Where the word of a king is, there is power: and who may say unto him, What doest thou?
Ecclesiastes 8:4 (KJV)
To those unfamiliar with the King James Only debate revolving around English Bible Translations, the citing of this verse may seem odd and utterly out of place. Even some involved in that debate may still be confused by it. To others, however, it is central to their bibliology.[1] As the only verse in the King James that is said to specifically name itself as the only true translation, this phrase is extremely controversial in some circles. While some verses have been interpreted as demanding a word-perfect Bible, which preserves every single jot and tittle of God’s Inspired Word, there are not explicit verses that specifically name this supposed text/translation. No verses cry “Behold the translation of Geneva, for therein doth the truth abide.” or “Bro, just drink in that sweet Message Bible though, it’s hot stuff!” In light of that fact, if one does believe in a letter-perfect preserved text, any translation/text may still be on the table for consideration as that perfect text, with the consultation of extra-biblical sources then becoming necessary for finding the specific answer. No verses, except, as some claim, this one. The answer, then, is claimed to lie in the King James Translation. Others, however, would highly question that conclusion and see it as little more that highly imaginative eisegesis.
The extreme gap in the understanding and application of this verse, and its potential unique ability to actually specify the “word-perfect text” certainly make it worth examining.
Literary Context and Genre
The book of Ecclesiastes is, itself, strange enough. It’s a part of the Wisdom Literature and claims to be the work of one of King David’s Sons who reigns as King in Israel,[2] leading many to conclude, then, that the masterful hand of Solomon was behind it,[3] a conclusion supported by Jewish tradition.[4] However, “Because its meaning has been frequently misunderstood, its legitimate place in the canon has sometimes been disputed.[5]” Additionally, some moan that “….there is still no general consensus that the book follows a logical development or argument.”[6] This makes exegesis somewhat tricky in places, yet also places a higher responsibility for deep, thoughtful, and well-studied answers to the questions it’s text draws out.
Still, even with those complications, some things are clear “…the real purpose of Ecclesiastes is to force us to take our mortality seriously and thus to consider carefully how we should live. Ecclesiastes knocks away all the façades by which we disguise the fact that life is short and all our accomplishments will pass away. In this sense, Ecclesiastes anticipates the NT teaching that only God’s grace, and not excessive zeal, saves us.”[7] Or, drawing on the well-known refrain of “vanity!”, “The author seeks meaning in many places yet only finds it in fearing God…”[8]
Eaton summarizes his sub-section of the book (8:2-9:10 “Authority, injustice, and the life of faith”) like this: “[The Preacher] faces the grim realities of kingly authority (8:1-9) and the injustices of life (8:10-15), and perplexed with the enigma of life (8:16-17) and the ultimate certainty of death (9:1-6), he again turns to a position of faith as the only remedy. (9:7-10)”[9] The first nine verses of chapter 8 follow the theme of authorities and wisdom. Specifically, the text speaks of how the “wise man” of V. 1 deals with the power and commandments of a king that cannot be corrected or redirected. Hence, Kidner’s remark “But with the dangerous caprices of a king to reckon with, wisdom has to fold its wings and take the form of discretion, content to keep it’s possessor out of trouble.”[10]
Exegesis of Passage
Verse 1 The first verse boldly declares the advantages of the wise man, asking who can compare to him, or who else can decern as he can. Following the two questions is a statement that echoes similar sentiments. “The contrast, יְשֻׁ ... עֹזוְ (“and the rudeness of his face is changed”), shows, however, that not merely the brightening of the countenance, but in general that intellectual and ethical transfiguration of the countenance is meant, in which at once, even though it should not in itself be beautiful, we discover the educated man rising above the common rank.”[11] That same author then linked this opening to the subsequent verses as follows “But that which follows easily subordinates itself to Ecc_8:1, in as far as fidelity to duty and thoughtfulness amid critical social relations are proofs of that wisdom which sets a man free from impetuous rudeness, and fits him intelligently and with a clear mind to accommodate himself to the time.”[12]
Verse 2 bluntly explains that a wise man does keep the kings command, though the last phrase is a bit tricky. The KJV’s “and that in regard of the oath of God.” Translationally, “The reference to the “oath to God” is difficult to specify: a subjective or objective genitive?”[13] The ESV opts for “because of God’s oath to him.” Linking the oath to the Divine promise to David and his seed of their right to rule. Thus, a wise man obeys the king because God has given that king the right to rule. However, the CSB follows the other interpretation: “because of your oath made before God” now linking that obedience to authority to service to God yet making the oath the possession of the readers to God, and not God’s to the king. The NASB 95 reads generically like the KJV, “because of the oath before God.” But has a footnote explaining “before God” is literally “of God.” While this keeps the ambiguity of the Hebrew text, it doesn’t shed any light on which meaning is meant. Either way, the motive is set as an “oath” and both interpretations point to the same end of providing a strong, binding reason for obedience to the king.
