Should we rely solely on the King James Version or are other Bible versions as authoritive as the King James?
I am sorry that the answer is a bit long. We felt we had to be thorough in answering this question.
A current movement among Christians proclaims the King James Version to be the only reliable Word of God, as all other versions are based on “corrupt” texts. Often times, when you read their arguments, they are woven into highly emotional and accusatory tones, and they are even hostility to anyone using other Bible versions.
Their biggest defense towards the King James Version is that “The KJV is the most accurate.” This being so, do these proponents believe in the existence of unicorns? It’s in the King James Version:
Num 23:22 “God brought them out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn.” KJV
Deut 33:17 “His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns: with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth: and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Manasseh.” KJV
Job 39:9 “Will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib?” KJV
Ps 22:21 “Save me from the lion’s mouth: for thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns.” KJV
Ps 29:6 “He maketh them also to skip like a calf; Lebanon and Sirion like a young unicorn.” KJV
Ps 92:10 “But my horn shalt thou exalt like the horn of an unicorn: I shall be anointed with fresh oil.” KJV
Isa 34:7 “And the unicorns shall come down with them, and the bullocks with the bulls; and their land shall be soaked with blood, and their dust made fat with fatness.” KJV
Why are unicorns mentioned in the King James version while no mention of them is to be found in other versions? Is it possible because the translators of the King James Version based at least some of their translations on the Septuagint (Greek translation of the Old Testament), which used “monokeros,” and the Latin Vulgate (Latin translation of the Bible), which used “unicornis”? If we look at the original Biblia Hebraica, we notice that the original Hebrew word is re’em which literally means “a wild bull”.
Since the translation of the King James Version, thousands of manuscripts, some being fragments, others being substantial, have been discovered and incorporated in more modern translations.
In the last 200 years, great progress has also been noted in the study of the Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek languages, which were the original languages in which the Bible was written. All that knowledge has been incorporated in more recent translations.
Are there problems with these modern translations? Absolutely! But there are many errors in the King James Version as well, besides the “unicorn” error.
No translation can be 100% accurate. You always loose something from the original language when you translate. For example, let us take the English expression: “It’s raining cats and dogs”. If we translated this literally in French, people in France would wonder where you came from, as this expression does not even exist in French. So how should you translate it? Should you translate it: “it’s raining hard”? Or is “it’s raining very hard”? Or would “There is a storm our there” be a better translation? All depending the translator, one or another translation would be used. However would one translation undermine the meaning of the original expression? Not at all! The meaning is still quite clear. And so it is also with the different Bible versions.
If you are used to the King James Version, feel free to use it as much as you want to. Don’t expect other versions to be word-for-word the same with the King James. A great book about this is “The Translation Debate: What Makes a Bible Translation Good?” by Eugene H. Glassman. It can be found at Amazon.com at: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0877844674/qid=1070063713//ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i0_xgl14/103-9442510-8107069?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
We have to remember that the Bible is not only a book of facts, but is also God’s Word. God’s Spirit will drive His message home into people’s heart, no matter the translation.
Let us remind ourselves that God’s Spirit is the author of the Bible. 2 Peter 1:21 “For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.” KJV
This is the reason why we welcome the Bible as the Word of God: every word was inspired from the Holy Spirit! 1 Thess 2:13 “For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.” KJV
Now, God’s Spirit does much more than inspire every word found in the Bible. Jesus promised us His Holy Spirit to guide us into all Truth. In other words, God’s Spirit is not only the inspiration behind the Bible; He also clarifies His Word and guide people to eternal Truths!
John 16:13 “Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth” KJV
John 14:17 “Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.” KJV
This is why God’s Word, no matter its translation, is potent to anyone reading it.
Heb 4:12 “For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.” KJV
Our God is not limited to one translation. He is not limited by space or time. He is all-powerful and will use His Word, no matter the translation to reach out and touch the lives of those seeking.
Ps 147:5 “Great is our Lord, and of great power: his understanding is infinite.” KJV
To limit God’s power to one translation is to limit God in His might and power.
To tell you the truth, when I want to dig deeper into a text, I do not go to the King James Version. Why go to another translation? I prefer to go to the original Hebraic and Aramaic Old Testament, or the original Koine (Greek) New Testament. I have the privilege to do so as the Lord gave me the opportunity to study these Biblical languages in depth. There is no greater pleasure than to study the etymology and context of words in the original language! May I encourage anyone who prefers one version over another to go to the original languages, and soon your differences will seem to evaporate, as you will notice that God’s message is clearly portrayed in all English translations. All have divine authority, as all are God’s Word.
