Featured John R. Rice, Jack Hyles, and the KJV

In that respect, Jack Hyles did not state the logical conclusion to which some of his own KJV-only statements would lead. Jack Hyles came to regard the KJV as his final authority although I have not found where he directly stated it. Jack Hyles declared: “We must have a final authority” (Need for an Every-Word Bible, p. 33), and he referred to “the Bible—our final authority” (p. 42). It would be clear from other statements by Hyles that the only Bible he regarded as perfect and thus his final authority would be the KJV. When the KJV is regarded as the final authority, that would make it superior to the preserved Scriptures in the original languages, in effect correcting the Hebrew and the Greek.

In another respect, Jack Hyles became more extreme than Peter Ruckman. While Peter Ruckman did claim that the KJV was incorruptible seed, I have not found where he made a claim of no salvation without use of the KJV. Thus, on the claim relating to salvation, Jack Hyles could be considered more extreme than Peter Ruckman.

 

The following is another example of assertion or claim by Jack Hyles that is more extreme than those of Peter Ruckman.

Jack Hyles asserted: “Do you mean if there is just one word wrong in the Bible, you have to throw everything else away?’ That’s exactly what I mean” (Need for an Every-Word Bible, p. 39).

Peter Ruckman wrote: “We recommend any edition of the AV (with any number of variations from any other edition)” (Bible Believers’ Bulletin, Sept., 1985, p. 3). In this same article, Ruckman commented: “In our group, we hold that ANY edition of the AV is reliable” (p. 2). In this article, Ruckman’s only stated exception from being an edition of the AV was the NKJV. Again concerning the KJV, Ruckman claimed that “any edition will do just fine” (Unknown Bible, pp. 1, 86). Ruckman referred to “any edition in any century” of the KJV (How to Teach the “Original” Greek, p. 119). Ruckman appealed to “a King James Bible (any edition from any year)“ (Difference in KJV Editions, pp. 9-10). Ruckman also referred to “a present copy of the AV, which anyone can buy anywhere” (p. 11). Ruckman claimed that “any edition of the AV (Edinburgh, London, Oxford, Nelson, Cambridge, New York, etc.) is vastly superior to the ‘originals’” (p. 18). Ruckman asserted: “The text of the AV in any edition is the text authorized by the Godhead, and it is the text that the Holy Spirit has continually stamped with His approval, in any edition” (Bible Babel, p. 92). Ruckman claimed: “You can find that word [the word of God] and those words [the words that God wants us to have] in ANY EDITION of an Authorized Version” (Biblical Scholarship, p. 414).

 

In my opinion, the 1967 book Let's Study the Revelation by Jack Hyles printed by the Sword of the Lord would make it crystal clear that Jack Hyles did change his position on the KJV. The foreword to this 1967 book stated that "this study was begun in 1953" at the Miller Road Baptist Church.

In that 1967 book, Jack Hyles suggested that certain renderings in the KJV could be or even should be "better translated" another way. No one who really believed that the KJV was inspired and perfect could write what Hyles wrote in 1967. From at least 1953 until 1967, this could be sound evidence that Hyles held a different position concerning the KJV.

Concerning Revelation 1:5, Jack Hyles wrote" "AND WASHED US" can also be rendered 'And freed us'" (p. 9).
Concerning Revelation 3:11, Hyles wrote: "'Take' could be translated 'receive'" (p. 29).
Concerning Revelation 4:6, Hyles wrote: "They are called 'beasts,' but the best translators call them 'living creatures'" (p. 36). [According to that statement, Hyles claims that some translators were better than the KJV translators].
Concerning Revelation 8:13, Hyles wrote: "The word 'ANGEL' here should be 'eagle'" (p. 50).
Concerning Revelation 13:15, Hyles wrote: "'AND HE HAD POWER' is better translated, 'And to him was given power'" (p. 72).
Concerning Revelation 16:13, Hyles wrote: "The word 'SPIRITS' means 'demons'" (p. 88).
Concerning Revelation 20:13, Hyles wrote: "The word 'HELL' really means 'Hades'" (p. 110).
Concerning Revelation 22:13-14, Hyles wrote: "'Do his commandments' should be translated, 'wash their robes'" (pp. 116-117).

