Bible Translation

Which Bible Translation Should I Use?

Often, as a gospel preacher, I am asked which Bible translation I would recommend. I always recommend the King James Version, the American Standard Version (1901) or the New King James version and personally prefer the King James.  There are several considerations that I have taken into account when deciding upon these particular translations. Mainly I look at the method that was used by the translators and look to see whether there is an overall theological bias to it.

First, I always look to use a translation that uses the “Form Equivalency” (FE) method of translation, where an attempt is made to render a literal “word-for-word” translation instead of one that uses the “Dynamic Equivalency” (DE) method which is more of a “thought-for-thought” translation. You could say that FE is at one end of the spectrum and DE at the other. The many English translations out there fall somewhere along this line. It could be said, for instance, that the American Standard Version of 1901 would be at the extreme FE end of the spectrum and perhaps the New Living Translation or the Message Bible at the extreme opposite end.  The King James, New King James, New American Standard Bible and English Standard versions are each much closer to the FE end of the spectrum than they are to the DE end. The New International Version and perhaps the New Revised Version are much closer to the DE end than they are to the FE end of the spectrum.

Second, I then look for theological bias. For instance one such theological bias is found in Galatians 5 in the New International Version  where the Greek word sarx is translated “sinful nature…, “ rather than simply “flesh…” Galatians 5:16-17 (NIV 1984) “So I say, live by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the sinful nature.  For the sinful nature desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the sinful nature. They are in conflict with each other, so that you do not do what you want…” For comparison’s sake notice this same passage in the ASV of 1901, “But I say, walk by the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh. For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; for these are contrary the one to the other; that ye may not do the things that ye would..”  Thayer’s defines sarx as, “flesh (the soft substance of the living body, which covers the bones and is permeated with blood) of both man and beasts.” The word,  simply defined, nowhere implies anything sinful! This particular fallacy is the result of those who have approached Biblical translation with the theological bias of Calvinism, where man’s very nature is thought to be fallen because of original sin, a man-made doctrine that the Bible does not support! The NIV, in its current version, has changed that particular wording but still maintains it in a footnote.

Another instance of theological bias is found in the English Standard Version in Romans 10:10, where it alters the language to point where a false doctrine on salvation is taught. Other passages in the ESV are well translated, but Romans 10:10 clearly show a theological bias.  The ESV translates it as follows, “For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved…” For the sake of comparison, the NKJV version renders it, “For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation…” The ESV in Romans 10:10 translates the Greek word eis as “is.” “With the heart one believes and is (eis) justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is (eis) saved…”  Is this an accurate rendering of the Greek word eis? Thayer’s defines eis as follows: “into, unto, to, towards, for, among..” Note that the Greek word eis is not a verb, rather it is a preposition and therefore  it should never be translated by the English word “is.” The ESV in Rom 10:10, also translates the Greek NOUNS “dikaiosune” and “soterian” as VERBS , rendering them “justified…” and “saved…” respectively. The ESV claims to be a “word-for-word” translation, yet here they replaced nouns with verbs and a preposition with a state of being.

To my mind, “believeth unto righteousness…” (KJV) is not the same thing as “believes and is justified…” (ESV) Neither is “confession is made unto salvation…” (KJV) the same thing as “confesses and is saved…” (ESV) The English word “is” implies a state of being. The ESV would have us believe and be justified; confess and be saved. Yet, the Greek indicates that belief leads untorighteousness and confession leads unto salvation – but it does not equate belief with the state of being justified, or confession with the state of being saved. Theological bias at play here?  I think so.

Because of this fairly obvious theological bias, I personally cannot recommend this translation for serious Bible study. It has many good qualities about it, but I do not think it is a worthy replacement for the KJV, the NKJV or the ASV 1901. For those who may argue from the standpoint of readability, I do not believe the language used in the ESV is any easier  to read than what is used in the NKJV for instance. In reality,  with a little bit of familiarity, the KJV and ASV are not at all hard to understand even for small children.

