Ankerberg Show

Announcer: Welcome to the John Ankerberg Show, classics edition. For decades, we have been privileged to host esteemed scholars discussing a wide range of topics from apologetics and science to biblical prophecy and beyond. Join us as we revisit these timeless conversations and make them accessible to you wherever you are.

Dr. John Ankerberg: Today on the John Ankerberg Show, is the Bible the Word of God or just the words of men? What does the Bible claim about itself? And what evidence does the Bible provide to prove its claim that it is true, that it did come from God?

My guest is philosopher and theologian Dr. Norman Geisler, Dean of Southern Evangelical Seminary.

Dr. Norman Geisler: Is the Bible the Word of God or is it the words of men? The Bible claims to be the Word of God and the Bible proves to be the Word of God.

In this program, we are going to show how this is the only book in the world that really claims to be and proves to be the Word of God.

Dr. John Ankerberg: So today, is the Bible the Word of God or just the words of men? We invite you to join us for this edition of the John Ankerberg Show.

Dr. John Ankerberg: Welcome. What evidence does the Bible offer that it comes from Almighty God? Well, today, Dr. Norman Geisler continues to present the evidence that shows that it did come from God.

And the question we want to address is, how do we know that the Bible has been translated correctly? What about all the modern translations? As you will hear, we think some of the new translations are very bad, some of them are good, and some of them are better. Which are which? I thought you might be interested in the answer to that question, so listen.

Dr. Norman Geisler: The Bible, is it translated correctly? We have asked some very important questions in preceding programs. We asked the Bible, who wrote it? The Bible, are there any errors? The Bible, is anything missing? The Bible, which books belong in it?

And now we want to ask the question, what about modern translations? Is it translated correctly? Basically, the answer to that is, there are many, many translations of the Bible. Some of them are bad, some of them are good, and some of them are better.

First of all, let us take a look at some of the translations. The translations of the Bible actually go back hundreds and hundreds of years in English, back to the 700s. We have listed over 1,200 translations of the Bible into English alone since 700 in our book, General Introduction to the Bible.

So, we have a lot of translations, but some of the main ones are listed here, we all know about the King James and the American Standard Version and the Revised Standard Version and the New International Version and the New King James.

I think what we are all asking ourselves is of all of the numerous Bibles out there, the numerous translations, are any of them really bad, really dangerous? Are any of them really good, and what about the ones in between? First of all, let us talk about the bad ones. I will mention just one here.

Some of the cults have made their own translations of the Bible, the New World Translation of the Jehovah's Witness cult is a bad translation. Take for example, John 1:1, they translate, "In the beginning was the Word, the Word was with God, and the Word was a god," small G.

That is a bad translation as any good Greek scholar can tell you that when the definite article is not used, it is referring to the nature rather than the individuality of it, and it should be translated in the beginning was the Word, the Word was with God, and the Word was of the very nature of God.

In fact, Jesus is called God many times in the New Testament. Hebrews 1:8 uses the definite article, saying to the Son, you are God. So that is a bad translation. They tend to distort the verses on the immortality of the soul, the deity of Christ, and a number of others. So, stay away from translations like that.

On the other hand, I would say most translations of the Bible are good. And by good, I mean all the essential doctrines, all the fundamental doctrines, all major and minor doctrines come through correctly in the translation. And it does not matter whether it is the King James, which I will say more about in a moment, which is archaic and the language is outdated.

Right on up to the NIV, the New International Version, none of them deny the deity of Christ, none of them deny the substitutionary atonement, or the bodily resurrection or any of the fundamentals of the faith. So, they are all good in that sense. Now, some of them are better than others. For example, I personally believe that the King James is archaic. It is out of date.

The words do not even have those meanings anymore. For example, anyone who thinks the King James was let down on a string from heaven and it was good enough for Paul and it is good enough for them, I would like to give a quiz to. What does he that letteth will now let mean? Second Thessalonians 2:7.

