Russian King James Bible

   History of translation

Since 1992 and observing the corruption in the modern versions (including the Synodal text) it has been translators desire for the common folk of the Russian speaking people to have God’s word,“not as the word of men but as it is in truth, the word of God,” (1 Thess. 2:13).

The necessity of preserving God’s words in other languages is taken from the historical fact when a king’s letter was sent across many provinces his letters were to be translated into other languages.

Therefore in the year of 2000 a group of men sat down and began the long journey and tedious work of translating the Authorized Version of the King James Bible into the Russian tongue. After eleven years the First Edition of the New Testament was printed (2011). The response was more than ever expected. The demand for such a translation was long waiting by many Russian speaking people around the world. After four years (2015) the Second Edition was published which included a First Edition the five ‘wisdom’ books of the Old Testament (Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and Song of Solomon).

      By July, 2017, the translation of the entire Bible was completed. It consisted of the Third Edition of the New Testament (along with the five ‘wisdom’ books of the Old Testament) and the First Edition of all the other Old Testament books.

      At present progress is being made for the Second Edition of the entire Bible soon to come (by the end of 2018).  

A purpose for translating the King James Bible into the Russian tongue is based upon the importance that God Himself places upon His own word :

“I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name” (Psalm 138:2).

      "We are not so foolish to think that God would leave His words in the hands of a priest- class of Nicolaitanes such as the Orthodox church (Synod, Eastern branch of the Roman Whore Rev. 17, 18) that lifts itself above the common folk (Rev. 2:6, 15) when handling the words of God. If the Holy Bible were limited to such men we would be left with a Book with error and fault. That is most certainly the case concerning the Synodal text. Nor could any such attempt to translate the Holy Bible (AV) be left in the hands of professional “linguists,” college students of the “original” Greek and Hebrew or the scholars of the “‘Yea hath God said’ society.” All three groups are Roman Catholic at heart and are of the Alexandrian Cult mentality. They do not believe in the providential work of God Almighty preserving His words, “the holy scriptures” (Rom. 1:2; 2 Tim. 3:15) word perfect in one BOOK, THE HOLY BIBLE, the English Authorized Version of King James (1611). " - said Perry Demopoulos, missionary and pastor of Bible Belivers Church in Kiev, Ukraine (also he is the director of translating process).

       Since 1992 it has been translators practice in matters of expounding the scriptures to have always mentioned any and all differences in the Synodal Text and others (such as Ogienko (Ukrainian) Kulish (Ukrainian) and the latest Popchenko’s Gospel of John in the Ukrainian tongue) from the King James Bible. Throughout this time the Lord had laid it upon the hearts of members of Bible Baptist Church (Kiev) and students of our Institute and Correspondence Course for Bible Believers to translate the Bible into the Russian tongue. The initial desire to accomplish this monumental task came not only from a foreign missionary but from the locals themselves who saw the need to take on such a work. This was not the desire of a foreigner out to pay some immature Christians who’ve never had experience handling the Book (AV 1611). It came as a desire and vision of the local saints who have been “rooted” in the word of God (Col. 2:7). The Russian language is the 5^th major language in the world. It is still considered the “international language” of former Soviet Russia and Russian speaking people around the world

What translators have NOT done

Translaor's efforts were NOT to revise the Synodal Text as others have attempted. They did not simply change some of the words of the Synodal Text where they differ from the King James Bible in matters of doctrine only as has been the case by other translation attempts. Their approach in this translation was to start with a “clean sheet of paper” and translate SOLELY BASED UPON THE AUTHORIZED VERSION OF THE KING JAMES BIBLE 1611 and diligently compare other versions as was the practice of the translators of the King James Bible.

BASIC RULES CONCERNING THE TRANSLATION

Here are some basic rules that group of translators laid down before they started the translation and also as they went along translating.

1. Any and all correction work of the translation would be done together as a group and not individually at different times separated from one-another. The witness of the Holy Ghost among a group of people is a Biblical practice (Acts 1:15-26). There were at times up to four to five men gathered for the correction process of the translation.  

2. The person overseeing the translation work would have to know both languages; English and Russian. For the most part there were three men with a working knowledge of Russian and English.

     A. Moses knew at least two languages to translate his conversations with Pharaoh into the Hebrew tongue.

     B. Paul would have had to know at least two languages seeing that he was sent as a missionary to different countries of the Asian and European continents. Therefore he would have a keener eye to any corruptions of the scriptures (2 Cor. 2:17).

3. Each and every verse would have to agree with the Authorized Version of the King James Bible (1611) in word, phrasing and in doctrine.

4. Although understanding/ and or interpreting a passage played a role in translating, the major role of translating and correcting the translation was TRANSLATING.

Below are the three God-given methods followed by as to interpreting the scriptures –       

      1.) Comparing scripture with scripture (1 Cor. 2:13). For example “was without form and void” (Genesis 1:2) is repeated at Jeremiah 4:23; “vaunt” (Judges 7:2) is repeated in 1 Corinthians 13:4; “face of the deep” (Gen. 1:2) is repeated in Job 38:30; “taken out of the way” (Job 24:24) is the key to expound what “withholdeth” (2 Thess. 2:7) and who “letteth” (2 Thess. 2:7) and who that is in 2 Thessalonians 2:7, and so on.

