Facts from 1769 Oxford KJV vs KJV-only claims

[Logos1560]

I made a long drive to Washington, D.C. this past week to have the opportunity to examine an edition of the KJV printed in 1769 at Oxford. In this thread, I will share some information learned from that 1769 Oxford KJV edition and other KJV editions as it relates to a number of KJV-only claims.

It is often claimed that our present KJV editions are the 1769 edition. Here are some statements by various KJV-only authors that relate to this claim. David Sorenson wrote: "The King James Version of the Bible in America at present is in fact the 1769 edition" (Touch Not the Unclean Thing, p. 17). D. A. Waite referred to “the 1769 edition of the King James Bible that we use today” (Critical Answer to Michael, p. 55). Alan O’Reilly maintained that “the AV1611 of today is Dr. Blayney’s edition, published 1769” (O Biblios, p. 35). David Cloud wrote that "an update was made between 1762-69 to correct any lingering printing errors and to update the spelling" (Faith vs. the Modern Bible Versions, p. 589). Douglas Stauffer asserted that "the 1769 edition merely continued the process of spelling standardization begun in the 1762 edition" (One Book Stands Alone, p. 348). Robert Sargent claimed that "the spelling was standardized to its modern form in the 1762 and 1769 editions" (English Bible, p. 229). Gail Riplinger proposed that "standardization of spelling" was "completed" in 1769 (In Awe of Thy Word, p. 602). Riplinger asserted that “the spelling of the KJV was standardized and made uniform beginning in 1762, by Dr. Thomas Paris of Cambridge, and finally in 1769, by Dr. Benjamin Blayney of Oxford” (p. 601). Timothy Morton contended that "the 1762 and 1769 [editions] were to update the spelling" and that "by 1769 whatever slight textual errors that still remained were removed, and the text was finally free from any man-made error" (Which Translation Should You Trust, p. 42). Al Lacy maintained that "the 1769 edition of the 1611 King James Bible is perfect" (Can I Trust My Bible, p. 144). Joey Faust maintained that "nothing after 1769 is a true edition" (Common Man‘s Defense of KJV-onlyism, p. 43). Hugo Schonhaar wrote: “The final two editions of the 1611 King James Bible took place in 1762 and 1769” (Woods, King’s Bible, p. 277). William Bradley claimed that "the last one in 1769 made no changes in the text, only standardization of spelling, punctuation, and updated typeface" (To All Generations, p. 71). Dennis Anderson claimed: “We know it [referring to the 1611 KJV] has gone through four revisions to correct misspelled words, the last one in 1769” (Flaming Torch, Summer, 1995, p. 6). Lloyd Streeter claimed that the perfection of the KJV "should be looked upon as a winnowing or refining process extending from Tyndale through 1769" (Seventy-five Problems, p. 104). Streeter asserted that God used "those who corrected printing and spelling errors between 1611 and 1769" (p. 104).

Another consideration is to see whether KJV-only advocates are consistent in whether or not they accept alterations in KJV editions. KJV-only author Dave Reese claimed: "If words are changed, it is not the King James Version. It is another Bible" (The Book No One Can Read, p. 56). Jim Ellis asked: "How could it be a King James Bible if it is different from the King James Bible?" (Only Two Bibles, p. 17). Attacking the idea that the New Scofield Reference Bible has the same basic text as the KJV, William Grady contended: "A lost man would laugh at the suggestion that a particular text could be promoted as the same text with even one alteration" (Final Authority, p. 311). Charles Perkins wrote: "Personally I cannot find anything ‘Godly’ about changing even one word in the King James Bible" (Flaming Torch, April-June, 1998, p. 7). Bill Bradley asked: "Would you allow someone to take your King James Bible and change it in more than 130 places, and still call it a King James Bible?" (Mickey Carter, Elephant in the Living Room, p. 142).

Are the above claims and statements by KJV-only authors applied to the actual alterations or changes in various KJV editions, including those made after 1769? Is it being claimed that if KJV-only advocates use an edition of the KJV that changes any words in the 1769 edition that they are using another Bible?

