Reprinted from “The Biblical Evangelist” vol. 36, no.
3, May-June, 2005 .
Interview With
John R. Rice
by
In this staged but documented discussion, Dr. John R. Rice, founder of The Sword of the Lord, is interviewed
concerning his views on the King James Version, modern translations, and other
textual issues. Documentation for his answers is found in the book, Our
God-Breathed Book – The Bible, by Dr. Rice.
The interview:
Q: Dr. Rice, is the King James Version
(KJV) perfect?
A: "A perfect translation of the Bible is humanly impossible. . .
. There are no perfect translations. God does not inspire particular
translations." (p.376)
Q: Should Christians be concerned that there
are no perfect translations of the Bible out there?
A: "When we speak of a flaw in this translation or that, we should
remember that the flaws are so few in any criticized
translation as to be a minor and almost an insignificant part of the whole.
Suppose there are 100 places in the Revised Standard Version (RSV) which I
think are bad translations – and there probably are.
That would be one verse, perhaps, in each 13 pages of the approximate 1300
pages in the edition! If liberals, biased against the deity of Christ, change
"virgin" in Isaiah 7:14 to "young woman," as I think is
wrong, or leave out "begotten" in John 3:16, which seems to be weak
scholarship, and take indefensible liberty, yet all the great truths of God are
taught in this version, all the comfort, all the commands. . . . So the
translations are the Word of God, and our serious effort to have good
translations and a proper opposition to liberal bias in translations and
irresponsible paraphrases should not keep us from rejoicing that in any
translation we know we can find Christ and salvation,
can know the will of God and be comforted by His promises." (pp. 376,377)
Q: When you say the Bible is inspired, are
you referring to the KJV?
A: "When we say that the Bible is inspired, we do not refer to the
translations or copies but to the original autographs, written down under God's
direction. It is true that we have so many copies of the original Scriptures
that they can be compared and so the actual wording of the translations can now
be checked, and we can be sure that in every essential matter we have exactly
the Word of God. And since the Scripture plainly claims that it is settled forever
in Heaven, that it is everlasting, and Jesus said that "the scripture
cannot be broken" (John 10:35), we can be sure that God in loving
providence guarantees that we will not lose these Scriptures, the Word of God.
But we do not claim for any copy or any translation the absolute, divine
perfection that was in the original autographs. Inspiration refers to the
original manuscripts." (pp. 68,69) "When we
speak of inspiration, we speak of the original autographs, the original
manuscripts. We have none of the original manuscripts. All we have are copies
of copies." (p. 354)
Q: What is your view of the Doctrine of
Preservation?
A: "God has promised that His Word 'liveth and abideth for ever.'
That did not mean that all of the Word of God was in one manuscript, as the
autographs were originally given. That does not mean that all
the Bible as a unit was perfectly preserved in one copy through the
centuries. For example, among the Dead Sea Scrolls found in the
Q: How do you reconcile your view of
Preservation with Matthew
A: "Jesus makes it clear in what intricate detail the Scriptures
will be preserved. Not a jot nor a tittle will pass
away! The Lord here guarantees even the verbal accuracy of the translations and
copies – not of one particular copy nor of one particular translation but of
the inspired Word in all of them together. Here, then, is a clear Bible
doctrine that the Word of God abides forever, it endures forever, it shall never pass away! So, if we know the detailed methods
by which God preserves His Word, well and good. If we do not know how
providence has overruled the wrath of men, the errors of copyists, the bias of
translators, we can still know that He does overrule them. And not altogether,
perhaps, in one copy or in one translation, but in them all collectively God
has His perfect Word, never to be destroyed, never to pass away. The Word of
God abides forever." (p. 360)
Q: Do variants in the ancient manuscripts
bother you?
A: "It has been shown again and again that with every possible
variation found in any of the manuscripts, there is not a single doctrine of
the Bible changed, not a single historical event affected, not a single duty
commanded that is thus clouded. God has wonderfully preserved His Scripture.
And we are sure that while in any particular single manuscript, there may be
some gloss or mistake in copying, as between an 'a' or 'the' or between one
letter in a word and another letter, we know that in all the manuscripts
together there abides the incorrupt Word of God, and that every honest Bible
reader thus can find the will of God for himself and divine truth on everything
he needs to learn from the Scriptures." (p. 367)
Q: What do you think of the New Scofield
Reference Bible and other attempts to update the text of the KJV?
A: "The Scofield Reference Bible, using the KJV and scholarly,
fundamentally sound notes, has been in wide use for many years. In the new
Scofield Bible there has been some enlargement of notes, some corrections, and
we find words as used today substituted for the archaic expressions. We think
that is a good thing. Also the Modern King James Version, copyright by
Jay P. Green, likewise corrects archaic words, and changes 'thou' and 'thee' to
you, etc., except when referring to deity. And so do the companion Children's
Version and Teen-Age Version. These are not new translations but the KJV with
the occasional obsolete word replaced by a word in common usage." (pp. 381,382)
Q: What is your opinion of the American
Standard Version (ASV)?
