The 1952 Revised Standard Bible

[Jerome]

November 1, 1952 issue of the Vancouver Sun :

Protest rally against new version, led by Rev. Mark Buch of Peoples Fellowship Tabernacle: "'the King James version is the divinely preserved Word of God to English-speaking peoples of the world'...sponsors of the new version are contributing to 'a great apostasy'."

"A number of Fundamentalist and other ministers are opposed to the new version. Rev. W.M. Robertson in Metropolitan Tabernacle on Sunday evening entitling his sermon 'The Unholy Bible."

 

[rlvaughn]

Mark Buch is the guy quoted in the Is this guy KJVO thread. I have written a short piece about him. It will be visible HERE Wednesday morning.

 

[Jerome]

Madison (Wisc.) Capitol Times in January 1953 reported:

RSV being denounced as "the Revised Standard Perversion" and "The Devised Version—The Liberal's Bible".

"rallies to protest and denounce changes from the King James Bible which appear in the new Revised Standard Version....Principle speaker at the rallies will be the Rev. Melvin M. Seguine....former pastor at Racine, he is now associated with the Independent Fundamental Churches of America."

 

[rlvaughn]

... the Rev. Melvin M. Seguine....former pastor at Racine, he is now associated with the Independent Fundamental Churches of America.

W. M. Robertson (mentioned in the other article) and his church Metropolitan Tabernacle (a Regular Baptist Church) joined the Independent Fundamental Churches of America in 1931.

 

[rlvaughn]

This article from the Lansing, Michigan State Journal (January 10, 1953, p. 6) shows David Otis Fuller involved in the RSV debate -- before J. J. Ray wrote a book, and probably before much of anyone had ever heard of Peter Ruckman. He didn't just wake up in 1970 and decide to write a book supporting the TR and KJV (although I would not doubt his views developed over time).

 

[rlvaughn]

A letter to the editor of the Petoskey (MIchigan) Evening News (November 25, 1952, p. 4) mentions a pamphlet written by David Otis Fuller in 1952.

 

[rlvaughn]

Would love to find a copy of this tract:


The Honolulu Advertiser, Sunday, November 9, 1952, p. 5, section 2

 

[rlvaughn]

Some quotes:

“The magnitude of the RSV affair surprised even members of the Standard Bible Committee, who were by no means unaccustomed to theological disputation. Chairman Luther Weigle had retired in 1949 as dean of Yale Divinity School only to find himself engaging by 1953 in full-time RSV crisis management. Everywhere Weigle went, the controversy dogged him.” -- In Discordance with the Scriptures: American Protestant Battles Over Translating the Bible, by Peter Johannes Thuesen, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999, p. 98

“Don’t burn the Standard Revised Version—the Red Russian Book—because that’s against the law. But bury it. Bury every copy you get your hands on.” -- Rev. Dan H. Graham, founder of the Dan Graham Bible and Evangelistic Institute, in “Bury Revised Standard Edition Graham Advises,” The Elizabethton Star, Friday, March 6, 1953, p. 1

“We denounce the ungodliness of the thing that they are trying to put in place of our beloved Bible.” Graham, Ibid. pp. 1, 8

“We’re in a war. To have our enemy come at us through our churches and our pulpits is a terrible thing…The King James Version is our stock pile of atomic bombs. The King James Version – the Word of God – is our defensese (sic) machinery.” Fred Stroud, pastor of First Bible Presbyterian Church, Nashville. Ibid. p. 8

To many this was just a battle over the Bible. To others it was a battle over the Bible coupled with a battle against Communism. That can be seen in some of the rhetoric of the times, and the titles of some of the pamphlets against the RSV (e.g. How Red are the Translators of the National Council of Churches’ Revised Standard Version of the Bible, W. O. H. Garman, Collingswood, NJ: Christian Beacon, 1953).

In my opinion, the traditionalists, evangelicals, conservatives, and fundamentalists did not all agree about the King James Version of the Bible, but stood basically “shoulder-to-shoulder” in their agreed opposition to the Revised Standard Version. Later they would separate on their relationship to the KJV, with some going on to continued (and greater) support of it, while others believed (or came to believe) there was a need for a new conservative translation.