 

[HankD]

For every new KJVO baloon which is floated and subsequently burst, the KJVO folks fabricate a new revision of history to reaffirm the original KJVO claims that "God only wrote one Bible", "things which are different are not the same", etc.. and that one and only Bible is the KJV of 1611 (er, we meant the 1613 revision, oh wait, the 1762 is the one and only, oops actually we meant 1769, oh, um, we'll get back to you as to Cambridge vs. Oxford, ad naseum...).

For the record, I love the KJV (any revision) but I don't attribute the translators with the gift of inspiration since only the Prophets and Apostles were granted that gift. A claim that the actual AV translators made (unless of course the Church of England is the true apostolic Church and that apostolic gift of inspiration is also applicable for translation work and passed on by the laying on of hands via their Bishops).

If they really believe that, then the KJVO promoters should renounce their present church and join the CoE.

The proof of the proverbial pudding to the contrary is that the Church of England themselves spent a couple of centuries refining their work. Yes, the errors corrected were "small" (like spelling, typos, noun number, verb tense, etc.) and yes, even the substantive errors were small, which is fine if you believe that God only makes small errors but not big ones.

HankD

 

[Harold Garvey]

For every new KJVO baloon which is floated and subsequently burst, the KJVO folks fabricate a new revision of history to reaffirm the original KJVO claims that "God only wrote one Bible", "things which are different are not the same", etc.. and that one and only Bible is the KJV of 1611 (er, we meant the 1613 revision, oh wait, the 1762 is the one and only, oops actually we meant 1769, oh, um, we'll get back to you as to Cambridge vs. Oxford, ad naseum...).

For the record, I love the KJV (any revision) but I don't attribute the translators with the gift of inspiration since only the Prophets and Apostles were granted that gift. A claim that the actual AV translators made (unless of course the Church of England is the true apostolic Church and that apostolic gift of inspiration is also applicable for translation work and passed on by the laying on of hands via their Bishops).

If they really believe that, then the KJVO promoters should renounce their present church and join the CoE.

The proof of the proverbial pudding to the contrary is that the Church of England themselves spent a couple of centuries refining their work. Yes, the errors corrected were "small" (like spelling, typos, noun number, verb tense, etc.) and yes, even the substantive errors were small, which is fine if you believe that God only makes small errors but not big ones.

HankD

Did God commit an error when he didn't preserve the original autographs and allowed time to eventually cause them to decay?

 

[Logos1560]

Some KJV-only advocates indicate or acknowledge that the present-day Oxford edition is different from the Cambridge edition, and these two editions are usually considered different editions because of only 3 to 5 main variations (2 Chron. 33:19; Jer. 34:16; Nahum 3:16; Josh. 19:2, Psalm 148:8). Some have even argued that the Cambridge edition is more accurate simply based on its rendering at the first three of the five verses just listed.

If there were just five differences between the 1769 Oxford edition and today's Oxford edition, should they be considered different editions just as the Oxford edition and Cambridge edition are considered different editions?

 

[AntennaFarmer]

This KJV has several differences from that KJV. So?

Snore......

Are you trying to say that since my KJV isn't exactly the same as a 1611 or 1769 edition then I should accept the thousands of differences between the KJV (most any edition) and (say) the NIV?

Don't you have a better argument?


A.F.

 

[Harold Garvey]

Some KJV-only advocates indicate or acknowledge that the present-day Oxford edition is different from the Cambridge edition, and these two editions are usually considered different editions because of only 3 to 5 main variations (2 Chron. 33:19; Jer. 34:16; Nahum 3:16; Josh. 19:2, Psalm 148:8). Some have even argued that the Cambridge edition is more accurate simply based on its rendering at the first three of the five verses just listed.

If there were just five differences between the 1769 Oxford edition and today's Oxford edition, should they be considered different editions just as the Oxford edition and Cambridge edition are considered different editions?

No, because the words weren't necessarally changed into modern words having vague and sometimes obscure meanings.

 

[annsni]

And if there's just one change in the KJV from the original, is it still the KJV??

 

[AntennaFarmer]

And if there's just one change in the KJV from the original, is it still the KJV??

Perhaps that depends on what word was changed.

 

[HankD]

Did God commit an error when he didn't preserve the original autographs and allowed time to eventually cause them to decay?

Why do you ask a question with an obvious answer Harold?

The real question is why did He allow them to decay?

