Third Millennium Bible (TMB), New Authorized Version (NAV)


 

Home

Daily Scripture Readings

Overview

Bible Preface

Examples

Search the Bible

Word Comparisons

Reviews & Endorsements

Related Matter

Poster

Products

Order Form
- Special Discount

Leather binding now available!
Special Order

Other DEI Offerings

Bible Word Comparisons

Four Traditional Bibles
Compared with
Twelve Contemporary Bibles

Third Millennium Publications

(Go directly to citations)

Introduction

A phenomenon of the last third of the twentieth century has been the astonishing proliferation of contemporary Bible translations, all containing differing messages. Sociologists and theologians may disagree as to the cause of this phenomenon, but the stark fact is that the sacred Word of God, which has been both divinely inspired and providentially preserved from the earliest times to the present day, has been altered in innumerable ways by contemporary translators involving changes in language, meaning, and theology.

It must be remembered that what modern translators are attempting to change is not the wording of a transitory document, but the holy and blessed Word of God. Can we through our silence suffer this to happen? Is not the Word of God eternal? Does not also the twentieth century have a responsibility to transmit the unsullied Word to generations to come?

The nature and magnitude of this gross and tragic contemporary development is the subject of this Bible Word Comparison.

It is the position of the compiler of this study that the large number of translations of the Scriptures is evidence of an underlying translator hostility toward many of the great ideas and thoughts that have characterized over 3,000 years of Jewish-Christian cultural history. We point out specifically that many modern translators and their client Bible publishers too often reflect the negative aspects of the post-Enlightenment era. We assert that the social and cultural orientation of many modern translators has influenced negatively their translating efforts. Modern translators of the holy Word of God have actually politicized, in multifaceted manifestations, their Bible translating efforts. Not only have they demeaned and downgraded the exalted diction of traditional Biblical English, but they have also contaminated biblical idiom with political ideas and concepts alien to the spirit and tenor of the Scriptures. Twentieth-century materialism and secularism, and also the influence of special interest groups, have each impacted to one degree or another most modern Bible translations, as has the Gnosticism of an ancient Egyptian and Hellenistic heretical culture.

In our approach to the problems posed by modern Bible translations, we broaden the scope of previous comparative word studies. Earlier word studies have compared wording in the Authorized (King James) Version with a few contemporary versions. In this Bible Word Comparison, we compare selected texts of four traditional bibles with twelve widely used contemporary bibles. The traditional bibles used in this comparison are the following:

  1. The Authorized Version of 1611, commonly known as the King James Version, which served as the dominant Protestant Bible for approximately 375 years;
  2. The Douay-Rheims Version, the Catholic version of 1609, which served as the principal Catholic English translation for over 350 years;
  3. The 21st Century King James Version (1994), an updating of the 66 books commonly found in the Old and New Testaments of the King James Version;
  4. The Third Millennium Bible (1998), an updating of all 80 books of the original Authorized (King James) Version of A.D. 1611.
To compare with the four traditional bibles enumerated above we have selected the following frequently used contemporary bibles:
  1. Contemporary English Version (1995)
  2. God’s Word (1995)
  3. New American Bible (1970)
  4. New American Standard Bible, Updated (1997)
  5. New International Version (1973)
  6. New Jerusalem Bible (1985)
  7. New King James Version (1982)
  8. New Living Translation (1996)
  9. New Revised Standard Version (1989)
  10. The New Testament and Psalms: An Inclusive Version (Oxford University Press, 1995)
  11. Revised English Bible (1989)
  12. Today's English Version (1976)

Before discussing specific word comparisons, we list in the following paragraphs five major differences between Traditional Bibles and Contemporary Bibles:

1.) Traditional Bible translators use a more formal, literal, and precise translating technique than is used in contemporary bibles. Most contemporary bibles reflect a less precise technique, known as dynamic equivalence. In essence, this latter technique results in translations which, in the mere subjective opinions of the translators, purport to reflect the meanings rather than the text, and are allegedly more in accord with the presumed intentions of the original writers. Some contemporary translators use an even more extreme translating technique referred to as paraphrase; wherein the translator simply decides approximately what the original writers may have meant, and then casts it in modern colloquial English. The use of these nonliteral translating techniques accounts for much of the flood of differing readings found in contemporary bibles.

