicarunt, praematura deliberatione habita, quando quidem facta esset honorifica accuratissimae translationis Anglicanae mentio, à Serenissimo Rege Iacobo, magna cum cura, magnisque sumptibus nuper editae, notum facere huic celeberrimae Synodo, quo consilio, quaque ratione sacrum hoc negotium a Serenissima ejus Majestate praestitum fuerit.”

“The theologians of Great Britain, unwilling to make a sudden and hasty answer to so great a question, judged it their duty to hold a consultation, since there had been an honorable mention of the most accurate English translation, lately published by the Most Serene King James, with great care and at great expense, to make known to this most illustrious Synod, by what counsel and means, by which his Most Serene Majesty bestowed this sacred business.”

At the seventh session of the Synod of Dort, on November 20, 1618 a report on the new Bible of 1611 (now commonly known as the Authorised or King James Version) Samuel Ward, a King James translator in the Second Cambridge Company, gave the Synod a report about that translation. The report was written in Latin. It is reproduced above, which an attempted English translation. Ward credits authority of King James behind producing the translation.

Concluding thoughts.

The preponderance of evidence is clearly on the side of the 1611 translation being authorized by King James I of England. It bore his authority from beginning to end – from his authorization at the Hampton Court Conference to his stamp of approval on the printed product. Those requiring undiscovered official government documents or documents that were destroyed by a fire in 1619 likely have a polemic agenda well beyond an interest in the history of the authorization of the “King James’s” Bible.

I use the book inspired and authorized by the King of Kings and Lord of Lords. That he used the King of England in the process of giving it to me in English is just fine by me! Who may say unto the King of kings and Lord of lords, What doest thou?

---

[i] Vance points out the lack of evidence of an official Council document most likely is “that all the Council records for the years 1600-1613 were destroyed by a fire at Whitehall in January of 1619.” King James, His Bible, and Its Translators, Third Edition, Orlando, FL: Vance Publications, 2022, p. 233.
[ii] In addition to the exegetical problem, this view of proving the King James Bible has an historical problem as well. King Henry VIII authorized The Great Bible in 1539, making it an English Bible authorized by a king – and the first one to be authorized, at that.
[iii] It is possible some printings do not reproduce this page, or some online reproductions did not bother to scan it. The facsimile of the 1st Edition, 1st Printing produced by The Bible Museum has it.
[iv] “Cum Priuilegio” also appears at the bottom of the New Testament title page. “Cum Priuilegio Regiae Maiestatis” is Latin. The coat of arms itself has two statements in French – Honi Soit Qvi Mal Y Pense (Shame be on him who thinks evil of it) and Diev Et Mon Droit (God and my right). It is well to note, however, that “Cum Priuilegio Regiae Maiestatis” also appeared in the Bishops Bible, as well as at least some editions of the Geneva Bible printed by Barker. Therefore, this is not exclusive to the King James Bible. In FTGF Lesson 192 | The AV 1611: Assessing The Preliminary Material, Part 3, Bryan Ross discusses the coat of arms related to the introductory material in the 1611 Bible. His thoughts on the coat of arms starts at around 40:40 minutes.

The apographa or copies of the originals

apograph, noun. A copy. The apographs or apographa (plural), in reference to the Bible, refer to copies as opposed to the original media (autographs or autographa) as first penned by the original writers.

The apograph of the book of Isaiah in the synagogue at Nazareth is scripture.

Luke 4 And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read. And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written…And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down...And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears.

The apograph which Jesus asked the chief priests and elders whether they had read is scripture.

Matthew 21 And when he was come into the temple, the chief priests and the elders of the people came unto him as he was teaching…Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord’s doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?

The apograph to which the Jews at Jerusalem had access is scripture.

John 5 After this there was a feast of the Jews; and Jesus went up to Jerusalem… Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him…Then answered Jesus and said unto them…Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

John 10 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;

The apograph the eunuch of Ethiopia carried with him from Jerusalem is scripture.