If some folk want to play the role of ostrich and and try to figure out which KJV is the real and "only" inspired Word of God even apart from the original languages, I say let them.

I Just don't appreciate them insulting the intelligence God gave me by trying to stick my head in the sand with them as well. For the most part
I ignore them (except on the BB).

Harold, at least with the copies of the originals in the original languages we have only to contend with the problems of the raw text and not the translational problems and the theological difficulties of transmission and "double-inspiration" as well.

HankD

 

[AntennaFarmer]

Did God commit an error when he didn't preserve the original autographs and allowed time to eventually cause them to decay?

How do we know that they decayed? Perhaps they are still out there somewhere.

 

[EdSutton]

Did God commit an error when he didn't preserve the original autographs and allowed time to eventually cause them to decay?

How do we know that they decayed? Perhaps they are still out there somewhere.

Exactly! Who can say that these have not been preserved somewhere? Or that God, in His Providence, does not choose to reveal this to us, at this time, for His own reasons.

For where is it 'written' that the "original autographs" have actually been lost and decayed?

Incidentally, how would one know if one actually held the autographs for any Scripture?

Would not one have to have some actual handwriting(s) of the various Biblical Authors, both OT and NT, with which to compare them, to authenticate the genuineness, or lack of the same, of the extant MSS? ???

Ed

 

[Logos1560]

brief survey of some differences in 1769

Scrivener made a list of some variations or differences in Blayney's quarto edition of 1769 (Authorized Edition, pp. 33-34). For one example, he noted that the 1769 edition had "the earth" instead of "the world" at 1 Corinthians 4:13 (p. 33). The 1769 edition had “coast“ instead of “coasts“ at Judges 19:29, “priest‘s custom“ instead of “priests‘ custom“ at 1 Samuel 2:13, “on the pillars” instead of “on the top of the pillars“ at the end of 2 Chronicles 4:12, “unto me” instead of “under me” at Psalm 18:47, “feared” instead of “fear” at Psalm 60:4, and “part“ instead of “parts“ at Psalm 78:66. It has “about” for “above” at 2 Corinthians 12:2 and “our joy“ for “your joy“ at 1 John 1:4. The 1769 edition had “Heman“ at Genesis 36:22 instead of “Hemam,” “brakedst” at Deuteronomy 10:2 instead of “brakest,” “thy earth” at Deuteronomy 12:19 instead of “the earth,” “the widow‘s“ at Deuteronomy 24:17 instead of “a widow‘s,” "thy companions" at Job 41:6 instead of "the companions,” “king of Jerusalem“ at Ecclesiastes 1:1 instead of “king in Jerusalem,” “the latter end“ at Proverbs 19:20 instead of “thy latter end,” “is a brier“ at Micah 7:4 instead of “is as a brier,” and “the holy apostles” at Ephesians 3:5 instead of “his holy apostles.” The 1762 Cambridge edition had “Heman” at Genesis 36:22 and may be the source of the 1769 Oxford rendering. John Eadie asserted that the 1769 edition had “thy progenitors” for “my progenitors’ at Genesis 49:26 (English Bible, II, p. 366).David Norton pointed out that the 1769 had “you were inferior“ instead of “ye were inferior“ at 2 Corinthians 12:13 and “the mighty is spoiled” instead of “the mighty are spoiled” at Zechariah 11:2 (Textual History, pp. 113, 298). James Strong and John McClintock maintained that the 1769 edition had “children of Gilead” for “elders of Gilead” at Judges 11:7 and “gates of iron” for “bars of iron” at Psalm 107:16 (Cyclopaedia, I, p. 563). McClintock also claimed that the 1769 edition omitted the following words at Revelation 18:22: “at all in thee, and no craftsman, of whatsoever craft he be, shall be found any more” (Ibid.).