All of our English Bibles are translations, sometimes from the Latin, sometimes from the Hebrew and the Greek. You always lose something when using a translation. However, it will be compensated by God’s Spirit dwelling in you and guiding you to all truth. See John 16:13: “However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth.” NKJV With such a guide in us, we have nothing to fear. We cannot be misled!
May I encourage each of you to not be in controversy about which English Bible translation is best. Instead, let us fulfill Jesus’ prayer towards His Heavenly Father John 17:21 “That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.” KJV
Our task on this planet is not to argue about translations, but to be unified in proclaiming the gospel message. Why? “That the world may believe that thou hast sent me.” Fighting against one another over translations is turning God into a mockery in front of unbelievers. This fighting will not convince them that we are sent by God. Only unity does that, as unity is hardly to be found on this planet.
Our task is to Matt 28:19-20 “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.” KJV
Let us go out, preaching God’s Word to those who don’t know Him, being united with each other by His Spirit. Let us set aside our difference of opinions and proclaim God for who He is. Let us pray for unity among our ranks and for a hunger to reach out to those who do not know the One who is the source of all of our blessings. Will you join me?
If you haven’t done so yet, invite Jesus into your heart by answering His call at http://www.answers2prayer.org/saviours_call.html and experience the only One who can give you inner peace. It’s worth the experience!
———-
Only read the following arguments if you need some answers concerning which Bible version is reliable.
P. S. Here are a few arguments that King James polemists are using, especially against the NIV. Attached are my responses.
Question 1: “Here is a Question regarding NIV (New International Version) being considered as the word of GOD: In Rev 22:16(NIV) says: “I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star.” (Note that Christ called himself as the Bright Morning Star). The Book of Isaiah 14:12(NIV) it says: “How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations!” Does this mean that Jesus Christ being the Son of God from heaven who called himself as the bright Morning Star has been cast down to the earth and once laid low the nations? Isn’t this a clear Blasphemy against the God of the BIBLE?”
Answers 1: Be careful with assumptions like these. In the King James Version Jesus is referred to as a lion:
Rev 5:5 “And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof.” KJV
However the devil is compared to a lion as well!
1 Peter 5:8 “Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour.” KJV
Would this mean that Jesus = the devil, as they are both compared to a lion in the KJV? Far from it! This kind of reasoning is dangerous, as it does not take God’s Word seriously and is not following proper exegetical procedures.
Question 2: “Also, considering the missing verses in the entire book such as Matthew 17:21, Matthew 18:11 and so on and so forth…… Rev 22:19 says: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. KJV Matt 4:4 It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. KJV Therefore, We must have the “Every Word” BIBLE…. Looks like Satan the “DECIEVER” corrupted the minds of many Christians and believed that the NIV is the word of God….”
Answers 2: You have to remember that the King James is not the standard for all the Bibles around the world. Only the original Hebrew Old Testament and the Greek Old Testament are the standards. All English versions are supposed to line up with them. We are not supposed to put a translation above the original. This kind of reasoning, though, does that.
There are two main reasons for differences in translations:
1. Many manuscripts that have small variances from the King James Version, have been found since the translation of the King James in 1611. Using the science of textual criticism, scholars determine which manuscripts are the closest to the original. The main meaning stays the same, but variances are found that need to be rectified in future translations. The first reason for differences in translation is not because of doctrinal differences or wanting to delete some verses, but rather to clarify the original text.
2. Another reason for differences is for what is called “increasing piety” among those who hand-copied the Scriptures. For example to show respect to the name of “Jesus Christ”, some would write “Lord Jesus Christ”. The Lord was not part of the original text and does not alter the meaning of the text at all. These kinds of additions do not appear in more reliable translations. Whenever there is a question in the translator’s mind, he/she adds a footnote, which explains the difference.
Let us look at the above mentioned texts and see if they altar the meaning of the text:
A. * Matt 17:20-21 “And Jesus said unto them, Because of your unbelief: for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you. 21 Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting.” KJV
* Matt 17:20 He replied, “Because you have so little faith. I tell you the truth, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there’ and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you.” NIV
Footnote: 17:20 a Some manuscripts you. [21] But this kind does not go out except by prayer and fasting. NIV
As you can see for yourself, the NIV has not deleted verse 21. Instead they have added a footnote, as this verse cannot be found in all the manuscripts found. With or without that verse the context and its message are still clear: If you have faith, nothing is impossible!