 

[Yeshua1]

Some quotes:

“The magnitude of the RSV affair surprised even members of the Standard Bible Committee, who were by no means unaccustomed to theological disputation. Chairman Luther Weigle had retired in 1949 as dean of Yale Divinity School only to find himself engaging by 1953 in full-time RSV crisis management. Everywhere Weigle went, the controversy dogged him.” -- In Discordance with the Scriptures: American Protestant Battles Over Translating the Bible, by Peter Johannes Thuesen, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999, p. 98

“Don’t burn the Standard Revised Version—the Red Russian Book—because that’s against the law. But bury it. Bury every copy you get your hands on.” -- Rev. Dan H. Graham, founder of the Dan Graham Bible and Evangelistic Institute, in “Bury Revised Standard Edition Graham Advises,” The Elizabethton Star, Friday, March 6, 1953, p. 1

“We denounce the ungodliness of the thing that they are trying to put in place of our beloved Bible.” Graham, Ibid. pp. 1, 8

“We’re in a war. To have our enemy come at us through our churches and our pulpits is a terrible thing…The King James Version is our stock pile of atomic bombs. The King James Version – the Word of God – is our defensese (sic) machinery.” Fred Stroud, pastor of First Bible Presbyterian Church, Nashville. Ibid. p. 8

To many this was just a battle over the Bible. To others it was a battle over the Bible coupled with a battle against Communism. That can be seen in some of the rhetoric of the times, and the titles of some of the pamphlets against the RSV (e.g. How Red are the Translators of the National Council of Churches’ Revised Standard Version of the Bible, W. O. H. Garman, Collingswood, NJ: Christian Beacon, 1953).

In my opinion, the traditionalists, evangelicals, conservatives, and fundamentalists did not all agree about the King James Version of the Bible, but stood basically “shoulder-to-shoulder” in their agreed opposition to the Revised Standard Version. Later they would separate on their relationship to the KJV, with some going on to continued (and greater) support of it, while others believed (or came to believe) there was a need for a new conservative translation.

I once had a bible in the rsv, and really not that bad!

 

[rlvaughn]

Another article on burning the Revised Standard Version, this one from The Nashville Banner, Thursday, December 11, 1952, p. 12. John W. Dysart, pastor of the Bible Presbyterian Church of Shelbyville, Tenn., initially plans to burn an RSV, but decides against it.

This image is not showing up on what I see, so I am trying again.

 

[Marooncat79]

I was either in 3-4 grade and the church I went to gave every child an RSV. I carried mine a while then I think I carried my fathers Bible?

Isnt the RSV called the bloodless Bible?

 

[Ziggy]

The "bloodless Bible" was the Good News for Modern Man in its earlier editions (1966 to about 1990). The translator, Robert Bratcher, refused to translate άιμα χριστου as "blood of Christ" but rendered it "death of Christ" due to his (liberal) view that rejected what he called a "slaughterhouse religion" concept.

The American Bible Society was heavily besieged with complaints over this, but steadfastly defended Bratcher and refused to alter the translation until Bratcher had died. But then they finally gave in, first rendering the phrase as "sacrificial death of Christ" and finally as the "blood of Christ", where it now stands today (with a footnote to "blood", reading "Or, sacrificial death".

(I have each of these editions in my Bible collection).

 

[rlvaughn]

From Ruckman's own Bible Baptist Bookstore site:
"Dr. Peter S. Ruckman (November 19, 1921 - April 21, 2016) received his Bachelor of Arts degree from the University of Alabama and finished his formal education with six years of training at Bob Jones University (four full years and two accelerated summer sessions), completing requirements for the Master of Arts and Doctor of Philosophy degree."

dissertation record:
"An historical analysis of practical theology as it is related to the Acts of the Apostles"
Peter S. Ruckman
Ph.D. Bob Jones University 1955

From Ziggy’s and Jerome’s research, Peter Ruckman must have been at Bob Jones U from about 1949-1955. Interestingly, much of this time would have been during the heat of the debate about the Revised Standard translation of the Bible.

In November 1952, the Rocky Mount Telegram quotes Bob Jones, Sr. calling the RSV “the biggest hoax that the devil ever tried to put over on Bible-believing Christians.” In a radio broadcast he challenged “any three Bible scholars who would like to defend the new translation to come to Bob Jones University and debate the subject: Resolved, that the revised standard version does not properly translate the Hebrew and Greek.” He said, “these translators ‘play down’ Jesus Christ.”

E. E. Mayes, a Southern Baptist preacher in Raleigh, NC, wrote to their News and Observer in December 1952, saying “If Dr. Bob Jones cannot recommend the new edition of the Bible I certainly could not.”

In a letter by Bob Jones, Sr. dated January 14, 1953 and printed in the Warren (PA) Times Mirror, Jones states, “I do not know one sound, intelligent, well-known evangelical, orthodox preacher in any denomination in the United States who is familiar with this new translation of the Bible that approved the translation.” He repeats his claim that “this translation is the greatest hoax the devil ever tried to put over on Bible believing Christians.” “When these translators ‘play down’ Jesus Christ by using ‘you’ in speaking of our Lord and using ‘thee’ and ‘thou’ when speaking of God the Father, they are attacking the fundamental truth of Christianity, and that is that Jesus Christ was the virgin-born son of God.”

