• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Men From The Past Who Used Other Versions

NaasPreacher (C4K)

Well-Known Member
Perhaps you cannot understand that no one can approve of a version that doesn't exist. Perhaps 50 years from now someone will revise the RV, and perhaps a preacher living now will approve of it, but that cannot possibly be known until the revision comes out and is examined.

Or maybe you believe Spurgeon had foreknowledge? Amazing, because most Calvinists will not even admit that God has foreknowledge.

Once again, Spurgeon could not possibly approve a revision that didn't exist until it actually existed and could be examined. If you can't understand this, I can't help you, it is a false argument on your part.

Spurgeon had 12 years in which he could have used the RV, from 1881-1893. That's plenty of time to be able to say 'Spurgeon used the RV'.
 

Baptist4life

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Spurgeon had 12 years in which he could have used the RV, from 1881-1893. That's plenty of time to be able to say 'Spurgeon used the RV'.

But "could have" and "saying it" doesn't make it fact. I believe that was his point. It was stated as a fact, when it's really just Rippon's assumption.

Originally Posted by Rippon
Since he advocated a revision of the KJV in the 1850's he would have certainly used it then, as he actually did in the latter 1800's.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Rippon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Spurgeon had 12 years in which he could have used the RV, from 1881-1892. That's plenty of time to be able to say 'Spurgeon used the RV'.

Yes, he used it approvingly dozens of times during those years.
 

Rippon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
But "could have" and "saying it" doesn't make it fact. I believe that was his point. It was stated as a fact, when it's really just Rippon's assumption.

I don't understand what you are saying. Spurgeon used the RV dozens of times in his sermons -- approvingly.That's fact -- not opinion.
 

Rippon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Perhaps you cannot understand that no one can approve of a version that doesn't exist. Perhaps 50 years from now someone will revise the RV, and perhaps a preacher living now will approve of it, but that cannot possibly be known until the revision comes out and is examined.

That'sd already been done. The RV was updated to the American RV. That was updated to the RSV. That was updated to the NRSV and ESV.

...most Calvinists will not even admit that God has foreknowledge.

This comment of yours is off-topic. However, that's absurd. What Calvinist denies God's foreknowledge. Sometimes you say things of the top of your head.


Once again, Spurgeon could not possibly approve a revision that didn't exist until it actually existed and could be examined. If you can't understand this, I can't help you, it is a false argument on your part.

C.H.S. advocated a revision of the KJV back in the 1850's. The actual retranslation of the KJV was released in 1881. He used the RV approvingly lots of times. Those are just the facts, Jack.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Jerome

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Example:
Man and woman fell together; together they must rise. After the resurrection, it was a woman who was first commissioned to carry the glad tidings of the risen Christ; and in Europe, where woman was in future days to be set free from many of the trammels of the East, it seems fitting that a woman should be the first believer. Not only, however, was Lydia a sort of first-fruit for Europe, but she probably also became a witness in her own city of Thyatira, in Asia. We do not know how the gospel was introduced into that city; but we are informed of the existence of a church there by the message of the ascended Christ, through his servant John, to "the angel of the church in Thyatira." Very likely Lydia became the herald of the gospel in her native place. Let the women who know the truth proclaim it; for why should their influence be lost? "The Lord giveth the word; the women that publish the tidings are a great host."
That's Psalm 68:11, English Revised Version, that Spurgeon is quoting in his 1891 sermon about Lydia of Thyatira.:thumbs:
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Jerome

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
More on Spurgeon's estimation of the Revised Version:

"For that Revised Version I have but little care, as a general rule, holding it to be by no means an improvement upon our common Authorized Version. It is a useful thing to have it for private reference, but I trust it will never be regarded as the standard English translation of the New Testament. The Revised Version of the Old Testament is so excellent that I am half afraid it may carry the Revised New Testament upon its shoulders into general use. I sincerely hope that this may not be the case, for the result would be a decided loss." —Charles Spurgeon

"The Revised Version we venture to assert is not accepted by the church at large as the successor of the Authorized Version, nor will it ever be. It is a good version, and in some respects the best yet produced; but it must be made far better before it can be compared in all respects with the Bible of our youth, and it will even then be long before it supplants it." —Sword and the Trowel, review of Matthew's Many Versions But One Bible

"On the whole, I am glad to find that there is so little alteration made in the Old Testament; and it is my opinion that if the Old testament revision had been issued first, it would have met with almost universal acceptance, and would have prepared the way for a heartier welcome for the Revised New Testament. The English of the New Testament is so wretchedly bad, compared with the simple yet stately rhythm of the Authorized Version, that it prevents the revision as a whole from being considered satisfactory." —Sword and the Trowel, Charles Spurgeon answering a student's inquiry
 

Jerome

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Mrs. Charles Cowman is another man from the past who used another version.
(PBV in Streams in the Desert)
 

Mexdeaf

New Member
More on Spurgeon's estimation of the Revised Version:

"For that Revised Version I have but little care, as a general rule, holding it to be by no means an improvement upon our common Authorized Version. It is a useful thing to have it for private reference, but I trust it will never be regarded as the standard English translation of the New Testament. The Revised Version of the Old Testament is so excellent that I am half afraid it may carry the Revised New Testament upon its shoulders into general use. I sincerely hope that this may not be the case, for the result would be a decided loss." —Charles Spurgeon