 

The New King James Version In the Great Tradition by Arthur L. Farstad has an Appendix C which listed "Commonwealth Oversight Committee" (pp. 151-152) and "North American Overview Committee" (pp. 152-156). Over sixty names are listed for the North American Overview Committee. Curtis Hutson is listed, but John R. Rice and Jack Hyles are not. Other members listed include Jerry Falwell, Elmer Towns, Henry Morris, Tim LaHaye, Adrian Rogers, Truman Dollar, and W. A. Criswell.

Under this heading "North American Overview Committee", Arthur Farstad wrote:
"Two large meetings of the North American Overview Committee met at Nashville and Chicago in 1975 to assist in preparing guidelines for the NKJV. Nearly all felt the project was worthy of the time, money, and effort that would be invested" (p. 152).

Arthur Farstad wrote: "The vast majority of the people who attended either the Chicago or Nashville meeting agreed to become members of the North American Overview Committee" (p. 32).

Perhaps some attended a meeting that did not agree to become a member.

 

At that link it says:

This below it has:

But by my calculations, Hutson would not have been the President of the Sword of the Lord in 1975, would he? Was not even the associate editor until after 1975 I think. Maybe he was there, but the way he was designated is wrong?

 

The Holy Spirit is not in a translation. Does the Holy Spirit use Shakespeare to evangelize? Who decides what the Holy Spirit uses? To say the Holy Spirit can use a modern translation would mean Shakespeare could be on par equally as both have scripture in them.

 

The book The New King James Version In the Great Tradition by Arthur L. Farstad which has an Appendix C that listed "Commonwealth Oversight Committee" (pp. 151-152) and "North American Overview Committee" (pp. 152-156) was published in 1989.

Perhaps it could be possible that the members of the overview committee were asked for their bibliographical information for Farstad's book at a date later than 1975 so that some members may have given their later positions sometime after 1980 rather than the ones that they may have had in 1975.

 

Thanks. That seems a likely possibility that would explain the discrepancy.

 

It's what was put out when the complete NKJV was published in 1982!

seen in 1982 issue of Christianity Today

Note the "deceased" after several who'd died while still associated with the project:

Boyce Blackwelder [1913-1976]
Huber Drumwright [1924-1981]
Batsell Barrett Baxter [1916-1982]



Frequently Asked Questions About the NKJV - Thomas Nelson Bibles

"Throughout the entire editing process, the work was regularly reviewed by the clergy and lay advisers on the British Oversight Committee and the North American Overview Committee"


Farstad's book, p. 32, says:

"Jarman, a distinguished retired businessman...headed up the North American Committee"

and

"a small handful of those who did come [to the intial meetings in 1975] felt they could not participate in the work"


Nelson publisher Sam Moore in his autobiography gives a "partial list" of those at the initial meetings of the NKJV North American Overview Committee in 1975:

B. Clayton Bell
D. Stuart Briscoe
Robert Coleman
W.A. Criswell
Mary C. Crowley
Millie Dienert
Jerry Falwell
Peter E. Gillquist
William S. Glass
Ben Haden
Richard Halverson
Howard G. Hendricks
E.V. Hill
D. James Kennedy
Jay Kesler
Tim F. LaHaye
Harold Lindsell
David L. McKenna
J. Robertson McQuilken
Jess C. Moody
Harold J. Ockenga
Lloyd John Ogilvie
Luis Palau
J. Dwight Pentecost
John R. Rice
Adrian P. Rogers
Elmer Towns

 

The Holy Spirit is not limited, using the writings that contain the Word of God. Nor is every translation 100% the Word of God. No the Holy Spirit does not have to "inspire" every translation. How the Holy Spirit works is not to be confused in preserving God's Word. That would be the act of God Himself preserving His Word, despite human involvement.

It is only humans trusting the words of other humans if their claim is an inspiration, or if they are led by the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit works inside of us to make such confirmation acceptable.

 

And yet the Holy Spirit "somehow" has even managed to save lost sinners thru "bibles" such as the Living, Message , and Good news!

 

The Kjv being eternal sound more like Islam and their Koran!