QUESTION: The King James Bible is a
mere translation from Greek to English. A translation can't be as good
as the originals, can it?
ANSWER: A translation cannot only be
"as good" as the originals, but better.
EXPLANATION: There are three "translations"
spoken of in the Bible. In all three cases, the translation referred
to is better than the original. Since we accept the Bible as our final
authority in all matters of faith and practice, ITS
"practice" will have more authority than any "mere human"
1. The first translation mentioned in scripture is found
in II Samuel 3:7-10.
7 "And Saul had a concubine, whose name was Rizpah,
the daughter of Aiah: and Ishbosheth said to Abner, Wherefore hast thou
gone in unto my father's concubine?
8 Then was Abner very wroth for the words of
Ish-bosheth, and said, Am I a dog's head, which against Judah do shew
kindness this day unto the house of Saul thy father, to his brethren,
and to his friends, and have not delivered thee into the hand of David,
that thou chargest me to day with a fault concerning this woman?
9 So do God to Abner, and more also, except,
as the LORD hath sworn to David, even so I do to him;
10 To translate the kingdom from the house of
Saul, and to set up the throne of David over Israel and over Judah,
from Dan even to Beersheba."
After the death of King Saul in I Samuel 31, Abner, who
had been the captain of Saul's army installed Ishbosheth as King instead
of David. (II Samuel 12:8,9)
Later Ishbosheth and Abner had a falling out. Abner, in
anger, announces to Ishbosheth that he is going to "translate"
the Kingdom of Israel from Ishbosheth to David..
It is obvious by Abner's statement of II Samuel 3:9 that
the LORD wanted David to be king over all twelve tribes
of Israel. Therefore the "translation" of the kingdom of Israel
to David was BETTER than the "original" state
which has a split kingdom with David rightly ruling over one portion
and Ishbosheth wrongly ruling over the other section. (Remember the
law of first mentions.)
2. The second translation spoken of in scripture is found
in Colossians 1:13.
"Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness,
and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:"
Here the "translation" spoken of is the conversion
of a lost sinner to a new life in Jesus Christ. No one in their right
mind could even pretend that this translation is not
a massive improvement over the "original" condition.
3. The third translation found in the Bible is located
in Hebrews 11:5.
"By faith Enoch was translated that he should
not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for
before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God."
The word "translate" only appears five times
in scripture. Once in II Samuel, once in Colossians and the remaining
three times here in Hebrews 11:5.
A Christian with even a shallow knowledge of the Bible
is familiar with the story of Enoch from Genesis 5. Enoch walked with
God and is known to have pleased God. He was a prophet (Judges 14) and
a man of faith. God saw fit to physically take Enoch
to heaven so that he would not have to experience death. This individual
action is a miniature version of what Christians call "The Rapture,"
mentioned in I Corinthians 15, I Thessalonians 4, Titus 2 and various
other places in the Bible. Since the word "Rapture" appears
nowhere in scripture a more proper name for this future occurrence might
be "The Blessed Hope" (Titus) or "The Catching Up"
(I Thessalonians) of "Our Translation" (Hebrews).
It is obvious that Enoch's translation was an improvement
over his "original" condition.
Thus we see that every translation mentioned in our final
authority in all matters is an improvement
over the original.
If you are a simple Bible believer you will have no trouble
accepting this. If you worship education or just hate to be wrong you
will reject this Bible fact as easily as you have rejected every
Bible fact that you couldn't agree with.
It should be noted here that the perplexed translators
of both the New American Standard Version and the New International
Version, when faced with this glaring contradiction
of their own personal prejudice, could not bring themselves to allow
the word "translation" in any of the above mentioned passages.
Which will you follow, the Bible or men?