From Scripture Scrolls or through the New English Bible, His voice may be heard through the Book.

A little more than Four Hundred years ago a large committee of devout and seemingly able scholars was about to present to the English-speaking world the most famous of all Bible translations, the King James Version.

Numerous translations had been published by various individuals and groups during the preceding century. Now the king had commanded that "one principal good one" be prepared, a version "not justly to be excepted against."

One would naturally suppose that the people of England were waiting with keen anticipation for the appearance of this important revision. But already the committee was coming under heavy criticism for presuming to revise the English Bible at all.

The Bishops' Bible of 1568 (the 2nd authorized version) and the Geneva Bible of 1560 had by now become widely accepted in Britain. The possibility that the familiar wording of these established versions might be modified in the 1611 revision was viewed with widespread alarm.

In an effort to allay suspicion, the King James translators appointed Myles Smith, one of their number and later the Bishop of Gloucester, to write a suitable preface in explanation and defense of their new version.

The preface, entitled "The Translators to the Reader," stood for many years at the beginning of every copy of the King James Version. It is unfortunate that this highly enlightening document is no longer included in modern printings.

"Zeal to promote the good," the translators began, "whether it be by devising anything ourselves, or revising that which hath been laboured by others, deserveth certainly much respect and esteem, but yet findeth but cold entertainment in the world. . . .

For he that medleth with men's Religion in any part, medleth with their custom, nay, with their freehold; and though they find no content in that which they have, yet they cannot abide to hear altering. . . .

"Many men's mouths have been opened a good while (and yet are not stopped) with speeches about the Translation so long in hand, . . . and ask what may be the reason, what the necessity of the employment: Hath the Church been deceived, say they, all this while? . . . Was their translation good before? Why do they now mend it? Was it not good? Why then was it obtruded to the people?"

Even though the King James translators were under a measure of public condemnation themselves, they spoke only with great respect of the Bible versions which had appeared before their time.

"We are so far off from condemning any of their labours that travailed before us in this kind, either in this land or beyond the sea, either in King Henry's time, or King Edward's . . . or Queen Elizabeth's of ever renowned memory, that we acknowledge them to have been raised up of God, for the building and furnishing of His Church, and that they deserve to be had of us and of posterity in everlasting remembrance. . . . Therefore blessed be they, and most honored be their name, that break the ice, and givether onset upon that which helpeth forward to the saving of souls. Now what can be more available thereto, than to deliver God's book unto God's people in a tongue which they understand? . . . Yet for all that, as nothing is begun and perfected at the same time, and later thoughts are thought to be the wiser: so, if we building upon their foundation that went before us, and being holpen by their labours, do endeavour to make that better which they left so good; no man, we are sure, hath cause to mislike us; they, we persuade ourselves, if they were alive, would thank us."

But such appreciation was not immediately forthcoming from the British public. The appearance of still another revision only brought confusion to many of the unlearned. How could these different translations all claim to be the Word of God?

To this the Kings James Committee replied with great skill and wisdom:

"We do not deny, nay we affirm and avow, that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English, set forth by men of our profession, . . . containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God. As the King's speech, which he uttereth in Parliament, being translated into French, Dutch, Italian, and Latin, is still the King's speech, though it be not interpreted by every Translator with the like grace, nor peradventure so fitly for phrase, nor so expressly for sense, everywhere. . . . No cause therefore why the word translated should be denied to be the word, or forbidden to be current, notwithstanding that some imperfections and blemishes may be noted in the setting forth of it."

During the three and four centuries since the King James Version first came off the press, the Bible has been translated, wholly or in part, into a few thousand language and dialects spoken all around the world, from the big cities, to the smallest hamlet. In English alone, several hundred different versions of the New Testament have been published.

It must be admitted that not all of these versions are translated "so fitly for phrase, nor so expressly for sense, everywhere." It is possible to find "imperfections and blemishes" in every one of them. But during the last hundred years or so, the purpose may not always have been the noblest, why some new version appeared. Some were and are planned to fit the ancient text to accommodate sins, God help them to overcome if they would just come before Him and sincerely pray and beg for it.

But I believe God speaks still through the Bible, even in all these many versions, yet through some clearer than through others!

As the King James translators also observed in their preface, the kingdom of God is not words and syllables. The truth about God remains eternally the same, in spite of the inadequacy of human language to describe Him. The very contrast between the greatness of God and His Kingdom and the limitations of human speech makes variety in Bible translation highly desirable in some way, yet, settle for one like the KJV for memorizing scriptures.

Consider for example, one of the most significant Greek words used in the New Testament to summarize the purpose of Christ's sacrificial death.

In Romans 3:25 the Apostle Paul declares that the Son of God thereby became our hilastorion. For centuries Bible translators have wrestled with this term.

Here are their choices,

1. In the first English Bible, prepared by Wycliffe in 1382, the word is rendered "an helper,"
   
2. changed in a later edition to "forgiver."
   
3. Tyndale (1525) prefers "a seat of mercy,"
   
4. following the leadership of Luther, who actually invented the name "mercy-seat" for the golden covering of the Ark of the Covenant.
   
5. The Great Bible (1539) translates, "the obtainer of mercy."
   
6. Whittingham (1557) offers "a pacification,"
   
7. changed later in the Geneva Bible (1560) to "a reconciliation."
   
8. The Bishops' Bible (1568) translates, "a propitiation,"
   
9. the interpretation adopted by the KJV in 1611, was "a sacrifice of reconciliation."
   
10. the Goodspeed Bible, `a sacrifice of reconciliation.'
    
11. Mrs. Montgomery (1924) renders, "an offering of atonement."
    
12. The Basic English Version (1941) translates, "the sign of His mercy."
    
13. The RSV (1946) offers, "an expiation."
    
14. The NEB (1961) interprets, "the means of expiating sin."
    
15. The 1978 Good News Bible, renders it, "by his sacrificial death he should become the means ..."
    
16. The English Standard Version (ESV), says, "a propitiation by his blood,"
    
17. The new Catholic Youth Bible, "an expiation,"
    
18. Moffat's Bible, "a propitiation,"
    
19. the German language Zurcher Bible (1931) says, "ein Sühnopfer durch den Glauben", which would translate most closely to `a propitiation.'
    
20. And Dr. Martin Luther's (1937) says, "zu einem Gnadenstuhl", which, as we said above, means "mercy-seat."

The very variety of translations illustrates the broad significance of this term and warns against the error of too hasty or narrow an interpretation. It makes apparent the necessity of more careful and wider study of Scripture to discover further clues as to Paul's intention in this passage.

There are numerous versions and editions of NT in my small but growing library. Sometimes during periods of special Bible study I find almost all of them spread around my place of study.

I have great respect for these publications as long as we know the agenda for some of the newer versions, those which have missing chapters and verses or gender bending Bibles and those to supposedly appeasing some other, non-Christian religions.

But, for the most part, today, there is a growing, prophesied contest between what God says in His book, and what man says. We must remain to true to `thus says the Lord.'