Suber Road Baptist Church http://suberroad.org The Gospel Changes Everything Sun, 20 May 2012 14:14:06 +0000 en hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 What is the Role of Theology in Youth Ministry http://suberroad.org/what-is-the-role-of-theology-in-youth-ministry/ http://suberroad.org/what-is-the-role-of-theology-in-youth-ministry/#comments Thu, 26 Apr 2012 15:40:43 +0000 jwetterlund http://suberroad.org/?p=692 Does theology bore young people or build an important foundation for their future fruitfulness? I recently came across the article Why Theology and Youth Ministry Seldom Mix on the Gospel Coalition website and was encouraged to see it reflect our heart here at SRBC. It emphasizes the need to teach our young people the truths of God’s Word instead of seeking to entertain them. When theology is properly prioritized and applied in youth philosophy we can be confident that God will honor His Word and the church will be built through the lives of our teens. My fear is that we often wrongly present theologically based teaching as contradictory to practical application and godly living. The Scripture continually emphasizes that right doctrine leads to a Christlike life. John Bunyan summarizes how a proper focus on Christ liberates the believer to pursue God.

Run, John, run. The law commands.

But gives neither feet nor hands.

Better news the gospel brings;

It bids me fly and gives me wings.[i]

The problem this article is seeking to address is why are churches losing young people as they come of age? It mentions that we have shortchanged our teens by emphasizing a shallow, man-centered philosophy instead of challenging our young people to wholeheartedly embrace gospel truth for themselves. The question I continually ask our teens is, “Why do you believe what you believe?” It is important to help our young people knock out all the props that we often unintentionally provide for them and reverse the trend of training lazy, shallow Christians. This article was an encouragement to me as we continue to pursue both doctrine and godly living.

[i] As quoted by Jerry Bridges, The Discipline of Grace (Colorado Springs, Co: NavPress, 1994) p. 90.

]]> http://suberroad.org/what-is-the-role-of-theology-in-youth-ministry/feed/ 1 Glorifying God in Your 9 to 5 http://suberroad.org/glorifying-god-in-your-9-to-5/ http://suberroad.org/glorifying-god-in-your-9-to-5/#comments Mon, 27 Feb 2012 17:45:26 +0000 admin http://new.suberroad.com/?p=458 Beginning with Worldview
It is a bit of a misconception to suggest that a secular worldview is one that is void of God. On the contrary, many secularists do believe there is a place for God, but it is a very limited place. A secular worldview is not necessarily one that eliminates God; rather, a secular worldview is one that compartmentalizes God. “Secularization did not cause the death of religion,” says theologian Walter Kasper. It did, however, relegate it to “one sector of modern life along with many others. Religion lost its claim to universality and its power of interpretation.”[1] In other words, a secular worldview is one that allows God to inform some parts of life, but not all. The Creator is marginalized. A secularist may invite God into certain rooms, but He is not permitted access to the entire house.
Leslie Newbigin, who spent many years as a missionary to India, tells that this kind of compartmentalization of God is a Western phenomenon. Few cultures around the world encourage a division between the sacred and secular or the public and the private. Faith is something that is intended to permeate all of life. “In most human cultures, religion is not a separate activity set apart from the rest of life.”[2] For sure, this is one of the ways that the “world” has affected the modern American church.
In stark contrast to a secular worldview, the Bible teaches that God is concerned about all of life. In addition to so-called religious activities (e.g. prayer, worship, etc.), God desires to inform every facet of life: work, play, relationship, family, etc. Paul gives a great summary of this when he states that even the most mundane actives of eating and drinking can and should be done to the glory of God (1 Cor. 10:31).
 
Unfortunately, the workplace has been one of the hardest hit areas by the secularization of America. Although most Christians spend the majority of their time at work, few stop to think about how deeply interested God is in both their performance and attitude towards their vocation. In her article, “How the Church Has Failed Business,” Laura Nash shows the dichotomy between work and faith. Christian businesspeople assume one worldview Monday through Friday and another on Sunday. Church and business have basically agreed to say off of each other’s turf.[3] However, this kind of compartmentalization fails to square with verses such as Colossians 3:23-24: “Whatever you do, work heartily, as for the Lord and not for men, knowing that from the Lord you will receive the inheritance as your reward. You are serving the Lord Christ.”
A Theology of Work
While there are many entry points to a theology of work, perhaps the best is the Genesis account of the creation:
Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. And God blessed them. And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” (Gen. 1:26-28)
The LORD God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to work it and keep it. (Gen 2:15)
Defining Work
According to these verses, work is glorifying God by bringing out and cultivating the potential of the creation for the purpose of human flourishing. In the Genesis account of the creation God did not present Adam with a complete earth, in the sense that all of the work was done for him; rather, he was given the raw materials and the gifts to bring out the numerous possibilities of the creation. K. Scott Oliphint echoes this idea when he states, “Creation was not given to man ‘complete,’ but was given as a gift to man, in order that we might bring out its latent potential in such a way that God would continue to be glorified in it.”[4] While God could have given the creation to man with all of its potential already drawn out, He chose to have man glorify Him though discovering and bringing out that potential, in other words, through work.
This definition finds further support from the so-called “creational” or “cultural mandate.” The words “subdue it and have dominion” show progress (Gen. 1:28). Adam was called and gifted to till the ground to bring the natural resources of the creation to a useful end (Gen. 2:15). As people created in God’s image, we are called to do what God does.[5] We cannot bring something out of nothing, but we can order the natural resources. This was at least part of Adam’s commission in these verses. In greater detail, Wayne Grudem explains:
The word translated “subdue” (Hebrew: kabash) implies that Adam and Eve should make the resources of the earth useful for their own benefit, and this implies that God intended them to develop the earth so they could come to own agricultural products and animals, then housing and works of craftsmanship and beauty, and eventually buildings, means of transportation, cities, and inventions of all sorts.[6]
Vocation
The word vocation comes from the Latin word for “call.” The world is a big place. Not all people are called to Adam’s vocation of gardener. All honest professions, however, move in the direction of subduing and ruling.[7] All work seeks to bring out the potential of the creation for the purpose of human flourishing. A plumber uses pipes, and gravity, and principles of pressure to channel water in useful ways.[8] An electrician uses his gifts of harnessing and moving electricity through conductors so that people can plug in TV’s, lights, and charge phones. An artist takes the raw material of the cosmos and rearranges it so that it is pleasing to the eye. Musicians take sounds that make little sense and arrange them in a way that communicates meaning. Good managers coordinate others to use their gifts and talents for the good of humanity. In addition to Adam’s, all honest vocations move in the direction of bringing out the potential of the creation.
Mental and Physical Labor
Before exploring some of the implications, it should be noted that both mental and physical labor can be done to God’s glory as evidenced by Adam doing both of these in the Garden. Most are quick to recall that man, as a gardener, used physical labor to till the ground. It should also be remembered, however, that man used his mental capabilities to name the animals. Stan Reeves notes that “Adam had to study, compare and contrast the animals to assign appropriate names to each of them.”[9] It is a mistake to assume that one occupation is more God honoring than the next.
Applications of Work
How does this theology of work apply to us today? What does any of this have to do with washing dishes, painting a room, or selling houses? The implications are huge! Consider just a few…
Decompartmentalizing God
First,a proper understanding of work should cause us to decompartmentalize our lives. God is concerned about all of the work that we do. Work is a way of bringing glory to God. In his classic book, The Pursuit of God, A.W. Tozer devotes a chapter to this topic. He states, “One of the greatest hindrances to internal peace which the Christian encounters is the common habit of dividing our lives into two areas, the sacred and the secular.”[10] The Gospel must shed light on everything that a believer does.
In their excellent article, “Church Support for Doing Business,” Ron Ferner and Philip Ryken show a contrast between the two powerful businessmen, John D. Rockefeller and John Wanamaker. It is well known that Rockefeller was faithful to his local church. He taught Sunday School and even tithed off of his massive salary. No doubt he placed great importance on worship on the first day of the week. This, however, did little to stifle the fact that he was ruthless businessman the other six days. Wanamaker also taught and gave to his local church. The difference between the two is that Wanamaker also sought to live the Gospel throughout the rest of the week. He looked for ways to integrate his faith into his business. Wanamaker went as far as delaying the opening of his department store on Broad Street in Philadelphia, the first and largest on the street, to allow D.L. Moody to use the building for a meeting. As postmaster general, he sought to do all business to the glory of God. His epitaph reads, “Servant of God.”[11]
The result of compartmentalizing faith can be devastating. A Christian who does not guard against this will find himself to be a faithful Christian on Sunday and a cut-throat worker on Monday. On Sunday he will attempt to consecrate himself to God, and on Monday intentionally fail to disclose valuable information to a client.
The Biblical writers know nothing of a division between the sacred and the secular. All work is sacred when done unto the Lord (Col. 3:22-24). Here we must agree with Dutch Statesman Abraham Kuyper: “There is not an inch of any sphere of life over which Jesus Christ does not say, ‘Mine.’” God’s concern for the life of a Christian runs through everything: the treatment of clients, the manner in which a waiter waits tables, the treatment of employees or employers, the care that a nurse takes in inserting an IV needle, the diligence that a city worker gives to something as trivial as filling a pothole for safe streets, the manner in which a stay at home mom rocks her baby to sleep. A worldview such as this makes good sense of verses that appear to be void of any spiritual advice: “Prepare your work outside; get everything ready for yourself in the field, and after that build your house” (Prov. 24:27). God is even concerned about how the house is built.
The Moral Goodness of Work
A second implication is, when done to the glory of God, work is a good thing. Work is not a necessary evil. God has privileged man to work. This principle comes to life when we remember that Adam’s call to work was not a result of the Fall. He worked the garden before he sinned. Work did change after the Fall; it became more difficult; but it has always been a part of God’s plan. It has been wisely pointed out that the curse in Genesis 3:17-18 is not on work, but on the ground. Also, work is part of the fourth commandment. As surely as Israel’s remembrance of the Sabbath recalls God’s resting on the seventh day, the command to work the other six recalls God’s creating activity. There is good cause, therefore, to say that there is a moral goodness to work. Three applications come to the surface. First, Christians should not be shy to explore their creativity and the potential of the creation since we understand that God has created us, at least in part, for this purpose. Michael Faraday (1791-1867) was a brilliant English chemist and physicist who contributed to the fields of electromagnetism and electrochemistry. In speaking about his love of science his niece, Margaret Reid, once said, “I shall never look at the lightening flashes without recalling his delight in a beautiful storm. How he would stand at the window for hours watching the effects and enjoying the scene; while we knew his mind was full of lofty thoughts, sometimes of the great Creator, and sometimes of the laws by which He sees meet to govern the earth.”[12] With great love for the Creator, Christians ought to pursue fields such as science, economics, politics, business, and the arts.
In addition to encouraging creativity, the moral goodness of work should also inspire believers to work hard with integrity (Exod. 28:3; 35:26; I Ki. 7:14; Dan. 1:17). The often quoted words of Marin Luther King, Jr. ring well here: “If a man is called to be a street sweeper, he should sweep streets even as Michelangelo painted, or Beethoven composed music, or Shakespeare wrote poetry. He should sweep streets so well that all the hosts of heaven and earth will pause to say, ‘Here lived a great street sweeper who did his job well.’” Christians should not be shoddy in their work; God has not called His people to laziness and poor craftsmanship. All work should be done to His glory.
Finally, we should be thankful to the Lord for all of the good gifts that come as a result of work (Jam. 1:17). Wayne Grudem’s imaginary encounter with Adam and Eve illustrates this point:
 