It means hinder. The word let, which means permit today, meant just the opposite in 1611. So, if you are reading the original King James, you are getting the wrong meaning because you are getting a meaning that is just the reverse of what it meant in 1611. Or try this one: The superfluity of naughtiness in James chapter 1 verse 21. What does that mean?

You do not have the foggiest idea. It means the overflowing of wickedness. Or what does this mean: We do you to wit of the grace of God. Second Corinthians 8:1. We do you to wit. We do not talk that way anymore. It means we want you to know of the grace of God.

Or quit ye like men. What are they quitting about? Actually, it means be strong like men. Second Corinthians 16:13. So, here we have verses that people do not even know what they mean and they say this is the Bible to be used. It is a good Bible, it was very good in its day, it lasted for a long time, hundreds of years, it was beautifully translated. It has beautiful poetry and rhythm to it.

But it is archaic and needs to be retranslated. So, we move to what I would call the better translations of the Bible.

Dr. John Ankerberg: Now, what do we consider to be the better translations of the Bible? And what evidence shows that they are better translations? Listen.

Dr. Norman Geisler: The better translations of the Bible, in my opinion, fall into two classes: those that are more literal and those that are more literary. Those that are more literal would be like the New American Standard Bible. I personally believe that that is probably the best literal translation of the Bible. It was done by conservative scholars, it was done by a group of scholars, not just one person.

It gives you the literal meaning of the original language. I believe it is the best study Bible if you want to know accurately what the original said. Get yourself a NASB, New American Standard Study Bible, and start studying it. On the other end of the spectrum, those Bibles that are translated by conservative scholars and a group of scholars that are more literary.

Anyone who studies the NASB knows that it is literal but it is kind of wooden. It does not flow well, it is not very memorizable. Whereas the New International Version is much more literary and done by all good scholars. All basic doctrines are the same and by the way, those who say that the NIV left out certain verses on the blood, you know, this simply is not true.

What they are doing is, they are going by the earlier and better manuscripts. In the same chapter that they supposedly left out a verse on the blood, there is another verse on the blood in that same chapter. If they were trying to get the verses on the blood out, they would have taken them all out. That is not the point. The point is that after 1840, from 1840 and following, we discovered a lot of earlier manuscripts.

When the King James Bible was translated in 1611, we had no manuscripts of the Bible that went back into the second, third, fourth, or fifth, even the sixth century. All of the manuscripts were very late. Just Beza, around 550, was used a little bit in the King James, and that was the earliest manuscript that was even used. From 1840 and following, we found Vaticanus manuscript around 325 AD, Sinaiticus, 350, Chester Beatty Papyri, 250 BC, Bodmer Papyri, 200, John Rylands Fragment from the first quarter of the second century, maybe as early as 114 AD.

And so, what they did, these earlier manuscripts had a little different wording and different verses in certain places than others. Classic example: First John 5:7. There are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit. These three are one.

The reason it is important to take a look at these earlier manuscripts is because they were closer to the original. If your manuscript comes from 1000 AD and the book was written at the time of Christ, then you have a thousand-year gap between it and you cannot be sure how accurately it was copied. But if you have a manuscript from 200 AD and 300, 400, then you are closer to the original. And these earlier manuscripts give us some different readings on certain verses. For example, first John 5:7. There are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit. These three are one.

You say, that is a great verse on the Trinity. It is right in the King James. But if you look in the NIV, you will not find the verse there at all. They take part of one verse and make another verse, but you will not find what I just quoted there. Well you say, why did they cut that verse on the Trinity out of the Bible? Because when Erasmus did his Greek Testament in the 16th century, there was not a single Greek manuscript that had that verse in.

In fact, he challenged anyone of his day because they said, "You are taking the Trinity out of the Bible." He said, "I am not taking the Trinity out of the Bible." Matthew 28:20 is still there, "baptizing in the name," singular, "the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit." Matthew 3:16 is still there, Father speaking from heaven, Holy Spirit descending, Christ is being baptized. We have all kinds of verses on the Trinity.

