(Authors note: The original version of this article was written on January 28, 2020)
Acts 8 records the story of Philip and the Ethiopian Official. Philip is led by the Holy Spirit to go to a wilderness area between Jerusalem and Gaza to share the Gospel with a man returning home to Ethiopia from Jerusalem, where he had been to worship. As Philip catches up with the man’s chariot, he asks a simple question. “Understandest thou what thou readest?” The Ethiopian’s response is important to note. He asked, “How can I, except some man should guide me?” He then invited Philip to join him in his chariot and expound the Scripture to him.
Mind you, this man wasn’t an ignorant person. He was “of great authority under Candace queen of the Ethiopians…had the charge of all her treasure, and had come to Jerusalem for to worship.” You don’t usually get elevated to such positions by being incompetent. Yet he was having trouble understanding this portion of Scripture.
The sticking point for the Ethiopian was to whom the writer in Isaiah 53 was referring. Was he referring to himself or someone else? (see verse thirty-four) It would seem obvious to us, given that the third person pronouns are used, that the writer was referring to someone else. But that point of grammar, for whatever reason, was not obvious to an educated and influential Ethiopian government official.
Having posed his question to Philip, verse thirty-five tells us, “Then Philip opened his mouth, and began to make the argument for a revised translation into the vernacular…” Actually, he didn’t do that. “Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus.” The solution to the man’s inability to comprehend the scripture he was reading was for a believer to preach it to him!
It should not shock us if a reader has difficulty understanding the Word of God. Sinful man cannot read the words of God and expect to immediately and always understand. “…The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.” (1 Corinthians 2:14) Even Peter, who was one of the penmen of the New Testament, said of the inspired writings that came from Paul’s pen that some of it was “hard to be understood.” That’s why the believer needs to Holy Spirit to guide him into the truth and why the unbeliever needs a Christian to preach and teach the truth of God’s word to him.
What does this story teach us about Bible translation? The argument is continually made against the continued use of the King James Version that its language is archaic and, therefore, it needs to be updated so the ordinary person can understand it. Sometimes you will read or hear William Tyndale’s words hijacked and used to bolster the argument, as in, “We just want the plowboy to be able to read and understand the Bible.”
While this argument may seem convincing on the surface, underlying it could be the dangerous philosophy that scholars who translate the Bible have the license to adjust God’s words to fit man’s thinking. When someone says the KJV needs to be retired because it uses some archaic language, they may not mean that we should just eliminate the “thee’s” and “thou’s” in our Bibles. (An excellent case can be made for using those pronouns, but that is another topic.) They may mean that we need a more interpretive version of God’s Word since modern man has difficulty understanding it. That is a problem because God didn’t inspire ideas and thoughts and then give man the liberty to use whatever words he wants to communicate those ideas and thoughts. God inspired words, preserves those words, and promises to bless those words. The words communicate God’s truth, and man has no right to change the words God used and still call the resulting translation “the Word of God.” By all means, we should explain the meaning of God’s words to those who don’t understand. But do not call the explanation of God’s Word “the Bible.” There is a vast difference between a translation and an explanation. A translation can only be called the Word of God insomuch as it is faithful to the inspired, preserved words of God.
I recognize that the KJV has undergone several revisions over the centuries. Changes to typeset, spelling, and minor word usage have been made to keep pace with those changes in the English language. I have a reprint of the 1611 edition in my library, complete with “f’s” instead of “s’s.” It’ f a fantaftic exercife to reade it. I do not believe that the spelling of English words, the definitions, or the shape of the letters are inspired by God.
Let me also acknowledge that when translating, sometimes there is literally no word in a language that means the same as a word in the original. In these rare cases, the translator must proceed with caution. Sometimes, a functional equivalent works best. For instance, the translators of the KJV used the expression “God forbid” to translate the strongest negative possible because there is no direct English equivalent. They felt that only by invoking the name of God in the negative could they communicate the force of the words in the original.
That being said, I urge you to be very cautious whenever someone argues for a new English translation based on the threadbare excuse that we need something easier to understand. The Bible isn’t hard for man to understand; it is impossible for man to understand without the help of the Holy Spirit. An educated Ethiopian official had trouble understanding parts of it. Peter had trouble understanding parts of it. And any plowboy would have trouble understanding it, too, without the Holy Spirit and perhaps a Christian to preach it to him.
Having heard Philip’s explanation and coming to understand that Christ was the One about whom Isaiah wrote, the Ethiopian asked, “See here is water. What doth hinder me to be baptized?” Having just come from Jerusalem, he knew that baptism had something to do with following Jesus and wanted to know if there was anything preventing him from being baptized. Verse thirty-seven records for us that Philip said, “If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest.” To which the Ethiopian responded, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.” He came to that conclusion not because he received an updated version of scripture but because “some man” guided him to the truth.
Copyright © 2024 Steven Chambers. All Rights Reserved. Used By Permission.
