Probably the greatest weakness of the King James Version is the fact that when it was translated only eight manuscripts were available from which the work could be done—the oldest one dating back only to the tenth century. Since then, about 3,400 manuscripts have come to light, some of them dating back as early as the fourth century, and a few even back to the second century, making the New Testament the second best preserved book of antiquity. A few Dead Sea Scrolls of the Old Testament even date before the time of Christ.

This fact has been given a great deal of publicity in connection with the new Protestant translations of the Bible. Some have the idea that these older manuscripts have only been recently discovered; but this is only partially true. Many students of the Bible have known of the older manuscripts, and for centuries have been taking advantage of the more accurate presentation of God’s Word which they afford.

The original writings of the Bible are all still lost or destroyed, therefore manuscripts now available are merely copies, usually copies of copies, many times removed. The value of a manuscript for critical textual examination depends largely upon its age, with those written before the time of Constantine tending to be especially good. The oldest manuscripts, and therefore tending to be the most valuable, are written in printed-style (pre-uncial) letters, in the style of the original writings of the Bible. They contain no punctuation, and they show no division between words.

The Old Testament was divided into chapters, as they now stand, by Cardinal Hugo, in the middle of the thirteenth century. These chapters were divided into verses, as we now have them, by Rabbi Nathan and adopted by Robert Stephanus, a French printer, in his edition of the Latin Vulgate, in 1555. The chapter and verse divisions in the New Testament, likewise were done in 1551, long centuries after the original manuscripts were written.

Punctuation was not used in the original writings of the Bible, nor does it appear in the oldest of the manuscripts, as our punctuation was not generally used until the end of the fifteenth century. It is important to keep this fact in mind when we study any English translation of the Bible, and to remember that the punctuation is not a part of the inspired record.

Generally speaking, the punctuation of all the English versions of the Bible is very good, but at times it has helped to confuse the meaning of the text. The accompanying lines in Greek are the words of Jesus to the thief on the cross (Luke 23:43), as appeared from the pen of the original recorder:

AMHNΣOIΛEΓΩΣOIΣHMEPONMETEMOYEΣHENTΩΠAPAΔEIΣΩ

Or in English, VERILYUNTOTHEEISAYTODAY- WITHMETHOUSHALTBEINTHEPARADISE

When punctuation was introduced into this statement—which in the King James Version says: “Verily I say unto thee, today shalt thou be with me in paradise,” the misplacement of the comma makes it appear that Jesus expected to be in Paradise with the thief on the very day he died. But, where did Jesus go that day? Does not Acts 2:27-32 say Jesus was in hell? which is not usually considered Paradise. By placing the comma where it should be, in harmony with what the Master really meant, Jesus’ words simply emphasized that the promise he was making to the thief was made on a day when, from the human standpoint, it seemed impossible that it could be fulfilled: “Verily I say unto thee this day, with me shalt thou be in Paradise.”—Luke 23:43, Rotherham Translation.

It is well also to remember that all the manuscript copies of the Bible were written by hand, and that each additional copy of these copies, when needed, also had to be written by hand, letter by letter, at a great expense of time and trouble. And very often, also at some expense of the original correctness. Careful though the scribe might be, it was well nigh impossible to keep from making some mistakes. Their mistakes were similar to the mistakes even an experienced secretary commonly makes today. One letter could be mistaken for another. The scribe’s eye might slip from a word to the same word in an adjacent line, either skipping words or duplicating them. If the manuscript were read to the scribe he might confuse two words of similar sound. Remarks and explanations written in the margin might, sometimes, in transcribing, be inserted into the text, as though they had been corrections of accidental omissions.

In these, and various other ways, errors might creep into the copy of the manuscript. Naturally these errors would be repeated by succeeding copyists. To these, at times, would be added other errors of his own. It is evident, as copies increased, that errors would also be liable to increase. Therefore, as a general (though not rigorous) rule, the earlier the manuscript the more nearly correct it is likely to be.

Even in the case of the printed Bible, errors are liable to occur, as all acquainted with the publishing business are painfully aware. And this despite every precaution and care in the preparation of copy by proofreaders and editors with years of training and experience. For example, in an edition of the Bible published in 1653, 1 Corinthians 6:9 reads: “Know ye not that the unrighteous shall inherit the kingdom of God?” In an old version known as the Printer’s Bible, Psalm 119:161 reads: “Printers have persecuted me without a cause.”