Want Some Answers ???

King James Error

Hi James,

Thanks for your quotes from Spurgeon. Other KJ radicals make the same mistake [ie Derek Pearce 'The Doubter's Dozen" back page]. But Spurgeon wasn't a KJ radical. Lets look at your quote -

>>If THIS BOOK be not infallible, where shall we find infallibility? We have given up the Pope, for he has blundered often and terribly; but we shall not set up instead of him a horde of little popelings fresh from college. Are these correctors of Scripture infallible? Is it certain that OUR BIBLES are not right, but that the critics be so?<<

I couldnít find this quote among Spurgeonís writings but I could well believe he said it. Some SDAís have wrongly called Spurgeon a Seventh Day Adventist because of his continual mention of the Lordís Sabbath. But by this Spurgeon was referring to Sunday as the Lordís Day, not the Saturday. Iím afraid the situation is similar with the mention of infallibility etc. Latitudinarianism was raising its ugly head in Spurgeonís day. And modernism, the father of literalism Scheiermacher [1768-1834] had been preaching and writing books for years. He was throwing off fundamental Christian doctrine, questioning every verse and calling people to reject the Bible as genuine or inspired. The Puritans reacted against this, evangelicals even withdrawing from the higher schools of learning.

You see, Spurgeon [1834-92] is not saying anything too different than most evangelicals today. When we say ĎGodís Word is infallibleí we donít mean only the KJV is Godís Word as apposed to the RV or NIV etc. Spurgeon is not saying those foreign Christians who canít read the KJV or donít use the KJV canít be saved. And they canít know sound doctrine. Heís not saying the RV [1881] is Ďsatanic, untrustworthy and a counterfeití. Spurgeon realised that textual criticism was a valid part of Christian scholarship. Radicals deceitfully quote Spurgeon at times. Ask your self why?

Note those places where Spurgeon mentions the RV in his commentary on Matthew he doesnít condemn it [7:9-10 9:3 22:10 24:32-33]. He knew the KJ translators added the words in italics in our KJV and so those words were not apart of holy writ. Note what Spurgeon says concerning Mtt.12:23 -

ďOur Revised Version very properly leaves out the "not". It was natural for the translators to put it in, for it looks as if many must have seen the true Solomon in this great Wonderworker. But as it is not in the original it; we must not allow the "not"; and then the question shows how strangely unbelieving they were, and yet how some conviction forced itself on them."

[CH Spurgeon ďA Popular Exposition to the Gospel According to MathewĒ 1893]

I rest my case.
Mark Purchase.

Back to Pearce