     The “scripture cannot be broken…” and those unbroken scriptures are in one complete volume – the Holy Bible.

      2.) Rightly dividing the word of truth (2 Tim. 2:15). Divisions are scattered all over the Bible whether they be by a comma or a colon or a semi-colon or a period or a letter; for example “heaven” and heavens”. There is a big difference. Doctrine is based upon the “form” of a word, letter or even a punctuation mark “For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled” (Matthew 5:18).

      According to Paul, Timothy was to “Hold fast the FORM of sound words” (2 Tim. 1:13).

      3.) Learning of a text by its context and repetitive words (Isa. 28:9-13), “For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:” (Isa. 28:10).

       These three methods were adhered to for the interpretation of a passage rather than first choosing any and all dictionaries and “self-helps.”

  One of the “key” (Luke 11:52) factors why the Authorized Version is still the most used text from which to do translation work is because of its excellent combining of the Old and New Testaments and its usage of the exact same words, or words in their similarities because of the same root word. The Lord Jesus Christ said “…the scripture cannot be broken…” (John 10:35). Therefore the Holy Bible is the complete intact word of God called “the holy scriptures” (Rom. 1:2; 2 Tim. 3:15).

    An electronic and hard cover Concordance were of most value in ‘tying-in’ the same word in the translation used throughout the entire Bible (AV) in its respective contexts. THAT they’ve tried to retain where possible within the realm of proper Russian word usage. The reason for that was two-fold:

            A. So that in as much as possible the result would be an equivalent “Concordance” within the translation itself as in the AV so that the scriptures would interpret the scriptures. After all, since the Holy Spirit wrote His own words it is the Holy Spirit Himself that is the interpreter of the scriptures (Gen. 40:8). God was most capable of working through the translators of the King James Bible so as to explain His own words by His own words. 

            B. So that in as much as possible the result would be an equivalent “Dictionary” of words within the translation itself as in the AV so that the scriptures would interpret the scriptures.       

      Without this approach the interpretation of the scriptures would lose its effectiveness (1 Thess. 2:13) as was and is observed in the various compared translations of different languages; English, Ukrainian, Russian, Greek and the Greek texts from which they came – Alexandrian or Antiochan.

5. Traslators made diligent observation and comparison of many other versions of the Bible to see how a verse was translated for doctrinal purposes, then its phraseology. Comparison was applied to see where versions disagreed with the AV or where they confirmed what we had initially intended to translate because of the AV reading. And yet another witness of another version that agreed with their choice would only support their choice of word(s) to refute any heretics’ disagreement.

6. Any and all commentaries used were for comparison’s sake not as a final authority. A great Bible expositor said in such words that when commenting on the Bible it is best to understand what other commentators may have said about any given verse in the Bible to compare them with what the Bible (KJV 1611) really says. Their explanations may help you concerning how to explain a verse so as to agree with the Bible. For example, concerning this matter of interpreting 1 Corinthians 2:15, he says,

       “I went through about eight translations and sixteen commentaries. My method in those things is I get everything together, and if I can get any help from any where that won’t contradict the King James Bible, I’ll take it. But I will not change the King James’ text. The King James’ text will have to stand. It they disagree with that, they have got the wrong interpretation.”

Translators purpose for the use of many other references other that the Authorized Version would be as follows;

      1.) This would be solely to see where these references agreed with the A.V. even though other attempts to translate the Holy Bible into the Russian or Ukrainian tongue DISAGREED with the King James Version.

            A.) To prove that where a profession to have followed the King James Version by others would be exposed to be a lie (Jam.1:17) even where other references agreed with the A.V.

                  a.) Such is the case where Stephanus’ Greek and other Greek Mss. agree with the A.V. in James 1:17 and the attempts of the Synodal DISAGREES with the King James Version.  

      2.) To show that where any other source other than the King James Bible would go against the

truth (2 Pet.2:14).

            B.) This would be to show the great conspiracy against the Authorized Version.

            C.) This would expose the ‘Textus Receptus’ “authorities” and Greek and Hebrew “scholars” that profess that their translation work would be equivalent to the Reformation text of the King James Bible.

                a. The Antiochan manuscripts read “Gehenna;” the AV reads “hell.” Greek manuscripts (any and all of them) read “Sanhedrin;” the holy scriptures read “council.” Greek manuscripts read “pascha;” the word of truth reads “EASTER.” All Greek manuscripts read “demon(s);” the oracles of God read “DEVIL(S).” Etc.

                b. There are five DIFFERENT publications of the Textus Receptus. Scrivner disagrees with Beza. Beza disagrees with Elzevir. Elzevir disagrees with Stephanus. Erasmus differs from Colinaeus’ text.

                c. There is no distinction between the “high priest” and the “chief priests” in “the ‘originals’” (scholars’ union cliché). The AV makes the difference between “the high priest” “chief priests” let alone the “priest(s)” to expose the hierarchy of the Whore of the Roman Catholic Church (Rev. 17, 18).

