Romans 7:6 “But now we are delivered from the law, THAT BEING DEAD wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.”
Some criticize the King James Bible as being in error by translating the Greek text as “that being dead”, which, in the context, refers to the law of Moses.However, the fact is there are literally thousands of Greek variants in the remaining Greek manuscripts that we have access to, and not all bible versions follow any particular Greek text all the way through . In fact, NONE of the multitude of conflicting modern bible versions always follows the same Greek texts as any other.
The Westcott-Hort (Nestle-Aland, UBS) Greek text has a different reading in it than does the Textus Receptus text that underlies the King James Bible. Unfortunately, the NKJV editors chose to alter the underlying Greek text that the King James Bible translators used, and opted instead to follow the reading found in the UBS 4th edition.
Versions like the NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV and NKJV follow different Greek texts which end up reading: “But now we have been delivered from the law, HAVING DIED (apothanontES) to what we were held by, so that we should serve in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the letter.” (NKJV) The verb in this different Greek text is a PLURAL verb, whereas the verb in the texts used by the KJB is SINGULAR, and can only refer to the law that has died to us.
This rendering of a different Greek text ends up teaching here that it is WE who died instead of the law that died. It is true that other verses teach that we have died to the law, but this particular verse in the King James Bible is teaching that it is the law that has died to us. This is the consistent teaching of the parallel illustration the apostle Paul is teaching in this same section of Romans chapter seven.
He begins by using the example of the husband who dies and the wife is then free to remarry. In the same way, we were bound by the law, but now it has died and we are free to be married to another. This analogy is consistent only by following the Greek texts employed by the King James transaltors. “but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband...but if the husband be dead, she is free from that law.” (Romans 7:2-3)
The same truth that Christ, through His substitutionary death in our behalf, put to death the law of ordinances that was against us is found in such passages as Colossians 2:14 and Ephesians 2:15.
“Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace.” (Ephesians 2:15) “Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross.” (Colossians 2:14)
2 Cor 3:7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was TO BE DONE AWAY:
2 Cor 3:11 For if that which IS DONE AWAY was glorious, much more THAT WHICH REMAINETH is glorious.
2 Cor 3:14 But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail IS DONE AWAY in Christ.
Rom 10:4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.
Heb 7:18 For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof.
Heb 8:13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.
Heb 10:9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.
In Romans 7:6 the Greek texts followed by the King James Bible translators read: “that being dead” (apothanontOS), and this verb is clearly singular and not plural. This is also the Greek reading found in the Trinitarian Bible Society Greek text by Scrivenir, and that of the Modern Greek text used by the Greek Orthodox churches all over the world today.
Here is a site where you can see the 1841 English Hexapla edition. The Greek text used by Scholz is seen here, which is basically the Westcott-Hort critical text and not that of the Textus Receptus used by the KJB and others. However he shows in a footnote that the Received Text reading is that of the King James Bible - You can see it here: http://bible.zoxt.net/hex/_0867.htm
Agreeing with the reading found in the King James Bible are the following English Bible versions: the Geneva Bible 1599 (“he being dead” - referring to the previous “husband” of the law, according to the analogy being followed). “That being dead” is also the reading of John Wesley’s 1755 translation, Mace’s 1729 translation, Webster’s 1833 translation,Young’s literal translation, the KJV 21st Century Version, and the Third Millenium Bible.
Jay P. Green’s 1985 Interlinear Greek-English translation is interesting in that in his Greek text he retains the reading of the King James Bible - “that being dead” (apothanontOS), but in his translation he sides with the Westcott-Hort text and has: “we have been set free from the law, HAVING DIED to that in which we were held”.
John Calvin, on the other hand, both in his Latin translation and in his exposition of the passage agrees with the King James reading. The King James Bible is not at all in error in Romans 7:6. It is just following a different Greek variant than that of the Westcott-Hort text which continues to change every few years. It is the NKJV, which has rejected in this place the Textus Receptus that underlies the King James Bible, that is in error.
Will Kinney
If the King James Bible in English is the perfect words of God, then What About Other Languages?
I am frequently asked this question by other Christians who do not believe the King James Bible or any bible is now the inerrant words of God.
I finally decided to put a concise answer together to respond to this common question. Here it is.
Hi brother and sister......, this is a good question but not at all hard to answer if you think about it. God never promised to give every nation or every individual a perfect Bible. It certainly never turned out this way in history, did it?
In fact, for the first 3000 to 4000 years of recorded history, there was only one nation on earth that had the true words of God. "He sheweth his word unto Jacob, his statutes and his judgments unto Israel. He hath not dealt so with any nation, and as for his judgments, they have not known them. Praise ye the LORD." Psalm 147:19-20.
Now that the gospel is going out to the nations, the only promise from God we have is that "this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come." Matthew 24:14
The gospel of salvation through the substitutionary death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ is found in any bible in any language it has been translated into, no matter how poorly or partially done it may be. God can and does use other bible versions, partial translations, or just simple gospel tracts to bring His people to faith in Christ. I do not deny but strongly affirm this to be true.