Manufactured products give us opportunity to praise God for anything we look at in the world around us. Imagine what would happen if we were able somehow to transport Adam and Eve, before they had sinned, into a twenty-firstcentury American home. After we gave them appropriate clothing, we would turn on the faucet to offer them a glass of water, and they would ask, “What’s that?” When we explained that the pipes enabled us to have water whenever we wanted it, they would exclaim, “Do you mean to say that God has put in the earth materials that would enable you to make that water system?”
“Yes,” we would reply.
“Then praise God for giving us such a great earth! And praise him for giving us the knowledge and skill to be able to make that water system!” They would have hearts sensitive to God’s desire that he be honored in all things.
The refrigerator would elicit even more praise to God from their lips. And so would the electric lights and the newspaper and the oven and the telephone, and so forth. Their hearts would brim over with thankfulness to the Creator who had hidden such wonderful materials in the earth and had also given to human beings such skill in working with them. And as Adam and Eve’s hearts were filled with overflowing thanksgiving to God, God would see it and be pleased. He would look with delight as the man and woman made in his image gave glory to their Creator and fulfilled the purpose for which they were made.[13]
All Work Can Be Done to His Glory
A third implication of this theology of work is that Christians should be cautious in drawing hard divisions between “full time Christian work” and “secular work.” While few would come right out and say it, many are under the impression that the work of a janitor is a second rate way to serve the Lord. There are people who serve the Lord, and then there are people in full time ministry that really serve God.
Some call the division between the secular and the sacred the “Catholic Distortion” since it was especially prominent in the Catholic era.[14] Protestant Reformers such as Luther would have nothing to do with it. He rejected the idea that priests performed work that was holier than shopkeepers. The entire world was to be “full of service to God, not only the churches but also the home, the kitchen, the cellar, the workshop, and the field.” According to the English Reformer William Tyndale, “there is difference betwixt washing of dishes and preaching of the word of God; but as touching to please God, none at all.” All of life is sacred for the Christian and should be done to the glory of God.
Columnist and author Nancy Pearcey tells of a conversation she had after speaking on Capitol Hill. She was approached by a congressional chief of staff who expressed frustration with many of the Christian young people who were working in politics felt “guilty” about their work in the field. He went on to explain, “[They] feel that if they were really committed to God, they wouldn’t be here. They’d be in the ministry.” Pearcey, then states, “Though many of these young people were graduates of Christian colleges, they had not been taught a Christian worldview. They still placed their professional work on the secular side of the secular/sacred split, regarding it as less valuable than religious activity.”[15]
The solution to this problem is not to downplay a call to full time Christian ministry, but to emphasize that all work can and should be done to God’s glory. Listen again to Colossians 3:23-24: “Whatever you do, work heartily, as for the Lord and not for men, knowing that from the Lord you will receive the inheritance as your reward. You are serving the Lord Christ.” We would expect to find a verse such as this in the context of prayer, evangelism, or fellowship. The context, however, is work. In addition to this, how encouraging it should be to the Christian worker to discover that the first instance of people being “filled with the Spirit” in the Bible are those doing the work of a craftsman: cutting stones and working with wood (Exod. 28:3l 31:1; 35:31). This passage shows a wonderful picture of redeemed workers glorifying God as they work their craft. As Ferner and Ryken state, “The point… is not simply that Christians can serve God in business, but that Christians can serve God through business.”[16]
Guarding Against the Extremes
One final implication of the creational mandate is that we are not owners, but stewards of the creation. As such, all responsible stewards must guard against two extremes of work: lackadaisicalness and idolatry. The first of these has such a pessimistic view of work that the best thing that can happen is for someone to find a way not to work. The second category has such a high view of work that it tends to make a god out of achievement.
Those who are lackadaisical work for the weekend. Work is just something done to “get by” or support a lifestyle; hence, there is little joy in work. People in this category tend to be shoddy and lazy in their work. Many in this category dream of winning the lottery and early retirement. In addition to this, lackadaisical people view others who have done well in business as “lucky.”[17]
Those who fall into the second category, idolatry, identify themselves by their work. They become obsessed with accomplishment. Work is like a drug; it is a fix. In this sense the worker derives pleasure from work itself, not from serving the Lord. Whereas the lackadaisical worker works for the weekend, the workaholic works the weekend. People in this category are highly motivated, defined by work and driven by the glory of ambition. Their career is the sun of their solar system; Jesus is not the savior, work is. The symptoms of this kind of idolatry are fairly obvious. There are great highs when things go well at work and great lows when things fall apart or when expectations are not met.
When a society gravitates towards these two extremes, conflict is inevitable. The shalom of the community can only deteriorate. Asmus and Grudem explain:
The lazy, careless, selfish consumers, who produce less and less of value for society; and the workaholics, who produce more and more, and gain immense wealth, but leave trails of broken families and lost children…. The “have-nots” will pull the economy down, and the “haves” will pull it up, and there will be increasing conflict between the two groups as they pull apart. Nobody will find joy and fulfillment in work.[18]
Sadly, as both sides demonize each other the wedge is driven deeper and deeper in between classes and people. A house divided against itself cannot stand (Mark 3:25).
The Gospel and Work
 
The good news is that the Gospel has the power to save both the lackadaisical and idolatrous worker. In the Gospel, Jesus restores people to be the kind of workers that they were created to be. He does so by renewing the motivations of the lackadaisical worker and the identity of the ambitious. Regarding the first, the Gospel has the power to change motives. The law can make you drive the speed limit, but it cannot make you want to be a responsible citizen. The law can make you an equal opportunity employer, but it cannot make you love someone of another race. In short, the law can change behavior, but not motivation. More than mere behavior modification, there are numerous examples in the Gospels of Jesus changing hearts. In Zacchaeus, a white collar criminal becomes a generous servant of the community (Luke 19:1-9). In confronting the woman at the well, as dignity is restored, the Samaritan woman shows a heartfelt desire to honor God with her life (John 4:1-29). Regarding Matthew, a one time traitor of the Jewish people joyfully takes on a new ministry to Israel. Through the power of the Gospel, the lackadaisical worker discovers a newfound desire to be a faithful worker.
The Gospel also rescues the ambitious worker from the idol of work. Whereas this individual once found value and satisfaction from achievement or employment status, he or she is now able to serve God through work without serving work itself. The one time workaholic who lived for the thrill of the accomplishment can finally put to rest runaway ambition. In union with Christ, this person no longer has to look towards the work of his hands to feel a sense of accomplishment. At the cross Jesus accomplished all that is necessary to feel significant before the One whose opinion really matters. There is a great picture of this in Luke 10:17-20, where the disciples return rejoicing that they have performed such great works. Jesus says to them, “Do not rejoice in this, that the spirits are subject to you, but rejoice that your names are written in heaven.” What Jesus is saying, in essence, is, “Do not draw your value and significance because of what you do; rather, know that you are significant because of your relationship with me.”
Work to the Glory of God
 

