West Coast Baptist College and the readability problems of the KJV: Mark Ward

No one addresses these topics better than Mark! One of the best voices on these matters ever. I so appreciate his work and his tone.

I continue to appreciate his attention to detail and tone. He is gentle but manages to still convey that what he’s confronting is serious—and, as in this case, that we need to take it more seriously.

I especially appreciated “Teachers need to do their homework.”

A principle for our times, for sure!

I think what the KJVO advocates are getting at is something that I've gotten at a lot; if we are unable to understand the language of the past, God help us as we try to parse out the Constitution, Declaration of Independence, and the like. I tend to agree with that part. One of the craziest examples of needing to update, IMO, is that one can hardly find My Utmost for His Highest in the original form--it's almost always "revised", even though it was originally written in 1914.

Love Ward's talk. One thing that comes to mind here is that if I were to insist on a particular translation as the standard, what's really going on is an attack on the perspicuity of Scripture. I enjoy old translations--I routinely read Luther's, the 1611 (with its archaic spellings), the Geneva, etc..--but I simultaneously realize that not everybody has the ability to understand them well. I still treasure the 1984 NIV a friend gave me when she realized I was having trouble understanding my RSV.

I'm thankful for both Carson and Ward addressing this issue in an irenic tone. I've heard how Carson's book, particularly, has been instrumental in changing hearts and minds on this issue. It sounds like Ward's work has also been helpful for young men in the IFB world as they encounter the false arguments of the KJVO crowd.

I’m of two minds on the KJV issue. I was raised in a church that used that, and I’m still most comfortable in most cases with that translation, as archaic as it may be. I also do occasionally use the Luther and Geneva like Bert, but not routinely. However, for material like the prophets, I tend to use a mixture of ESV, NIV, and even NLT so I can get a better understanding of those texts. Familiar texts are easy to understand in the KJV; obscure ones not so much. I don’t particularly care for the fact that more modern versions don’t sound so much like scripture to me (especially in very familiar passages), but I realize that is just my personal preference.

I will also occasionally mix in more modern German translations like the Elberfelder or HFA. My wife, for whom English is her 2nd language, routinely reads both German and multiple English translations to make sure she is understanding the text. The KJV is not easy reading for her, but she does very well with it when she uses it.

I do agree with those who say students should be able to read at least a little of the older modern English like Shakespeare and the KJV so that important texts that haven’t been modernized, like the U.S. founding documents, can be understood. However, I don’t think that’s a good reason to insist that any readers of scripture from later generations than myself stick to something as old as the KJV, particularly for an unbeliever, as the most important thing is that they understand the Word so that the Holy Spirit can reach and convict them.

None of this solves the issue with the textual differences between translations like the KJV and most modern translations, which is the important thing to many “TR-only” types who are not English KJVO. However, even though I personally prefer the traditional texts, unlike those I just mentioned, I’m not of the opinion that the differences prevent use of translations that don’t come from my preferred textual family.

I don’t particularly care for the fact that more modern versions don’t sound so much like scripture to me (especially in very familiar passages), but I realize that is just my personal preference.

I write a newspaper column every 2 weeks with a short little challenge from scripture. It is often more like a short sermon illustration. I like to use very easy to understand translations, but often I will include a quite well known verse like John 3:16. I have begun to quote such verses from the KJV because I realize they may be more familiar even to the unsaved. Another example is John 14:2. Although we could spend many posts debating about if it should be translated "mansions," "dwelling places," "rooms," etc- quite a few people have heard that "in my father's house are many mansions," so I would use the KJV there because of its familiarity to the general public. I doubt Dave is alone in feeling the comfort of familiar passages stated in a familiar way. As I take my audience into consideration, even though the majority of the passages I quote are taken from a more modern version, I still often quote from the KJV in some of the most familiar passages.