Verse 3 provides some good wisdom for those living in a strict monarchy. First, if offers some advice “Be not hasty to go out of his sight” which is explained as “Haste to leave the king’s presence would indicate disaffection or disloyalty (see the phrase in Ho. 11:2)[14]” One is strongly advised against that attitude of abandoning the king or turning from him. Then, the KJV’s “stand not in an evil thing;” seems to have the idea of continuing to “stand” for something displeasing to the king. The NIV here has “Do not stand up for a bad cause,” with the reason being “for he will do whatever he pleases.” The wise man is advised to be loyal to the king, as well as careful with where he stands, as the king will do as he wishes and will surely remove any obstacles in his path. Should a man consistently confront the king and continue to stand in something the king doesn’t like, that man may find himself kicked out of the palace, or worse.
Verse 4 continues that thought perfectly, providing the final details for that interpretation of V. 3. The NASB’s “Since the word of the king is authoritative, who will say to him, “What are you doing?”” perfectly conveys the simple truths here. Nobody can truly stand up against a king, confronting him, and correcting him, without the fear of a single word of the king forever removing him from the palace, or even the land of the living.
Verses 5 and 6 draw more truth from this scenario, declaring that obeying the king’s commands avoids misfortune at the king’s hand. This provides the opposite of V. 4, but then 5b reveals the balance that should come, as there are times and ways that should be discerned to confront properly. This is shown well in the CSB’s “a wise heart knows the right time and procedure.” V. 6 then reiterates the frustration that comes from this process, as it reminds readers to that discernment and judgement, even when evil/misery/trouble lays heavily on him. What a great truth, then! As it reminds readers to still be wise in how to handle stressful, annoying, and hard situations from those in positions of power.
Verse 8 seems to zoom far out, revealing that submission to powerful kings is not the only time in life that unassailable circumstances can threaten and bring inescapable problems. One simply cannot tell what will come in the future, or how it will come. That is the age-old struggle of mankind. Some of these are clear, but others not so much. “Release from war might be understood as an excuse from participating. But in that case there is no reason why a person should not have adverted to the legislation of Deut 20:1ff., which provides for excuse. It is better to understand the phrase as escaping from the usual evils of war, such as pillage, capture, death. NJV translates, “from that war,” i.e., the battle between life and death.”[15]
Verse 9 rounds out the paragraph, with the narrator again bringing himself to the forefront and commenting on his observations. He also provides a closing remark that connects well to the opening verses of the chapter. “when man had power over man to his hurt.” (ESV) This rounds out the section that is characterized by the root “שׁלט” or “power.” However, the phrase “under the sun” brings to mind God’s sovereignty, which shines clearly in the next paragraph. (Vs. 10-13)
Ending the chapter is a section contrasting the vanity of men to the sovereignty of God. (Verses 14-17) While God is said to give life “under the sun” (V. 15) man is to simply enjoy, as he can’t figure it all out. (V. 17) While this opening introduces the idea of needing wisdom to deal with the powerful king, the verses also point out other areas of life that cannot be resisted. This leads into the rest of the chapter that points readers to the Highest Power, the only one that can control those incredible influences. Verses 10-13 teach that fearing God causes things to “go well” while wicked men, while turning all their cunning to better their lives, will fail. Ultimately, God’s power is promoted as above all other powers, yet also above man’s wisdom. Wisdom not only recognizes that, but also, sees the need to enjoy life and react wisely to situations out of control.
Relevancy to Bibliology
While exegesis of this incredible book could continue, enough has been done to catch that general theme. Yet, if none of what’s been explained seems to you to be addressing the canon of Scripture, the approved translation of God, or any sort of bibliology whatsoever… you’d be right. The context, overarching themes, and even the minor points, have nothing to do with the King James Version.