But that does not make these other partial translations, bible tracts or versions the perfect words of God. There has to be at least one perfect Bible in this world that serves as the Final Authority and Standard by which all others are measured.
It certainly does not exist in the Hebrew or the Greek. There is no "the Hebrew" and much less is there "the" Greek. Besides, once a complete Bible is put together, there has to be a translation of some kind in order to put both the Old and New Testaments into one language. Since God has promised to preserve His WORDS (not just the general, ballpark approximation) in the book of the LORD, this book must exist somewhere.
All the evidence points to the King James Bible as being that book for the last almost 400 years. It was the KJB that was used by English and American missionaries to carry to gospel to the nations in the greatest missionary movement in history. It was the KJB that was carried out into space and read from.
I believe in the sovereignty of God in history. "For the kingdom is the LORD'S; and He is the governor among the nations." Psalm 22:28. God has set His mark upon many things in this world that reveal His Divine hand at work in history. Why do we use the 7 day week instead of the 10 day week? Why are dates either B.C. (Before Christ) or A.D. (Anno Domini - year of our Lord)? (although the secular world is now trying in vain to change this too to BCE and CE.) England just "happens to be" the one nation from which we measure the true Time (Greenwich time, zero hour) and from which we measure true Position, zero longitude. In 1611 the English language was spoken by a mere 3% of the world's population, but today English has become the closest thing to a universal language in history. God knew He would use England, its language and the King James Bible to accomplish all these things long before they happened.
Today it is only the King James Bible believer who boldly maintains that there really is an inerrant, complete and 100% true Holy Bible on this earth that a person can actually hold it in his hands and read and believe every word. All modern version proponents deny that any tangible, “hold it in your hands and read Bible” IS now the inerrant words of God.
God only holds us accountable for the light He has been pleased to give us. To whom much is given, from him shall much be required - "For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall much be required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more." Luke 12:48. God has given to the English speaking people His perfect words in the King James Bible. We will be held far more accountable for what we have done with this Book than any other people.
To the degree that foreign language bible versions follow the same underlying Hebrew and Greek texts, and to the degree that their individual translations match those found in the King James Bible, to that degree they can be considered to be the true words of God. To the degree that they depart from both the texts and meanings found in the KJB, to that degree they are corrupt and inferiour.
I do not believe that every foreigner in non-English speaking countries needs to learn the English language and read the King James Bible. Salvation through faith in the substitutionary death, burial and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ is not only found the King James Bible. If there are several different versions in their own native language (Spanish, German, Russian, Chinese, or whatever), then I would recommend they use the one that most closely follows the same Hebrew and Greek texts that underlie the King James Bible. If they only have a translation based on the ever changing, modern Critical Texts, then they should thank God for what they do have and use it.
Regarding the question of “Well, what about before 1611?” please see my article here:
http://www.oocities.org/brandplucked/before1611.html
As for: “Can a Translation be inspired?” please see:
http://www.oocities.org/brandplucked/transinsp.html
This is how I see it and what I believe. Not a difficult question at all.
In contrast to the KJB believer's views, the multiple choice, contradictory meanings, and "different, omitted, added, or made up underlying texts" proponent has no Final Written Authority or Standard by which all others are to be judged, and he has no inspired, inerrant and 100% true Bible to give or recommend to anyone.
By His grace, accepted in the Beloved,
Will Kinney
Genesis 50:20 Ye thought - God meant
In Genesis 50:20 Joseph says to his brethren: "But as for you, ye THOUGHT evil against me; but God MEANT it unto good, to bring to pass, as it is this day, to save much people alive."
For some reason, perhaps known only to himself, Mr. James White has a bee in his bonnet about how the King James Bible renders this verse. In his book, The King James Only Controversy, on page 230 Mr. White says regarding the KJV: "Another example of inconsistency can be found at Genesis 50:20. The Hebrew text provides a plain parallel here that is obscured by the curious KJV translation. Joseph told his brothers that while they had MEANT their actions for evil ends, God had MEANT the same actions for good ends. The KJV introduces a distinction that is not to be found in the text it is translating."
I'll wager that most people who have read this passage as it stands in the King James Bible have never had the thought jump out to them "You know, that just does't seem right. They missed that plain Hebrew parallel."
I was once involved with James White in an online discussion about the Bible version issue and we addressed this particular verse. Here is part of our conversation. (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/realtruthradio/message/87)
I said: "James, I will be happy to address Genesis 50:20. I thought it was one of your more ridiculous criticisms. Why don't you tell us all what is wrong with the KJB reading, so we will all be clear on why you consider it to be an error, and then I will be glad to respond".
James then posts: Genesis 50:20 (NASB) "As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good in order to bring about this present result, to preserve many people alive.
Genesis 50:20 (KJV) But as for you, ye thought evil against me; but God meant it unto good, to bring to pass, as it is this day, to save much people alive.