In the earlier part of the 20thcentury, Eric Liddell was one of the greatest runners in the world. In addition to being a great athlete, Liddell would eventually move to China where he served as a missionary. Liddell bucked every trend of the day. Prior to running every race he would go down the line and shake the hand of every other man in the race. He would run every race flailing his arms with his face pointed to the sky. When Liddell was asked, “How can you see the finish line?” he would reply, “The Lord guides me.” He was also a man of strong conviction. In the 1924 Olympics Liddell gladly gave up what most consider to be a sure gold medal because of his refusal to run on Sunday. A few days later he ran the 400 meter race, which he was not expected to win. He crossed the line in record time. When asked why he ran, he replied, “I believe God made me for a purpose, but he also made me fast. And when I run I feel His pleasure.” The same should be true for all Christian workers. God has created each person with gifts to use for His glory.


[1]. Walter Kasper, “Nature, Grace, and Culture: On the Meaning of Secularization,” in Catholicism and Secularization in American: Essays on Nature, Grace, and Culture, ed. David L. Schindler (Huntington, IN: Communion Books, 1990), 38.
[2]. Quoted by Nancy Pearcey in Total Truth: Liberating Christianity from Its Cultural Captivity (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2004), 69.
[3]. Laura Nash cited by Ron Ferner and Philip Ryken, “Church Support for Doing Business in God’s Word,” in Business Ethics Today: Adding a Christian Worldview as Found in the Westminster Confession of Faith, ed. Philip J. Clements (Philadelphia: Westminster Theological Seminary, 2011), 332.
[4]. K. Scott Oliphint, “Prolegomena to the Practice of Ethics in Business,” in Business Ethics Today: Adding a Christian Worldview as Found in the Westminster Confession of Faith, ed. Philip J. Clements (Philadelphia: Westminster Theological Seminary, 2011), 64.
[5]. David VanDrunen supports the reading, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness, so that they might have dominion…” in Living in God’s Two Kingdoms (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2010), 39.
[6]. Wayne Grudem, Business for the Glory of God: The Bible’s Teaching on the Moral Goodness of Business (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2003), 25-6.
[7]. Some understand work to be a response to Christ’s fulfillment of the Genesis mandate (VanDrunen, 57) while others suggest that it is a contribution or continuation (Al Wolters, Creation Regained: Biblical Basis for a Reformational Worldview [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005], 41). This discussion is beyond the scope of this short essay.
[8]. Stan Reeves, “The Spirituality of Work,” Founders Journal (Spring, 2004): http://www.founders.org/journal/fj56/article1.html
[9]. Ibid.
[10]. A.W. Tozer, The Pursuit of God (Camp Hill, PA: Christian Publications, 1993), 109.
[11]. Ron Ferner and Philip Ryken, “Church Support for Doing Business in God’s World,” in Business Ethics Today: Adding a Christian Worldview as Found in the Westminster Confession of Faith, ed. Philip J. Clements (Philadelphia: Westminster Theological Seminary, 2011), 328-29.
[12]. George Johnson, The Ten Most Beautiful Experiments (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2008), 75.
[13]. Grudem, Business for the Glory of God, 26.
[14]. Os Guinness, The Call: Finding and Fulfilling the Central Purpose of Your Life (Nashville: Word, 1998), 32.
[15]. Pearcey, 66.
[16]. Ferner and Ryken, 325.
[17]. Barry Asmus and Wayne Grudem, “What is at Risk for Business if We Lose a Christian Worldview” in Business Ethics Today: Adding a Christian Worldview as Found in the Westminster Confession of Faith, ed. Philip J. Clements (Philadelphia: Westminster Theological Seminary, 2011), 180.
[18]. Ibid., 180-81.
]]> http://suberroad.org/glorifying-god-in-your-9-to-5/feed/ 0 Bible Translations at Suber Road Baptist http://suberroad.org/bible-translations-at-suber-road-baptist/ http://suberroad.org/bible-translations-at-suber-road-baptist/#comments Mon, 27 Feb 2012 17:44:29 +0000 admin http://new.suberroad.com/?p=456 Introduction
Throughout Scripture the biblical writers presuppose that God intends that His Word be understood by His people.[1]Deuteronomy 6:6-7 assumes that fathers are able to teach their children the Law of Moses. In another passage Moses tells that the Word of God is clear and understandable:

For this commandment that I command you today is not too hard for you, neither is it far off. It is not in heaven, that you should say, ‘Who will ascend to heaven for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, ‘Who will go over the sea for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ But the word is very near you. It is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can do it. (Deut. 30:11-14)
The New Testament is equal in its affirmation of the clarity of Scripture. Most notably, Jesus assumes that His listeners are able to read and understand the Word of God. Six times in the Gospel of Matthew the Son of God asks, “Have you not read …” When confronted by the Pharisees Jesus tells them, “Go and learn what this means, ‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice.’ For I came not to call the righteous, but sinners” (Mat 9:13). The assumption in passages such as these is that the misunderstanding lies not with the text of Scripture, but with the hearer.[2] It has also been pointed out that most of the letters in the New Testament are written to churches, not to pastors and/or elders. These biblical writers take for granted that ordinary, average church members can understand their epistles. Some passages of Scripture even assume that children are in the listening audience (such as Eph. 6:1-3).[3] In light of this evidence we must conclude with Paul that “if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost” (2 Cor. 4:3).
Translations
Though the implications of the doctrine of perspicuity are numerous, the purpose of this paper is to highlight just one: translations. If God intends the Scriptures to be clear and understood, then each group of Christian people must seek a translation that best communicates the Word of God in their respective language. This does not mean that translations should be rendered in the simplest possible language, so as to accommodate all within the culture or church. With few exceptions, the target audiences of the original Scriptures (autographs) were adult believers. This is generally true for both the Old and New Testament. Therefore, the most faithful translation is one that targets adult believers as the primary audience.[4] Among other tests (the primary being accuracy in translation), this means that each generation of English speaking Christians must wrestle with and determine which translation of the English Bible is the clearest.
King James Version
Though numerous English translations have been available to the public for some time, up until recent decades the King James Version has been the translation from which most Christians and churches have chosen to read. This is not without good cause. Beyond the memorable and poetic language, the translation itself is very much in tune with the original languages. With the passing of time, however, the English language has changed. Whereas in times past the KJV was one of the clearest and most understandable of the English translations, this is no longer the case.Let me be perfectly clear here. In my opinion the issue with the KJV is not one of philosophy. Without question, the KJV translators desired to honor the Lord in their translation by being as accurate and honest with the text as possible. Nor am I convinced that the translators missed the mark on a balance between dynamic (conveying the thoughts) and formal equivalence (word for word or literalness). The issue is not one of philosophy; the KJV is an outstanding translation. The question is one of clarity. Is the KJV the clearest and most understandable translation for modern day English speakers?[5]
Comparison of Clarity[6]
Because of the evolution of the English language, the KJV struggles to communicate with the same clarity that it did centuries ago. While scores of examples could be given, I offer the following list.[7] Though a few other modern translations would do well for comparison, the following verses from the KJV will be compared to the English Standard Version (ESV).
Peculiar or Possessed?
 
KJV 1 Peter 2:9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:

ESV 1 Peter 2:9 But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for
his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light.
In this passage Peter tells that the church is the possession of God. At one time the KJV’s peculiar may have communicated the idea of possession. But this usage has since changed. Today peculiar means “strange,” “unique” or “odd.” Unfortunately, to this day some Christians continue to justify unusual behavior and standards through this reading of the verse.
Prevent or Precede?
 