B. *Matt 18:10-11 “Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven. 11 For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.” KJV
* Matt 18:10 “See that you do not look down on one of these little ones. For I tell you that their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father in heaven”. NIV
Footnote: 18:10 a Some manuscripts heaven. [11] The Son of Man came to save what was lost. NIV
Again the supposedly deleted text is mentioned, but is not added to the NIV, as not all manuscripts found include this verse. Again the context and the message are clear: We should not look down on children. They are well beloved by God.
Question 3: Aren’t the modern translations based upon corrupted sources (Alexandrian texts, etc.) that were not trusted or used by early believers, but were instead modified by Catholics, Arians, and the like?
Of course there is one thing that the various revised versions have that the KJV does not – a COPYRIGHT – yes, while you are free to print and distribute copies of the KJV from the garage of your home, doing the same with a new , revised version will soon have the owners of the rights to the particular version that you are printing sending their solicitors after you – after all , how dare you print and distribute THE WORD OF GOD without their permission ???
Answers 3: There is no evidence of this historically and no one has been able to bring forth proof of this. Isn’t an innocent person innocent until proven guilty? The same is true with Bible versions. One has to prove his/her allegations; otherwise one is no better that those tabloids filled with sensational news.
King James proponents accuse the pope of removing Bible verses from the Bible, but they have nothing to show up for it. Their arguments show great misunderstanding of church history.
King James proponents also assert that the early church used the texts upon which the King James were translated, but are now unavailable through its being heavily used. Where is the evidence?
However there is evidence from the Qumran scrolls (the Dead Sea scrolls) dating as early as the third century B.C. and dating as late as 68 B.C. which are as close to the original as can be, that verify that the manuscripts used by newer Bible versions are as close to the original as possible. These manuscripts were similar to those used by Jesus’ disciples and the early church! These scrolls were not available in 1611 when the King James was translated, as they were only discovered in 1947.
Now concerning copyright laws. Anything that is written the last 70 years (and sometimes more) is copyrighted automatically. If the King James Version would have been translated this decade, it would have been copyrighted automatically. Please refer a summary of copyright laws at: http://www.unc.edu/~unclng/public-d.htm
However, the NIV, AMP, NAS and other versions let us quote from their Bibles without getting into any copyright infringements. They could make quite a lot of money if they did enforce the copyright laws.
Question 4: “In the NIV, Matthew 5:22 states “But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, ‘Raca,’ is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ Will be in danger of the fire of hell.”
This says that ANYONE who is angry with his brother is subject to judgment, or in other words, anyone who is angry is guilty of sin (if no sin is involved, there would be no reason for judgment).
Now we look at Mark 3:3-5 in the NIV: “Jesus said to the man with the shrivelled hand, “Stand up in front of everyone.” 4 Then Jesus asked them, “Which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or to do evil, to save life or to kill?” But they remained silent. 5 He looked around at them in anger and, deeply distressed at their stubborn hearts, said to the man, “Stretch out your hand.” He stretched it out, and his hand was completely restored.”
Versus 3 and 4 are included to show that Jesus is speaking here. In verse 5, we see that Jesus was angry. So, between the combination of Matthew 5:22 and Mark 3:5 the NIV states that Jesus is a sinner. Thus, the NIV has a major flaw in and of itself. No comparison with other versions is needed to make the NIV a flawed text. If it has one proven flaw, how can you trust any other verse in the book? Further, if you don’t believe this to be a flaw, I’d like to know what you are basing your salvation on? There is an NIV note on Matthew 5:22 that states “Some manuscripts brother without cause”. This tells us that they knowingly left it out, and it was not an oversight (intent really doesn’t matter, but it is interesting that they left this out on purpose).
Just in case you are interested, let’s look at the same two verses in the King James:
Matthew 5:22 “But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.”
Mark 3:3-5 “And he saith unto the man which had the withered hand, Stand forth. 4 And he saith unto them, Is it lawful to do good on the sabbath days, or to do evil? To save life, or to kill? But they held their peace. 5 And when he had looked round about on them with anger, being grieved for the hardness of their hearts, he saith unto the man, Stretch forth thine hand. And he stretched it out: and his hand was restored whole as the other.”
“Anger without cause” is clearly different than “anger”. In the KJV, Jesus is not made out to be a sinner.”
