Several years ago, a frequent lecturer on the subject of "Bible Versions,"
stated his preference for the use of old English forms of address such as "thee,"
"thy," and "thine." He has a preference for such even though he does not use
them in normal day to day conversation. He doesn't use old forms of address
when he preaches. He prefers the translations of the Bible that use them. He
believes Bibles that use the old pronouns are showing greater respect for the
word of God. He refers to the old English forms of address as "solemn and
sacred pronouns."
I can understand that a person may have preferences regarding the version
of the Bible he uses. If a person wants to use a translation that is more than 400
years old, based on an inferior Greek text, influenced by Calvinism in some of
its translation choices, and poses a considerable degree of difficulty in
being understood, he has the right to do so. I can also understand that a person
may like to read literature that uses old poetic expressions and cadence. What
I cannot understand is anyone calling things what they are not. There is simply
no such thing as "solemn and sacred" pronouns in our English Bibles.
The translators of the King James Version chose "thee," "thy," and "thine"
because that is the way they talked in 1611. Some linguistic scholars call the
speech "Elizabethan" because it was the style of English used by writers and
speakers during the time Queen Elizabeth was queen of England (1558-1603).
One such dramatist and poet during that time was William Shakespeare
(1564-1616).
There is a way that we can determine with absolute certainty that the
so-called "solemn and sacred" pronouns do not exist in versions of the Bible.
They are the figment of a fertile imagination gone wild. The KJV's rendering
of the Lord's temptation by the devil, as recorded in Matthew tells us that
Jesus addressed the devil by saying, "Get thee hence, Satan: for it is
written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shall shalt thou
serve." (Mat. 4:10) Do you believe that our Lord was showing respect to
Satan by the use of "thee" as recorded in the KJV? "Solemn and sacred"
pronouns ? What about Paul's statement to Elymas the sorcerer (who tried
to turn away certain ones from the faith)? Paul said to him, "O full of all
subtilty and all mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness,
wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord? And now, behold,
the hand of the Lord is upon thee, and thou shalt be blind, not seeing the sun
for a season." (Acts 13:10-11) Elymas is called a "child of the devil," "enemy
of all righteousness," and one who perverts the right ways of the Lord, yet
according to the KJV Paul addressed him with "thou" and "thee."
"Solemn and sacred" pronouns?
A person is not showing disrespect to deity if he addresses God by using
ordinary, current pronouns in prayer and songs. Translations of the scriptures
that use ordinary forms of address are not less respectful than those that use
the old forms. When a person ridicules modern translations of the sacred text
that attempt to give humanity the word of God in current English, on the basis
that they do not use "solemn and sacred" pronouns, it is either a display of
ignorance or it shows how deep the talons of human tradition have sunk into
that person's heart.Whatever the reason, it is regrettable!
RD
Copyright 2011
stated his preference for the use of old English forms of address such as "thee,"
"thy," and "thine." He has a preference for such even though he does not use
them in normal day to day conversation. He doesn't use old forms of address
when he preaches. He prefers the translations of the Bible that use them. He
believes Bibles that use the old pronouns are showing greater respect for the
word of God. He refers to the old English forms of address as "solemn and
sacred pronouns."
I can understand that a person may have preferences regarding the version
of the Bible he uses. If a person wants to use a translation that is more than 400
years old, based on an inferior Greek text, influenced by Calvinism in some of
its translation choices, and poses a considerable degree of difficulty in
being understood, he has the right to do so. I can also understand that a person
may like to read literature that uses old poetic expressions and cadence. What
I cannot understand is anyone calling things what they are not. There is simply
no such thing as "solemn and sacred" pronouns in our English Bibles.
The translators of the King James Version chose "thee," "thy," and "thine"
because that is the way they talked in 1611. Some linguistic scholars call the
speech "Elizabethan" because it was the style of English used by writers and
speakers during the time Queen Elizabeth was queen of England (1558-1603).
One such dramatist and poet during that time was William Shakespeare
(1564-1616).
There is a way that we can determine with absolute certainty that the
so-called "solemn and sacred" pronouns do not exist in versions of the Bible.
They are the figment of a fertile imagination gone wild. The KJV's rendering
of the Lord's temptation by the devil, as recorded in Matthew tells us that
Jesus addressed the devil by saying, "Get thee hence, Satan: for it is
written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shall shalt thou
serve." (Mat. 4:10) Do you believe that our Lord was showing respect to
Satan by the use of "thee" as recorded in the KJV? "Solemn and sacred"
pronouns ? What about Paul's statement to Elymas the sorcerer (who tried
to turn away certain ones from the faith)? Paul said to him, "O full of all
subtilty and all mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness,
wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord? And now, behold,
the hand of the Lord is upon thee, and thou shalt be blind, not seeing the sun
for a season." (Acts 13:10-11) Elymas is called a "child of the devil," "enemy
of all righteousness," and one who perverts the right ways of the Lord, yet
according to the KJV Paul addressed him with "thou" and "thee."
"Solemn and sacred" pronouns?
A person is not showing disrespect to deity if he addresses God by using
ordinary, current pronouns in prayer and songs. Translations of the scriptures
that use ordinary forms of address are not less respectful than those that use
the old forms. When a person ridicules modern translations of the sacred text
that attempt to give humanity the word of God in current English, on the basis
that they do not use "solemn and sacred" pronouns, it is either a display of
ignorance or it shows how deep the talons of human tradition have sunk into
that person's heart.Whatever the reason, it is regrettable!
RD
Copyright 2011
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete"If a person wants to use a translation that is more than 400 years old, based on an inferior Greek text, influenced by Calvinism in some of
ReplyDeleteits translation choices, and poses a considerable degree of difficulty in being understood, he has the right to do so." haha. I love it! Simply priceless.
On top of everything you've written, "thee," "thou," "thy," and "thine" are the familiar, not formal, pronouns. In the days when they were commonly used, one might use "thou" when addressing one's child, dog, or best friend, but always "you" when talking to the boss. Using familiar second-person pronouns to address God Almighty was actually a pretty radical concept, and too often los, I fear, today.
ReplyDeleteI've been a gospel preacher for about 15 years and an English teacher for almost 30, but I'm not sure that many Christians really believe me when I tell them what I just shared above.
I really enjoy the work on your websites. Keep up the good work.
Milton Stanley
Fredonia Church of Christ
Manchester, Tennessee