The “King” in V. 4 is referring to monarchs in general, not just James, the “Word of a king” is not referring to Scripture at all, but simply the daily, normal commands of a generic human monarch, and even then, those words, and the power of that monarch are cast as something to be feared and cautiously dealt with, not wholeheartedly embraced. Though great men, like Spurgeon himself,[16] used this text to speak on the “word of the LORD” and the power of his creating voice, as well as the Bible in general (with no mention of which edition or translation) such an interpretation is only slightly more appropriate for the ending of chapter 8, which highlights God’s sovereignty, yet that section of text also displays the uncertainty of God’s working from a human perspective, which clashes with the known and certain nature of the Bible. Even then, “the word of the king” as a reference to “God’s Word” still doesn’t specify which text or translation any more than the common phrase “the Scriptures” do! Therefore, to use any of this passage to back the idea of KJVOnlyism is dubious; even more so when making that analogy means God is equated with a threatening king that is set as an antagonist to the wise man.
For that matter, even if, somehow, verse 4 did mean that only translations authorized by kings are authoritative, the Great Bible also qualifies, for it was commissioned by King Henry VIII.[17] In fact, the oldest surviving portions of Old Testament prose were translated directly by a king, King Alfred the Great,[18] whereas both the Great Bible and the KJV were only done on the authority of kings, and not by their own hand. However, another way of looking at that also disqualifies the original autographs that were penned by the Apostles, the Prophets, and the unknown writers, leaving us with little beyond the poetry of David and Solomon.
King James Onlyist Claims
Sadly, the above won’t stop some from supporting the KJV from this verse. One church in California proudly claims this on their website: “Welcome to the Antelope Valley’s King James, Bible-Believing, Independent, Fundamental, and Street Preaching Baptist Church! Lancaster, California “Where the word of a king is, there is power…” Ecclesiastes 8:4”[19] Matthew Vuusher attempts that when he comments: “The King James Bible itself was made by the ruler and people of England: “Where the word of a king is, there is power: and who may say unto him, What doest thou?” (Ecclesiastes 8:4).”[20] While one pastor read the verse several times in his sermon titled “Why We Believe in the King James Bible (Eccl 8:4)”, another pastor applied this to the KJV, though he never specified his reasoning behind making this verse apply that way.[21] It seems these writers all attempted to tie this verse into saying on the KJV has power because it’s authorized/named after a king.
As we have seen however, a straightforward interpretation on the text destroys that idea. Those that use it, however, don’t always do so in a straightforward way. Peter Ruckman, for example, said the following:
“Copyrights are for making money. Copyrights are so that people have to write and ask, “Can I print that?” Yes, you can—for a tidy sum. I believe the King James Bible is the word of God because it has no copyright on it. It may have the Crown Copyright, but you don’t have to ask the Crown for the right to print it. In Ecclesiastes 8:4 it says, “Where the word of a king is, there is power.” If it had a Crown copyright, it was copyrighted under a king. If it was copyrighted under a king, it has the right copyright.”[22]
Now, I’m frankly not entirely sure what he means by all of this. His propositions seems to line up this way:
1. Copyrights are for making money.
2. The KJV has no copyright, except it actually does, but not functionally.
3. The copyright it has is the right one, based on Eccl 8:4, because it’s under a king.
4. Therefore, the KJV is the Word of God.
Several amusing issues arise from this. First, in England, the Crown Copyright does indeed protect the KJV, and only authorized publishers can print the KJV.[23] However, many other countries, refusing to recognize that, made the KJV public domain. Thus, it technically still has a protecting, profitable copyright. You do, in fact, have to ask the crown.[24] Second, if the purpose of copyrights is to make money, and also, though unstated in Ruckman’s premise, to protect the book from being altered, how is the so-called “right copyright” even right? It fails on both major accounts in places were the text is public domain. Third, if that is the only copyright that is “right” then why does Ruckman copyright his own books with normal, American copyrights?[25] That seems rather hypocritical for calling out that kind of thing for being the wrong copyright, then making use of it himself.