At a Winona Lake, Indiana rally held at Grace Theological Seminary in February 1953, J. Barton Payne of Bob Jones University spoke on “RSV errors in the Old Testament.”

 

[Yeshua1]

From Ziggy’s and Jerome’s research, Peter Ruckman must have been at Bob Jones U from about 1949-1955. Interestingly, much of this time would have been during the heat of the debate about the Revised Standard translation of the Bible.

In November 1952, the Rocky Mount Telegram quotes Bob Jones, Sr. calling the RSV “the biggest hoax that the devil ever tried to put over on Bible-believing Christians.” In a radio broadcast he challenged “any three Bible scholars who would like to defend the new translation to come to Bob Jones University and debate the subject: Resolved, that the revised standard version does not properly translate the Hebrew and Greek.” He said, “these translators ‘play down’ Jesus Christ.”

E. E. Mayes, a Southern Baptist preacher in Raleigh, NC, wrote to their News and Observer in December 1952, saying “If Dr. Bob Jones cannot recommend the new edition of the Bible I certainly could not.”

In a letter by Bob Jones, Sr. dated January 14, 1953 and printed in the Warren (PA) Times Mirror, Jones states, “I do not know one sound, intelligent, well-known evangelical, orthodox preacher in any denomination in the United States who is familiar with this new translation of the Bible that approved the translation.” He repeats his claim that “this translation is the greatest hoax the devil ever tried to put over on Bible believing Christians.” “When these translators ‘play down’ Jesus Christ by using ‘you’ in speaking of our Lord and using ‘thee’ and ‘thou’ when speaking of God the Father, they are attacking the fundamental truth of Christianity, and that is that Jesus Christ was the virgin-born son of God.”

At a Winona Lake, Indiana rally held at Grace Theological Seminary in February 1953, J. Barton Payne of Bob Jones University spoke on “RSV errors in the Old Testament.”

The Esv was based upon the Rsv, as think only changed like 10 % of it!

 

[rsr]

The primary difference is that the ESV translates the OT in light of the NT, which accounts for "virgin" instead of "young woman."

 

[Marooncat79]

The Esv was based upon the Rsv, as think only changed like 10 % of it!

So. There were not errors on 100%

 

[rlvaughn]

Some of the Voices of the People in Richmond, Virginia after the release of the RSV.

“I think it is very wrong to change the wording. The King James version is beautiful and was written by the inspired men of God.

“In the last chapter of Revelations, verses 18 and 19, we read where it is wrong to take away or add to God’s Word. When we read our Bible and ask God to give us an insight as to the meaning, we need not have it simplified to understand it. The Bible should not be changed in any way; let us keep the King James version.” Sara Hines Claiborne, Richmond, Virginia
“Doesn’t Like New Bible; Prefers King James Version,” in “Voice of the People” in Richmond Times-Dispatch (Richmond, Virginia) Sunday, October 26, 1952, p. 2-B

“Of course, everyone has a right to their opinion and there is no one who can change mine in regard to the King James Version, which was good enough for our forefathers and is good enough for me.” Norma Webb Todd-Davis, Bremo Bluff, Virginia
“More on Why She Prefers The King James Bible,” in “Voice of the People” in Richmond Times-Dispatch (Richmond, Virginia), Wednesday, November 5, 1952, p. 18

“As to this controversy over the new Bible translation, where are our ‘born again’ Christians, our pastors, our teachers, our ‘watchman on the wall’? Do we believe in our Lord Jesus as the only begotten of God, or was He born of an ordinary ‘young woman’?

I, for one, will stand up and be counted as one that believes in the inspired word of the King James version—inspired of God, written by men led by the Holy Spirit—and condemn the new version, men led by the son of perdition, trying to take from and add to the Bible as spoken of in the last chapter of Revelation.” Edna Carpenter of Duane, Virginia
“Reader Strongly Condemns New Version of the Bible,” in “Voice of the People” in Richmond Times-Dispatch (Richmond, Virginia), Friday, December 12, 1952, p. 24

 

[church mouse guy]

I read the family KJV at home but my mother gave me the RSV about ‘56 or ‘57. I was aware that there was a controversy although I was in a small town high school. It was considered watered down and not elegant English. I eventually went back to the KJV and threw the RSV away. I use the NASB or NIV for clarification. Now the KJV is fading.

 

[Yeshua1]

The primary difference is that the ESV translates the OT in light of the NT, which accounts for "virgin" instead of "young woman."

Well, the Holy Spirit Himself gave that meaning to us in Matthew!

 

[Guvnuh]

Thank you men, for a sound and civil discourse.
Wish more discussions were like this.
Makes it easier to control my opinionated self.