Chuck Smith was KJV-Only in the past
This point is a case of multiple personality disorder. On the old Calvary Internet Fellowship Expected Behaviors page, John Scudder presented the following:
I. Doctrinal Mention: Our focus is fellowship in Christ, rather than debate of science (evolution, etc), special interests (homosexuality), politics (government/congress), deviant teachings (name/claim/prosperity/KJV only/etc.), and other topics that can "flair" up adverse feelings among a gathering of people.
In this Scudder lists the "KJV/Only" view as a deviant view. The problem here is that Chuck Smith is one of those "KJV/Only deviants." On his newer version of the page, Scudder has changed the text to read:
J. Doctrinal Mention: Our focus is fellowship in Christ, rather than debates of science (evolution, etc), special interests (homosexuality), politics (government/congress), deviant teachings (name/claim/prosperity/etc.), Bible versions (KJV, NIV, etc) and other topics that can "flair" up adverse feelings among a gathering of people.
Chuck Smith has at least two tapes that clearly present his view as KJV/Only. These two are the Word For Today tapes 575-576, titled "Foundation of The Word."
The following quote is from tape 575, first side:
Now these same textual critics and scholars that are telling us that we can't accept all of what is in the King James, as truly divinely inspired of God, are the same school of scholarship that tell us that really we can't accept all of the stories in the Bible as being genuine, because we know that a lot of the Old Testament Stories are just nothing more than Hebrew mythology.
Hear the quote for yourself.
Note that in that quote, Smith fails to differentiate between higher and lower criticism. Another quote from the same (mid front) is:
I don't want that position, of being an authority to tell you what you can believe and can't believe except that I can tell you this: You can believe the Word of God in its entirety, and you'll never go wrong.
And you can believe the King James version (and we'll get into why you can believe the King James version) in it's entirety and never, never go wrong.
Hear the quote for yourself.
Smith clearly put the KJV into the same level of authority as the Bible itself with that quote.
Another quote from near the end of the first side of Tape 575 is:
And God saw to it though, that the TR was preserved, though every endeavor was made to destroy it and the reason why we don't have the ancient copies of Textus Receptus such as the Codex Siniaticus is because the church made a deliberate attempt to destroy all of the copies of Textus Receptus, they were trying to wipe it out in order that we'd only have their altered text; that is the Church of Rome.
Hear the quote for yourself.
As shown, Smith taught that the Roman Catholic church was at the center of a conspiracy to destroy the King James version. Contrary to Smith's misreading of history, Codex Siniaticus was found at an Orthodox monastery. In fact, it was named after the place it was found. It's not a Catholic version at all.
It was the Textus Receptus that really inspired Luther and when he made his translation into German he made it out of the Textus Receptus and it is exactly as our King James Bible.
Hear the quote for yourself.
Luther used the Greek New testament of Erasmus - a Roman Catholic. Luther also included the Apocrypha in his translation in agreement with the Catholics.
From near the end of side two (tape 575):
I will be giving you next week also a list of references if you'd like to make further research, there's a lot of good material been written on this subject, rather than just the critical kind, the supportive kind, of your King James Bible.
Hear the quote for yourself.
My difficulty with the modern translations is that they often seek to do away with the deity of Jesus Christ. This is one of those areas where I distrust and despise, the revised version of the Bible.
Tape 5176
200 years before Jesus was born, there were 70 Hebrew scholars who felt that the people should have the scriptures in a language they could understand. After they returned from Babylon, the majority of the people did not speak Hebrew. It became a language that was only for the biblical scholars of those days. The people had to depend upon the scholars to teach them the scriptures, because they no longer spoke the language.
Tape 5176
That's just one of hundreds of cases I have against the modern translations. That's why I'm glad that the Lord has provided us with a translation which treats the "majority text" as the authority for the fundamental truth that God has declared. I rejoice in this.
Tape 5176
Additional points are: #1 - We attended the Calvary Chapel Costa Mesa Tuesday Night School of the Bible class taught by lawyer John Stewart that clearly taught the KJV-Only position. At least two CRI employees went to the class to take notes on the views of Calvary Chapel and their KJV-Only view (we spoke with them). Hanegraaff will not take public action as it threatens his already weakened connections to Calvary Chapel.