Additionally, as we’ve seen the passage has nothing to do with copyrights, the King James, or bibliology at all! Even if it did address bibliology, several other translations, which are rejected by KJVOnlyists, would also qualify. Finally, there is some historical doubt if the KJV is truly, in the technical definition, “authorized.” David Norton commented this in his book:
“Though commonly known as the Authorised Version (AV), it appears not to have been officially authorized” … “The finely engraved title page, by Cornelis Boel, reads:
The Holy Bible, Conteyning the Old Testament, and the new: Newly Translated out of the Originall tongues: & with the former Translations diligently compared and reuised: by his Maiesties speciall Comandement. Appointed to be read in Churches.
Imprinted at London by Robert Barker. Printer to the Kings most excellent Maiestie.
Anno Dom. 1611.
The use of ‘appointed’ and the absence of ‘authorised’ are striking – the more striking in that the Bishops’ Bible after 1585 had been ‘authorised and appointed to be read in Churches’ (H188). Moreover, there is no official record of authorisation (for these reasons I prefer to call this Bible the King James Bible).”[26]
Conclusion
Through an honest and detailed evaluation of the text, we’ve seen the beauty and wisdom of the oft neglected Book of Ecclesiastes. We’ve seen the powerlessness of men, and the hope that lies only in God. We’ve seen that the life of wisdom must know how to deal with circumstances beyond control and beyond our understanding, yet none of that is beyond God!
However, as I hope it also clear to you, dear reader, we’ve also seen the unfortunate seizing of the text that seeks to manipulate God’s plain and easy meaning into supporting their agenda. We’ve seen how that clashes with the text’s intended meaning, and even to a point, with the actual historical facts. We’ve also seen how that misrepresentation is not even consistent with their claims of exclusivity, but still draws in other editions and translations, some of which would even better qualify for the title “word of the King.”
In short, this is a marvelous passage that is sadly, and blatantly, highjacked to promote an alien cause with no regard for what God himself was communicating here.
Bibliography
“Quarterly Record No. 625.” Https://Www.tbsbibles.org/, 2018, www.tbsbibles.org/news/news.asp?id=426621.
“The Queen's Printer's Patent.” Cambridge University Press, www.cambridge.org/about-us/who-we-are/queens-printers-patent.
Davis, Grady. “Later and Modern Versions: English.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 19 Oct. 1998, www.britannica.com/topic/biblical-literature/Later-and-modern-versions-English.
Delitzsch, Franz, and James Martin. Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon. Eerdmans, 1972.
Eaton, Michael A. “Ecclesiastes.” New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition. Ed. D. A. Carson et al. 4th ed. Leicester, England; Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity Press, 1994. 616. Print.
Eaton, Michael A. Ecclesiastes: an Introduction and Commentary. InterVarsity Press, 1983. Page 118
Garrett, Duane A. “Ecclesiastes.” CSB Study Bible: Notes. Ed. Edwin A. Blum and Trevin Wax. Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers, 2017. 1005. Print.
Glenn, Donald R. “Ecclesiastes.” The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures. Ed. J. F. Walvoord and R. B. Zuck. Vol. 1. Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1985. 978. Print.
Gorski, Randy. “AV King James Baptist Church - Lancaster, CA " KJV Churches.” KJV Churches.com, www.kjvchurches.com/churches/united-states/california/lancaster/av-king-james-baptist-church/.
GUIDE TO THE PCE OF THE KING JAMES BIBLE, Page 381, Matthew Verschuur
House, Paul R., and Eric Mitchell. Old Testament Survey. 2nd ed. Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing Group, 2007. Print.
Kidner, Derek. A Time to Mourn &; a Time to Dance: the Message of Ecclesiastes. InterVarsity Press, 1976. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAiJ0g-tlFo
Murphy, Roland. Ecclesiastes. Vol. 23A. Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1992. Print. Word Biblical Commentary.
Norton, David. A Textual History of the King James Bible. Cambridge Univ. Press, 2007.
Ruckman, Peter S. Problem Texts. Pensacola Bible Institute, 1980.
Ruckman, Peter S. Why I Believe the King James Version Is the Word of God. Bible Baptist Bookstore, 1989.
Schreib, Mike. “Why We Believe in the King James Bible (Eccl 8:4).” 15 June 2014, Ontario, Bible Baptist Church International.
