Charles Surgeon warned against anyone who alter the Word of God

I think he wasn't talking about the specific word-for-word KJV, but about scripture in a more general sense. I believe this because of his non-KJV-only quotes that can be found at this link.

BTW, if it wasn't so sad, it would be almost humorous that Ruckman said that Spurgeon was "controlled by Satan," "lied to the Holy Ghost," and was "killed" by God [!] as a consequence of NOT being a "KJV-Onlyite!" [Bible Believer's Bulletin, August 1991]

 

Isn't it?

 

Askjo tries to recruit the Prince of Preachers for the KJV-only cause:

Charles Surgeon [sic], a famous Calvinist, spoke out and warned against anyone who twisted the Word of God.

Knowing Spurgy, he probably had a few choice words for those who would twist his words. He was no KJV-onlyist, that was for certain:

- C. H. Spurgeon, "And We Are: A Jewel from the Revised Version" (MTP vol. 32, 673-74), a sermon he preached on inspired words missing from 1 John 3:1 in the KJV.

 

If you're insinuating that he warned against folks coming out with translations other then the KJV, that would be incorrect. He wasn't talking about translating the Bible from Hebrew/Greek to English, or any language. He was talking about altering the text from the original. With the exception of unintended translational errors, this has not been done in any of the frequently used English translations that exist today.

 

y won't baptist KJBOs quit coopting Spurgy (!) n start taking his balanced non-KJBO advice?

the non-KJBO position isn't unique to Spurgeon--Moses, Isaiah, Jesus, Paul, n most giants of faith thru church history were NOT KJBO.

perhaps its time for Askjo n his friends to come on over. we'll forget that they were even KJBO at one time!

 

I don't need to take a look at Spurgeon. He was preceded by scripture by at least 1700 years.

 

Spurgeon's text - Isaiah 66:2 "To this man will I look, even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembleth at my word." KJV

"There are people who do believe that there is a Word of God. There are plenty of persons who profess and call themselves Christians, and yet do not believe that this sacred Book is the very Word of God. Say that it is inspired, and they answer, "So is the Koran, and so are the Vedas." They talk after this fashion: "This is the religious book of the ancient Hebrew nation. A very respectable book it is, but infallible , certainly not: the very Word of God , certainly not." Well, then, we distinctly part company with such talkers. We can have no sort of fellowship with them in any measure or degree with regard to the things of God. They are to us as heathen men and publicans. If we are to come under the head of those that tremble at God’s Word, we must believe that there is a Word of the Lord to tremble at, as we do most assuredly believe, let others talk as they may." emphasis mine

Trembling at the Word of the Lord delivered by C. H. Spurgeon, at the Metropolitan Tabernacle, Newington, on Thursday evening May 1st, 1884

It "seems" as if Spurgeon considered the KJV Bible in his hands at the time of this message as the "infallible, very Word of God." So much as to part company with those who would deny it.

 

What in the excerpt you have posted leads you to believe Spurgeon was speaking specifically about the particular copy he had in hand at that moment, and not the Bible in general?

 

I can only conclude that he was referring to the "book" that he was preaching from. The text is a KJV passage.

 

I can never believe how people try to make Spurgeon KJVO

"I do not hesitate to say that I believe that there is no mistake whatever in the original Holy Scriptures from beginning to end. There may be, and there are, mistakes of translation; for translators are not inspired" (35:257).

Seems his position is clear.

Bryan
SDG

 

Pastor_Bob said:

I can only conclude that he was referring to the "book" that he was preaching from. The text is a KJV passage.

Really? Reading it for myself, and without the emphases you put on it, I can just as easily conclude that he was referring to the work of literature known as the Bible, of which he had a copy in his pulpit, and not to any particular copy or version.

This is further borne out from the context, where he compares the Bible to the Koran and to the Vedas (not, you will note, this copy of the Koran or that translation of the Vedas).

And knowing from the rest of his works that Spurgeon did not regard human translators of Scripture as inspired, then a better case can be made that Spurgeon was talking about the Bible, not merely one translation, version, edition, or copy theref.

 

Nor do I.

The Bible in 1884 England was the King James Version. It was not referred to as the KJV but simply as the Holy Bible.

 

Speaking for myself, I certainly would agree with his statement. I think all of us here consider the KJV to be infallible, the very word of God. We, like Spurgeon and the KJV translators, affirm that every faithful translation is infallible, the very word of God.

 

Pastor_Bob said:

The Bible in 1884 England was the King James Version. It was not referred to as the KJV but simply as the Holy Bible.

That is superficially true, but it doesn't explain why it is that Spurgeon was supportive of the revision of the Greek New Testament, or the Revised Version, which he sometimes preached from after it was published.

So I can either believe that Spurgeon believed in some sort of "KJV dispensationalism" that says it was especially the Word of God in some way that other Bibles were not, which is demonstrably false; or I can believe that his support of the KJV was a matter of convenience since for most of his career there wasn't much of an alternative. Again, the broader context of Spurge's career suggests the latter.

 

[/QUOTE]The Bible in 1884 England was the King James Version. It was not referred to as the KJV but simply as the Holy Bible. [/QB][/QUOTE]

I think an easy way to think about this is simply to imagine asking anyone at random what they carry to church with themselves. The answer virtually all would give is simply "My Bible".

I have a hard time imagining that very many would go into a more detailed response such as "my New American Standard Version of the Bible" or "my New International Version of the Bible".

To almost any Christian, it would simply be "My Bible".

 

Here's a good link discussing Spurgeon and his views on "the Bible":

http://www.kjvonly.org/doug/david_otis_fuller.htm

Here's some interesting quotes from Spurgeon as given on that site. Unfortunately, no references are listed: