TESTIMONIES OF KING JAMES BIBLE DEFENDERS
Mark Buch
 

"Then one day I was looking at my Greek New Testament and I read on the flyleaf that this Greek New Testament had followed the preparations of Professor Eberhard Nestle. We call it Nestle’s Greek New Testament. I then found down in the middle paragraph: ‘The text is the resultant of a collation of three of the principle recensions of the Greek New Testament’ [two of these were Tischendorf and Westcott-Hort]. I looked this up in my dictionary. Collation means texts put side by side, one here, one there for comparison. Principle recensions means reviewing or examining an ancient text—a text so corrected. Corrected? Now we are correcting God? And then I turned over the page and it gave an explanation of the critical apparatus. What is the critical apparatus? I found there were notes all along in Nestle’s Testament. It then dawned on me—I’ve gone to all this trouble trying to read [the Greek] and I’m no further ahead than I was before! How am I to know which God wrote and which God didn’t write? My faith was shaken because faith comes by hearing ... of the Word of God. The Word of God is the basis of our faith. If you don’t have a true copy of the Word of God, forget about faith" (In Defence of the Authorized Version, pp. 30,31).

"In the Fall I went back to the Prophetic Bible Institute in Calgary [William Aberhart’s school]. I came to the second year of Apologetics. It opened the subject of Divine Inspiration and preservation in particular, of the original manuscripts. It was a very helpful and blessed time. During that time I also took Greek at Western Baptist Bible College in Calgary. My heart leaped for joy as my mind was saturated with new confidence. The moment the story began to dawn upon me as we were tracing our way following the pure stream of the divinely inspired Bible, back, back to the divinely inbreathed autographs, my whole life changed" (In Defence of the Authorized Version p. 31).

"To grant the original manuscripts were the perfect, inspired Word of God two or three thousand years ago, is small comfort to man today, for it is common knowledge that they are lost. The big question to us then is not, ‘Did God inspire the original manuscripts?’ We know He did, but has God preserved that perfect revelation through time in copying and translation? Again and again the Word itself emphatically states He has. ‘The Word of the Lord endureth forever, and this is the Word which by the gospel is preached unto you’ (1 Peter 1:25)" (Mark Buch, "Christians Took Scrolls into Alps," The Vancouver Province, Saturday, June 13, 1953).

"We met in his spacious office overlooking Victory Square Park and downtown Vancouver. I found Mr. Cunningham to be a very gracious and knowledgeable person, courteous and soft spoken with a delightful English accent. I was seated opposite his large desk in a big leather chair. Mr. Cunningham acknowledged my contribution in the controversy. I gently reminded him of the immense publicity he and others had given the R.S.V. through advertising but not a word about the Authorized Version. I asked him why the hesitancy to give the Old Bible its deserts.

"He answered, ‘I can’t see it. The Bible to me is the Bible, whatever the version. What’s the difference?’

"I immediately took him up on that, handing him the Authorized Version and opened to Colossians 1:14.

"‘You are a man of words. You live by your knowledge of English. I also do in a way.’ Then putting my finger on verse 14 I asked that he read it. He did, out loud! Then I asked, ‘Which is the most important phrase in that verse?’

"After a very brief pause he answered, ‘Through his blood.’

"‘Why?’ I asked.

"‘Through his blood tells us how,’ was his answer.

"I stressed how important this was. I then handed him a copy of the R.S.V. I believe it was the first edition out. I still have it. Opening it to the same text I asked him to read it. He began again, reading out loud and then stopped after the first line and with furrowed brow looked up and said, ‘Why, the phrase "through his blood" is missing, but why?’

"I answered, ‘Either they refused to translate it out of prejudice to the old time faith of our fathers which requires the blood of God’s sacrificial lamb Jesus Christ to wash away our sins, or it wasn’t in the Greek manuscripts they used.’

"Looking up at me he asked, ‘What do you think?’

"I answered, ‘Knowing what we do of the R.S.V. translators committee, I’D SAY THEY SPURNED THE MAJORITY TEXT OR TEXTUS RECEPTUS AND USED RATHER THE POLLUTED WESTCOTT AND HORT LINE OF MANUSCRIPTS.’

"After a few moments silence he asked, ‘Could you prepare a series of articles on the historicity of the Authorized Version of the Bible?’ (Mark Buch, In Defence of the Authorized Version: One Pastor’s Battle, pp. 37,38)