Answers 4: Have you noticed how highly emotional these accusations are? Let us look together at what the NIV has been accused of.
Matt 5:22 “But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother (b), ‘Raca,'(c) is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ Will be in danger of the fire of hell. NIV
Footnote 5:22 b Some manuscripts brother without cause NIV
Footnote c An Aramaic term of contempt NIV
Again, the NIV is not trying to hide these texts are they are clearly displayed in their footnotes. However they are not included in the main text because these words are not found in all the known manuscripts.
Also to derive from this text that Jesus is a sinner because he was angry at hypocrites, basing this on Mark 3:5 “He looked around at them in anger and, deeply distressed at their stubborn hearts” NIV is a poor application of literary reasoning. Notice the cause of Jesus’ anger: “distressed at their stubborn hearts”. He was not out there to get them, but to save them! Their stubborn hearts were hindering them to accept Jesus as their Messiah!
Also, nowhere in the NIV is there a text saying that Jesus was a sinner. On the contrary! Heb 4:15 “For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are-yet was without sin.” NIV
Question 5: Have you been to Jesus for the cleansing power? Are you washed in the blood of the Lamb? Are you fully trusting in His grace this hour? Are you washed in the blood of the Lamb?
Not according to the new Bible Per-Versions!
Not according to the New International Version (NIV), New American Standard Version (NASV), New Living Bible, New Revised Standard Versions (NRSV), Revised Standard Version (RSV), The Living Bible (TLB), Today’s English Version, Contemporary English Version (CEV), International Standard Version: (ISV) and the other Per-Versions!
Revelation 1:5 clearly reads in the King James Bible:
And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, (KJB)
But you are NOT “washed in the blood” in the New Per-Versions . . .
American Standard Version (ASV) reads:
and from Jesus Christ, [who is] the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loveth us, and loosed us from our sins by his blood; Amplified Bible reads:
and from Jesus Christ the faithful and trustworthy Witness, the First-born of the dead [first to be brought back to life] and the Prince (Ruler) of the kings of the earth. To Him Who ever loves us, and has once [for all] loosed and freed us from our sins by His own blood. Contemporary English Version (CEV) reads:
May kindness and peace be yours from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness. Jesus was the first to conquer death, and he is the ruler of all earthly kings. Christ loves us, and by his blood he set us free from our sins. Good News for Modern Man reads:
and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn Son who was raised from death, who is also the ruler of the kings of the earth. He loves us, and by his death he has freed us from our sins International Standard Version (ISV) reads:
and from Jesus Christ, the witness, the faithful one, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler over the kings of the earth. To the one who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood; Living Bible (TLB) reads:
and from Jesus Christ who faithfully reveals all truth to us. He was the first to rise from death, to die no more. He is far greater than any king in all the earth. All praise to him who always loves us and who set us free from our sins by pouring out his lifeblood for us. New American Standard Version (NASV) reads:
and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. To Him who loves us and released us from our sins by His blood New Century Version (NCV) reads:
and from Jesus Christ, Jesus is the faithful witness, the first among those raised from the dead. He is the ruler of the kings of the earth. He is the One who loves us, who made us free from our sins with the blood of his death. New International Version (NIV) reads:
and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood, New Living Bible reads:
and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness to these things, the first to rise from the dead, and the commander of all the rulers of the world. All praise to him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by shedding his blood for us. New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) reads:
and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. To him who loves us and freed us from our sins by his blood New Testament in Modern English (J.B. Phillips) reads:
and from Jesus Christ the faithful witness, firstborn of the dead, and ruler of kings upon earth. To him who loves us and has set us free from our sins through his own blood Revised Standard Version (RSV) reads:
and from Jesus Christ the faithful witness, the first-born of the dead, and the ruler of kings on earth. To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood Today’s English Version reads:
and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the first to be raised from death and who is also the ruler of the kings of the world. He loves us, and by his sacrificial death he has freed us from our sins The shocking FACT is – NOWHERE in the new Per-Versions do they read “you are washed in the blood”!
I repeat – NOWHERE do the new Per-Versions read “you are washed in the blood”!
What can wash away my sins? Nothing but the blood of Jesus. What can wash away my sins? Nothing . . . According to the new Per-Versions
Oh Happy day when Jesus washed my sins away! – Not according to the NIV, NASV, NCV, CEV, at al!