Well, why did you not put that verse in your Bible then, Erasmus? He said, "Because I cannot find a single Greek manuscript with it in." He said, "If you can find one, I will put it in." So, a few days later they came back and said, "Here is one." The ink was still wet on it. And Erasmus was forced to put it in his Greek Testament. That became the basis, ultimately the Textus Receptus, the received text, upon which the King James was based and it got in the Bible.

Then, from 1840 and following, when scholars discovered that we do not have that in any Bible in the second century, third century, fourth century, fifth century, that it was not in any of the early Bibles at all. They said, "Look, we have got to be honest and say that was a little gloss, a little note written in the margin of some Bible that some later scribe incorporated into the text." And it really was not in the original. We have got to be faithful to the original and it was taken out.

Another point that is very important is when they were making up the creeds and debating the deity of Christ and the Trinity, this verse, First John 5:7, was never quoted. If it had been there in the original Bible and had been in the manuscripts of their day, they surely would have quoted an important verse like this.

Dr. John Ankerberg: All right, we have seen that one example of a bad translation of the Bible is the New World Translation of the Jehovah's Witnesses. It is bad because the translators were not honest in translating the words. They inserted their own ideas into the text rather than allowing the text to accurately convey the meaning of the biblical writers.

And second, we have talked about the good translations. These translations convey all major and minor doctrines of the Bible correctly, accurately. Next, what should you keep in mind when you are looking to purchase a translation of the Bible? Dr. Geisler explains.

Dr. Norman Geisler: So, we have got really three kinds of translations: the bad ones, like the Jehovah's Witness, that are distorting essential truths. Good ones, where all the essential truths are there, but better ones. And I would think that better ones would include the New American Standard Bible, but it is very literal. The New International Version, which is more literary. And then there are some that are kind of halfway in between that improve on the King James and are literary but still literal. That would be the New King James Version of the Bible.

It still has the rhythm and cadence of the old King James, but it got rid of the archaisms, like he that letteth will now let and quit ye like men and so forth, and then updated it in modern language, but it is not very much of a paraphrase or interpretive. Here is what you have to keep in mind when you are looking at translations of the Bible.

Who are the people that translate? Were they biased? Now, obviously, the people who translated the Revised Standard Version were biased. These were liberal scholars and when they came to Isaiah 7:14, they said young maiden instead of virgin. Well, it had to refer to virgin because the verse is quoted in Matthew 1:21 and following and it says a virgin shall conceive. So, it is a bad translation and it comes out of the bias of the particular translators.

Whereas the New American Standard Bible, the New International Version, is not done by biased liberal scholars. And another important thing about these translations is they are done by a committee of several scholars, not just one person, ultimately, like say, for example, the Living Bible that was done by Ken Taylor, fine Christian, fine believer, doing it for his children, paraphrased it.

But it is not a literal translation, it is a paraphrase, and often it is a devotional paraphrase and people get blessed by it, but it is one person and it is a paraphrase. If you want a more accurate Bible, you need to get a Bible where a committee of people and is not really a paraphrase but it is a translation. And that would be Bibles like the New International Version and the New King James Version of the Bible.

But again, let me emphasize, all of the translations are good. We are not talking about bad versus good, we are talking about good versus better because all the essential truths are there, they have not been distorted, and you can pick up any of these translations apart from the Jehovah's Witness and a few other cultic translations, and all of the essential truths of the gospel are present.

Dr. John Ankerberg: Now, before we move on, if you missed our previous four programs, I asked Dr. Geisler to quickly summarize the evidence that proves that the Bible came from God. Listen.

Dr. Norman Geisler: Let me put this thing in focus. We have been talking in this whole series about the Bible from God to us. A chain reaching from God right down to the Bible in our hands. The first link in the chain is who wrote it: inspiration. The second link in the chain is really transmission. Has it been transmitted down the centuries correctly? And we saw that the original was written by men of God, inspired by God. We showed it has been copied accurately down through the years. The third link is canonization, which books belong in it? How did we get these 66 books?