Acts 8 … a man of Ethiopia…was returning, and sitting in his chariot read Esaias the prophet… The place of the scripture which he read was this… Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture…

The apograph of the law at the the synagogue at Antioch Pisidia is scripture.

Acts 13 But when they departed from Perga, they came to Antioch in Pisidia, and went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and sat down. And after the reading of the law and the prophets...

The apograph in possession of the synagogue Thessalonica is scripture.

Acts 17 Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where was a synagogue of the Jews: and Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures

The apograph in possession of the synagogue at Berea is scripture.

Acts 17 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

The apograph available to Timothy is scripture.

2 Timothy 3 and that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All scripture is given by inspiration of God…

All scripture is given by inspiration of God

2 Timothy 3 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

Additionally, these texts suggest a valid copy of scripture is scripture.

• The copy of the book of the law made for the king of Israel is authoritative scripture (Deuteronomy 17:18-19).
• The copy of the law of Moses written by Joshua upon stones at mount Ebal is authoritative scripture (Joshua 8:32).
• The copy of the book of the law read by Ezra in Jerusalem is authoritative scripture (Nehemiah 8).
• The proverbs of Solomon, which the men of Hezekiah copied out is authoritative scripture (Proverbs 25:1).
• The copy of the book of the law to which a certain lawyer and certain Pharisees had access is is authoritative scripture (Matthew 12:5; Luke 10:26).

What’s the Standard?

Standard, as a noun usually carries the idea of something that is established by authority or general consent as a model or rule for the measure of quantity, weight, extent, value, quality, etc.; as an adjective usually carries the idea of conforming to an accepted or established rule, well-established, accepted as normal.

I had never thought much about this, until I heard Peter Van Kleeck, Jr. mention it in interview with Jeff Riddle at Stylos blog. Though modern textual critics work overtime trying to convince us that the original text of scripture has not been preserved and that we therefore have no standard – Bible translators using their products “work overtime” trying to convince us they have created a standard. There are at least ten modern translations that include “Standard” in the name of their Bible.

• American Standard Version
• Christian Standard Bible
• English Standard Version
• Holman Christian Standard Bible
• International Standard Version
• Legacy Standard Bible
• Literal Standard Version
• New American Standard Bible
• New Revised Standard Version
• Revised Standard Version

Nevertheless and regardless of what people think of the King James Version translation of the Bible, it is the “English Standard” Bible. It has been around and in use for 410 years and is what every Bible aspires to be or desires to replace.

Authority, but which?

In “The Bible in the Time of the Reformation,” Stanko Jambrek discusses three common forms of authority found in Christian circles.

• Theological authority – doctrinal beliefs or “creeds” as the sources of faith and life.
• Ecclesial authority – the church, with the Pope as the head, holds ultimate authority in all standards of faith and life. 
• Canonical authority – the Bible or Scripture as God’s authoritative revelation. The Bible is the inspired, inerrable, and ultimate in authority in all the standards of the faith and life. 

Jambrek concludes “the Scriptures (canonical authority) as the inerrable Word of God [are] above any human’s opinion or conclusions (theological authority) and the church tradition (ecclesial authority).”

Stanko Jambrek, “The Bible in the Time of the Reformation,” Biblijski institut, Zagreb. 2010, p. 108. Jambrek is a professor at the Bible Institute in Zagreb, Croatia, as well as the founder and editor of Kairos: Evangelical Journal of Theology. This periodical is published biannually, in both the Croatian and English languages.

The Boss

One day a man went to a pet shop to buy a parrot. The assistant took the man to the parrot section and asked the man to choose one. The man inquired, “How much is the yellow one?”

The assistant said “$2000.” The man was shocked. He asked the pet-shop assistant why it’s so expensive. The assistant explained, “This parrot is a very special one. He knows typewriting and can type really fast.”

“Well, what about the green one?” the man asked.

The assistant replied, “He costs $5000 because he knows typewriting and can answer incoming telephone calls and takes notes.”

“What about the red one?” the man asked.

The assistant said, “That one is $10,000!”

The man wondered, “What does HE do?”

The assistant answered, “I don’t know, but the other two call him boss.”