Is Phony Theology the Result of "New" Bible Translations?

photo credit: professor megan via photopin cc
"Do you think that all of the false doctrines floating around today are because of all the different Bible versions we have?"

A friend of mine recently asked me this question. It's a good question. I mean, unless you are a theological pluralist, all of us agree that there are some pretty wild and totally off the wall teachings out there that claim biblical support. So where do all these lies come from? Are all the different versions of the Bible responsible for them? Here are three reasons why I would say no.

1. False teachings have been around since the first century of the Christian church where there were no "other" Bible versions. In fact, most of the false teachings around today are simply a repackaging of old lies. A lot of these lies were born during the early years of the church when the NIV, ESV, KJV, or any other translation did not exist. As a matter of fact, many people in these days had the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts and they knew how to read them without a Lexicon. Regardless of all of this, dissident groups like the Judaizers and the Gnostics gained a foot-hold in the church. Over the next few centuries there were countless theological controversies like Pelagianism, Arianism, Adoptionism, Docetism, Monarchianism, Sabellianism, and plenty of other "isms." All of these were born without the help of Zondervan and Thomas Nelson (both publishers of modern translations).

2. This kind of question comes with a presupposition behind it. While my friend may or may not have had a presupposition, the question itself carries it. The presupposition is this: Modern heresies are the result of new translations, therefore all new translations must be rejected and only the old translations maintained. By "old translations" what is most often meant is the King James Version. At this point we enter into the KJV-only debate. Once again, the positions defending this are weak. The KJV, while a great translation, is not the only reliable one and other Bibles such as the NIV translate other passages more accurately than the KJV. Since I have already written on this topic I won’t go into detail here. To read more about my views on the KJV-only theory click here.

3. Suppose we entertained the KJV-only mentality. Allow me to ask, how many false doctrines have been taught using the KJV? Do those who use the KJV inherently teach sound Bible truth or are there lots of lies taught from using that very same Bible? The answer is yes. A perfect example is Marshall Applewhite, the leader of the Heavens Gate cult that was responsible for a mass suicide of its members in the 90's. Applewhite studied using a KJV Bible. Dave Koresh, the cult leader of the Branch Davidians was an ardent defender of the KJV-only theory. It is, in my estimation, pretty evident that a KJV-only world would not be a heresy free one. Thus, the idea that false doctrines are the result of new translations is without foundation.

In conclusion, I would like to point out that the answer to my friend’s question “Do you think that all of the false doctrines floating around today are because of all the different Bible versions we have?” Is no. While it may be true that not all versions are reliable for doctrinal study, and that some versions are terrible translations that can lend support to the spread of false teachings it is not true that false teachings are the result of modern Bibles. Neither is it true that the KJV is the only reliable translation and is itself, due to mistranslated texts, responsible for phony theology. The best rule of thumb is to get some good reliable translations and study them together, comparing scripture with scripture, and if necessary studying the original languages all under the leadership of the Holy Spirit. There is no such thing as the “perfect” translation but Gods word has definitely been preserved and if we study with His help we will be ready to respond when we hear the lies.

2 comments:

  1. "The Clear Word Bible has to be the worse. In fact, I do not think anyone should trust The Clear Word as a reliable translation of the Bible, or even as a useful paraphrase. It repeatedly distorts the teaching of the Bible. It removes significant content that is in the original Hebrew or Greek, and adds new ideas that are not found in the original texts. Verse after verse has been changed simply to support unusual Seventh-day Adventist doctrines, but these changes are not supported by reliable translations such as the KJV, NKJV, ESV, NASB, RSV, or NIV, or even by dynamic equivalence translations such as the New Living Translation or free paraphrases such as The Message. I was deeply troubled as I read various verses because it was clear that these verses were no longer the words of God only, but the words of God mixed in with many words of man, and ordinary readers of The Clear Word will not be able to tell the difference

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have never read the Clear Word so I can't comment out of experience but to be honest, its neither here nor there. The Clear Word is neither an official nor an unofficial Bible in the SDA church. All the Clear Word is, is a devotional paraphrase put together by one guy who then decided to publish it for others. I do share your concerns and have never even bothered reading it for the simple fact that I was not fond of the publication from day 1. In fact, many SDA's feel the same way. There are some who have enjoyed it and yes, some who have even become confused by it and thought it was a legitimate translation of some sort, so I do share your concerns in that area. But at the end of the day, it has nothing to do with the SDA church anyways so its neither here nor there.

      Delete

Please feel free to share your thoughts! Just remember to keep your comments friendly and relevant. Comments that are not risk being incinerated in cyber space. Happy typing! :D