What Are We to Believe?

September 9, 2009

Dear Fellow Travelers,
Bible study, to say the least, is quite challenging, especially in light of the fact that there are so many varied translations—NIV, NASB, KJ, NKJ, AMP, RSV, NRSV, ASV, to mention a few. In spite of all the good intentions of the various translators, it is virtually impossible for any of them to translate without theological bias; consequently, not every passage is translated in accordance with the original manuscripts. If you do not believe me, read, Ro-mans 5, 6, 7, & 8 in both the NIV and the NASB. I think the proof is in the tasting of the pudding, as someone much wiser than I has already indicated.
Since most of us are neither Hebrew nor Greek scholars, about all we can do is de-pend on those who are scholars for some understanding of the original manuscripts. Unfortunately, those who are scholars are biased—every last one of them—so we must be careful about jumping to theological conclusion and, then, casting the conclusion into cement.
Now, I do not want to be misunderstood, so listen up: I preach and teach from the Scriptures, and I do so because I am absolutely convinced that they are the inspired, inerrant, Word of God; however, I am not so naive, as to believe that each of the various translations from which I read are all without error, as in accurate. The fact is this: they differ in many places. Allow me to give you this example:
“For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh” (Romans 8:3 NASB).
“For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man” (Romans 8:3 NIV).
In the first place, the NASB capitalizes “Law”; whereas, the NIV does not, which in my opinion is very significant. In the second place, the NASB references “sinful flesh”; whereas, the NIV references the “sinful nature,” which is positively significant. In the third place, the NASB indicates that God condemned sin in “sinful flesh”; whereas, the NIV indicates that He condemned sin in “sinful man,” which is surely worth noting.
Surely, it is fair to raise this question: Why these differences? Is it because it is so difficult to translate New Testament Greek into English, or is it because it is so difficult to abandon one’s theological biases, when doing the translation? In my opinion, it is some of both, with most of the weight on the latter.
Anyway, this is what concerns me: Many people, who have virtually no knowledge of either Hebrew or Greek, think they can solve the translation issues by going to a concordance or lexicon and discerning for themselves what is accurate. BEWARE!
I well-remember the TV ad where the patient was talking on the telephone with his surgeon, who was telling him where and how to make an incision into his abdomen, so he could remove his own appendix. BAD IDEA! I also well-remember the TV ad that depicted an English speaking man sitting on his French speaking shrink’s couch, trying to understand his counsel. BAD IDEA!
It might be a good idea to be careful about casting your interpretation of the Scriptures into cement, especially in light of the fact that using a sledge hammer is very difficult work, not to mention, that your well-being just might be affected in a very negative way, if your interpretation happens to be incorrect.
On this you can rest assured: God will not change His mind to accommodate our ideas of truth, regardless of how convinced we might be of their truthfulness.