The word prevent is a good case study since it not only means something different today, but almost holds the opposite definition. Four hundred years ago prevent meant “to come before.” Today, the word communicates the idea of stopping something or someone. Consider the following examples.
  •  Psalm 119:147
 KJV I prevented the dawning of the morning, and cried: I hoped in thy word.
What does the Psalmist mean in this verse? Can he possibly mean that he is stopping the dawn? No. The idea here is that the psalmist rose up before the dawn. Notice the clarity in the ESV: “I rise before dawn and cry for help; I hope in your words.”
  • Matthew 17:25
KJV Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers?
ESV Jesus spoke to him first, saying, “What do you think, Simon? From whom do kings of the earth take toll or tax? From their sons or from others?”
  •  I Thess. 4:15
 
KJV For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
ESV For this we declare to you by a word from the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep.
Examples of Obsolete Words[8]
 
As language changes, not only do new words come into the vocabulary, but some make their way out. The KJV contains several obsolete words. Most church members would be hard-pressed to define even a few of the following.
  • amerce (Deut. 22:19)
  • blains (Exod. 9:9)
  • brigandine (Jer. 46:4)
  • crookbackt (Lev. 21:20)
  • chambering (Rom. 13:13)
  • champaign (Deut. 11:30 – not the drink)
  • charger (Matt. 14:8 – not the animal)
  • churl (Isa. 32:7)
 
Biblical Names
 
One of the benefits of most modern translations is the continuity of names in the Bible. The same name is translated the same way. This is not always the case with the KJV. For example, in Genesis 5 Seth has a son and names him “Enos.” The name is repeated five times in this chapter. But in 1 Chronicles 1:1, the name is rendered “Enosh.”[9] Will a careful reader of the KJV realize these variations of spelling refer to the same person? Perhaps. But the clearest translation will render the name the same throughout the Word of God.
Sentence Structure
 
A change in language may also bring about change in sentence structure. Some sentences in the KJV are difficult to follow.
KJV 2 Corinthians 8:1 Moreover, brethren, we do you to wit of the grace of God bestowed on the churches of Macedonia;
ESV  2 Corinthians 8:1 We want you to know, brothers, about the grace of God that has been given among the churches of Macedonia,
The ESV reads with a much greater clarity in a verse such as this.
Punctuation
 
KJV 2 Corinthians 5:21For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.
ESV 2 Corinthians 5:21 For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.
Punctuation has also changed. In the case of 2 Corinthians 5:21, the reader is led to believe that it is “us” who knew no sin. None would punctuate a sentence this way today.
Implications of the Study
The KJV is to be admired. It is a wonderful translation that God has used mightily. However, the KJV does not communicate with the same degree of clarity that it once did. As the pastor of SRBC, it is of the utmost importance to me that people understand the Word of God. Surely this can be done by continuing to use the KJV. But is this the best approach? While we could continue to exegete our way through some obsolete words and awkward sentence structures, for many, these are unnecessary obstacles to understanding the Bible. It is for the sake of clarity and understanding that I wish to move to a modern translation in my preaching and teaching.I prefer the ESV for the same reasons that previous generations preferred the KJV. Both translations reflect a reverence for the Word of God. Both seek to communicate the literalness of the ancient languages without sacrificing readability. Both are widely accepted translations among conservative Bible-believers.Though not a translator by trade, in the last several years I have had the opportunity to translate several books of the Bible while preaching and teaching through them. Through this process I have grown quite confident in the ESV, not only because of the reports of other pastors, but because of my own comparative work. My level of confidence is as strong in the ESV as it is for the KJV.

 
 
 
 
Appendix A
Further Examples of Clarity
 
Perfecting or Equipping?
 
KJV Ephesians 4:12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
ESV Ephesians 4:12 to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ.
The idea in this text is clearly one of equipping. Not only is this indicated by the Greek word itself,[10] but the context makes this clear. In centuries past, perfecting was a legitimate
translation for this passage. Today, however, perfecting carries the idea of perfection or excellence, not equipping.
Thought or Meant?
 
KJV Genesis 50:20 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.
ESV Genesis 50:20 As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive, as they are today.
It is in a story of forgiveness that we come across this great statement on the providence of God. The idea in this text is not that the brothers just thought evil against Joseph, but that they actually tried to carry it out. They meant evil.
By and By or At Once?
 
KJV Mark 6:25 And she came in straightway with haste unto the king, and asked, saying, I will that thou give me by and by in a charger the head of John the Baptist..
ESV Mark 6:25 And she came in immediately with haste to the king and asked, saying, “I want you to give me at once the head of John the Baptist on a platter.”
Centuries ago “by and by” was an expression that meant “right now” or “immediately.” Today the word communicates the opposite idea: “in time” (or casually). In this text the daughter of Herodias wants the head of John the Baptist. The phrase in question is communicating the urgency of the request. She wants it now. This is further seen by the expression “she came in immediately” or “straightway.”
 
Fetched a Compass or Set Sail?
 
KJV Acts 28:13 And from thence we fetched a compass, and came to Rhegium: and after one day the south wind blew, and we came the next day to Puteoli:ESV Acts 28:13 And from there we made a circuit and arrived at Rhegium.
We can be sure that “fetched a compass” was an excellent way to say “set sail” four hundred years ago. But today it means what it sounds like: “we secured a compass.”
Conversation or Citizenship?
 
KJV Philippians 3:20 For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ:
ESV Philippians 3:20 But our citizenship is in heaven, and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ,
 In times past conversation could refer to citizenship or even lifestyle. Today it means “to talk.”
Banquetings or Drinking Parties?
 
KJV 1 Peter 4:3 For the time past of our life may suffice us to have wrought the will of the Gentiles, when we walked in lasciviousness, lusts, excess of wine, revellings, banquetings, and abominable idolatries:
ESV 1 Peter 4:3 For the time that is past suffices for doing what the Gentiles want to do, living in sensuality, passions, drunkenness, orgies, drinking parties, and lawless idolatry.
While I’m sure banquetings communicates the idea of drunkenness to some, drinking parties is much clearer for today’s readers. In addition to banquetings this verse contains a couple of other words that may be unclear to modern readers: lasciviousness and revellings.
 
Turtle or Turtledove?
 
KJV Song of Solomon 2:12 The flowers appear on the earth; the time of the singing of birds is come, and the voice of the turtle is heard in our land;
ESV Song of Solomon 2:12 The flowers appear on the earth, the time of singing has come, and the voice of the turtledove is heard in our land.
What does a turtle sound like?
 
Target or Javelin?
 
KJV 1 Samuel 17:6 And he had greaves of brass upon his legs, and a target of brass between his shoulders.
ESV 1 Samuel 17:6 And he had bronze armor on his legs, and a javelin of bronze slung between his shoulders.
The KJV uses target. Does this mean that Goliath had a bull’s eye between his shoulders? Javelin is a much clearer translation.
Meat or Flour?
 
KJV Leviticus 14:10 And on the eighth day he shall take two he lambs without blemish, and one ewe lamb of the first year without blemish, and three tenth deals of fine flour for a meat offering, mingled with oil, and one log of oil.
ESV Leviticus 14:10 And on the eighth day he shall take two male lambs without blemish, and one ewe lamb a year old without blemish, and a grain offering of three tenths of an ephah of fine flour mixed with oil, and one log of oil.
Road or Raid?
 
KJV 1 Samuel 27:10 And Achish said, Whither have ye made a road to day? And David said, Against the south of Judah, and against the south of the Jerahmeelites, and against the south of the Kenites.
ESV 1 Samuel 27:10 When Achish asked, “Where have you made a raid today?” David would say, “Against the Negeb of Judah,” or, “Against the Negeb of the Jerahmeelites,” or, “Against the Negeb of the Kenites.”
Aschish is not asking David if he is doing construction. He is asking about a raid. Perhaps making a road communicated this idea four hundred years ago. It does not today.
 
Appendix B
More Examples of Obsolete Words
 
 
·      cieled (Hag. 1:4)
·      cockatrice (Isa. 11:8)
·      collops (Job 15:27)
·      confection (Exod. 30:35 – This has nothing to do with baking.)
·      hoised (Acts 27:40)
·      wimples (Isa. 3:22 – This is a coat.)
·      stomacher (Isa. 3:24)
·      suretiship (Prov. 11:15)
·      sackbut (Dan. 3:5)
·      the scall (Lev. 13:30)
·      muffler (Isa. 3:19 – not the car part)
·      descry (Judg. 1:23)
·      glede (Deut. 14:13)
·      habergeon (Job 41:26)
·      neesing (Job 41:18)
·      minstrel (Matt. 9:23)
·      nitre (Prov. 25:20)
·      tabret (Gen. 31:27)
Appendix C
FAQ
 
