In spite of the title of this article, you are still probably asking yourself if the English-speaking world really needs another New Testament translation. The answer is a definitive YES!
There are many reasons but I will give you the best reason first. The Kings James Version proved to be so popular that other versions that came along afterwards were forced into using much of the same vernacular in order to be economically viable.
In other words, if these companies expected to sell their versions, they were forced to keep much of the KJV vernacular and many obvious transliterations.
For an example of transliteration you can examine the Greek word "angelos." Angelos correctly translated would render messenger, every time. However, Instead of translating angelos into the English word messenger the KJV scholars transliterated it angel.
You might ask yourself why would they do such a thing in the first place? Only God knows for sure but one safe bet would be that the term was already in common use when the manuscripts were translated.
Besides, “angel” held a strong connection with the human psyche then and now because of the images it conjures up in the mind. You have a multitude of paintings of angels in many different situations the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel is just one example. The word messenger simply doesn’t stir the same imagination and emotion in the human heart.
An even more telling example of transliteration found in the KJV and those that followed is the Greek word “christos.” Instead of translating christos into "anointed" which is the exact rendering and carried a profound meaning to the Jewish culture in which Jesus appeared, the KJV transliterated it and capitalized it Christ.
This error – and make no mistake it was an error even though the scholars knew better – has caused obvious interpretational difficulties to the reader. If fact, it is well known that most actually use the term “Christ” as Jesus’ last name, causing them to miss the deeper meaning that is put forth by the correct translation “anointed.”
Some of you may be saying to yourself, big deal. However, if you were actually interest in learning while you study, you would have been forced into digging deeper into the biblical significance of the word “anointed.”
In reality, the KJV has many more significant biases than those caused by the transliteration of certain words. The Bible student must keep in mind that scholars with a very definite ecclesiastical paradigm translated the KJV. They were members of the Church of England. This denomination had its own sordid history of persecuting and torturing heretics (those who disagreed with the "powers that be"). They were also under certain strictures of the King of England.
As if this wasn't compromising enough, they had no personal experience of any other form than sacerdotal hierarchy. Because of this, they translated scriptures that had to do with leadership and "followship" in the strongest English terms. I will only mention one example here in this article.
In Hebrews 13:17 the verse states.
"Obey them that have the rule over you, and be submissive, for they watch for your souls, as those who must give account, let them do so with joy and not with grief, for that would be unprofitable to you.”
There are several words in the Greek language for "obey", but the one translated "obey" in Hebrews 13:17, is NOT one of them. For an example, hupakouo, is usually translated obey in Matthew 8:27,..."the winds and the sea obey him."
And yet the word peitho, rendered “obey” by the KJV in the Hebrews text under discussion, NEVER implies unwilling obedience and is never used in regard to obedience to congregational leaders.
Peitho, the word translated "obey" in Hebrews 13:17, is translated 23 times "persuade", 10 times "trust", and one time "agree". It is translated 5 times "obey," but only in Hebrews 13:17, 21, does it refer to obedience to another person (See Acts 5:36,37; Romans 2:8; Galatians 3:1; James 3:3). Don't you think it just a little strange that it is translated "obey" when speaking of "leadership" in this place?
Another scripture that is a blatant example of ecclesiastical bias is found in 1 Timothy 3:1-2. The Kings James Version renders it thus:
"This is a faithful saying: If a man desires the office of a Bishop, he desires a good work. A Bishop then must be blameless..."
The translators, under the king's injunction to keep the main terms of the Church of England's ecclesiastical form, make two main errors. The first is adding a word to the text that doesn't appear in the Greek, i.e. "office". There is neither a word in the text for office NOR the idea of office outside their own paradigm.
The second is an error in translation. The word translated "Bishop" is episkopos. The word means to "oversee", to "tend".
Vine defines it thus: "EPISKOPOS, lit., an overseer (epi, over, skopeo, to look or watch), whence Eng. "bishop"..." The passage in 1st Timothy actually reads, "If a man wants to oversee, he desires a good work."
One reformer wrote,
"I am convinced that the King James Translators, laboring under an 'institutional church' mentality, selected the strongest words possible which conveyed the idea that the people must submit to the authority of the Clergy. In this way King James could control the people through the Church, of which he was Supreme Ruler."
Another prominent bias that was handed down and instilled in the mind of countless churchmen was the unbiblical limiting of women’s role in the churches. One example among many should suffice here.
The King James translators, as previously mentioned, were well acquainted with "ministers" within the Church of England hierarchy. They consistently translated the word diakonos "minister" when referring to a worker of the congregation except when it came to Phoebe, and then they translated it "servant" (Romans 16:1-2). Are you surprised? By the way, Phoebe is the only person in the entire New Testament who is referred to as a diakonos of a specific church and yet the KJV translators and most others that have followed suit purposefully dilute her “position”.
As we know from experience, "minister" is a word that has become a title. This word is taken from the Latin translation of the Greek word diakonos meaning "servant," or properly "table servant." The word group is translated 38 times "minister" by the KJV. It is translated "ministry" 16 times, "ministering" 3 times, and "ministration" 6 times. It is translated "serve", "servant", and "service" 21 times. It would be correct to translate it "serve" and its derivatives every time.
These example are just an hint of ecclesiastical biases included in the KJV New Testament that definitely effects the students beliefs and practices. Countless others could have been noted but it was not the purpose in this article to detail all translator biases that have adversely effected generations of Bible students but to point out the reasons why a non-ecclesiastical rendition of the New Testament is due.
If you want to read more on the subject you can view my theses, “Men Who Would Be Kings” at
http://biblemaverick.com/articles.html
Well praise God; there is such a translation now on the market. In fact, it is called “A Non-Ecclesiastical New Testament.” The author is a self-taught Greek scholar with a PhD in math from the University of Florida. He spent more than 10 years researching, compiling and revising his translation and used only the earliest manuscripts.
It is available in both PDF and hard copy and a preview is provided before purchase so that you can examine it for yourself. All the information can be found at
http://biblemaverick.com/Frank.html.
John