 

[Logos1560]

Here is some of the information found from examining a number of Oxford and Cambridge KJV editions. This is not a complete comparison. I did not have a list of all these examples when I had the opportunity to examine the 1769 Oxford KJV edition so its rendering is not listed in some examples. I hope to check other renderings in that 1769 Oxford edition later. In some cases, access was no longer available for the Oxford edition, especially the 1782 and 1799 editions, after other differences were found. In some cases, one of the old Oxford editions was missing some pages. In other cases, some of the Oxford editions may have followed the rendering of a KJV edition earlier than 1769 or may have changed the rendering in the 1769. In these examples the character shaped like a "f" for a long "s" in some of the old editions was updated. These examples include the rendering of the 1762, 1769, and 1790 Cambridge KJV editions in many cases. The edition identified as present Oxford is the Oxford KJV edition in the Scofield Reference Bible.

Genesis 18:7
fetched (1777, 1804 Oxford)
fetcht (present Oxford)

Genesis 18:19
houshold (1769, 1777, 1795, 1804, 1810, 1812, 1821, 1828, 1829, 1835, 1838, 1840 Oxford) [1762, 1769, 1790 Cambridge]
household (present Oxford)

Genesis 18:27
LORD (1769, 1777, 1782, 1795, 1804, 1810, 1812 Oxford) [1790 Cambridge]
Lord (present Oxford)

Genesis 18:30
the LORD (1769, 1777, 1795, 1804, 1810, 1812 Oxford) [1790 Cambridge]
the Lord (present Oxford)

Genesis 18:32
the LORD (1769, 1777, 1795, 1804, 1810, 1812 Oxford) [1790 Cambridge]
the Lord (present Oxford)

Genesis 20:4
LORD (1769, 1777, 1782, 1795, 1804, 1810, 1812, 1821 Oxford) [1762, 1769, 1790 Cambridge]
Lord (present Oxford)

Genesis 21:16
lifted (1777, 1795, 1804 Oxford)
lift (present Oxford)

Genesis 24:57
enquire (1769, 1777, 1795, 1804, 1810, 1812, 1821, 1828, 1829, 1835, 1838, 1840, 1847, 1850, 1857, 1859, 1865, 1868, 1870, 1876, 1880, 1885 Oxford) [1762, 1769, 1790 Cambridge]
inquire (present Oxford)

Genesis 36:22
Heman (1769, 1777, 1795, 1804, 1810, 1812 Oxford) [1762, 1769, 1790 Cambridge]
Hemam (present Oxford)

Genesis 42:33
housholds (1769, 1777, 1795, 1804, 1810, 1821, 1828, 1829, 1835, 1838, 1840 Oxford) [1769, 1790 Cambridge]
households (present Oxford)

Genesis 49:26
thy progenitors (1769, 1795, 1810, 1812, 1821, 1828 Oxford) [1790 Cambridge]
my progenitors (present Oxford)

Exodus 6:21
Zithri (1769, 1795, 1810, 1812, 1821, 1828, 1829, 1835, 1838, 1840, 1847, 1850, 1857, 1859, 1865, 1868, 1870, 1876, 1880 Oxford) [1790 Cambridge]
Zichri (present Oxford)

Exodus 15:17
Sanctuary, O LORD (1769, 1777, 1782, 1795, 1804, 1810, 1812, 1821, 1828 Oxford) [1769, 1790 Cambridge]
sanctuary, O Lord (present Oxford)

Exodus 21:6
awl (1777, 1795, 1804 Oxford)
aul (1769, present Oxford) [1769 Cambridge]

Exodus 23:17
LORD God (1769, 1777, 1795, 1804, 1810, 1812, 1821, 1828 Oxford) [1790 Cambridge]
Lord GOD (present Oxford)

 

[Jerome]

Here is 1769:

Genesis 18:7
fetched (1777, 1804 Oxford)
fetcht (1769, present Oxford)

Genesis 21:16
lifted (1777, 1795, 1804 Oxford)
lift (1769, present Oxford)

 

[Logos1560]

Leviticus 18:18
besides (1782, 1795, 1804 Oxford) [1769 Cambridge]
beside (1769, present Oxford)

Numbers 7:3
waggon (1769, 1777, 1795, 1804, 1810, 1812 Oxford) [1769, 1790 Cambridge]
wagon (present Oxford)

Numbers 14:17
LORD (1769, 1777, 1782, 1795, 1804, 1810, 1812, 1821, 1828 Oxford) [1769, 1790 Cambridge]
Lord (present Oxford)