The ESV has grown in popularity in part because a certain well-known gospel preacher  wrote an article, just after the ESV became available on the market in 2002, stating that he thought it may in time prove to be an excellent translation. Notice what he said, “Though the ESV is not without some weakness, generally speaking, it appears to be an accurate, literal translation, rendered in beautiful English. It is a version, we believe, that will serve the English-speaking world with distinction. It is our hope that this new version will not become a point of contention within the body of Christ.” (Wayne Jackson, Article: The English Standard Version, www.christiancourier.com). In this article, Brother Jackson simply gave his preliminary findings on the ESV, admittedly without a thorough investigation of the translation: “I have not gone through the entire volume. I’ve only checked random passages; nonetheless, I am impressed with this new version. It may turn out to be one the best modern alternative to the King James translation, although I still prefer the meticulous precision of the American Standard Version (1901).” (IBID) As the ESV has come under more and more scrutiny, more and more instances of theological bias are being noted.

All translations have their issues. One mistranslation every English version since the Bishop’s Bible (1568) has made is to not translate the Greek verb baptizo as “immerse,” (which is what it literally means) but rather to transliterate it as simply “baptize…”  This was done so that those who were practicing sprinkling and pouring for “baptism” would find it more acceptable. Every English version has its particular flaws the NKJV and ESV, for instance, poorly define the Greek word porneia as “sexual immorality” rather than adultery or fornication, which is a more precise definition. The King James Version has some problems as well, such as the insertion of the word “easter…” in Romans 12:4 and its imprecise use of the word “hell…” in places where the Greek word hades is used.  The NKJV more accurately transliterates it as “hades…” The ASV (1901) is considered by many scholars to be the most outstanding English translation, but many find it harder to follow than even the KJV.

To quote an older preacher, “The real problem with Bible translations is not in which one we use, but rather that we do not use the one we have…!”

“Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth…” (2 Timothy 2:15 KJV)

 

Posted in Jack McNiel | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Bible Translation

Do You Not Understand?

Understand: Thou Shalt Get a Clue

A comedian once said that all people are clueless once in a while, but some make a career out of it.  To illustrate his point he told the story of three fellows who went off a bridge in a pick-up truck.  The one that was driving rolled down the window and swam out, but the two sitting in the back drowned because they couldn’t get the tailgate down.

While such a story may amuse us, being spiritually “clueless” is not a laughing matter.  Its one thing to be naïve about something; it’s an entirely different matter to be intentionally ignorant or unwilling to learn or unwilling to accept the truth.  The Pharisees were like this; so much so that Jesus called them “fools and blind” (Matt. 23:17, 19; cf. Jn. 9:39-41).  Yet, one does not have to be like the Pharisees to be spiritually clueless.  One can almost hear the frustration in Jesus’ voice after He would give careful instruction to His disciples, only to realize that they didn’t have a clue what He was saying.  He would say things like, “Are you still without understanding?  Do you not understand…?” (Matt. 15:16-17) “How is it you do not understand…?” (16:11)  Jesus was not belittling them; He was trying to get them to open their eyes and understand what the will of the Lord is.  And that’s just what He’s still trying to do through His word today (cf. Matt. 7:21-27; 13:14-15; Jas. 1:21).

Friends, we are able to “read and understand” (2 Cor. 1:13).  We are able to understand the truth (2 Tim. 3:15-16), therefore, there is no excuse for spiritual blindness. “Therefore do not be unwise, but understand what the will of the Lord is” (Eph. 5:17).

Posted in Aaron Veyon | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Do You Not Understand?

Leaven Can Be Dangerous

Health Alert!  Leaven Can Be Dangerous!

The Bible uses the word “leaven” twenty-four times. It is used in the Old Testament eleven times. Five of these times it gives instruction about the observance of the Passover (Ex. 12:15, 19; 13:7; 34:25; Deut. 16:4). Four times it is used to forbid the use of leaven with a grain offering (Lev. 2:11; 6:17; 10:12). Amos mentions it being offered with sacrifices as an illustration of how far the Jews had drifted from honoring God (Amos 4:5). The other time it is mentioned is where God commanded using leaven with the bread offered at Pentecost (Lev. 16:27). It is always used in a literal way in the Old Testament.

However, when one comes to the New Testament, the picture is entirely different. Every reference to it has a spiritual, figurative application. Look at the following usages.