2.) Traditional bibles all employ Biblical English. Contemporary bibles use the secular, colloquial English currently in use in commerce and the media. Biblical English has been the historic language of liturgy, worship, and prayer. It is not, as has often been alleged, Elizabethan or Shakespearean language. Biblical English, in fact, has never at any time been the popular or spoken language anywhere. It is the language reserved exclusively for the holy Scriptures and for liturgy, worship, and prayer. It owes its character to the faithful and literal translation from the original biblical languages into English. It has as a matter of history found its acceptance in Scriptures for more than five hundred years in over ninety percent of the English-speaking churches throughout the world. Only in the last half of the twentieth century does one find secular, colloquial English being used in Bible translations.

3.) The New Testament Greek text of traditional bibles, used continuously for almost two thousand years, is generally referred to as the Ecclesiastical Text or the Byzantine-Antiochian Text. The text used as a basis for contemporary bibles is dramatically different, and is referred to among scholars as the Alexandrian cluster of texts. This text was unused and ignored in the Christian community for over fifteen hundred years, and was first used in an English-language Bible translation in 1881. Since then it has become the basis for most contemporary bibles. The Alexandrian Text used in contemporary bibles contains almost 3,000 fewer words than the traditional text, and reflects the secular bias of the ancient Hellenistic and Alexandrian culture of the third century A.D.

4.) Most modern Protestant bibles omit books, totaling over 126,000 words, contained in the Authorized (King James) Version of 1611. These omitted books are known as the Apocrypha/ Deuterocanonical Books. The Apocrypha/Deuterocanonical Books in the Authorized Version of 1611 are: 1st and 2nd Esdras, Tobit, Judith, The Rest of the Chapters of the Book of Esther, The Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, The Song of the Three Holy Children, Susanna, Bel and the Dragon, The Prayer of Manasseh, and 1st and 2nd Maccabees. All but two of these books are found in the Douay-Rheims Version. Most of these books were included in the original editions of the most widely used bibles of the last six hundred years, including the Wycliffe Bible (1382), the Coverdale Bible (1535), the Great Bible (1539), the Geneva Bible (1560), the Bishop's Bible (1568), the Douay-Rheims Version (1609), and the Authorized Version (1611). These beautiful writings were also included in the original German Luther Bible, the Latin Vulgate, the Syriac Peshitta, and Ethiopic Ge`ez, Armenian, Coptic, and Old Church Slavonic versions. In addition, these books were included in the Septuagint, the Greek Old Testament used by the Apostolic Church. For reasons never widely publicized, and without adequate advance public knowledge or discussion, these books were removed from the Authorized Version by agreement among the publishers and certain special interest groups approximately two hundred years after the original printing, and have not yet reappeared in most Protestant bibles.

5.) The actual wording of the Scriptures has been changed in contemporary bibles in hundreds of instances. Plainly stated, many contemporary bibles have adapted God’s Word to accommodate to recent secular social and political trends through the use of gender-neutral language and other forms of socio-linguistic engineering, currently referred to as "political correctness." This development in modern translations is truly a lamentable attempt to modify the Word of God to conform to the prevailing secular culture.

In the balance of this Bible Word Comparison we will be discussing specific examples (among many) of theological, linguistic, social, and political biases which have been incorporated into modern translations. We suggest that the reader focus attention primarily on the specific biblical words being compared rather than on the comments of the compiler. Though necessarily subjective, our remarks are based on forty years of legal experience in studying and evaluating the meaning and nuances of English words, together with years of comparative study of English-language bibles. But, if you do not agree with our comments, ask yourself how best to explain the enormous differences in both text and meaning between contemporary bibles and traditional bibles. Work out your own explanation as to how and why these substantial differences developed in translations of the inspired Word of God.