"The Revised Version we venture to assert is not accepted by the church at large as the successor of the Authorized Version, nor will it ever be. It is a good version, and in some respects the best yet produced; but it must be made far better before it can be compared in all respects with the Bible of our youth, and it will even then be long before it supplants it." —Sword and the Trowel, review of Matthew's Many Versions But One Bible

"On the whole, I am glad to find that there is so little alteration made in the Old Testament; and it is my opinion that if the Old testament revision had been issued first, it would have met with almost universal acceptance, and would have prepared the way for a heartier welcome for the Revised New Testament. The English of the New Testament is so wretchedly bad, compared with the simple yet stately rhythm of the Authorized Version, that it prevents the revision as a whole from being considered satisfactory." —Sword and the Trowel, Charles Spurgeon answering a student's inquiry

If he were alive today, he would use the English Standard Version- after all, he WAS English, not American! :laugh:
 

NaasPreacher (C4K)

Well-Known Member
More on Spurgeon's estimation of the Revised Version:

"For that Revised Version I have but little care, as a general rule, holding it to be by no means an improvement upon our common Authorized Version. It is a useful thing to have it for private reference, but I trust it will never be regarded as the standard English translation of the New Testament. The Revised Version of the Old Testament is so excellent that I am half afraid it may carry the Revised New Testament upon its shoulders into general use. I sincerely hope that this may not be the case, for the result would be a decided loss." —Charles Spurgeon

"The Revised Version we venture to assert is not accepted by the church at large as the successor of the Authorized Version, nor will it ever be. It is a good version, and in some respects the best yet produced; but it must be made far better before it can be compared in all respects with the Bible of our youth, and it will even then be long before it supplants it." —Sword and the Trowel, review of Matthew's Many Versions But One Bible

"On the whole, I am glad to find that there is so little alteration made in the Old Testament; and it is my opinion that if the Old testament revision had been issued first, it would have met with almost universal acceptance, and would have prepared the way for a heartier welcome for the Revised New Testament. The English of the New Testament is so wretchedly bad, compared with the simple yet stately rhythm of the Authorized Version, that it prevents the revision as a whole from being considered satisfactory." —Sword and the Trowel, Charles Spurgeon answering a student's inquiry

Excellent research - thank you
 

Jerome

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
One also runs across the PBV in Oswald Chambers's My Utmost for His Highest.
 

Rippon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Spurgeon did indeed advocate revising the KJV in the 1850's. This was long before the Revised Version was even contemplated by W&H.

I have long appreciated the wonderful book :God's Word In Our Hands edited by James B.Williams and Randolph Shaylor. Chapter two is called :The Voice Of The Preachers -- by J.Drew Conley. Here is a portion of what Mr. Conley said on page 64 :"What is not as well known is that the prince of preachers actually edited a book on the English Bible published in 1859, early in his ministry."

Here are some things C.H.S. said in the Preface of his book.

" The cant and fudge which cries out against the least alteration of the old version of our forefathers, as if it were positive profanity, are nothing to me.I love God's word betther than I love King James pedantic wisdom and foolish kingcraft.
We want God's own book pure and unaltered...we desire to see it yet purified till it shall be as near perfection as a human translation of the divine Book can possibly be brought... I plead for a faithful translation; and from my very love to the English version, because in the main it is so,I desire for it that its blemishes should be removed, and its faults corrected.
It is an arduous labour to persuade men of this, although in the light of common sense the matter is plain enough. but there is a kind of Popery in our midst which makes us cling fast to our errors, and hinders the growth of thorough reformation; otherwise the Church would just ask the question, 'Is the King James' Bible the nearest approach to the original?' The answer would be, 'No; it is exceedingly good, but it has many glaring faults.' and the command would at once go forth, -- 'Then ye that have learning amend these errors; for at any cost, the Church must have the pure Word of God.' "
 

Dr. Bob

Administrator
Administrator
Here are some things C.H.S. said in the Preface of his book.

"The cant and fudge which cries out against the least alteration of the old version of our forefathers, as if it were positive profanity, are nothing to me.I love God's word betther than I love King James pedantic wisdom and foolish kingcraft.

We want God's own book pure and unaltered...we desire to see it yet purified till it shall be as near perfection as a human translation of the divine Book can possibly be brought... I plead for a faithful translation; and from my very love to the English version, because in the main it is so,I desire for it that its blemishes should be removed, and its faults corrected.
It is an arduous labour to persuade men of this, although in the light of common sense the matter is plain enough. but there is a kind of Popery in our midst which makes us cling fast to our errors, and hinders the growth of thorough reformation; otherwise the Church would just ask the question, 'Is the King James' Bible the nearest approach to the original?' The answer would be, 'No; it is exceedingly good, but it has many glaring faults.' and the command would at once go forth, -- 'Then ye that have learning amend these errors; for at any cost, the Church must have the pure Word of God.' "

That deserves to be quoted again and again. Thanks for listing it, bro. And thankfully learned men (and women) have made great amends to it, using the full range of Greek plus modern methods of discerning original text, to give us far better translations in English than any tongue deserves.
 
Top