According to the NIV, NASV, NCV, CEV and other Per-Versions – Jesus Christ did not wash your sins away!
Answer 5:
The NIV and other versions do teach that we are washed in Jesus’ blood. Read for yourself:
Rev 7:14 “They have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.” NIV
Rev 7:14 “They have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.” NASU
Rev 7:14 “They washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.” ASV
Rev 7:14 “They washed their robes in the blood of the Lamb and made them white.” NLT
Rev 7:14 “They washed their robes and whitened them by the blood of the Lamb.” TLB
Rev 7:14 “Have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.” AMP
Rev 7:14-15 “They have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.” NASB
However what does it mean to be washed by Jesus’ blood? It is good and well to use some well-worded phrases, but does one always know what it means to be washed by the blood of the Lamb?
Doesn’t it mean that we have obtained forgiveness from our sins from God through the blood of Jesus Christ? What is easier to understand to someone who has never entered a church before? This is the core message that all English Bible versions are trying to portray, a simple message that doesn’t confuse the ones who don’t even know God. We have been forgiven (Wow!) From our sins through what Jesus did for us on the cross. This is the gospel message. The Good News to be proclaimed throughout the world. Let us rejoice together!
Rev 1:5 “has once [for all] loosed and freed us from our sins by His own blood,” AMP
Rev 1:5 “freed us from our sins by his blood” NIV
Rev 1:5 “released us from our sins by His blood” NASU
Rev 1:5 “loosed us from our sins by his blood”ASV
Rev 1:5 “has freed us from our sins by shedding his blood for us” NLT
Rev 1:5 “who set us free from our sins by pouring out his lifeblood for us” TLB
Rev 1:5 “has freed us from our sins by his blood” RSV
Rev 1:5 “and released us from our sins by His blood” NASB
Question 6: I ask you to consider this. I don’t think God accepts KJV attackers.
Bible Scholar Looses Voice on the John Ankerberg TV Show while attacking Truth! (To see the whole article go to http://www.linearg.com/remnantofgod/falseprophets.htm#shocker )
Answer 6: I am so sad to see you rely on unreliable information like this. As Christians we are responsible to defend the truth and make sure that whatever we share with others is the truth.
Concerning your article entitled “Bible Scholar Looses Voice on the John Ankerberg TV Show while attacking Truth!” I researched its claims and they proved to be false! When contacting John Ankenberg.org, the place where this supposedly happened, the following was brought to my attention: “Did Dr. Don Wilkins Really Lose His Voice on a Recent Taping of The John Ankerberg Show on the New Translations?” To be found at http://www.ankerberg.com/ankerberg-articles/wilkins.html To summarize this revealing and fact based article: no such thing ever happened!
My brother, I wish that you would have as much zeal to reach out to those who are lost and share them the truth about Jesus Christ. John 14:6 “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” KJV
Please propagate the truth and not rumors who are not even based on facts. The Bible encourages us:
Rom 16:17 “Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.” KJV
Please my friend, let us put away our petty differences and focus on Jesus, who is the truth. Don’t water down Jesus with biased rumors. Only Jesus is the truth and so is His Word in any language and version.
Question 7: “An easy way to determine if a Bible is from the KJV originals or some other translation is to check Genesis 1:1. Watch for the word heaven or heavens and see.
NIV: Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. KJV: Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
This is a pretty good litmus test.”
Answer 7: You are right that the NIV states: Gen 1:1 “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” NIV
And the King James says that Gen 1:1 “In the beginning God created the Heaven and the earth.” KJV
Which one is correct? What criteria should we use to find if it is heaven or heavens? Shouldn’t it be the original Hebraic text?
Gen 1:1 “Bªree’shiyt baaraa’ ‘Elohiym ‘eet hashaamayim wª’eet haa’aarets.” (I use western notation, as most of our readers are unable to read the original Hebraic text)
Notice that the original word for heaven or heavens is “hashaamayim”. Notice the ending of the word in “im” which always denotes plurality. In reality “shaamayim” is a dual of an unused singular “shameh” (according to Strong’s Hebrew definition)s. In other words, this word is found in plural in the original text, although generally that word is used in the singular. Which means the NIV “heavens” is a better rendition of the original Hebraic text.
Does it change the meaning of the text if one or the other is used? Not at all. The meaning is still the same: God is the Creator of all things.