Abbreviations Used in Comparisons

Traditional Bibles

AV - Authorized Version (King James Version)
D-R - Douay-Rheims Version (Original Catholic English Version)
KJ21 - 21st Century King James Version
TMB - Third Millennium Bible

Contemporary Bibles

CEV - Contemporary English Version
GW - God' Word
NAB - New American Bible
NASBU - New American Standard Bible Updated
NIV - New International Version
NJB - New Jerusalem Bible
NKJ - New King James Bible
NLT - New Living Translation
NRSV - New Revised Standard Version
OxL - New Testament & Psalms - An Inclusive Version
REB - Revised English Bible w/ Apocrypha
TEV - Today's English Version

Bible Word Comparison

Exodus 20:13

AV - Thou shalt not kill.
D-R - Thou shalt not kill.
KJ21 - Thou shalt not kill.
TMB - Thou shalt not kill.
 
CEV - Do not murder.
GW - Never murder.
NAB - You shall not kill.
NASBU - You shall not murder.
NIV - You shall not murder.
NJB - You shall not kill.
NKJ - You shall not murder.
NLT - Do not murder.
NRSV - You shall not murder.
REB - Do not commit murder.
TEV - Do not commit murder.

Comment

Does God say that human beings shall not kill each other (traditional bibles) or, alternatively, that they shall not deprive another person of life in a manner which secular laws and judicial decisions define as murder (contemporary bibles)? Note that most modern translators, in using the word murder rather than kill, he in fact exempted certain types of killing of human beings from the commandment. Examples, among others, are doctor assisted suicide, negligent killing, abortion, and euthanasia, none of which are legally considered to be murder. God's Word is that thou shalt not kill a human being, not merely that you shall not murder a human being.

Proverbs 29:7

AV - The righteous considereth the cause of the poor
D-R - The just taketh notice of the cause of the poor
KJ21 - The righteous considereth the cause of the poor
TMB - The righteous considereth the cause of the poor
 
CEV - The wicked don't care about the rights of the poor
GW - A righteous person knows the just cause of the poor.
NAB - The just man has a care for the rights of the poor
NASBU - The righteous is concerned for the rights of the poor
NIV - The righteous care about justice for the poor
NJB - The upright understands the cause of the weak
NKJ - The righteous considers the cause of the poor
NLT - The godly know the rights of the poor
NRSV - The righteous know the rights of the poor
REB - The righteous are concerned for the claims of the helpless
TEV - A good person knows the rights of the poor

Comment

In traditional bibles the cause of the poor is regarded with great concern and compassion. But contemporary bibles focus on the rights of the poor, quite a different matter.

In traditional translations the circumstances of the poor are intended to elicit loving compassion by those more fortunate. But in some contemporary bibles what should elicit compassion becomes a vehicle for the promotion of the political rights, entitlements, and claims on society by the poor. Thus so-called social justice supplants compassion for our less fortunate brethren. When godly love for the poor is replaced by legal claims or rights to be politically asserted by the poor, love and compassion vanish and are replaced by class tensions and conflict.

Ecclesiastes 9:9

AV - Live joyfully with the wife whom thou lovest
D-R - Live joyfully with the wife whom thou lovest…
KJ21 - Live joyfully with the wife whom thou lovest…
TMB - Live joyfully with the wife whom thou lovest…
 
CEV - Life is short, and you love your wife
GW - Enjoy life with your wife, whom you love
NAB - Enjoy life with the wife whom you love
NASBU - Enjoy life with the woman whom you love…
NIV - Enjoy life with your wife, whom you love
NJB - Spend your life with the woman you love
NKJ - Live joyfully with the wife whom you love…
NLT - Live happily with the woman you love…
NRSV - Enjoy life with the wife whom you love
REB - Enjoy life with a woman you love…
TEV - Enjoy life with the woman you love

Comment

Traditional bibles use the blessed words live joyfully by contrast to the hedonistic, secular admonition to enjoy life, in most contemporary bibles. In traditional bibles, the preacher of Ecclesiastes recognizes and celebrates the unique and blessed status of traditional marriage together with its joyful potential. The difference between living with one's wife and living with a woman you love is obvious. The Bible is devoid of God's blessing on live-in arrangements, which violate over 3,000 years of Jewish-Christian values and morals.

