Okay, this isn’t exactly a news flash. But Westcott and Hort, the respected scholars who published the first major critical edition of the Greek Text of the modern era (in 1881), are the innocent victims of a mind blowing smear campaign. King James Version Onlyism has charged them with all sorts of unbelievable heresies, chief of which is the belief that their text is better than the Textus Receptus, which underlies the KJV.
Westcott and Hort both stood against liberalism in their day, to one degree or another; Westcott particularly authoring excellent, conservative commentaries. Never mind these facts, KJV Onlyists scoured through post-humously published journals and letters, and scanned through the dozens of other published books by these scholars and came up with some gems. When presented in just the right manner, to just the right kind of audience, Westcott and Hort can be successfully transformed into monsters. With ellipses (…), italics and the fundamentalist favorite: the ALL CAPS, Westcott and Hort’s quotes, already removed from their contexts are doctored into such a fashion that they are ready to be included in prominent KJV defending books.
It’s sad that the above is quite true. It’s sad that this is the extreme to which people go to somehow legitimize their view. Of course, Gail Riplinger is proof that you don’t have to stop with this extreme measure. I won’t continue, because my friend Damien Garofalo just posted the next post in a series he’s doing analyzing D.A. Waite’s KJV Only seminar slides. Dr. D.A. Waite is one of the foremost defenders of the King James Bible and in his books as well as his seminars, he makes use of the guilt by association argument concerning Westcott and Hort. I encourage you to check out Damien’s post which exposes some of the fundamentalist smear for what it really is.
Waite may be using these doctored quotes second hand. But that shouldn’t excuse him since this would then reveal shoddy scholarship rather than a fondness for libel. And as a former KJV Onlyist, I can attest that many of us are sadly misinformed about these godly scholars, Westcott and Hort. Feed a person poor arguments and faulty facts long enough, and they’ll believe anything. So forgive me, Westcott and Hort. Thanks for your work in moving us closer to the fine Greek text we have today.
A final note: check out the Westcott and Hort Resource Centre for more information. Or see some of these articles by James May at kjvonly.org.
It is enough that it is an ad hominem argument. Westcott and Hort could have been the most profligate wretches history has ever seen, while still editing a good Greek text. Satan quotes Scripture. Should we therefore discard it?
What is so precious about you Bob is that you are so firmly grounded in the Lord and the truth of his Word that you are able to see past the smoke screens thrown up by the enemy! I am always sure to hear sound words in your postings!
Bob,
Thanks again for directing people to my blog, I really appreciate that. And I’m glad you noted that Waite’s tailor-made quotes could have been done by a second hand. I’d hate to slander Waite by saying he’s deliberately lying, either. But let’s face it, we’ve all been there in our lives: holding to a position, such as KJVO, which is hard to defend, we grasp at any and every ounce of evidence that seems to support our position.
Dr. Waite will always hold some culpability here. He has made it his life mission to research these issues. If he’s just taking the quotes from some other KJVO author without looking at the source material–that’s just as bad. Not to mention the fact that the record has been set straight on stuff like this many times in print and on the internet and yet the lies continue to be peddled at his book store and in talks he gives at Burgon Society meetings or wherever.
I thought you might get a kick out of this. This post came up as an automatically generated “possibly related post”. http://sharingtruth.wordpress.com/2008/07/29/westcott-and-hort/
Funny link, Phil. You’re right about culpability. Perhaps not direct intention to deceive, but a careless refusal to listen to those trying to set the record straight.
The lack of discernment and critical thinking involved in these sorts of presentations boggle my mind. Even though I supported this sort of thinkng for a number of years, actually less than a decade, the more I examined the documentation behind such things, the more I realized this line of thinking was off track. But as you know, this sort of stuff only survives with those who don’t think critically, but implicitly trust whatever claims feed their own skeptical opinions. It really doesn’t take much to demonstrate that the emperor has no clothes.
Once a KJVO friend of mine brought a book by Riplinger to work. I decided to “lucky dip” it for a claim I could research and see if the documentation supports the claim. You can read about it here:
http://capthk.wordpress.com/2007/02/01/riplinger-fails-pop-quiz/
and here:
http://capthk.wordpress.com/2007/02/02/riplingers-mythology-regarding-wycliffe-and-the-latin-vulgate/
Interesting stuff, John. I went to Google Books and they have an interesting announcement now. In the future they’ll be able to expand access to more titles after a settlement with an author’s guild. If you go to the home page of Google Books they have a link on the details.