Questions
A change such as this may spur on a number of questions. In this section I will answer a few of the most common. I will keep my answers as concise and brief as possible, but I am more than willing to follow up in person.
Are modern translations as literal and honest to the original languages as the KJV?
Not all modern translations are equal. Some lean to the side of “formal equivalence” (literal) while others employ a more “dynamic equivalence” (gives the meaning of the text). Examples of translations that lean towards formal equivalence are KJV, NKJV, NASB, and the ESV. Those that favor more dynamic equivalence are NLT and the LB. Those in the middle may be NIV, JB, NEB, and the NAB.[11]A balance here can be quite difficult to strike. James White gives the following example. The French have a saying, “I have a cockroach,” which means, “I am depressed.” So if you translate that into English you have to either say, “I have a cockroach,” (formal) which few English speakers will understand, or you can translate it, “I am depressed” (dynamic).[12]
Consider 2 Corinthians 5:7. The text literally reads, “We walk by faith, not by sight.” This literal translation is seen in versions that follow a formal equivalence, such as the ESV and KJV. However, since this is a metaphor for life as a journey, the NIV moves in the direction of dynamic equivalence: “We live by faith, not by sight.”
In some cases a translator does well to apply a degree of dynamic equivalence. Concerning the story of Mary in Matthew 1:18 the Greek text literally reads, “having in belly” (ἐν γαστρὶ ἔχουσα, en gastri echousa). Clearly, the Greek idiom means “pregnant.” Since a literal translation into the English may not communicate as well as the Greek, most translations render this expression dynamically: “with child” (KJV, ESV, NIV, NAS).
While some congregations will use translations that lean towards dynamic equivalence, it is my conviction that we should use those that favor formal equivalence (literalness). This is why I prefer the ESV to most other modern versions.
Aren’t modern translations the product of textual criticism?
Textual criticism is the process of reconstructing the original reading of a text when two or more manuscripts disagree. Incredibly, we have over 5,700 Greek manuscripts! None of these are in exact agreement. However, over 99% of the disagreements are easily explained: a misspelled word, a same line repeated twice, a line left out, etc. Sometimes a scribe will import a familiar phrase into a passage. He might be used to hearing, “Grace and peace unto you,” and he comes across a passage that says, “Grace unto you.” So he accidentally writes, “Grace and peace unto you” since he is used to hearing it that way. Again, almost all of the textual variants are easily explained.
Are modern translations wrong for using textual criticism? No. EVERY translation, including the KJV, is a result of textual criticism. The underlying Greek text of the KJV is called the “Texus Receptus.” The original TR is the result of the textual criticism of the Catholic monk, Erasmus. Later, Theodore Beza made nine more editions to Erasmus’s text.
Do modern translations intentionally alter the text to remove important doctrines?
           
There will always be some who intentionally mistranslate the Bible in order to communicate false doctrine (e.g. The New World Translation), but this is a false and slanderous accusation against good, conservative translations, and a classic case of circular reasoning. Someone will open their KJV, compare it with a modern translation, and then show that a doctrine has been left out. They may then accuse the modern translation of heresy. But the original languages must be the standard, not the KJV or any other English translation.
If there is a modern translation conspiracy, it’s a pretty poor one since some verses in modern translations express the fundamentals of the faith with greater clarity than the KJV. Several examples could be pointed out.[13] Consider just one: Romans 9:5. The KJV reads, “Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.” Compare that with the ESV: “To them belong the patriarchs, and from their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen.” The ESV is much clearer on the deity of Christ in this verse. Jesus is God over all! Once again, if there is a conspiracy, it’s a pretty poor one.
In addition to the changes in the text itself, some object to modern translations because of their marginal notes. For example, in Mark 1:1 the evangelist employs the phrase “Son of God.” This expression is found in the KJV, NAS, NIV, and ESV. However, the three modern translations (NAS, NIV, and ESV) contain a marginal note telling that some early manuscripts do not contain the phrase. It may be suggested that marginal notes such as these confuse the reader. However, when first published, the KJV contained 8,422 similar marginal notes, some of which are still contained in some modern editions of the KJV.
Aren’t there some verses missing in most modern translations?
Since there are some discrepancies among the 5,700 plus Greek manuscripts, each translation committee must determine which reading to follow. Modern translations may omit words or verses due to evidence in the manuscripts. The three that are most commonly noted are Mark 16:9-20, John 7:53-8:11, and I John 5:7-8.
Simply put, no conspiracies exist here. Translators of good, modern translation are simply following the manuscript evidence. Consider an example from Revelation 16:5.
KJV Revelation 16:5 And I heard the angel of the waters say, Thou art righteous, O Lord, which art, and wast, and shalt be, because thou hast judged thus.
ESV Revelation 16:5 And I heard the angel in charge of the waters say, “Just are you, O Holy One, who is and who was, for you brought these judgments.
The KJV uses the phrase “and shalt be” where virtually every modern translation (apart from the NKJV) inserts “O Holy One.” Why do modern translations move in this direction? Because every single Greek manuscript on Revelation 16:5 contains the reading “O Holy One” instead of “and shalt be.”[14] Modern translators are not seeking to undermine the Word of God. They are merely reflecting the evidence in the Greek manuscripts.
In the cases of Mark 16:9-20 and John 7:53-8:11, neither are found in the earliest of the Greek manuscripts. However, though both lack strong support, most modern translations, including the ESV, do include these verses in the translation. Most contain a marginal note telling that the earliest manuscripts do not include these verses. A marginal note such as this does not distort the Word of God.  As mentioned elsewhere in this document, the original publication of the KJV contained over 8,000 marginal notes.
The most controversial omission is I John 5:7-8: “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one” (KJV). This text is commonly called the Comma Johanneum. Why do many modern translations omit this sentence? Once again, they choose to follow the evidence in the manuscripts. The earliest manuscripts of 1 John do not contain the sentence, and it is barely attested to in the recent ones. Erasmus, the man responsible for editing the Greek text that underlies the KJV, did not put the Comma in the first or second editions. And though it appeared in the third edition (1522), many believe that he inserted it to harmonize with the Latin Vulgate, which contains the verse. To date, there are only a few manuscripts that contain the Comma, all of which are recent, and most of which have the reading in the margin, not the text itself. In short, no conspiracies exist. The translators are simply following the evidence in the manuscripts.
Modern translations are under copyrights. Isn’t this marketing the Word of God?
It is true that virtually all modern translations fall under copyright laws. However, upon completion of the KJV, King James I of England assigned it Cum Privilegio (Lat. “with privilege”). The Cum Privilegio is a patent which protects the work for the life of the person who holds the copyright, plus 50 years. In this case, the patent was secured in the name of the Crown. Therefore, the patent on the KJV is in place for the duration of the British Crown, plus 50 years. Today, although the KJV is not copyrighted in the US or most other countries, the patent is still in effect in England. All Authorized Versions of the Bible in Great Britain are generally printed under agreements with Cambridge and Oxford. If the fact that the KJV is to be preferred in the US because it is not under copyright, does that mean that it shouldn’t be preferred in the England since it is still under the Cum Privilegio? By no means. Any translation should be taken upon its own merits, not whether or not it is under copyright.
Are those who work on modern translations liberals who smuggle their homosexual agenda into the translation?
This was an accusation leveled at the NIV. Though I prefer not to use the NIV in public ministry, this is a false accusation. The easiest way to discover if there is a conspiracy is by looking at passages in the NIV that deal with the topic of homosexuality. Here is a comparison of a few:
  • Romans 1:26
KJV For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
NIV Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones.
  • I Corinthians 6:9
KJV  Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
NIV Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders
Romans 1 is a very important text on the topic of homosexuality. As the reader can see, the NIV makes no effort to alter the meaning from the KJV. I Corinthians 6:9 is even more telling. The phrase “homosexual offenders” in the NIV is even clearer than the KJV. Once again, if the NIV translators have a conspiracy, it’s a pretty poor one.

Another objection that moves in this direction regards Westcott and Hort. Some charge that these two men, who worked on the Greek text that underlies some modern translations (first published 1881), were heretics and sympathetic to Roman Catholicism. In response to this charge, I am not aware of any modern translation since WWII that has used Westcott and Hort’s text. In addition to this, the Roman Catholic monk Erasmus worked on and edited the text that underlies the KJV. If Westcott and Hort’s work should be dismissed because an alleged association with Rome (which is a false charge to begin with), should the text edited by a member of the Roman clergy be given a pass?
Shouldn’t the KJV be preferred since it is easier to memorize?
There is some merit to this argument. For many, especially for those who grew up under the sound of the KJV, it is easier to memorize and it sounds like Scripture. However, not all have this experience. Frankly, there are many who find modern translations easier to memorize (myself included). Each person ought to memorize out of the translation of his or her own choosing.
Doesn’t a change in translations indicate a move in the wrong direction, usually towards liberalism?
This may be true some of the time, but this is certainly not true across the board. In the last couple of decades, broader Christianity has seen a major shift towards conservative doctrine. Some of these were denominations and churches who were overrun by liberals. This shift did not take place under the KJV but primarily under modern translations.
Changing to a good, modern translation does not indicate a change in philosophy or doctrine. Rather, it indicates respect for the doctrine of perspicuity.
Will I be asked to change the translation I carry if the pastor begins preaching out of a different translation?
No!
Isn’t the ESV descended from the RSV? Is the ESV any different?
One of the main concerns about the RSV was that the translation committee contained some liberal scholars. In stark contrast, both the oversight and review committees of the ESV were comprised of conservative, orthodox scholars and pastors. This difference is evidenced by a comparison between the two translations.Consider the following examples:
  •  Deity of Christ in the Psalms
 Psalm 2:7
RSV I will tell of the decree of the LORD: He said to me, “You are my son, today I have begotten you.
ESV I will tell of the decree: The LORD said to me, “You are my Son; today I have begotten you.
   Psalm 110:1

 

RSV A Psalm of David. The LORD says to my lord: “Sit at my right hand, till I make your enemies your footstool.”