A: "The translators of the ASV had the advantage of having access
to the three oldest manuscripts with which we are familiar – the Vatican, the
Alexandrian, and the Sinaitic manuscripts. It corrects some mistakes in the
KJV. One very serious error in the translation of the KJV makes Revelation
22:14 say, 'Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right
to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.' That
would seem to make the plan of salvation by works and that people go to Heaven
by keeping God's commandments. But it is not a good translation. The ASV
correctly says: 'Blessed are they that wash their
robes, that they may have the right to come to the tree of life, and may enter
in by the gates into the city. . . . Now there is available the new American
Standard Bible New Testament, published by Moody Press. The ASV of 1901, widely
acclaimed for its word-for-word fidelity to the Greek, has been painstakingly
revised by the Lockman Foundation in the light of the latest textual advances.
Dr. Wilbur M. Smith says, 'Certainly the most accurate and most revealing
translation of the New Testament that we now have.' The scholar and the
preacher would do well to have the ASV at hand and to consult it when
necessary, but generally would do well, we think, to use the KJV in the pulpit,
in memory work, and in class teaching, since it is actually the translation of
the mass of people." (pp. 382,383)
Q: Why do you prefer the KJV?
A: "Since 1611, the KJV of the Bible has been more widely spread
and more greatly used than all the other English translations of the Bible
combined. The beauty, the stately dignity and reverence of the language is far
beyond that of any other translation. It has done more to influence Western
civilization, Western language, viewpoints and morals than anything else in
Q: Could you cite an example of a passage in
the KJV that is faulty or inaccurate?
A: "Once I was troubled as I read Hebrews 4:9-11. . . . In verse
10 we are told that one enters into the heavenly rest by ceasing from his own
works. But verse 11 says in the KJV, 'Let us labour therefore to enter into
that rest.' I thought then, as I do now, that labor is not the way to get
salvation and to have the heavenly rest. I felt certain the meaning was
different, the translation faulty. So I looked in Young's Analytical Concordance and found every way that the word
there translated labor was used, and it means rather to 'give diligence.' One
should give diligence, that is, he should urgently set out to 'enter into that
rest.' Not 'labor,' but earnestly attending to the matter at once, is taught
here. You see, the blessed Holy Spirit within made the meaning clear despite
what seems to be a faulty translation. God never lets His Word perish."
(pp. 373,374) "The KJV of Luke 1:3 is, unfortunately, inaccurate."
(p. 165)
Q: Are you concerned that the presence of
many translations might water down God's Word and confuse God's people?
A: "There are many, many translations. The differences in the
translations are so minor, so insignificant, that we can be sure not a single
doctrine, not a single statement of fact, not a single command or exhortation,
has been missed in our translations. And where the Word of God is not perfectly
translated in one instance, it is corrected in another translation. And if the
Word of God is not perfectly portrayed in one translation, it is portrayed,
surely, in the winnowed sum of them all. And besides, one can go back to the
original Greek and Hebrew texts to check for himself the translations. Or those
who do not know Hebrew and Greek may use Young's
Analytical Concordance. There you will find in every single case the
original Greek or Hebrew word, find how it is used, and thus can check the
translations. . . . Do the various translations differ materially on any
doctrine, any fact of history, any Christian duty, on the plan of salvation, or
the Person of Christ, or any comfort or instruction? No, they do not!" (p.
355)
Q: Should a preacher ever use modern
translations in the pulpit?
A: "A preacher should refer, when necessary, to other versions, as
I do many times. When I quote John
Q: What books do you recommend on the topic
of the inspiration of God's Word?
A: "The Inspiration of the Holy Scriptures, by L.
Gaussen, published in
Q: Dr. Rice, thank you for your time. Do you
have any concluding thoughts or advice?
A: "Let us suggest again that every Christian, every minister,
every scholar make the KJV the principal basis of his Bible study. Students and
ministers probably ought to have the ASV to consult and a Young's or Strong's Analytical
Concordance by which he may look up the usage in the Bible of any particular
Greek or Hebrew word and thus check the translation by its inspired use in more
than one place." (p. 391)
[All
answers are from Dr. Rice's book Our God-Breathed Book – The
Bible, Copyright 1969, Sword of the Lord Publishers. The pages on which
each answer is found in this book are beside each answer. Please pass this
along. The prayer of the compiler of this interview is that it might help young
Fundamentalists in their search for where to stand in the modern KJV-Only
debate.]