God Save the King

Reading:   2 Kings 11

Although "God Save the King" has been used in verse prior to this (5 times in fact), it jumped out at me today and demanded my attention...

2 KINGS 11:12

12 And he brought forth the king's son, and put the crown upon him, and gave him the testimony; and they made him king, and anointed him; and they clapped their hands, and said, God save the king.

I was confident I would find something interesting about "God save the king" on the interweb and I must say, I wasn't disappointed. I discovered some outright unruly displeasure for the phrase in regards to its usage in the King James Version of the bible...crazy, right?  Anyway, there were also some impressive articles refuting the ignorant, self-aggrandizing, buffoons.  The article I found most akin to my beliefs, and well written to boot, was God Save the King, by Will Kinney.  Here are some highlights from the article...

A modern version proponent recently wrote... [that] the King James Version translators used a dynamic equivalence method in which they inserted God's name where it is not in the original. This is in the phrases "God save the king" and "God save king [king's name]" in 1 Samuel 10:24; 2 Samuel 16:16; 1 Kings 1:25,1 Kings 1:34, 1 Kings 1:39, 2 Kings 11:12; and 2 Chronicles 23:11. 

This person then goes on to say that the King James translation of "God save the king" is "DEPLORABLE" because 1. a literal, word-for-word translation method was not used 2.the translators used colloquialism and idiom 3.they deceive the reader into thinking that these words are in the original 4.they take God's name in vain. 

I am often amazed at the criticisms against the King James Bible that the modern version proponents bring up. They don't usually discover these things for themselves but copy and paste them from some anti-KJV site, like those of Doug Kutilek or James White.

They profess a great love for God's words, yet if you ask them where we common Christians can get a copy of the infallible words of God, they soon reveal that the only "infallible bible" they have exists solely in their minds and imaginations. They don't believe any translation can be the infallible words of God nor do they have any "Hebrew and Greek texts" that completely represent the originals. Their mystical bible is made up of their own personal opinions and preferences, and of course, their "bible" differs from the "bible" the next scholar has dreamed up for himself. Each man becomes his own final authority... 

"The word, “God (אלהים)” is not in the Hebrew, which says, “live (subjunctive) the king.” The subjunctive mood expresses a wish. The translators understood this passage as the invocation of the providential preservation of the life of the king. Thus “God” was added  

to convey the meaning of the utterance. If not to God, who else would God-fearing Hebrews address this plea to? To an impersonal "fate"? Such would be a Pagan attitude. Whereas contemporary English speakers might say, "Long live the king" without necessarily having God in mind, the preservation of life and God were intrinsically linked in the mind of a God-fearing Hebrew." 

Realize that the King James Bible and all these other versions are English translations, written to English speaking persons (the target audience) expressing what this Hebrew phrase means in English. We do not have kings here in America, but those God fearing nations that had or continue to have kings or queens to this day still say 'God save the king' or 'God save the queen'. 

The fact is directly implied and recognized that it is God who gives and preserves the life of the king, as well as everyone else on this planet.

Bravo, Mr. Kinney!  Not exactly where I thought today's blog would go...I thought I would find a nice story, poem, or lyrical verse to share and instead discovered a debate.  That's okay, much more interesting and I always love a good scrape!

~Kipling