 

ESV A Psalm of David. The LORD says to my Lord: “Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.”

 

  • Virgin, not young woman
 Isaiah 7:14

 

RSV Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, a young woman shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
ESV Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

 

  • Person of the Holy Spirit
Romans 5:5

 

RSV And hope does not disappoint us, because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit which has been given to us.

           

ESV And hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us.
  • Propitiation not expiation
Romans 3:25

 

RSV Whom God put forward as an expiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins;

 

ESV Whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins.

 

  • Deity of Christ in the New Testament
Romans 9:5

 

RSV To them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ. God who is over all be blessed for ever. Amen.

 

ESV To them belong the patriarchs, and from their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen.


Why is this a good time to change translations at SRBC? 

The KJV is a fine translation (one that leans towards formal equivalency); therefore, up until this point, I have not felt the urgency to change. In addition to this, I believe it is very important to respect those who have grown up under the sound of the KJV. For the first ten years of my public ministry, I have asked those who carry modern translations to be patient with those who still carry the KJV. However, I believe we are at the point where the overall congregation (as well as both saved and lost visitors) will profit from a clearer and more understandable translation of the Word of God.

 

[1]. The clarity of Scripture is known as the doctrine of perspicuity. Though several definitions could be offered, Mark Thompson’s serves well: “The clarity of Scripture is that quality of the biblical text that, as God’s communicative act, ensures its meaning is accessible to all who come to it in faith” in A Clear and Present Word, NSBT (Downers Grove: Invervarsity, 2006), 169-70. It should be noted, however, that although the perspicuity of Scripture assumes clarity, Wayne Grudem is correct when he says that Scripture is not able to be understood all at once, without effort, without ordinary means, without the reader’s willingness to obey, without the help of the Holy Spirit, without the possibility of human misunderstanding , and never completely. See Grudem’s article, “The Perspicuity of Scripture” in Themelios 30:3 (2009): 291-301.

[2]. Grudem’s (292) sarcasm is helpful here, “In a day when it is common for people to tell us how hard it is to interpret Scripture rightly, we would do well to remember that not once in the gospel do we ever hear Jesus saying anything like this: “I sympathize with your frustration – the Scriptures relevant to this topic contain unusually complex hermeneutical difficulties.”
[3]. Ibid., 293.
[4]. Ibid., 306.
[5]. This may be a good place to remind ourselves that the KJV translators were quite concerned with the clarity of God’s Word: “We do not deny, nay, we affirm and avow, that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English set forth by men of our profession … containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God.… No cause therefore why the word translated should be denied to be the word, or forbidden to be current, notwithstanding that some imperfections and blemishes may be noted in the setting forth of it….” (The Translators to the Reader, 1611, xix). The Baptist Confession of 1688 reflects a similar idea: “Because these original tongues are not known to all the people of God, who have a right unto; and interest in the Scriptures, and are commanded in the fear of God to read [Ac 15:15] and search them [Jn 5:39], therefore they are to be translated in to the vulgar language of every nation, unto which they come [1 Cor 14:6, 9, 11-12, 24, 28], that the Word of God dwelling plentifully in all, they may worship Him in an acceptable manner, and through patience and comfort of the Scriptures may hope [Col 3:16].”
[6]. See Appendix A for a more extensive list of examples.
[7]. A more exhaustive list can be found in James R. White’s The King James Only Controversy (Minneapolis: Bethany House, 1995, 2009). I have found White’s work to be the most comprehensive, fair, and articulate book on this subject.

[8]. Further examples of obsolete words can be found in Appendix B.[9]. Other examples are Sheth and Seth; Pau and Pauh; Cis and Kish; Agar and Hagar; Jeremiah, Jeremias, Jeremie, and [Jeremy]; Henoch and Enoch;  Jered and Jared; Noe and Noah; Jonah, Jona and Jonas; Jephthae and Jephthah; Balak and Balac; Sara and Sarah; Gidion and Gideon; Elijah and Elias; Kora and Core; Elisha and Eliseus; Hosea and Osee; Isaiah, Esaias and Esay; Hezekiah and Ezekiah; Zechariah and Zecharias; Judas, Judah, Juda and Jude; Zera, Zara and Zarah; Marcus and Mark; Lucas and Luke; and Timothy and Timotheus. Jack P. Lewis, The English Bible from KJV to NIV, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1991), 48, cited in White, 288.

[10]. The word Paul employs here is καταρτισμός (katartismos). If Paul wanted to communicate the idea of “perfecting,” he could have used another word, such as τέλειος(teleios) or perhapsπληρόω(pleroo).
[11]. Gordon D. Fee and Mark L. Strauss, How to Choose a Translation for All Its Worth(Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2007), 28.[12]. White, 47.[13]. John 1:18, 14:14; Acts 16:7; Rom. 10:17; 1 Pet. 3:15; 2 Pet. 1:1; Jude 5; Rev. 1:8.

[14]. From where, then, did this reading in the KJV come? John Calvin’s successor, Theodore Beza, assumed a different reading from the Greek manuscripts that he had in his possession. The Greek word for “O Holy One” (ὁ ὅσιος) is similar in appearance to the verb “and shalt be” (ἐσόμενος). In the words of James White (237), “Beza believed there was sufficient similarity between the Greek terms … to allow him to make the change to harmonize the text with the other such language in Revelation.” But the KJV reading is not found in any Greek manuscripts.

]]> http://suberroad.org/bible-translations-at-suber-road-baptist/feed/ 0 Practical Implications of the Story of the Bible http://suberroad.org/practical-implications-of-the-story-of-the-bible/ http://suberroad.org/practical-implications-of-the-story-of-the-bible/#comments Thu, 29 Dec 2011 08:00:22 +0000 mwyatt http://suberroad.com/?p=242 From time to time, it is helpful to step back and reacquaint ourselves with the overarching story that the Bible tells. Reflection on this topic is important because of our tendency to “miss the forest for the trees.” We often get so focused on our favorite passages, doctrines, books, or sections of the Bible that we miss THE Story. The Story of the Bible is the story of God accomplishing His plan of redeeming His broken creation. Theologians have divided the story a number of different ways, but here at Suber Road Baptist Church we like to divide it as follows:

  • Creation – God is the rightful King of the world and worthy of our praise.
  • Fall – Mankind has rebelled against God as his rightful King.
  • Judgment – God justly punishes mankind’s rebellion.
  • Atonement – God made a way for mankind to be forgiven of their rebellion and have a restored relationship with Him through His Son, Jesus.
  • Resurrection – God approved of Jesus’ life and ministry, raising Him from the dead as the promised Messianic King.
  • Response – God’s redemptive action calls for a response of repentance to God and faith in Christ.
  • Consummation – God will ultimately redeem the entire cosmos.

As we consider the Story of the Bible, there are several practical implications that are relevant for us. The Story of the Bible provides. . .

1.     An Outline for Evangelism

This is a great way to share the Gospel, because the story of the Bible is the story of redemption. I think we often have a difficult time communicating the Gospel because we rip it from its context within this overarching narrative, which begins with Creation and ends with Consummation. I’ve found sharing the Gospel comes very natural when I share it within this overarching story. Also, stories just seem to stick with us better than truth presented in bullet-point fashion. This is true of both Christians trying to learn the Gospel better as well as unbelievers trying to learn Christian essentials for the first time. The tract Two Ways to Live: The choice we all face (by Matthias Media) is very helpful in learning to share the Gospel in this way.

2.     A Christian Worldview

Everyone has a set of lenses through which they see and make sense of the world around them, whether secular or religious. The Story of the Bible gives the basics of a Christian worldview. It accurately portrays reality, the real state of affairs — where we’ve been, what the problem is, what the solution is, and where all of this is going. It is the story of this book that answers the big questions of life: Who am I? Where did I come from? Am I valuable? Is there any purpose/meaning to life? The point is that if we want to have a right understanding of reality, of life, of where things are going, then we have to understand this Story.

3.     A Basis for Missions

As we reflect on the Story of the Bible we see that doing missions is not something that can be limited to a few proof texts in the NT. It is firmly rooted in the overarching mission of God to rescue His broken creation. The point is that our mission in taking the Gospel to the end of the world is based on His mission (John 17:18). We do missions because God is on a mission.

4.     A Framework for understanding the rest of God’s Word

Let’s be honest, there are parts of the Bible that seem very irrelevant to us. We are often left wondering, what does that mean to me? Having a thorough understanding of the big picture will help you to understand the parts. When confronted with a passage that is difficult, one of the first things I do is ask some of the following questions. Where does this passage/story fit into the overall story that is being told? How does it relate to one of the big picture points we’ve looked at? How is God bringing about His Plan or telling us about it in this passage? Much of the time, asking these kinds of questions will help you make some headway through those difficult passages.

