Bible Versions: The King James Only Debate, by David Malcolm Bennett
Amongst the examples she gives are Acts 19:10 and 1 Cor. 16:22. In the Acts reference the KJV has “the word of the Lord Jesus” and the NIV and the NASB “the word of the Lord”.26 In First Corinthians the KJV has “If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ” and the NIV and NASB have “If any man love not the Lord”. The reason for this is simply that the best Greek manuscripts do not have the words which have been omitted in the NIV and NASB, so therefore the translators did not include them.
It is very striking, however, that the phrases “the Lord Jesus” and “the Lord Jesus Christ” or similar appear in plenty of other places in the modern translations. It is clear that there has not been a plot to remove them. See, for example, Acts 2:36; 4:33; 7:59; 8:16; Rom. 1:4; 5:1 & 21; 6:23; 1 Cor. 1:1-10; 2 Cor. 1:2 & 3; 1 Pet. 1:3 and many more. If these new versions were a plot to ally with New Age or to remove our Lord’s true nature from the Scriptures, then you would expect that changes would have been made in every case, not just a few. What is really happening is that the translators are responding to what they believe to be the most accurate Greek text.
In addition, Riplinger argues that modern translations use “a son of God” or “a son of man” in reference to Christ, rather than “the Son of God” or “the son of Man” as in the KJV. This she says is to fit in with the New Age idea of God having many sons, not just one.27 Illogically, the list she gives of “a son” translations includes one reference (Mark 15:39) where the NIV, the NASB and the RSV all have “the son” not “a son”.
However, the facts are that though “the” is replaced by “a” in some instances, usually where the definite article is omitted in the Greek, there are many other occurrences where the NIV and the NASB, for example, have “the Son”. These include: Matt. 8:20; 12:8, 32 & 40; Mk. 2:28; 8:38; 10:45; Jn. 1:34; 3:14; Acts 7:56; Rom. 1:4; Gal. 2:20; and Heb. 4:14. Thus Riplinger’s claim is totally unjustified.
Another common complaint from those in the KJV-Only camp is that the Trinitarian reference in 1 Jn. 5:7 does not appear in modern translations. This is true with the exception of the New King James (NKJV), which has it. Verse 7 in the KJV says, “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost; and these three are one.” The NIV says, “For there are three that testify” and then goes directly to verse 8, with “the Spirit, the water and the blood”. Though there is a variety of wording in other recent translations, all consulted (apart from the NKJV) omit the Trinitarian reference.
The reason for this omission in the modern versions is that there are very good reasons to believe that these words were not part of the original letter. In fact, those words in the KJV have not been found in any Greek manuscript of 1 John before the eleventh century, and even then it was written in the margin by a different hand, apparently at a much later date. All the earlier manuscripts do not include it.28 While the sentiments in that verse are true, those words are not a genuine part of 1 John.
On the other hand, it is worth noting that James White argues that the NIV is stronger on the deity of Christ than is the KJV, and he is correct. He gives a chart with twelve key passages on the deity of Christ. In this he demonstrates that the NIV is stronger in this regard than the KJV in six of those references. The KJV is only stronger than the NIV in just one on that list. The NASB is also stronger than the KJV in this collection of verses.29
Category: Biblical Studies, Pneuma Review, Winter 2013
Followers
Fans