Isaiah 7:14

AV - Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a Son
D-R - Behold a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son
KJ21 - Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a Son
TMB - Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a Son
 
CEV - A virgin is pregnant; she will have a son…
GW - A virgin will become pregnant and give birth to a son
NAB - …the virgin shall be with child, and bear a son
NASBU - Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son
NIV - The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son
NJB - …the young woman is with child and will give birth to a son…
NKJ - Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son
NLT - Look! The virgin will conceive a child!
NRSV - Look, the young woman is with child and shall bear a son
REB - A young woman is with child, and she will give birth to a son…
TEV - …a young woman who is pregnant will have a son…

Comment

Here is a monumental difference between the traditional bibles and some contemporary bibles. A reading of this verse in context discloses the writer's intention to describe a notable and astonishing miracle, namely, the birth of a child to a virgin. But some modern versions substitute the words young woman for virgin, thereby tending to deprive the birth of our Lord of its miraculous and blessed nature.

The translating of this verse in some contemporary bibles is a prime example of the materialist and secularist challenge to the whole concept of the miraculous. In its ancient form this verse is prophetic of the birth of Christ. Changing it is an attack on miracles generally, but more specifically upon the divine birth of our Lord.

Is this deviation from traditional bibles consistent with wide-spread efforts of secularists and atheists to explain biblical miracles in terms of natural phenomena?

I Maccabees 9:10

AV - If our time be come, let us die manfully for our brethren…
D-R - …But if our time be come, let us die manfully for our brethren…
TMB - If our time be come, let us die manfully for our brethren…
 
NAB - If our time has come, let us die bravely for our kinsman…
NJB - If our time has come, at least let us die like men for our countrymen…
NRSV - If our time has come, let us die bravely for our kindred…
REB - …if our time has come, let us die bravely for our fellow countrymen…
TEV - If our time has come, let's die bravely for our fellow Jews…

Comment

It appears that certain political groups, in their efforts to promote a gender-neutral culture, object to the attribution of the quality of manliness to a soldier, even though the meaning is well understood. This is an example of the constantly recurring linguistic bias in contemporary bibles against masculine characterizations.

Matthew 16:16

AV - And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ
D-R - Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ
KJ21 - And Simon Peter answered and said, "Thou art the Christ
TMB - And Simon Peter answered and said, "Thou art the Christ
 
CEV - Simon Peter spoke up, "You are the Messiah
GW - Simon Peter answered, "You are the Messiah
NAB - Simon Peter said in reply, "You are the Messiah
NASBU - Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ
NIV - Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ
NJB - Then Simon Peter spoke up and said, 'You are the Christ
NKJ - …Simon Peter answered and said, "You are the Christ
NLT - Simon Peter answered, "You are the Messiah
NRSV - Simon Peter answered, "You are the Messiah
OxI - - Simon Peter answered, "You are the Messiah
REB - Simon Peter answered: 'You are the Messiah
TEV - Simon Peter answered, "You are the Messiah

Comment

Note the difference among translations in respect to the enormously important understanding of the nature of Christ Himself. Most traditional and conservative translators use the word Christ, whereas the word Messiah is used by most contemporary translators.