]]> http://suberroad.org/practical-implications-of-the-story-of-the-bible/feed/ 0 Suffering in Light of the Gospel http://suberroad.org/suffering-in-light-of-the-gospel-2/ http://suberroad.org/suffering-in-light-of-the-gospel-2/#comments Thu, 22 Dec 2011 12:50:37 +0000 cbonadies http://suberroad.com/?p=238 The cross reveals the very possibility of suffering. In the Gospel a righteous man brought glory to God while dying on a cross. If we understand this, we will not “be surprised” (1 Pet. 4:12) when we experience the same.

One of the reasons that people lose faith in times of suffering is our tendency towards a religious rather than a Christian worldview. A religious worldview teaches, “bad things happen to bad people and good things happen to good people.” Far from a random thought, this is the default of the human heart. The biblical examples are numerous. This is what the disciples assume when, coming upon a blind man, they ask, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” (Joh 9:2) In Luke 13 Jesus recounts two tragedies. One involved Pilate slaying a group of Galileans and mingling their blood with sacrifices. The other concerned a tower that fell on a group of people at Siloam. In both cases the crowds assume that these tragedies took place because the people were greater sinners than most. Finally, remember the words of the natives of Melita when the snake came out of the fire to bite Paul: “No doubt this man is a murderer. Though he has escaped from the sea, Justice has not allowed him to live.” (Act 28:4) The assumption here is that an injury such as this can only mean that this man is guilty of something. All of this sounds very much like Eliphaz in the book of Job: “Remember: who that was innocent ever perished? Or where were the upright cut off?” (Job 4:7)

The flip side of this, of course, is that good things will happen to good people. Some think that as soon as I give my heart to Jesus my problems will disappear: my grades will come up, the pretty girl will fall in love with me, and grandma will get healed.

The Hebrews are struggling because they have adopted this religious world view of suffering. They cannot help but think, “How is it that we who follow Jesus are losing everything and those who have abandoned Jesus are doing so well?”

The Gospel brings us face to face with the very possibility of suffering. Peter writes boldly, “Therefore let those who suffer according to God’s will entrust their souls to a faithful Creator while doing good.” (1Peter 4:19) In a similar way, the writer of Hebrews shows us that if the sinless, righteous Son of God suffered while following God’s will, it is reasonable that His followers will too. (Hebrews12:5-7) In other words, the Gospel teaches us that pain, loss, and suffering are not a sign that a person is unfaithful to the Lord.

Hebrews 11 illustrates this so well. In this chapter the author takes an inventory of some of the great men and women of the faith. Many of these are described as accomplishing great things. But, note the contrast in the middle of these verses:

And what more shall I say? For time would fail me to tell of Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, of David and Samuel and the prophets– who through faith conquered kingdoms, enforced justice, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions, quenched the power of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, were made strong out of weakness, became mighty in war, put foreign armies to flight. Women received back their dead by resurrection.  ////   Some were tortured, refusing to accept release, so that they might rise again to a better life. Others suffered mocking and flogging, and even chains and imprisonment. They were stoned, they were sawn in two, they were killed with the sword. They went about in skins of sheep and goats, destitute, afflicted, mistreated– of whom the world was not worthy–wandering about in deserts and mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth. (Heb 11:32-38)

By faith some subdued kingdoms; by faith some were subdued by the kingdoms. By faith some escaped the edge of the sword; by faith others went to the sword. Some of these saints glorified God in life; others glorified God in death.

I cannot explain why some seem to live in the first half of this paragraph and why others exemplify the latter. But we can be sure that both were faithful to the Lord.

]]> http://suberroad.org/suffering-in-light-of-the-gospel-2/feed/ 0 Suffering in Light of the Gospel http://suberroad.org/suffering-in-light-of-the-gospel/ http://suberroad.org/suffering-in-light-of-the-gospel/#comments Tue, 22 Nov 2011 08:00:05 +0000 cbonadies http://suberroad.com/?p=232 As believers in Christ, we seek to understand everything in light of the Cross. The Gospel is the lens though which we understand the world, draw strength for daily living, and discover ultimate hope. Nowhere is this truer than in the area of suffering.

While there are many passages that teach us how to suffer in light of the Gospel, Hebrews 12 is one of the most vivid. Notice how the author weaves together our suffering with the suffering of Jesus:

Jesus’ Mission (vv. 1-3)

  • Jesus endured suffering (vv. 2-3)
  • The end of His suffering is glory (v. 2)

Our Mission (vv. 4-12)

  • We endure suffering (v. 7)
  • The end of our suffering is fruit (vv. 10-11)

For the author of Hebrews, Jesus’ suffering serves as a pattern for us. There is even a repetition of a key word: “endured” (vv. 2, 7). Just like a zipper brings together the teeth on both sides of a garment, the author zips together our suffering with the cross of Christ.

This pattern is not unique to the book of Hebrews. The apostles routinely call us to understand our own suffering in light of the cross. Consider Romans 8:16-17: “The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs–heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him. Peter does something similar: “Beloved, do not be surprised at the fiery trial when it comes upon you to test you, as though something strange were happening to you. But rejoice insofar as you share Christ’s sufferings, that you may also rejoice and be glad when his glory is revealed.” (1 Peter 4:12-13)

What does this mean practically? The only way that a believer can come to grips with suffering in his or her own life is by coming to grips with the pain in Jesus’ life. We cannot even understand suffering apart from the Gospel. This is why the passage in Hebrews begins with the words, “Consider Him…” (v. 3) In other words, when you as a believer experience a trial, the first move is always to look to the cross.

It has been wisely said, “If God can make sense of the suffering of Jesus, He can most certainly make sense of the suffering in your life.” Hebrews 12 reveals four important points about Gospel-centered suffering: the possibility, the progress, the purpose, and the potential. We uncover the first in the next post.

]]> http://suberroad.org/suffering-in-light-of-the-gospel/feed/ 2 The Complexity of Suffering (pt 7) – So What? http://suberroad.org/the-complexity-of-suffering-pt-7/ http://suberroad.org/the-complexity-of-suffering-pt-7/#comments Wed, 16 Nov 2011 13:42:35 +0000 cbonadies http://suberroad.com/?p=228 In the book Grief and Pain in the Plan of God, Walter Kaiser gives eight reasons why God allows suffering in this present world. They are Retributive, Disciplinary, Empathetic, Vicarious, Doxological, Revelation, Apocalyptic, and Testimonial. The issue of suffering is complex indeed! The implications of a survey such as this are far reaching and remarkably practical. First, we must exercise a degree of restraint in reading too much into any given tragedy. Most of the time, a simplistic answer will not do. Consider the responses that the American people heard on 9-11 when the planes crashed into the Twin Towers. Many people on the conservative right understood this event to be the judgment of God against Americans for immorality and apostasy. Not to be outdone, some from the liberal left assumed the opposite: God is judging America because of its birth defect of slavery, oppression of women, and exploitation of the poor. Both pulpits were essentially crying, “America’s chickens have come home to roost!” (to quote Jeremiah Wright).

On the surface these two responses appear to be antithetical. One is conservative and other is liberal. One believes that God judged the nation because of sexual sin, while the other pointed to social sin. What is easily missed here, however, is that both sides are in essence drawing the same theological conclusion: this must be the result of God’s judgment (Retributive). Each side is offering a simplistic answer to a very complex question. There are other possibilities here. Could God have caused or allowed 9-11 to allow His people to weep with those who weep (Empathetic)? Is it possible that God wants to grow Christians through pain and suffering (Disciplinary)? Perhaps this was God’s way of bringing the lost to faith? Why is it that both sides of the aisle automatically assumed a retributive purpose?

This brings us to a second point. Even in a single event, we should recognize that God has many different purposes. As a case study, consider the book of Lamentations. In the book, Jeremiah the prophet laments the capture and fall of Jerusalem. The destruction is so terrible that the prophet finds himself in a state of shock.

Why did God allow the city to be sacked? Why this national tragedy? A careful study of the book of Lamentations shows not one, but multiple reasons. Some parts of the book do highlight a retributive purpose (Lam. 1:12; 2:1). God does seem to be judging people for unbelief and unfaithfulness, but there is more. In the midst of this tragedy Jeremiah is given the opportunity to weep with those who weep (1:16). For the prophet, the purpose was empathetic. By the time we get to the third chapter, we see yet another reason. This event was designed to bring glory to God (3:21-26). In addition to all of these, this is a great opportunity for the nation to turn her face to the Lord and grow spiritually (3:20-26). To say that God has only one purpose in any given tragedy is far too simplistic.

In light of the fact God has many reasons for allowing pain and suffering, each individual must personalize a response. The question is not, “God, why did you allow this?” A better question is, “Lord, how do you want me to respond? What are you trying to accomplish in my life?” Even through a single event, the Lord may have a different purpose for each individual.