Google Books is the worst thing to ever happen to the KJVO movement. Previously, who would have had access to the works of people like Burgon, Scrivener, and Westcott and Hort? Now we don’t have to settle for quotes ripped out of their context–we can read what they said for ourselves. I have links to W&H’s works along with a few other books of interest in the Resources section of my blog. http://readmoreblog.wordpress.com/resources/
Thanks, Phil. You are correct.
To be perfectly blunt, I have found very few KJV-Onlyists who won’t stoop to outright dishonesty to promote their false and lost cause of KJV-Onlyism.
Re Riplinger et al: Where do we get them, and how come we never run out?
Why is KJVO even given a second thought? It is absurd on its face. I is a symptom of the vapid nature of fundamentalism that this farce is accepted. IFB’s have become a parody of themselves. How long will this movement continue?
heyrandy,
Never underestimate the preservative power of turnover.
Carl,
I hear you. There are rank and file KJVOs however who don’t know any better…..
I won’t belabour this point, and if it’s been made elsewhere please forgive the repetition here. I was, by the grace of God, a KJO person for about three months.
I occured to me, when I read the KJO version of Tischendorf’s rescue of the Sinaitic Codex from the flames, that they were looking at this event just as the monks did. They think the Sinaitic text is trash and should have been burned. I, however, thought to myself, “Isn’t is much more likely that Tischendorf was sent Providentially o RESCUE and PRESERVE the text?!”
That, and the biographies of the translators and history of the translation directed by King James, shows such political as well as prejudicial effects as would cause any translation like it today to be much criticized, the TNIV being a good example.
So you guys are so against the the KJV… What “bible” do you use as authoritative? Do you believe in preservation of Scripture? OR, is it up to you to decide what is hit and what is miss? I can tell you think anyone who “believes in the KJV” is moronic… so now I am supposed to listen to someone who has no inspired and preserved text? You have got to be kidding… and you must be full of hate toward God’s authority over your life… Well, I believe “thus saith the Lord” can be trusted… my salvation depends on it… so does yours!
The 17 verses removed in the ESV are Matthew 12:47, 17:21, 18:11, 23:14; Mark 7:16, 9:44, 9:46, 11:26, 15:28; Luke 17:36, 22:44, 23:17; John 5:4; Acts 8:37, 15:34, 24:7, 28:29 and finally Romans 16:24. Look them up!
Do you know what Matthew 18:11 says?
Matthew 18:11 “For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.” KJV
What a verse to take to completely out!
Not only does the ESV take out 17 complete verses, it takes out over 33,000 words in just the New Testament alone. If the ESV is “easier” to read it is not because of it’s reading grade scale, but the fact that is takes out so much of God’s word.
The ESV takes out the name “Jesus” 18 times, “Jesus Christ” 51 times, “Christ” 39 times, “Lord” 66 times and “God” 38 times. The ESV attacks our Lord Jesus Christ! The ESV also removes the word “Hell” 40 times, the words “devil” and “devils” 83 times.
In Matthew 5:22, the ESV makes Jesus Christ a sinner by removing the phrase “without a cause”. Remember that Jesus Christ got angry in Mark 3:5.
Great points, Prodigal. You should check out our new KJV Only team blog.
We’re not KJV Only but we are blogging our way through that debate.
kjvodebate.wordpress.com.
Bob
In logic, that is called a straw man argument. No one has spoken “against the KJV.” In fact, there have been repeated assertions to the contrary, that the King James is a good translation. The objection has been to those who claim that the King James Version ONLY is the word of God, and that it is somehow less spiritual to use another version. I think I represent the consensus here, when I say: Since we believe in the priesthood of all believers, we believe that God’s Spirit enables each of us to examine the evidence, and come to a God-honoring conclusion, rather than accepting the word of men uncritically. To claim that it is unspiritual for a Christian to think for himself is to accept the Romanist belief that spiritual truth is derived from the authority of the church.