Spurgeon, Charles Haddon. “THE WORD OF A KING.” At the opening of a new baptist chapel, trinity road, upper tooting, London.
Tatiana C. String, “Henry VIII's Illuminated 'Great Bible'.” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, vol. 59, 1996, pp. 315–324. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/751412.
Unger, Merrill Frederick. The New Unger’s Bible Handbook. Rev. and updated ed. Chicago: Moody Publishers, 2005. Print.
Walter Kaiser Jr, Ecclesiastes: Total Life (Chicago: Moody Press, 1979), 25–29.
ENDNOTES
[1] Schreib, Mike. “Why We Believe in the King James Bible (Eccl 8:4).” 15 June 2014, Ontario, Bible Baptist Church International. [2] According to 1:1 and 1:12. This leads to the conclusion that the writer was Solomon, who also penned the beloved Proverbs, and his also confusing and controversial Song of Songs. [3] Walter Kaiser Jr, Ecclesiastes: Total Life (Chicago: Moody Press, 1979), 25–29. [4] House, Paul R., and Eric Mitchell. Old Testament Survey. 2nd ed. Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing Group, 2007. Print. [5] Unger, Merrill Frederick. The New Unger’s Bible Handbook. Rev. and updated ed. Chicago: Moody Publishers, 2005. Print. [6] Glenn, Donald R. “Ecclesiastes.” The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures. Ed. J. F. Walvoord and R. B. Zuck. Vol. 1. Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1985. 978. Print. [7] Garrett, Duane A. “Ecclesiastes.” CSB Study Bible: Notes. Ed. Edwin A. Blum and Trevin Wax. Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers, 2017. 1005. Print. [8] House, Paul R., and Eric Mitchell. Old Testament Survey. 2nd ed. Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing Group, 2007. Print. [9] Eaton, Michael A. Ecclesiastes: an Introduction and Commentary. InterVarsity Press, 1983. Page 118 [10] Kidner, Derek. A Time to Mourn & a Time to Dance: the Message of Ecclesiastes. InterVarsity Press, 1976. Page 72 [11] Delitzsch, Franz, and James Martin. Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon. Eerdmans, 1972. [12] Ibid [13] Murphy, Roland. Ecclesiastes. Vol. 23A. Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1992. Print. Word Biblical Commentary. [14] Eaton, Michael A. “Ecclesiastes.” New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition. Ed. D. A. Carson et al. 4th ed. Leicester, England; Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity Press, 1994. 616. Print. [15] Murphy, Roland. Ecclesiastes. Vol. 23A. Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1992. Print. Word Biblical Commentary. [16] Spurgeon, Charles Haddon. “THE WORD OF A KING.” At the opening of a new baptist chapel, trinity road, upper tooting, London. [17] Tatiana C. String, “Henry VIII's Illuminated 'Great Bible'.” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, vol. 59, 1996, pp. 315–324. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/751412. [18] Davis, Grady. “Later and Modern Versions: English.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 19 Oct. 1998, www.britannica.com/topic/biblical-literature/Later-and-modern-versions-English. [19] Gorski, Randy. “AV King James Baptist Church - Lancaster, CA " KJV Churches.” KJV Churches.com, www.kjvchurches.com/churches/united-states/california/lancaster/av-king-james-baptist-church/. [20]GUIDE TO THE PCE OF THE KING JAMES BIBLE, Page 381, Matthew Verschuur [21] Kidner, Derek. A Time to Mourn & a Time to Dance: the Message of Ecclesiastes. InterVarsity Press, 1976. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAiJ0g-tlFo [22] Ruckman, Peter S. Why I Believe the King James Version Is the Word of God. Bible Baptist Bookstore, 1989. [23] “The Queen's Printer's Patent.” Cambridge University Press, www.cambridge.org/about-us/who-we-are/queens-printers-patent. [24] “Quarterly Record No. 625.” Https://Www.tbsbibles.org/, 2018, www.tbsbibles.org/news/news.asp?id=426621. [25] “Problem Texts” by Ruckman has “copyright © 1980 Peter S. Ruckman” in the front. Ruckman, Peter S. Problem Texts. Pensacola Bible Institute, 1980. [26] Norton, David. A Textual History of the King James Bible. Cambridge Univ. Press, 2007.
Comments