]]> http://suberroad.org/the-complexity-of-suffering-pt-7/feed/ 0 Fork in the Road: Decision Making in the Proverbs (pt. 3) http://suberroad.org/decision-making-3/ http://suberroad.org/decision-making-3/#comments Thu, 10 Nov 2011 08:00:48 +0000 mwyatt http://suberroad.com/?p=220 In this post we are going address the third key ingredient to decision-making in Proverbs: Submitting to the Lord’s will. Read part 1 and part 2 in this series.

III.         Submitting to the Sovereign

In the process of decision making, the most important ingredient is God Himself. Proverbs repeatedly encourages the reader to consider the Lord’s role in one’s decisions. Several things can be said about the Lord’s role in one’s decisions. However, it is important to note that in all of these things the theme of God’s sovereignty is constantly present.

The first thing to which Proverbs alerts the reader, is that the Lord is the one who gives approval to your plans. He is the One who answers. Prov. 16:9 says, “The heart of man plans his way, but the LORD establishes his steps.” This verse brings the reader face to face with the reality that while he may seek wise counsel and make good plans, it is ultimately the Lord who determines the outcome (cf. Prov. 16:33)

Second, Proverbs also emphasizes God’s role as the Judge of one’s motives. Prov. 16:2 says, “All the ways of a man are pure in his own eyes, but the LORD weighs the spirit” (cf. 17:3; 21:2). The Lord sees both what we do and why we do it. Not only does this verse speak of God’s sovereignty, but it also implies that an individual should be suspicious about his motives. In that way, this verse echoes the declaration of the prophet Jeremiah about the wickedness of the heart of man (Jer. 17:9). This is also a good time to remind ourselves of what Gospel-driven motives look like. In the Gospel, we do things out of a love for the Lord, not to exalt ourselves or in an attempt to manipulate Him.

Third, Proverbs notes that, in the end, God’s plans are what will prevail. Prov. 19:21 says, “Many are the plans in the mind of a man, but it is the purpose of the LORD that will stand” (cf. 21:30-31). We are forcefully reminded that no plan of man can possibly upset the designs of God for this world. The LORD reigns! Practically, this should do at least two things for us:

  1. Inspire confidence in believers as we face an uncertain future.
  2. It should also encourage the believer to ask whether his plans are in line with those of the Lord.

How is the reader to respond to God’s sovereign role in the decision making process? Proverbs gives instruction here as well.  First, we must trust in the Lord rather than our own wisdom. Prov. 3:5-6 says, “Trust in the LORD with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make straight your paths.” Prov. 16:3 says, “Commit your work to the LORD, and your plans will be established.”The Hebrew word translated “commit” (galal) properly means “to roll.” This is a colorful way of saying that we should give the burden and weight of our plans to Him. The emphasis is placed on depending on God in the things you do.

Second, we must respond in humility to our limited knowledge. Prov. 27:1 reminds us of the reality of unforeseen events. “Do not boast about tomorrow, for you do not know what a day may bring.”Prov. 20:24 says, “A man’s steps are from the LORD; how then can man understand his way?” This is an acknowledgment that sometimes we are just clueless about how God is working in our lives. Sometimes even the best of plans don’t go the way we expected and we are left wondering, what in the world is God doing? This is why the trust is so important.

Decision-making is a rich subject in the Proverbs. It overlaps with many other themes, from friendship to God’s sovereignty. Yet, Proverbs clearly emphasizes at least three main ingredients in making wise decisions: advice, planning, and submitting to the Lord. If one is going to make wise decisions that honor the Lord, none of these things can be neglected.

]]> http://suberroad.org/decision-making-3/feed/ 0 Fork in the Road: Decision Making in the Proverbs (pt. 2) http://suberroad.org/decision-making-2/ http://suberroad.org/decision-making-2/#comments Thu, 03 Nov 2011 08:00:38 +0000 mwyatt http://suberroad.com/?p=216 Previously we noted that, according to Proverbs, there are at least three key ingredients to wise decision making: advice, planning, and most importantly, submitting to the Lord. In this post we are going address the second of these: planning.

II. Making Plans

Having a well thought out plan and direction is emphasized throughout Proverbs. Wise decisions are not usually made “on the fly,” but involve weighing the options. For those who will take the time to plan, the chances of success increase. Prov. 21:5 says, “The plans of the diligent lead surely to abundance, but everyone who is hasty comes only to poverty.” This proverb reminds the reader that there are no short-cuts when it comes to being successful; those who are willing to pay their dues by making adequate preparations and working hard find great blessing awaits them. As with all the proverbs, this is not an iron-clad promise. Rather, it is a general principle which recognizes that, generally, planning and hard work pay off (cf. 14:23).

As with the issue of acquiring advice, Proverbs has much to say about the kind of person who makes plans. Prov. 13:16 says, “In everything the prudent acts with knowledge, but a fool flaunts his folly.” This proverb is affirming the old cliché which says “actions speak louder than words.” Prov. 14:15 says, “The simple believes everything, but the prudent gives thought to his steps.” This verse is saying the prudent person is discerning about the way he lives. He is thoughtful about his course of action. On the other hand, the simple person just accepts everything without thinking about it.

In addition, Proverbs also speaks of one’s thoughts and plans in terms of their rightness or wrongness. That is, Proverbs often casts one’s planning (and the accompanying actions) in a decidedly moral light. Prov. 14:8 says, “The wisdom of the prudent is to discern his way, but the folly of fools is deceiving.” Derek Kidner clarifies this passage by saying, “Way in Proverbs means ‘conduct’ rather than ‘career’: hence this saying makes moral reflection the essence of shrewdness, whereas we tend to reduce shrewdness to business-sense.” Kidner’s testimony is borne out by the context of this passage which addresses immoral actions (cf. 14:15, 18). The application for us that the Proverbs are primarily (although not exclusively) concerned about making plans and being thoughtful about godliness rather than about the specifics of what job to take or what car to buy. The fact that believers often think first and foremost in categories other than godliness speaks to the distance between their priorities and those of the Word of God.

Further, Proverbs emphasizes the necessity of implementing your plans. Specifically, Proverbs mentions two extremes that one must be careful to avoid. The first is taking no action (14:23). Here, a person is all talk. However, talk accomplishes little. You have to act on your plans. The second is taking the wrong action (28:19).

That is, wasting time with irrelevant activity. The point is that both of these result in poverty. While Proverbs encourages the reader to take the right action based on good planning, it also provides a dose of reality. Prov. 13:12 says, “Hope deferred makes the heart sick, but a desire fulfilled is a tree of life.” There are few things more discouraging than the realization that something you have planned will take much longer than you expected. This verse is meant to help us be realistic about how long it may take our plans, in the providence of God, to be brought to completion.

For all the effort, diligent planning is worth it in the end. As with acquiring advice, there are specific results that come with thoughtfulness and planning. Proverbs cites things such as abundance (21:5), security (10:9, 29), joy (12:20), and a blessed life or long life (12:28) as products of planning.

]]> http://suberroad.org/decision-making-2/feed/ 0 Fork In the Road: Decision Making in the Proverbs (pt 1) http://suberroad.org/decision-making-1/ http://suberroad.org/decision-making-1/#comments Thu, 27 Oct 2011 12:12:39 +0000 mwyatt http://suberroad.com/?p=213 A Fork in the road

Making decisions is a part of life. It is something that we do constantly. There are simple decisions, like what to eat for lunch. There are also more complex decisions, like who to marry, what kind of friends to have, what career to pursue, or what house to buy. In all of these things, God’s people should be especially concerned with making decisions that honor the Lord. Several questions naturally arise as a result:

  • How does one go about making such important decisions?
  • What guidance does the Scripture offer?
  • How is biblical wisdom seen in the decision-making process?

According to Proverbs, there are at least three key ingredients to wise decision making: advice, planning, and most importantly, submitting to the Lord. Our goal is to examine these three ingredients and explain how each of them contributes to wise decision-making in Proverbs.

I.              Acquiring Advice

Prov. 11:14, “Where there is no guidance, a people falls, but in an abundance of counselors there is safety.”The first ingredient for wise decision-making is consulting others for advice. Acquiring a variety of opinions about the decision to be made is critical. There is a prerequisite, however. This may seem to be stating the obvious, but getting advice is recognizing that advice is needed. Prov. 19:20 says, “Listen to advice and accept instruction, that you may gain wisdom in the future.” This verse is an exhortation to recognize one’s own need for advice. In other words, we are called to an attitude of humility. Prov. 12:15 says, “The way of a fool is right in his own eyes, but a wise man listens to advice.” The fool thinks that he has all the answers. He is so self confident that he will not accept advice. In contrast, the wise man is humble enough to listen to the advice of others.

Good decision making is often thwarted by our own pride. There is, however, wisdom in taking advice (Prov. 13:10). A wise person is one who recognizes the value of thoughtful advice (Prov. 20:15). In fact, Proverbs tells us that one of the great blessings of friendship is “earnest counsel” (Prov. 27:9).

]]> http://suberroad.org/decision-making-1/feed/ 1