WIXLIB

A121 Which Version 2:A121 Which Version04/07/200712:33Page 6Which Bible Version What, we may ask, is an eternal sin? We cannot say but we do know what eternaldamnation is and so does everyone in his or her conscience before God.Luke 6.48AV: He is like a man which built an house, and digged deep, and laid the foundationon a rock: and when the flood arose, the stream beat vehemently upon that house,and could not shake it: for it was founded upon a rock.NIV: He is like a man building a house, who dug down deep and laid the foundationon rock. When the flood came, the torrent struck that house but could not shake it,because it was well built.The NIV here seems to teach that the believer’s security does not depend onChrist alone but also on the quality of his own life, implying that works are effectualin our perseverance; clarity has been replaced by ambiguity.Ephesians 5.9AV: (For the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness and righteousness and truth;)NIV: (for the fruit of the light consists in all goodness, righteousness and truth)The previous verse says that believers are light in the Lord and that they are towalk as children of light. We are to be in practice what we are by nature as those whohave been born again and have the seed of regeneration in their hearts. We are to beholy in our conduct as we are in our character. Verse 9 is telling us how this holinessis possible and why it should be actual in our lives: the gracious working of the HolySpirit produces a holy fruit in God’s children.These are textual changes. They alter the structure of Scripture. There is anothertype of change which does not affect the structure of Scripture but which is nevertheless important because it too affects the meaning of Scripture: translationalchange. This is where the Hebrew or Greek text underlying the modern versions is thesame as that underlying the AV but the translators have rendered the words differently so that the meaning is affected.4. TranslationBible versions inevitably reflect the theological prejudices of their translators.There are certain key verses in the Old and New Testaments by which the variousmodern versions may be evaluated. Among these verses are:6

A121 Which Version 2:A121 Which Version04/07/200712:33Page 7 Does it really matter?Isaiah 7.14AV: Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive,and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.Revised Standard Version (RSV): Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold,a young woman shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.We know that whoever is born of ordinary generation inherits Adam’s corruptnature. It was necessary that the Son of God should be born by extraordinary generation to ensure the sinlessness of His human nature. Isaiah records the sign whichwill indicate the arrival of the Messiah in this world: a virgin shall be with child. It isperverse of the RSV to translate the Hebrew word ‘almah as ‘young woman’. AsJ. Gresham Machen said: ‘there is no place among the seven occurrences of ‘almah inthe Old Testament where the word is clearly used of a woman who was not a virgin’.2Daniel 3.25AV: He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire,and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.New English Bible (NEB): He answered, ‘Yet I see four men walking about in the firefree and unharmed; and the fourth looks like a god.’There is every difference between ‘the Son of God’ and ‘a god’: the latter couldrefer to anybody who was highly esteemed by men. Surely it was only the presence ofthe true and living God in the Person of the Son that resulted in the miracle of thedeliverance from the burning fiery furnace. This indirect testimony to the deity ofChrist is lost.John 1.14AV: And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, theglory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.NIV: The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory,the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.In the AV the phrase ‘only begotten’ (or elsewhere ‘only begotten Son’) carries withit a distinct doctrinal significance. It means that Christ is the eternal and natural Sonof the Father, of the same essence. The NIV abandons this precious phrase, replacingit with the ambiguous ‘the One and Only’ (John 1.14,18) or ‘one and only Son’(John 3.16,18). Interestingly the Gideons, who in the UK customarily distribute theNIV, were given permission by the publishers to print and circulate a special editionof the NIV which retains the phrase ‘only begotten’ in the six places where the regular edition omits it.7

A121 Which Version 2:A121 Which Version04/07/200712:33Page 8Which Bible Version Acts 20.28AV: Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the HolyGhost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchasedwith his own blood.Good News Bible (GNB, 1st edition): So keep watch over yourselves and over all theflock which the Holy Spirit has placed in your care. Be shepherds of the church ofGod, which he made his own through the sacrificial death of his Son.Among the modern versions the Good News Bible in particular seems to have anaversion to any mention of blood (although this instance at least is corrected in thesecond edition). It views the term ‘blood’ as an emblem for death and systematicallyreplaces the former with the latter in at least sixteen instances, some of which concern our Lord Jesus Christ. But though the two are related they are not identical.Scripture says, ‘it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul’ (Leviticus17.11); ‘without shedding of blood is no remission’ (Hebrews 9.22). The emphasis onblood in Scripture reminds us of the nature of Christ’s death: He made atonement forsin. This truth is repugnant to liberal theologians (and sadly to some modern ‘evangelicals’) because it emphasises the holiness of God when they want all the emphasison the love of God. However, divine justice had to be satisfied by Christ and divinewrath pacified or else there could be no salvation for guilty sinners.Even more is lost by this rendering. The AV indicates that the blood which purchased the church was the blood of a divine Person—God in our nature. The GNBand some other modern versions lose this indirect proof of the Godhead of Christ.Romans 8.28AV: And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, tothem who are the called according to his purpose.Living Bible (LB): And we know that all that happens to us is working for our good ifwe love God and are fitting into his plans.This is a private interpretation, not a translation, and it is a wrong interpretation!It is a twisting of the text, doing down predestination and sovereign grace and exalting man’s free will. This version was produced by one individual and he frequentlyintruded his false arminian views upon the text.Revelation 19.8AV: And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white:for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints.New King James Version (NKJV): And to her it was granted to be arrayed in fine linen,clean and bright, for the fine linen is the righteous acts of the saints.8