Numbers 20:14
travel (1769, 1777, 1795, 1799, 1804, 1810, 1812, 1821, 1828, 1829, 1835, 1838, 1840, 1847, 1850, 1857, 1859, 1865, 1868, 1870, 1876, 1880, 1885 Oxford) [1762, 1769 Cambridge]
travail (present Oxford)

Numbers 24:6
vallies (1777, 1795 Oxford)
valleys (1769, present Oxford) [1769 Cambridge]

Deuteronomy 10:2
brakedst (1769, 1795, 1804, 1810, 1812 Oxford) [1762, 1769, 1790 Cambridge]
brakest (present Oxford)

Deuteronomy 12:19
thy earth (1769, 1777, 1795, 1810, 1812 Oxford) [1769, 1790 Cambridge]
the earth (present Oxford)

Deuteronomy 19:5
ax (1769, 1777, 1795, 1810, 1812, 1821, 1828, 1829, 1835, 1838, 1840, 1847, 1850, 1857, 1859, 1865, 1868, 1870, 1876, 1880, 1885 Oxford) [1762, 1769, 1790 Cambridge]
axe (present Oxford)

Deuteronomy 22:3
all lost thing (1769, 1795, 1804, 1810, 1812, 1821, 1828, 1829, 1835, 1838, 1840, 1847, 1850, 1857, 1859, 1865, 1868, 1870, 1876, 1880, 1885 Oxford) [1790 Cambridge]
all lost things (present Oxford)

Deuteronomy 24:17
the widow's (1769, 1795, 1810, 1812, 1821, 1828, 1829, 1835, 1838, 1840 Oxford) [1762, 1769, 1790 Cambridge]
a widow's (present Oxford)

Joshua 19:2
Beer-sheba, Sheba (1769, 1810, 1812, 1821, 1828 Oxford) [1769, 1790 Cambridge]
Beer-sheba, and Sheba (present Oxford) [1762 Cambridge]

Judges 11:7
children of Gilead (1769, 1795, 1810, 1812 Oxford) [1769, 1790 Cambridge]
elders of Gilead (present Oxford)

Judges 13:8
O my LORD (1769, 1777, 1782, 1795, 1804, 1810, 1812 Oxford) [1762, 1769, 1790 Cambridge]
O my Lord (present Oxford)

Judges 19:29
coast (1769, 1795, 1810, 1812, 1821, 1828, 1829, 1835, 1838, 1840 Oxford) [1769, 1790 Cambridge]
coasts (present Oxford)

 

[Logos1560]

some examples from the Gospels:

Matthew 2:1, 5, 22
Judea (1769, 1770, 1777, 1792, 1795, 1798, 1804 Oxford) [1769, 1790, 1817, 1824, 1833, 1837, 1873 Cambridge]
Judaea (present Oxford in Scofield Reference Bible)

Matthew 3:10
ax (1769, 1770, 1777, 1792, 1795, 1798, 1810, 1812, 1821, 1828, 1829, 1835, 1838, 1840, 1847, 1850, 1857, 1859, 1865, 1868, 1870, 1876, 1880, 1885 Oxford) [1769, 1790, 1833 Cambridge]
axe (present Oxford)

Matthew 10:3
Lebbeus (1769, 1770, 1777, 1792, 1795, 1798, 1804 Oxford) [1769, 1790, 1817, 1824, 1833, 1837, 1873 Cambridge]
Lebbaeus (present Oxford)

Matthew 13:27
housholder (1769, 1770, 1777, 1792, 1795, 1798, 1804, 1810, 1812, 1821, 1828, 1829, 1835, 1838, 1840 Oxford) [1769, 1790, 1833, 1837 Cambridge]
householder (present Oxford) [1817, 1824 Cambridge]

Matthew 14:9
oaths’ sake [1873 Cambridge]
oath’s sake (present Oxford)

Matthew 27:57
Arimathea (1769, 1770, 1777, 1792, 1795, 1798, 1804 Oxford) [1769, 1790, 1817, 1824, 1833, 1837, 1873 Cambridge]
Arimathaea (present Oxford)

Mark 3:8
Idumea (1769, 1770, 1777, 1792, 1795, 1798, 1804 Oxford) [1769, 1790, 1817, 1824, 1833, 1837, 1873 Cambridge]
Idumaea (present Oxford)