We pose this question: is the difference in word selection due to relative skill in translating, or social and theological bias? Messiah is a historically Hebrew concept and describes a much awaited and anticipated hero-figure who would deliver Israel from its political oppressors and had been prophesied by Hebrew prophets for hundreds of years before Christ. The Messiah was historically not endowed with the power to forgive sins. The word Christ is a more complete and adequate description of Jesus, the Son of God who came to save and forgive. Hebrew and Greek scholars tell us that the Jewish concept of Messiah did not include viewing Jesus as God (Oeos).

Luke 2:14
AV - …and on earth peace, good will towards men.
D-R - Glory to God in the highest; and on earth peace to men of good will.
KJ21 - "…and on earth peace, good will toward men!"
TMB - "…and on earth peace, good will toward men!"
 
CEV - "Peace on earth to everyone who pleases God."
GW - "…and on earth peace to those who have his good will!"
NAB - "… and on earth peace to those on whom his favor rests."
NASBU - "…And on earth peace among men with whom He is pleased."
NIV - "…and on earth peace to men on whom his favor rests."
NJB - …and on earth peace for those he favours.
NKJ - "…And on earth peace, good will toward men!"
NLT - "…and peace on earth to all whom God favors."
NRSV - "…and on earth peace among those whom he favors!"
OxI - - "…and on earth peace among those with whom God is pleased!"
REB - "…and on earth peace to all in whom he delights."
TEV - "…and peace on earth to those with whom he is pleased!"

Comment

Does the birth of Christ, accompanied by the praise of a multitude of angels, signify a glorious event to be shared by the human race generally, or is it a blessing shared only by and for those who are favored by God and pleasing to Him? Does not the Lord send His rain on the just and the unjust? (Mt 5:45)

Luke 4:4

AV - …man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.
D-R - …Man liveth not by bread alone, but by every word of God.
KJ21 - '…Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.'
TMB - '…Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.'
CEV - (omitted)
GW - (omitted)
NAB - (omitted)
NASBU - (omitted)
NIV - (omitted)
NJB - (omitted)
NKJ - 'Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.'
NLT - (omitted)
NRSV - (omitted)
OxI - - (omitted)
REB - (omitted)
TEV - (omitted)

Comment

Scripture is used to interpret Scripture. Thus, every time a crucial word or statement is left out, biblical teaching is undermined. The opposite is also true, namely, every time the translator leaves in a crucial word or statement, as in versions based on the traditional, canonical Byzantine text, it preserves and reinforces a crucial Christian truth. In this case, the truth is that we serve a God who asks us to live by every word of His revelation.

Also similar omissions from most contemporary bibles are Matthew 17:21; 18:11; 23:14; Mark 7:16; 9:44, 46; 11:26; 15:28; 16:9-20; Luke 17:36; 23:17; John 5:4; 7:53-8:11; Acts 8:37; 15:34; 24:7; 28:29; Romans 16:24, to name a few among others.

This particular type of deletion is illustrative not of a translation error but rather of the selection by modern translators of a different, shorter, and inferior text for translation purposes.

Luke 23:32

AV - And there were also two other malefactors led with him, to be put to death.
D-R - …two other malefactors led with him to be put to death.
KJ21 - …two others, malefactors, led with Him to be put to death.
TMB - …two others, malefactors, led with Him to be put to death.
 
CEV - Two criminals were led out to be put to death with Jesus.
GW - Two others, who were criminals, were led away…
NAB - Now two others, both criminals, were led away…
NASBU - Two others also, who were criminals, were being led…
NIV - Two other men, both criminals
NJB - Now they were also leading out two others, criminals, to be executed with him.
NKJ - There were also two others, criminals, led with Him…
NLT - Two others, both criminals, were led out to be executed…
NRSV - Two others also, who were criminals, were led away…
OxI - - Two others also, who were criminals, were led away…
REB - There were two others with him, criminals who were…
TEV - Two other men, both of them criminals, were also…

Comment

Traditional bibles characterize the men who were crucified with Christ as malefactors. Contemporary bibles characterized these two men as criminals. A malefactor is an evil person by definition. A criminal, on the other hand, is a person condemned by a ruling judicial and political authority. Not all people who are adjudged criminals according to some secular code of law, are malefactors, but all malefactors are evil-doers. Conduct which political society defines as criminal is profoundly different from conduct which biblical tradition defines as evil. For example, some political protestors are arrested, convicted and jailed; but they are not necessarily malefactors.

