KJV Questions and Answers - Far Eastern Bible College

used by English-speaking Christians today. To use other Bibles when thebest is clearly available would be to neglect our responsibility.(8) What did the KJV translators mean when they said that“the meanest translation” is still “the Word of God”?The 1611 Preface of the KJV is often used by anti-KJVists tosupport the corrupt modern versions. They argue that in that Preface theKJV translators themselves viewed even the worst English versions as theWord of God.Did the KJV translators really say that every translation of the Bibleeven if filled with grammatical, translational, or doctrinal errors could berightly called the Word of God? They certainly did not. The context inwhich they wrote those words clearly reveals this: “Now to the latter weanswer, that we do not deny, nay, we affirm and avow, that the verymeanest translation of the Bible in English set forth by men of ourprofession (for we have seen none of theirs of the whole Bible as yet)containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God: as the King’s speechwhich he uttered in parliament, being translated into French, Dutch,Italian, and Latin, is still the King’s speech, though it be not interpretedby every translator with the like grace.”It is clear that by the word “meanest” they do not mean “worst” (i.e.“evil in the highest degree”). Who would dare mistranslate the king’sspeech? Clearly they were not talking about sense but style. By “meanest”they meant poor in literary grace. When beginning Greek studentstranslate their Greek Bible into English, it may be rough and wooden; butif literal and precise, it is the Word of God. The KJV translators, some ofwhom were Puritans, certainly did not humour wicked or corruptversions. It is utterly ridiculous and absurd to suggest that they did.Anti-KJVists have thus put words into the mouths of the King Jamestranslators to make them mean what they did not mean by “meanest” in amean attempt to demean the Pro-KJV position.(9) Who is Peter Ruckman and what is his view on the KJV?Peter Ruckman earned his PhD from Bob Jones University. He holdsto the view that the KJV is separately inspired of God, contains advancedrevelation, and thus superior to the original Hebrew and GreekScriptures. Ruckman’s position is erroneous, even heretical becauseinspiration in the light of 2 Tim 3:16, and 2 Pet 1:21 is applicable only to12 KJV Q&A