The church is like leaven (Matt. 13: 33; Luke 13:21). This is the only time that leaven is used in a good sense in the New Testament. Leaven placed in dough spreads throughout the dough and amazingly increases the size of the loaf. Jesus wanted His disciples to visualize the growth of the church.

False teaching is like leaven (Matt. 16:6, 11-12; Mark 8:15). When the Lord first spoke of the leaven of the Pharisees and the Sadducees, His disciples did not understand. Afterwards, they discovered that He was speaking of the false teachings of men and how dangerous it is in spreading to others. Paul also describes false teachers as being like leaven which will permeate the entire church (Gal. 5:9).

Hypocrisy is like leaven (Luke 12:1). It was not just the doctrine of the Pharisees that Jesus rebuked, but also the fact that what they first appeared to be was, in reality, a lie. When Christians are hypocrites, their influence leads to hypocrisy in others. This concept is also found in Paul’s uses of the phrase “the leaven of malice and wickedness” and contrasts it with sincerity and truth (1 Cor. 5:8)

Sin left unattended in the church is like leaven (1 Cor. 5:6-7). The church at Corinth had serious problems. Paul described an immoral situation which was so vile even the pagans would not practice it. Yet, it was in the church, and instead of dealing with it, they were proud. Paul warned them that if this sin and all sins were not addressed, it would spread to all the church just like leaven. He told them to purge out that evil leaven and give that man back to Satan. Oh, that the church today would heed his words!

Leaven and you. The fact leaven is used to describe the church shows the power of righteousness. It is used to describe the power of unrighteousness. The question to be considered is, what kind of leavening influence are you having?

Posted in Dan Jenkins | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Leaven Can Be Dangerous

Called to be Saints

Do a quick search of the word “ saints ” and you will find it used 62 times in the New Testament  (NKJV). The Greek word is defined generally as something “ separate from common condition  and use; dedicated” and when in context it is used to classify people refers to “members of the  first Christian communities.” This is quite appropriate since we are told that the Christians in  Corinth had been washed, sanctified, and justified (1 Corinthians 6:11).

In fact, every Christian is sanctified – set apart – for His purposes. When we obey the gospel  through repentance, confession, and baptism we are delivered from “the power of darkness”  and “conveyed [translated] into the kingdom of the Son of His love” (Colossians 1:13). The  Apostle Paul said that the Christians in Rome had been “called to be saints” (Romans 1:7) as  were those in Corinth (1 Corinthians 1:2).

So whenever the subject of “sainthood” comes up I am amazed at how mankind and human  innovations have poisoned the beautiful relationship between God and His children. Just this  morning I received a news alert about Pope Francis clearing the way for Pope John Paul II to be  declared a saint. In an article entitled “Pope Francis Clears John Paul II, John XXIII for  Sainthood” a number of statements are made that highlight the fallacious doctrines devised by  men concerning sainthood.

Sainthood is not bestowed upon men or women by human hands! The path to sainthood is  a process in which we each individually respond in faith to God’s commands and God – through the blood of Christ – cleanses us from our sins and we are reconciled back to  God (2 Corinthians 5:18 – 20; Ephesians 2:16; Colossians 1:20). I am thankful that I do  not need the Pope to “clear the way” for my sainthood! God has already done it.

In the aforementioned article there is a discussion of the ceremonial date in which sainthood  will officially be bestowed. Some even worry that  “the process has been too quick.”  The  fact is that there is a ceremonial date in which we become saints but it is not a  predetermined date in the future, it is the day that we submit ourselves in obedience to  God. If our sainthood is not bestowed upon us until after our death it will be too late – that’s a fact!

Miraculous Confirmation. Apparently Pope John Paul II is going to get to be a saint because  a Costa Rican woman supposedly “prayed” to John Paul II (a subject for another article)  and was miraculously healed of a cerebral aneurism. However the woman in question  cannot talk about this “miraculous healing” because she has been “sworn to secrecy.”  Why? Our sainthood has been confirmed by the healing of the blood of Christ and since  I do not have the power to miraculously heal anyone nor would I want anyone praying to  me (as if anyone would) I am thankful for the sweet sacrifice of our Savior.

