Today I am broken-hearted at some things that I have read on two SBC blogs that I have come to respect and value for their contribution to the discussion of what it is to be Southern Baptist. The first thing that came to my attention was this article by Dave Miller at SBC Voices. I was stunned and thought it to be a bad joke until I read the article that he linked to on the SBC Impact blog.
It is unfortunate about what happened with the resolution regarding the 2011 NIV at this years annual convention, I was not there so I can only depend on reports from those who were. It is my understanding that this resolution was brought before the convention from the floor with two messengers speaking out against this translation and no one speaking out in support of it. I am also under the impression that it was approved by what appeared to be 90% of those voting. So I went to Denny Burk’s blog and watched the process to confirm what I had been told and found the information to be accurate. I am in no way defending this translation, but making a point about how it was handled at this years convention.
It is disheartening to read the wording of the proposed resolution that is found at the SBC Impact blog. I find it outrageous that because someone does not want to learn the English language, they wish to state that the KJV “alters the meaning of hundreds of verses, most significantly by using archaic language.” Excuse me, but did you not learn how to use a dictionary? The alterations that are referred to appear as a result of someone’s lack of self-education. Then you have the gall to state, “Resolved: That the messengers of the Southern Baptist Convention meeting in New Orleans, Louisiana, June 19-20, 2012 express profound disappointment with King James I for this inaccurate translation of God’s inspired Scripture.” On what planet did you drop in from? Because you are to busy to study English, that makes the KJV inaccurate?
I spent fifteen years and hundreds of dollars studying this very debate. If my library couldn’t get a book, I searched it out through rare book dealers. I even have an 1881 edition of the critical text as well as an 1881 English translation of that text. My concern is not with the idolized original autographs, but with the preservation of the words of God. Because that is what this debate is truly about. Did God preserve His words or not. If so, where are they and who has been hiding them from us. I have the latest and greatest UBS and NA critical text. I have the Majority text of Peirpont/Robinson. I have the Ecclesiastical/ Byzantine/Textus Receptus. I have the Beza Text. I have every major, and the majority of the minor, translations of the New Testament starting with Wycliff through to The Voice. I have read them. I have studied, wept, and poured out my heart over this issue.
My conclusion is not yours, and yours is not mine. I preach and teach from the KJV. I do not expect others to use it just because I do. I do expect people to be intellectually honest with themselves about the translation they use and ask themselves why they use it. If a man believes that the ESV is the best translation, I expect him to preach and teach from it. If he doesn’t because his church has always used the NIV, then he needs to educate his people about the translation he uses and why he uses it. If he doesn’t he is being dishonest with his people and himself.
This kind of uneducated, narrow-minded thinking is what makes KJV-only people salivate. You see, I recognize scholarship when I see it. I appreciate the work done on the Apologetic Study Bible, the ESV Study Bible, and the NKJV Study Bible. I read the notes. I digest what is there and I increase in my knowledge where I once was naïve. I appreciate Bill Mounce and especially Daniel Wallace and all the efforts that these men have put forth. Biblical scholarship and textual criticism have come a long way, but the issue is still the same, has God preserved His words or not? Dan Wallace will even tell you that current scholars are agreed on 90% of what the original reading was. Well, what about the 10%? Either God preserved His words or He didn’t. It is that plain of an issue.
If the purposed resolution does go to the floor of the convention, I will leave the SBC. I would even call on the twenty-three percent of pastors in the convention, who use the KJV, to do the same.
But why stop with the KJV? Why not go all the way and remove Calvin’s writings and Luther’s works. Oh and lets not forget the Puritans and their Geneva Bible. They are all over four hundred years old and still include archaic words in newer translations and editions of their works. The best solution to the resolution is to just say out loud what translation you do want instead of the one’s you don’t.
Resolved: That all of the churches associated with the Southern Baptist Convention will only use the Holman Christian Standard Bible and that Lifeway will not advertise, use, purchase, nor sell any other translation. Bible burning to be held in the parking lot after the meeting.


Today I had the opportunity to do some browsing on the internet. I don’t do that as often as I would like, so I took full advantage of doing so and came across several very interesting items. One caught my attention,