Mark 3:18
Alpheus (1769, 1770, 1777, 1792, 1795, 1798, 1804 Oxford) [1769, 1790, 1817, 1824, 1833, 1837, 1873 Cambridge]
Alphaeus (present Oxford)

Mark 3:18
Thaddeus (1769, 1770, 1777, 1792, 1795, 1798, 1804 Oxford) [1769, 1790, 1817, 1824, 1833, 1837, 1873 Cambridge]
Thaddaeus (present Oxford)

Mark 10:46
Bartimeus (1769, 1770, 1777, 1792, 1795, 1798, 1804 Oxford) [1769, 1790, 1817, 1824, 1833, 1837, 1873 Cambridge]
Bartimaeus (present Oxford)

Mark 10:46
Timeus (1769, 1770, 1777, 1792, 1795, 1798, 1804 Oxford) [1769, 1790, 1817, 1824, 1833, 1837, 1873 Cambridge]
Timaeus (present Oxford)

Mark 12:17
Cesar's (1769, 1770, 1777, 1792, 1795, 1798, 1804 Oxford) [1769, 1790, 1817, 1824, 1833, 1837, 1873 Cambridge]
Caesar's (present Oxford)

Mark 14:70
Galilean (1769, 1770, 1777, 1792, 1795, 1798, 1804 Oxford) [1769, 1790, 1817, 1824, 1833, 1837, 1873 Cambridge]
Galilaean (present Oxford)

Mark 15:16
Pretorium (1769, 1770, 1777, 1792, 1795, 1798, 1804 Oxford) [1769, 1790, 1817, 1824, 1833, 1837, 1873 Cambridge]
Praetorium (present Oxford)

Mark 15:38
vail (1792, 1795, 1804 Oxford) [1873 Cambridge]
veil (1769, present Oxford)

Luke 2:27
spirit (1795, 1810 Oxford) [1769 Cambridge]
Spirit (1769, present Oxford)

Luke 3:1
Iturea (1769, 1770, 1777, 1792, 1795, 1798, 1804 Oxford) [1769, 1790, 1817, 1824, 1833, 1837 Cambridge]
Ituraea (present Oxford)

Luke 4:33
and he cried out (1770, 1777, 1795 Oxford) [1762, 1769 Cambridge]
and cried out (1769, present Oxford)

Luke 5:17
Judea (1769, 1770, 1777, 1792, 1795, 1798, 1804 Oxford) [1769, 1790, 1817, 1824, 1833, 1837, 1873 Cambridge]
Judaea (present Oxford)

Luke 11:32
Nineveh (1792, 1795, 1798, 1810 Oxford) [1817, 1873 Cambridge]
Nineve (1769, present Oxford)

Luke 16:23
lifted (1769, 1770, 1777, 1792, 1795, 1804 Oxford) [1769, 1790, 1824 Cambridge]
lift (present Oxford)

Luke 19:2
Zaccheus (1769, 1770, 1777, 1792, 1795, 1798, 1804 Oxford) [1769, 1790, 1817, 1824, 1833, 1837, 1873 Cambridge]
Zacchaeus (present Oxford)

Luke 19:4
sycamore (1769, 1777, 1792, 1795, 1798, 1804, 1810, 1812 Oxford) [1790, 1817, 1824, 1837 Cambridge]
sycomore (present Oxford)

John 10:25
believe [1873 Cambridge]
believed (present Oxford)

John 10:28
any (1770, 1777 Oxford) [1769 Cambridge]
any man (present Oxford)

John 10:29
none (1770, 1777 Oxford) [1769 Cambridge]
no man (present Oxford)

John 11:34
They say (1770, 1777 Oxford) [1762, 1769, 1817, 1873 Cambridge]
They said (1769, present Oxford)

John 14:6
and the truth (1769, 1770, 1777, 1792, 1795, 1798, 1804 Oxford) [1769, 1790, 1817, 1824, 1833, 1837 Cambridge]
the truth (present Oxford)

John 19:38
Arimathea (1770, 1777, 1792, 1795, 1798, 1804 Oxford) [1769, 1790, 1817, 1824, 1833, 1837, 1873 Cambridge]
Arimathaea (present Oxford)