The Bible clearly states that saints were alive and living in a beautiful, sanctified relationship  with God here on earth (Acts 9:13, 32, 41; 26:10; Romans 12:13) and all how have who have  obeyed the gospel from that time to today have sainthood bestowed upon them. Jesus makes  intercession for saints (Romans 8:27) and we ought to be thankful that He does that for us today  and not until after we die. Thanks be to God that we have this wonderful designation!

Are you a saint? Obey Him today and be faithful!

 

Posted in Tim Dooley | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Called to be Saints

Modest Apparel Standard

Who Sets the Standard for Modest Apparel?

Little would Isaiah know that his woeful words of prophecy would apply to a generation long after his when he declared, “Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!” (Isa. 5:20). How tragic and sad that these words appropriately describe the morality of our current times. We may see such when a young person “comes out of the closet” and embraces homosexuality, only to find society (and the firestorm of media) laud and praise his or her bravery and courage. Nevertheless, the true portrait of bravery and courage is the young person who defies the immoral times and the pressure from peers by deciding to keep pure in refusing to dress immodestly! The true portrait of bravery and courage in the eyes of God are the Christians who refuse to have public swimming parties at their home with both genders present because of the grave temptations present in such circumstances (cf. Matt. 5:27-28). The truest sense of bravery and courage are the ones who actually do what David did not do as he glanced and saw one dressed inappropriately (cf. 2 Sam. 11:1-5)—turn, look and run the other way without resorting to fulfill sinful exhibitions, such as what Joseph did in Egypt before the wife of Potiphar. In this issue, we would like to examine the topic of “Modesty.” In addressing any moral or religious topic, it is imperative that we begin with the matter of authority and answer the critical question, “Who sets the standard for modest apparel?” The Bible is crystal clear.

First, it would be important to distinguish between modest and immodest apparel in the eyes of God, for if there were no such distinction with Him, then the standard for determining such would be unknown. Yet, the Bible begins with the first family—through their sin, the eyes of Adam and Eve opened to see that which previously brought no shame (their nakedness) and to cover themselves up, replicating on the outside (physically) what they were trying to do on the inside (spiritually); that is, hiding their shamefulness from God, they created aprons of leaves from fig trees (Gen. 3:7-10). Yet, upon confrontation with God, He made for them coats of skins, evidently showing His disproval for their immodest apparel (Gen. 3:21). Later, we see the detailed instructions for the priests as to how they were to dress in service before God: “And thou shalt make them linen breeches to cover their nakedness; from the loins even unto the thighs they shall reach” (Exod. 28:42). As we study through the Bible, we continue to learn some things about the clothing that people wore during Bible times. In Matthew 5:40 and Luke 6:29, we learn that there were outer garments and inner garments. The inner garments (next to the skin) were of light material (linen or wool) that went either to the knees or the ankles. By distinguishing between them, and seeing examples of individuals who were immodestly dressed by only wearing the inner garments in public (i.e., 1 Sam. 19:24; John 21:7), we can put all of this together to see that the word of God does indeed make a distinction between modest and immodest apparel.

Second, because God makes a distinction between modesty and immodesty in His word, then we seek to find the authority for how we act. Jesus makes the claim of authority in Matthew 28:18: “All authority hath been given unto me in heaven and on earth” [ASV]. Indeed, all authorities are subject to him (1 Pet. 3:22), because God has “put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church, which is his body, the fullness of him that filleth all in all” (Eph. 1:22-23). Therefore, He is “Lord of lords and King of kings” (Rev. 17:14). We must consult with Christ (and by extension, His apostles) for the standard of modest versus immodest apparel.

Therefore, when we see all of the passages that point out principles of purity and study such passages on modesty as First Timothy 2:9-10, they instruct us that we are to be Christians who are distinct in how we display ourselves, inwardly as well as outwardly. We understand that apparel has the unique ability to express our attitudes and character, and the child of God should always be conscious about such things. May the articles in this issue highlight the truth of God on this important matter, and may the people of God rise to the challenge and stand for what is right and proper!

Posted in Sam Willcut | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Modest Apparel Standard