P. S. Did you know that the word “God’ in Gen 1:1 in the original is “Elohiym”. Notice the “ym”, which denotes plurality. It’s the plural of “elowahh”. This denotes the plurality of the Godhead (3 in one). None of these translations are rendering this fact. Does it make their translation invalid? Far from it!
Rob Chaffart
____________________________________________________
All of the major translations and paraphrases are very accurate. Thousands of hours of painstaking work by theologeans who know Greek, Hebrew and Aramiac have ensured this. It could be that all of versions found in Christain bookstores are accurate. I just have not been party to that information. In other words, whether you read NIV, NASB, KJV, The Message, The Living Bible or Phillips, you are seeing the true translations in the first 3 and good paraphrases in the last 3.
To say that King James is the only translation to read is naive. I will give 3 reasons for this:
1) The King James version is not as accurate as the NIV or as the NAS. This is because of the circumstances regarding its translation. The first edition was put out in 1611 under pressure by King James of England. There was a short time constraint. There was pressure to please the King. There were not very many original manuscripts to examine. (I do not believe ANY were actually referenced at this time.) The NIV and the NAS source the thousands of manuscripts that have been found, mainly in the past 100 years. Given these facts, it is amazing that the KJV is still very close to these newer Bibles which are 99.3% as written by the original authors. It helps that the KJ has been revised a few times since 1611 to give us what we have today.
2) If the KJV is the only Bible one must read in order to get the truth, then unless you speak English, you may easily land in hell. Or, to put it another way, the non-English speaking Germans can not trust their modern translations into German.
3) Teaching that the KJ is the only version is divisive. Too many churches have used this to divide the church of Jesus Christ. If a doctrine divides the body, then it is a good guess that the one who likes to divide and conquer God’s people is the one pushing it.
Personally, I grew up reading the KJV. But, even with several years of college, I still need to pull out a dictionary in order to fully understand the text. Remember that the King James was written in England almost 400 years ago AND in a style that was NOT spoken. People can come to Christ and learn about the Christian life with any Bible, even the heretical “New World Translation” of the JW’s. But, since I want people to actually read as much of the Bible as possible, I give them God’s Word in a package that is easy to absorb. I have given away Bibles in several different translations. Please do not be misled by persuasive speakers, but search out the truth for yourself, like the Bereans of Acts 17:11.
Todd Shilt
____________________________________________________
The KJV is the most popular amongst people. But other versions have words broken down in language that is much easier to understand. The Student Bible is a perfect example of this. It speaks in plain English as if you and I were speaking to each other, in order for the reader not to become so confused. I don’t believe there is anything wrong with the versions to help beginners understand what the Bible is saying, as long as it doesn’t twist the meaning of what it is saying. Personally I think the KJV is the best to use, with reference to the Student Bible if one has a question about a certain passage and it’s meaning.
DeeDee
____________________________________________________
This is not a legitimate question. The KJV is no longer a useful translation for those who want to preach using the most accurate and understandable translations. Though I have great respect for its tradition and the beauty of its language, I would not place the KJV in the top 5 and probably not the top 10 of useful translations.
Kevin Barron
____________________________________________________
I have never believed that the KJV alone is the only true translation of the Bible into English. The Elizabethan English sometimes obscures the message, and it is far better to be familiar with several translations. The Lord will put the meaning He had for the passage into your heart anyway.
Richard Coleman
____________________________________________________
I think, other versions of the Bible should be used as HELPS only. Some people use them as an excuse in most cases, not to take out time to seek God for the proper understanding of His Word. The Hly Ghost knows the intrepatation. He wrote the Book! Understanding comes by way of much prayer and fasting! I can see a new babe in Christ who is trying to to get a clearer understanding by using an intrepetational scripture to help them to get a clearer understanding of the Word of God, by comparing each scripture carefully, but I find it difficult to understand why ministers and/or Bible Scholars, use other texts openly oppose to the King James version of the Bible. I also understand that the way words were pronounced then were more difficult. However, using other intrepatations drive some people away because they feel the Word of God has been altered. I had an experience not long after I became saved, which helped me to understand that we must be very careful when we are dealing with the Word of God! There was this couple seeking a church home. They came to church faithfully. One night in Bible Class, I brought my intrepatational bible to class. My pastor asked me to read the scripture after it was read in the King James version. After class the gentleman asked me what type of Bible I had, I told him, and they never returned to our church again. I learned a very valuable lesson from that experience. I never took that bible out the house again. Only in private, if I am having difficulty understanding a text do I use other texts.
Rosemary Jones