"The Hebrew presents a strict parallel, "you (Joseph's brothers) MEANT (chashav) evil" and then "God MEANT (chashav) it for good." Translating the verb as "thought evil" and then "meant it unto good" obscures the parallel that is so important in demonstrating compatibilism in this passage. It is not that the KJV is WRONG but that it is INFERIOR to the modern translations of the passage, including that of the NKJV: Genesis 50:20 "But as for you, you meant evil against me; [but] God meant it for good, in order to bring it about as [it is] this day, to save many people alive. (NKJ) So, upon what basis do you argue for the superiority of obscuring the parallel that is clear in the original tongue?" - James White. (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/realtruthradio/message/87)
You see, Mr. White doesn't have nor believe in a perfect, infallible Bible. He "uses" the NASB a lot, but doesn't mind correcting it when he feels it goes against his final authority for determining both text and meaning. What final authority might this be? Well, simply put, it is his own mind and understanding. James is a professional Bible corrector and nobody has really gotten it right yet after all these attempts to give us God's words - not the KJB, RV, ASV, NKJV, NIV, NASB, RSV, NRSV, ESV - none of them. James should write his own bible version and be done with it: that is the only way he will be satisfied. It also would make him very happy if his made up bible version gained him boatloads of money and worldwide fame.
What James fails to notice is that many other Bible translators, just as qualified as himself, have not seen fit to render this verse in the same way he "thinks" (or should that be "means"?) to translate it.
In fact, other Bible commentators who are well known for "correcting" the KJB on occasion, have left this verse intact as it stands. John Gill remarks: "But as for you, ye THOUGHT evil against me,.... That must be said and owned, that their intentions were bad; they THOUGHT to have contradicted his dreams, and made them of none effect, to have token away his life, or however to have made him a slave all his days: but God MEANT it unto good; he designed good should come by it, and he brought good out of it: this shows that this action, which was sinful in itself, fell under the decree of God."
Not only does the King James Bible translate this section as "ye THOUGHT...but God MEANT", but so also do the 1936 Jewish translation put out by the Hebrew Publishing Company of New York, Webster's 1833 translation, the Modern King James Version by J.P. Green, the Amplified Bible (put out by the same people who make the NASB), the KJV 21st Century version 1994 and the Third Millenium Bible 1998.
The Geneva Bible of 1599 says: "ye THOUGHT evil against me, but God DISPOSED it to good" while the Coverdale bible 1535, Bishops' Bible 1568, and Wycliffe 1395 all read: "Ye THOUGHT evil against me, but God TURNED it unto good."
The NASB, NKJV say: "you meant...God meant"
NIV "you intended....God intended"
Holman CSB and Rotherham's Emphatic Bible "you planned...God planned"
Spanish Reina Valera "You thought...but God directed"
Italian Diodati "you thought...God thought"
Young's "ye devised...but God devised"
New Jerusalem "you planned...but by God's design"
The word used here has many meanings. In fact the NASB that Mr. White uses, when it suits his needs, has rendered this same word as not only "meant", but also "thought"(5 times), account, purpose, consider, compose, calculate, devise, esteem, execute, to make, to have, intend, pondered, reckoned, regard, require, scheme, seem, skillful, value and workman.
It really bothers Mr. White that the King James Bible says "ye thought... but God meant it unto good", even though the meaning is the same as the new versions he promotes, and several other translators have rendered the phrase the same way as the KJB. However, it doesn't seem to bother him that in this same verse both the NASB and NIV have changed the literal meaning of the Hebrew "as it is THIS DAY".
The KJB, RV, ASV, NKJV, and Young's all say: "God meant it unto good, to bring to pass, AS IT IS THIS DAY, to save much people alive." The Hebrew here for "this day" is two words, #2088 this, and # 3117 yom - day. Yet the NASB says: "to bring about THIS PRESENT RESULT" ("present result" replacing the literal word "day"), while the NIV paraphrases with: "to accomplish WHAT IS NOW BEING DONE".
I personally have no big quarrel with either the NASB or NIV here, and I certainly would not put this in any book as an egregious example of how wrong these versions are. Yet Mr. White seems content to strain at gnats in the KJB, and neglects to point out the liberties these other versions take with the literal Hebrew. Such is the mind of a Bible corrector.
I think Mr. White is pretty hard up to find some kind of "error" in the King James Bible and will go to almost any ridiculous extreme to produce one. This is just another silly example from the fertile mind of someone who sets himself up as the final authority regarding the true words of God. Mr. White cannot tell you where you can get a copy of God's preserved words in any language, including "the" Hebrew and "the" Greek. Why? Because he doesn't have one. I have read his book several times and never found out where I can get a copy of an infallible Bible. He will recommend several "reliable translations", all of which contradict each other hundreds of times in both text and meaning, but not even these are perfect according to Mr. White. If you want to know what God REALLY said, you have to ask Mr. James White. Want a second opinion? Ask him again.
Will Kinney