The law of right and wrong - God's law - defines who are malefactors. The law of political powers defines who are criminals, some of whom may be malefactors, and some of whom may be, in fact, heroes and saints.

Acts 8:37

AV - …I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
D-R - …I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
KJ21 - …"I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."
TMB - …"I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."
 
CEV - (omitted)
GW - (omitted)
NAB - (omitted)
NASBU - …"I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."
NIV - (omitted)
NJB - (omitted)
NKJ - …"I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."
NLT - (omitted)
NRSV - (omitted)
OxI - - (omitted)
REB - (omitted)
TEV - (omitted)

Comment

Notice that here all traditional bibles, and also the conservative contemporary bibles, contain the ringing confession and affirmation of the Ethiopian official that Christ is the Son of God. But most modern translators either omit this clause entirely or put it in a footnote implying that only lesser versions contain it. Such is yet another example of omissions in contemporary bibles resulting from the translators' use of the shorter Alexandrian cluster of Greek texts. It has been suggested previously in this discussion that the Alexandrian Text, the basis for almost all modern translations, is the product of editing by early Gnostic sects in order to conform Scripture to suit their particular heretical theological agenda. It requires no stretch of the imagination to conclude that the affirmation that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, as found in traditional versions, would hardly suit such an agenda.

Acts 10:34

AV - Then Peter opened his mouth, and said …God is no respecter of persons
D-R - And Peter opening his mouth, said…and God is not a respecter of persons.
KJ21 - Then Peter opened his mouth and said "…God is no respecter of persons…"
TMB - Then Peter opened his mouth and said …God is no respecter of persons
 
CEV - Peter then said: Now I am certain that God treats all people alike.
GW - Then Peter said, "Now I understand that God doesn't play favorites."
NAB - Then Peter proceeded to speak and said, "In truth, I see that God shows no partiality."
NASBU - Opening his mouth, Peter said: "I most certainly understand now that God is not one to show partiality"
NIV - Then Peter began to speak: "…God does not show favoritism…"
NJB - Then Peter addressed them, '…God has no favourites…'
NKJ - Then Peter opened his mouth and said: "…God shows no partiality."
NLT - Then Peter replied, "I see very clearly that God doesn't show partiality."
NRSV - Then Peter began to speak to them: "I truly understand that God shows no partiality,"
OxI - Then Peter began to speak to them: "…God shows no partiality…"
REB - Peter began: "…God has no favourites,"
TEV - Peter began to speak: "I now realize that it is true that God treats everyone on the same basis."

Comment

Contemporary bibles are the source of one of the great errors of modern secularists. This passage in traditional bibles indicates that God does not show favor on the basis of worldly status (i.e., social, economic, cultural or political status of people). It makes no difference whether people are poor or rich, weak or powerful, male or female, or of any particular color of skin. Contemporary bibles, on the other hand, say that God has no favorites and treats all people alike. This, of course, is utterly untrue. A recurring message of the Bible from Genesis to Revelation is that God does in fact have His favorites, namely, His children who sincerely love Him, earnestly try to live by His Word, keep His commandments, and receive His Son as Savior and God. The implication of modern translations, on the other hand, is clear: it doesn't make any difference how a person lives or how grossly he defies God's law; such a person shares God's favor equally with persons who love Him and live in accordance with His laws.

Historic Bibles reflect this seminal theme: God has a preference for the good--not a preference for the poor or the rich, or the weak or the powerful. God's preference extends to virtuous and godly people, regardless of their race, national origin, color, or economic circumstance.