A121 Which Version 2:A121 Which Version04/07/200712:33Page 9 Does it really matter?This rendering is acceptable according to the Greek but surely not correct according to the context which is the Marriage of Christ the Lamb of God and His Bride, theChurch. On such an occasion we could never think of being covered spiritually withany robe but the perfect robe of Christ’s own righteousness, imputed to us andreceived by faith. Are not all our ‘righteousnesses’ or ‘righteous acts’ ‘as filthy rags’(Isaiah 64.6)?A good translator will translate words in accordance with the overall teaching ofthe Bible or the analogy of faith. The doctrines of Scripture have been summarisedand systematised in the historic creeds and confessions of the church. One of theseconfessions, the 17th-century Westminster Confession of Faith, itself explains how weshould approach difficult passages of Scripture (Chap. I.ix): ‘The infallible rule ofinterpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself: and therefore, when there is aquestion about the true and full sense of any Scripture (which is not manifold,but one), it must be searched and known by other places that speak moreclearly’.We have seen what the devil does with the Word of God. We may now deal withthe specific question, Which Version: Does it Really Matter? Again we will turn toScripture to discover the principles which must guide us in identifying the true Wordof God. We could say a lot about manuscripts, the findings of textual criticism and soon but in the end these things can never be decisive, especially for the man in the pew.How many Christians know Hebrew and Greek? How many who do know Hebrewand Greek have studied all or any of the Biblical manuscripts? There are nearly 5,500catalogued Greek New Testament manuscripts in existence today! We believe thatGod has left us in His own Word the principles by which we are to know the true Wordof God.Viewpoints on VersionsThere are three general viewpoints which people have on the question of Bibleversions.First ViewpointSome people say that all versions of the Bible are really the same. They knowthat there are different versions of the Bible. They remember the old AuthorisedVersion from their childhood. Now in their adulthood they are familiar with variousmodern versions. They can see that the style of the cover and the style of the English9

A121 Which Version 2:A121 Which Version04/07/200712:33Page 10Which Bible Version differ but in the end they can see no great difference between the versions. In theireyes all the versions deserve the title ‘The Word of God’, and any one may be safelyused. It is simply a matter of one’s own personal preference. Ask these people, WhichVersion: Does it Really Matter? and they would give a very simple reply: No! There areno changes of any importance. They have that attitude to religion which does notseem to see much harm in anything at all, anything that is apart from having clearand decided views in religion! Oh how oblivious they are to spiritual danger! Theyignore the warning which Paul gave; ‘For we are not as many, which corrupt the wordof God’ (2 Corinthians 2.17).We must beware of corrupters! There were those thenand there are those now who corrupt the text and corrupt the teaching of the Bible.We have to say that, apart from any other consideration, this position that all versions of the Bible are really the same fails already at the practical level. When we takea closer look at the contents of the different versions, we discover some major differences. For instance, we find that in most modern versions Mark’s Gospel ends atchapter 16 verse 9 but in the Authorised Version it continues until verse 20. Similarly,in John’s Gospel most modern versions omit twelve complete verses from 7.53–8.11while the Authorised Version includes them. And there are individual verses missingfrom the modern versions, as we have already seen. What are we to do when weencounter these passages in our reading or in our preaching? Are we to make use ofthem or are we not? Are they the Word of God or are they not?It is irrational to say in a post-modern sort of way that these opposites can bothbe true—yet this is often what is done. Many versions include these passages in themain text but inform the reader in footnotes that the ‘most reliable manuscripts’ donot contain them. What is the reader to think of this? It hardly reflects Peter’s statement, ‘We have also a more sure word of prophecy’ (2 Peter 1.19). And how can onepreach from passages such as the above if one has real doubts that they are the Wordof God?We should be clear that the textual differences between the Authorised Versionand modern versions are not confined to just a few passages or a few words. Here aresome figures to indicate the extent of the problem. (These or similar figures will befound in the many publications which cover this subject.) The figures relate to thetext of the New Testament, where the problem largely occurs.The Greek text underlying the New Testament in modern versions is approximately 2,500 words shorter than the Greek text underlying the New Testament in theAuthorised Version. This is nearly 2% of the whole. It is the equivalent of removing1 and 2 Peter from the Bible.10

