Is There Only One “Authorized” Translation of the Bible?
IS THERE ONLY ONE “AUTHORIZED” TRANSLATION OF THE BIBLE?
_____________________________
Once in a while I get this question from inquiring minds contacting me on our church website: “Do you use only one version of the Bible in your church?” When this question is asked it always has to do with whether or not we use the King James Version of the Bible, which some camps consider the only “authorized” version of the Bible, and that all others are satanic substitutes.
The short answer to this question is that, no, we do not use only one translation of the Bible in our church, and no, we do not consider the King James Version the “authorized” version of the Bible.
The long answer reveals more about why we don’t use the King James version, exclusively.
The King James version of the Bible was translated from 1604 to 1611 for the Church of England. The question I believe we should be asking, then, is, what was everyone prior to 1611 doing for Bible reading? Was there no version of the Scriptures that God approved of prior to that? Was Martin Luther’s translation of the Bible into German in 1522 heresy and unapproved by God? And today, what are Chinese Christians to do who cannot read English, and who therefore have the Scriptures translated in their native language? Are they heretics, too, for not reading an English King James Bible? Actually, the only truly authoritative version of the scriptures are the Hebrew and Greek in which they were originally written. Every version after that has translational mistakes, yes, including the King James version.
Also, we must base everything we do as Christians on the authority of God’s Word, and there is nowhere in the Bible that affirms or dismisses any one translation. In fact, translations of the Scriptures are not addressed at all in the Bible. To quote Daniel B. Wallace of Dallas Theological Seminary,
“Nowhere in the Bible am I told that only one translation of it is the correct one. Nowhere am I told that the King James Bible is the best or only ‘holy’ Bible. There is no verse that tells me how God will preserve his word, so I can have no scriptural warrant for arguing that the King James has exclusive rights to the throne. The arguments must proceed on other bases.”
Wallace goes on to point out that the King James Bible has undergone three revisions since its inception in 1611, incorporating more than 100,000 changes. Which King James Bible is inspired, then?
Also of huge importance are the translational mistakes in the King James version. The man who edited the text was a Roman Catholic priest and humanist named Erasmus. He was under pressure to get it to press as soon as possible since, 1) no edition of the Greek New Testament had yet been published, and 2) he had learned that Cardinal Ximenes and his associates were working on publishing a translation of the Greek New Testament and he was in a race to beat them. As a consequence of this hurried attempt at a translation, Erasmus’ edition has been called the most poorly edited volume in all of literature! It is filled with hundreds of typographical errors which even Erasmus would acknowledge. And this is why so many other English translations of the Bible now exist, to update the text and try to improve upon these translational inconsistencies. Thus, to claim that the King James Bible or even the New King James Bible is somehow superior to other translations is, well, misinformed, if you’ll pardon my frankness.
To learn more about the problems with the King James version of the Bible, I would recommend reading Wallace’s complete article: https://bible.org/article/why-i-do-not-think-king-james-bible-best-translation-available-today
Having said all this, it is amazing to me how God’s Word is truly alive and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, to quote Hebrews 4:12. Even with the translational problems with the King James version, it has been part of the foundation of Christianity in the West. It has still worked in preserving the centrality of the faith and the basic teachings of Christ. Even so, if we can identify and correct some or all of the translational mistakes in the King James version after more careful study of the ancient Greek and Hebrew manuscripts, why wouldn’t we?
So, no, we do not adhere to just one Bible version. At our church, Blessed Life Fellowship, we read from many translations, including the King James version on occasion, but the ones we use the most are the New King James version, the 1984 NIV, and the NLT, and we refer to the Hebrew and Greek often for clarity. In my personal reading I also use the Amplified Bible, the English Standard Version (ESV), and sometimes the Holman Christian Standard Version (HCSV).
Speaking of some of these newer translations, I’ve heard some preachers take the NIV to task, stating that it is not a “real” translation for omitting certain passages like Matthew 17:21: “This kind comes out only by prayer and fasting.” Well, it may surprise you to know that this line was not in the original manuscripts of the Gospel of Matthew. It was added later. Thus, it could be argued that Matthew 17:21 is not divinely inspired. The translators of the NIV Bible are simply attempting to stay true to the original manuscripts that were divinely inspired. However, I do prefer what other translations like the New Living Translation do, which is to include Matthew 17:21 in the text, but footnote it, stating what I have stated here, that this passage is not in the original manuscripts and was added later.
I do believe that there are irresponsible translations of the Bible that take too many liberties. There are definitely bad translations of the Bible, and I steer clear of those. But again, to exalt the King James or New King James versions of the Bible above all others is short-sighted given all of their translational problems.
I often like to say that the BEST translation of the Bible is the one you will actually read and study and that leads to Christ-like living. That version for me personally is the 1984 NIV (I’m NOT a fan of the 2011 NIV revision, by the way). My advice is to do your own homework. Find a translation that you can easily understand, but was translated in such a way as to maintain the integrity of the ancient manuscripts of the scriptures. Those that I’ve mentioned here are great choices, but there are other English translations that are truly scholarly translations and are easier to read than some of the older translations.