1 Corinthians 13:1

AV - Though I speak with the tongues of men and of Angels, and have not charity
D-R - If I speak with the tongues of men, and of angels, and have not charity
KJ21 - Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not charity
TMB - Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not charity
 
CEV - What if I could speak all languages of humans and of angels? If I did not love others…
GW - I may speak in the languages of humans and of angels. But if I don't have love
NAB - If I speak in human and angelic tongues but do not have love
NASBU - If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have love
NIV - If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love
NJB - Though I command languages both human and angelic --if I speak without love
NKJ - Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love
NLT - If I could speak in any language in heaven or on earth but didn't love others…
NRSV - If I speak in the tongues of mortals and of angels, but do not have love
OxI - If I speak in the tongues of mortals and of angels, but do not have love
REB - I may speak in tongues of men or of angels, but if I have no love
TEV - I may be able to speak the languages of men and even of angels, but if I have no love

Comment

In this wonderfully moving and eloquent chapter, the traditional bibles are correct in using charity instead of love. Webster's New International Dictionary, Second Edition, Unabridged (Webster II), defines charity with precision: "Christian love; specif.: The virtue or act of loving God with a love which transcends that for creatures, and of loving others for the sake of God;--is rendered in Greek as agape in the New Testament." The word love, though it may connote selflessness, can also mean a number of other things, including brotherly love, romantic love, erotic love, love of country, etc. Charity is the highest form of love, i.e., Christian love (agape). There is no precise English word equivalent for the Greek word agape. The traditional translators chose charity rather than love as more precisely meaningful. Charity triumphs even over faith and hope.

This is an age devoted to the banalizing, romanticizing, commercial exploitation and perversion of the concept of love. The great traditional translators providentially anticipated this development and provided the best possible translation of the Greek word agape in order that the depth and precision of its meaning might not be lost.

Conclusion

We who prepared this study prayerfully hope that this little book will, to some degree, alert both the lay reader and the scholarly community alike to the dangers which current political and cultural biases in contemporary Bible translations pose to the very foundation of 3,000 years of Jewish-Christian culture. The secularist battle for the hearts and souls of men is being fought not only on the theological level, but also on the social, political, and linguistic level through the vehicle of contemporary alterations in the historic Word.

Hopefully, goodly and godly souls will be inspired to join us in our efforts to combat this spreading threat to truth and virtue. We welcome the help of believers from academia, the churches, and all segments of the public at large in exposing the moral and cultural errancy of many modern Bible translations. It is an urgent task. Our work has only begun.

We earnestly pray that others will join with us in a commitment to accurate and faithful proclamation of the eternal, divinely-inspired and preserved Word of God.


Copies of the complete Bible Word Comparison (62 citations compared) are available in a softcover 80 page book from the publisher for $4.50 plus $2.00 shipping for the first copy and $.50 for each additional copy sent to the same address. Please send check or money order to the address below. Credit card orders may also be placed by toll-free phone at 1-800-225-5521.


Bible Word Comparison
ISBN # 1-892833-01-8
Copyright 1998 by Deuel Enterprises, Inc.
Gary, SD 57237
Published by Third Millennium Publications
A division of Deuel Enterprises, Inc.
1111 N Coteau Street
Gary, SD 57237 USA
All rights reserved.

The publisher is pleased to grant permission to quote, reproduce, or transmit brief passages from this material for book reviews, articles, church bulletins, and for personal use without written consent of the publishers, provided that the source and copyright are acknowledged and appended.

Home - Daily Scripture Readings - Overview - Bible Preface - Examples - Search the Bible - Word Comparisons - Reviews -  Poster - Order Form - Copyright

Copyright 1998-2017 Deuel Enterprises, Inc.

For more information contact:
E-mail: TMB@TMBible.com
Phone: 1-800-225-5521 or 1-605-272-5575
Fax: 1-605-272-5306

Address standard mail to:
Third Millennium Publications
a division of Deuel Enterprises, Inc.
PO Box 40 - 1111 N Coteau Street
Gary, SD 57237 USA