8. The final authority would always be the Authorized Version of 1611. For more information about this see An X-Ray of the Synodal Version (by Perry Demopoulos at www.harvestukraine.org under BOOKS).

9. The usage of italics was necessary for the sake of clarity where even in “‘the verbal plenary inspired original autographs” (an old wives’, Eve’s fable of the “Yea hath God said” society”) words are MISSING (2 Sam. 21:19). That was and still is one of the marks of the honesty of the translators of the Authorized Version. 

4    A. Where the translators could retain the italics from the Synodal Text we also used them where those italics agreed with the Authorized Version. 

   B. Where the Authorized Version uses italics we tried to retain them in as many cases as possible which was quite often.  

   C. Where there were neither italics in the Synodal nor in the King James Bible we used the method of italics in italicized square brackets [ ]. 

10. Concerning old Russian words, we have retained those words that are still in use in classical literature, or poet form. If not then we translated the word(s) that retain the proper doctrine using sound words of plain speech of today that would be an equivalent to the Authorized Version.  

11. Where an old Russian word is still in use in classical literature, if and when it did not agree with the Authorized Version (1611) we adhered strictly to the King James Bible.

12. The order of New Testament Books line up with the order of the King James Bible. For this see our material on “The Right Order of the Books of the New Testament” (Chart No. 4 by Perry Demopoulos). The Synodal Bible has the epistles of James through Jude immediately after the book of Acts (following the “sleight of men” i.e., Origen) and then Hebrews immediately before Revelation.  

13. Where words are used beginning with capital letters “Potentate” (1 Tim. 6:15) we followed the Authorized Version of the King James Bible from cover to cover for a number of reasons;

     A. From the Antiochan line of ‘koine’ i.e., (common) Greek language all the letters were lower case with the exception of a couple letters in the alphabet itself.  

     B. Translators used capital letters for emphasis following the AV from cover to cover “I AM THAT I AM…” (Exod. 3:14), “HOLINESS UNTO THE LORD” (Zech. 14:20), “MYSTERY …” (Rev. 17:5) “KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS” (Rev 19:16), etc.

      Any and all Greek manuscripts use either all small letters (koine, Antiochan) or all capital letters (Uncial MSS,).

     C. Of course where the words such as Jesus Christ, God, and other proper nouns are written they used capital letters.

     " It was the pride and lack of understanding of the translators of the Synodal translation (1876) to magnify people to the level of Jesus Christ by capitalizing personal pronouns such as Mary, the “Apostles,” “Angels” etc. " - said Perry Demopoulos.

     E. Where the King James Bible has a word capitalized concerning proper nouns, translators also adhered strictly to that rule (for example Acts 11:26; 26:28; 1 Pet. 4:16). For personal pronouns such as “he,” “his,” “him,” etc. in the Old Slavonic Version (1874) concerning the Lord Jesus Christ they were often times not capitalized (Matt. 22:16, 19, 21, and hundreds of other places). Also the translators used the same form of letter (large) concerning pronouns when addressing another other than Jesus Christ.

     F. Where grammar rules of the Russian tongue do not allow for using capital letters for proper nouns we adhered to that such as “Jews,” and “Greeks.”  

     G. Since we found there to be conflicting authorities of the Russian language concerning grammatical marks we adhered strictly to the Authorized Version concerning all commas, colons, semi-colons, question marks, exclamation marks, periods, etc.  

Additional material that was used at the time of translation

Resources  for comparison with, contrast to, and agreement with the King James Bible -

1. Restoration Bible (Witness Lee Organization)
2. Synodal Bible (1876),
3. The Bible-Book of the Holy Scriptures (Getz),
4. The New Testament from the Greek, and The Holy Scriptures, (Slavonic Bible Society),
5.  Old Slavonic and Russian Parallel Version of the New Testament (1872, 1874).
6.  Ivan C. Ogienko (1962), Ukrainian
7.  P.O. Kylish (1930), Ukrainian
8.  George Derkach (1993) Ukrainian
9.  Stephens Greek text (1550)
10.  Luther’s German Translation

     The following commentaries were used:

•        The Bible Believers Commentary Series- Dr. Peter S. Ruckman
•       The Believer’s Study Bible - for Biblical Studies
•       New Commentary on the Whole Bible – Jamieson, Fausset, Brown
•       Exposition of the Old and New Testaments – John Gill

      Robertson’s Word Picture Commentary (Study of words of the Greek New Testament.  

     Other additional material used:

•       THE ENGLISHMAN’S GREEK CONCORDANCE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT George V. Wigram
•       THE EXPANDED VINE’S EXPOSITORY DICTIONARY of NEW TESTAMENT WORDS
•             W.E. VINE
•       Various Dictionaries- Greek-English; Russian-English; Dall, Lingvo, etc.  

1. References

Russian King James Bible

This article "Russian King James Bible" is from Wikipedia. The list of its authors can be seen in its historical and/or the page Edithistory:Russian King James Bible. Articles copied from Draft Namespace on Wikipedia could be seen on the Draft Namespace of Wikipedia and not main one.

---