Note: We received an email from Stewart (Feb 2012) stating:
If you are interested in accuracy, you'll want to change the false statement that I taught "KJ only" at Calvary Chapel's Tuesday night Bible School. I have never been "KJ only" and did not do so at Calvary Chapel. I taught that there is evidence that the Byzantine Text-Type goes back into the 2nd c. independently. I am an eclectic textual critic, and always have been, and wrote my Master's thesis on a textual critical issue at Talbot Seminary. Chuck Smith gave me the opportunity to teach the class knowing that I was not a "TR" man or "KJ only." I denounced Gail Riplinger's book, along with Peter Ruckman's rantings of a lunatic. Please correct your statement. Thanks.
I stand by what I wrote (here from 1996) as I was in Mr Stewart's class and heard what I heard, but welcome the opportunity to allow Mr Stewart to clarify his position here. The class in question was around 20 years ago and I wrote what I wrote not long after the class based on what I remembered/understood from the class. Stewart's position may well be a nuanced one that differs in some subtle details from the stricter KJ only position. I could dig up tapes and notes from the class, but will let Stewart's statement above stand as his position.
#2 - At a pastors conference a couple of years ago, Hank Hanegraaff was invited to sit on the platform as a speaker. The questioner put a question to Smith/Hocking about Bible translations issue. The laughter from the audience clearly shown the assembled pastors completely realized that Chuck Smith is a KJV-Only person.
Before Hanegraaff was allowed to speak, Pastor David Hocking took an opportunity to poke fun at Hanegraaff for his stand against the KJV-Only movement. Hocking was not a KJV-Only advocate before coming to CC. Hocking did a mini-book review of a book that he and Smith then highly recommended to the assembled collection of CC Pastors. The book is titled, New Age Bible Versions, and is an extreme KJV-Only book.
Hear a partial quote (way too long to include complete quotes).
For a great review of the book, New Age Bible Versions, by Bob and Gretchen Passantino, of Answers In Action, click here.
Hocking told the assembled pastors that all of the people that had written on the subject of the KJV debate recommended the book and that they could get rid of their other books on the subject and just have that one book.
Hear the quote.
Chuck Smith took advantage of the situation to "rib" Hanegraaff about the subject in front of the assembled pastors. Hanegraaff was publicly humiliated by the incident and not long after that an article was published in the CRI Journal against the New Age Bible Versions book. Anyone agree with Hanegraaff and think revenge is sweet?
Hear the quote.
However, Hocking put his foot in his mouth on several points. For one, Hocking called the author, G. A, Kipplinger, an Harvard/Cornell/Cambridge/Oxford man who has really done his homework on the subject. The only problem is that G. A. Ripplinger is actually a woman (Gayle Ripplinger) and she never went to Oxford or Cambridge. In fact, Ripplinger was a home economics major in college and is self-studied on the subject of textual criticism.
#3 - Calvary actually has sold the New Age Bible Versions book in its bookstore and reportedly sold many cases of the book. If it was just a book in the bookstore they could have tried to claim that they did not know the contents of the book, but the glowing recommendation to the Pastors Conference attendees by David Hocking and the endorsement by Pastor Chuck Smith demonstrates that either they never read the book, or that the position has become embarrassing now and they are backing away from it.
Therefore, based on the publicly documented facts, we feel free to state that the Senior Pastor of Calvary Chapel Costa Mesa , Chuck Smith, both personally holds and teaches the KJV-Only view as normative:
- Tapes #575 and #576 Foundation of the Word
- Recommendation of Ripplinger's New Age Bible Versions
- Selling the book in the CCCM Chapel Store (bookstore)
- John Stewart's class supporting the KJV Version against the other versions
Has Anyone Else Commented Publicly About This?
Greg Koukl, host of the Southern California, Stand For Reason Bible radio program, dated 4-3-96, did a program the covered the endorsement of the New Age Bible Versions book, by G. A. Ripplinger. He, and his guests, Bob and Gretchen Passantino discussed the book and the endorsement by Hocking and Smith.
Comments (0)
You don't have permission to comment on this page.