A121 Which Version 2:A121 Which Version04/07/200712:33Page 11 Does it really matter?The total number of word differences (chiefly omissions, additions and substitutions) between these two texts is approximately 10,000 or nearly 7% of the whole.3While many of these differences are minor, according to Everett W. Fowler4 over1,500 affect the meaning of the text and nearly 500 of these substantially affect themeaning. Biblical doctrine is at stake. So there are theological implications as wellas practical problems if we take this viewpoint.In the final analysis, this position—that all versions of the Bible are really thesame even when they do not agree in many places on what the true, God-given, textis—cannot be held logically. It cannot be maintained alongside an orthodox, Godhonouring doctrine of Scripture.Second ViewpointMany people are of the view that the modern versions are definitely betterthan the old version, the Authorised Version. By modern versions we mean thatsequence of versions which began with the Revised Version of 1881 and which hasincluded the Revised Standard Version, the New English Bible, the Good News Bible,the New International Version and now the English Standard Version. This streamshows no sign of drying up yet; on the contrary the pace of publication has beenincreasing with the passage of time.A consequence of this is that the ‘shelf life’ of modern versions seems to bedecreasing. Which pulpits today use the Revised Standard Version—a version onlyfifty years old? Will the New International Version, only twenty-five years old, withstand the competition from the newly-arrived English Standard Version (the twoversions are, of course, produced by rival publishers)? What effect does this rapidturnover of versions have upon respect for the Scriptures and memorisation of theScriptures? These things alone should alarm anyone who reverences the Word of Godand the God of the Word.Many of those who use modern versions do so quite oblivious to the real departure they represent from the Authorised Version. Their thinking is, I want a Biblewhich speaks my language, or, I want a Bible which gets the gospel across to theyoung people of today. They believe that all that has really taken place in the modernversions is that the English has been made more up-to-date; the archaisms have beenremoved but the meaning retained.11

A121 Which Version 2:A121 Which Version04/07/200712:33Page 12Which Bible Version The application of these two principles—we might call them readability andrelevancy—has led to the casual, forgettable English which is the hallmark of somany of the modern versions. Let us consider readability. The idea is that the easier the Bible is to read the easier it will be to understand. This is simply not true. Listento the apostle Paul: ‘But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God:for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned’ (1 Corinthians 2.14). A proper understanding of Scripture comesfrom the gracious work of the Holy Spirit which we term illumination. Significantlythe definition of ‘readable’ given in one dictionary is: ‘interesting without being ofhighest quality’.5 Ought that ever to apply to the Bible? Surely we should aim for thevery highest quality wherever the translation of the Word of God is concerned!Let us consider relevancy. The idea is that the Bible must be accommodated tothe present age. It must adopt the spirit of and speak in the language of the prevailing culture. It must be brought down to man’s present level. But rather than the Biblebeing brought down to man’s fallen level, fallen man must be lifted up to the Bible’slevel. This is the gracious work of the Holy Spirit which we know as regeneration.Many of those who believe that modern versions are better than the AV believethat in the end it is the overall message of a verse which matters rather than its actual word content. So they are happy with paraphrases of the Bible, and versions whichreproduce the sense of the original Scripture if not the exact words. Sometimes thisapproach to translation is termed ‘dynamic equivalence’. That this was the approachof the NIV translators is clear from the NIV Preface: ‘The first concern of the translators has been the accuracy of the translation and its fidelity to the thought of thebiblical writers. They have weighed the significance of the lexical and grammaticaldetails of the Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek texts. At the same time, they have strivenfor more than a word-for-word translation’.6[emphasis mine]It should be plain that a fundamental Biblical principle is compromised here:inspiration. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God and that inspiration is verbal in character. Look at Matthew 4.4: ‘It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone,but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God’. The individual wordsdo matter and should be reproduced in any translation. Interpretation belongs topreachers, not translators.But what is the key claim of those who advocate the superiority of the modernversions? Those who actually translate the modern versions, and especially thosewho have constructed and edited the Greek text which underlies the New Testamentin these versions, do not believe that the modern versions merely modernise the12

A121 Which Version 2:A121 Which Version04/07/200712:33Page 13 Does it really matter?English. They believe that the true text of the New Testament was lost to the churchfor many centuries but it has now been recovered to supply the Greek text underlyingthe New Testament of the modern versions.This was the thinking of the two men who promoted this idea in the 19th century—B.

The subject of Bible versions is by no means an academic one, as some may think. It may have academic aspects to it but it is really a very personal subject which affects every believer. We trust that we have all been called by the grace of God to know and love the Lord Jes