Bible Basics: Bible Translations

Pastor Hampton of Grace Bible Church from Alabama has video on GodTube in which talks about why the King James Translation (KJV) is the true translation everyone should use. I think that he is a sincere Christian who loves God and is living all he knows how. Unfortunately it is wrong to teach that the KJV is the ultimate translation and that people are wrong if they use a different translation. Translations are not divinely inspired. The Old Testament was originally written in Hebrew. The New Testament was written in Greek. Because of textual variants and issues in translating these languages into English the only way to be sure exactly what the Bible, short of learning to read Greek and Hebrew (which are not the same today as they were then) says is to study multiple translations and really digging into the text. Pastor Hampton makes a lot of assertions. Here is his video. I will go through each of his assertions and compare the New International Version (NIV) with the KJV. On his church's website he has documented about 200 differences between modern translations and the KJV. I'm not going to cover all of them in this post, but I recommend reading The King James Only Controversy by James White if you want to dig into this. It is worth it.



The list of scriptures in blue are from the KJV and the NIV is in red.
Here is a list of assertions that were made in the video:

1. Assertion - Matthew 18:11 is left out of other Bibles but not the KJV.

The reason why newer translations do not have verse 11 is because it is not in the oldest manuscripts. The KJV was translated from the best manuscripts at the time. Remember that the KJV version was completed in 1611 AD and has undergone numerous revisions over the past 400 years.

2. Assertion - Mark 1:2,3 KJV says "prophets" and other translations say Isaiah when vs 2 is from Malachi and vs 3 is from Isaiah therefore proving that the newer translations are lying.

As it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee. The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.

It is written in Isaiah the prophet: "I will send my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way" — "a voice of one calling in the desert, 'Prepare the way for the Lord, make straight paths for him.' "

The thing about Mark1:2,3 is that when you look in the Greek text, it reads as the NIV translates it. Why? I have two ideas. Pick one. Either the NIV is basing its translation on an older manuscript than the KJV used or the text the KJV used was redacted by a well-meaning scribe at some point who knew that Mark 1:2 was quoting Malachi 3:1 and Mark 1:3 was quoting Isaiah 40:3. He may have thought that he was providing clarity. And from a modern western European mindset, the same mindset from which Pastor Hampton was speaking, it is a little more clearer to render the verse that way. However from a 1st Century mindset attributing the quotations to Isaiah would not have been seen as an error. When quoting from a group of prophets often Jews would attribute the quote to the "major" prophet. We still refer to Isaiah as a "major prophet" and Malachi as a "minor prophet" today. "Major" does not mean better or more important. It just means that his book was longer relatively speaking.

3. Assertion - Galatians 2:16 "faith of Jesus Christ" in KJV and "faith in Jesus Christ" in other versions.

Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified

Pastor Hampton makes much a difference in the NIV rendering and the KJV rendering. According to him, how you understand this verse dictates whether or not you believe that you are saved by your faith or by Jesus' faith. According to my interlinear Greek text either rendering is correct. To Hampton "faith of Jesus Christ"means that we are saved by Jesus' faith. He is right we can't have it both ways we are either justified by our faith or by Jesus' faith. I think that he is misinterpreting the text. No where in all of scripture do we see Jesus needing or having faith. By definition of what faith is (Hebrews 11:1) why would Jesus need faith? Jesus is God incarnate (see my posts about Jesus and the trinity). We are justified by our faith in Christ. Which is not a work because God calls us to himself through Jesus. That is why we believe and have faith in Jesus. This isn't a small point. It's the crux of what the Gospel is and is not.

4. Assertion - Luke 2:33 has the KJV saying "Joseph and his mother" but other translations call Joseph Jesus' father.

And Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him.

The child's father and mother marveled at what was said about him.

Again I think Pastor Hampton needs to look at the Greek text. It reads like the NIV. I think either rendering is fine and does nothing to mess up what we know about Jesus. The preponderance of scripture does show us that Joseph was not Jesus' biological father but Jesus did submit himself to Joseph's and Mary's authority as his parents just as we are supposed to do to our parents. Recall Luke 2:51 says

And he went down with them, and came to Nazareth, and was subject unto them: but his mother kept all these sayings in her heart.

Who is the "them"? Joseph and Mary!!! Therefore there is no problem with how the NIV renders Luke 2:33 and besides if you look at the Greek text (the 21st Edition of Eberhard Nestle's Novum Testamentum Graece) you see it the way the NIV translates it.

Conclusion
Why I believe that Pastor Hampton is sincere and only has the best of intentions, I must disagree with the conclusions he draws in his video. The modern translations are in many ways superior to the King James Translation because they draw on older manuscripts and the older the manuscript the more accurate it should match the original text. The KJV is an awesome translation and it deserves recognition as one of the finest English translations ever. All translations have mistakes because people make mistakes. The original texts are infallible, God-breathed truths - inspired by God. 2 Peter 1:16-21 says

For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.

For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.

We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:

Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation

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.

These words cannot be used to describe translations. This is why I read and compare many different English translations including the KJV.