Now, once you get it inspired, transmitted accurately, collected correctly, then the next and final link is translations into modern language. We must remember that all these translations are based on the same Bible. The same Hebrew Old Testament and Greek New Testament. The question is, if you put it in French, you put it in German, you put it in English, you put it literally in English, you put it in a paraphrase in English, but it is the same Bible. It is just different renderings of the same Bible, some more literary, some more literal. But we are not talking about different Bibles, we are talking about the same Bible based on the same Hebrew and Greek that brings the same truths across to us in different ways of stating it.

Dr. John Ankerberg: Now, what about the so-called errors in the Bible? Well, there is an illustration that Dr. Geisler gave to us, which I asked him to repeat, that I think will help you understand copyist errors. We do not believe there are any errors in the original manuscripts. Today, we believe we have accurate copies that have come down to us conveying what the biblical writers wrote.

Now, in some of those copies, we notice mistakes were made by the copyist. But because we have so many thousands of manuscripts that have come down to us, we know where the mistakes were made and what should have been written. Dr. Geisler presents the evidence for this fact. Listen.

Dr. Norman Geisler: Let me return to an illustration we used several programs ago to get the point across here. Let us take a look at the visual. Now, notice the first one. It is pretty clear that that means you have one 10 million, even though there is an error in the first letter. And the second line, there is an error in the second letter. But they all say the same thing, even though each one has an error in a different point.

Now, a lot of people are concerned about the so-called errors in the translation. Why does this one put it that way and the other one put it another way? Because you can get the same meaning across even though there are minor errors in translation. There is no one that would not pick up their 10 million dollars if they got that telegram or got that message saying that they have won 10 million dollars. And you should not put your Bible away because you are afraid that there are little errors in the translation. 100% of the message comes through even though there are minor errors in the translation.

Just like 100% of the message in this visual comes through. You look at that and 100% of that message, "You won 10 million dollars." And that is a big message that came through even though there is an error there. Likewise, the minor errors in translation do not obscure getting 100% of the message that God loves you, Christ died for you, rose from the dead, and you can be saved just by believing in him and trusting in him. That is the message of the Bible. It comes through clearly in almost all the major translations of the Bible.

Another point we should keep in mind is that we have 5,686 Greek manuscripts of the New Testament and maybe 10,000 of the Hebrew Old Testament in fragments and complete manuscripts. That is a neat thing, you know. We do not have the originals, but the fact that we do not have the originals does not really hurt anything. Number one, if we had the originals, somebody would probably be worshiping it. Remember the snake in the wilderness that was put on the pole, they were later worshiping it.

Number two, if we had the original, somebody has to be a custodian, right? They could tamper with it. But if you do not have any one original in the custodianship of any one group, and that group would claim to be the true church, of course, because they have the original, then you have it spread all over the world. Some of it in Russia, some of it in England, some of the United States. There is no way anyone can tamper with all the copies. God has actually preserved his originals in the copies, and he has preserved it from the possibility of worship and he has preserved it from the possibility of distortion.

Dr. John Ankerberg: Now, after hearing all of this evidence proving the accuracy of the Bible, how should it impact you? How should you live your life in relationship to the Bible's teachings? Dr. Geisler explains.

Dr. Norman Geisler: Let me kind of summarize this whole thing, the entire series. This book in our hand can be trusted because originally, God inspired the writings that were given through apostles and prophets who were given miracles to prove that they were men of God, who made supernatural predictions. Jesus confirmed it to be the Word of God. Archaeology has confirmed it, the unity of the Bible.

And furthermore, it has been so accurately transmitted down through the ages that whereas Homer's Iliad is only 95% accurate and the Mahabharata 90% accurate, this has been 99.9% accurately copied. And the .1 doesn't affect any doctrine, any major teaching of the Bible. The translations of the Bible are good. So, when you pick up this Bible, you have got the Word of God confirmed by acts of God, confirmed by the Son of God, accurately transmitted, and you have the very voice of God in your language speaking to you and to me.

Now, that puts the burden on us. If this is the Word of God, and we can pick it up and read it, then we are obligated to obey its message. We are obligated to live by this book. The Bible, nothing more, nothing less, and nothing else. If you need something that you can count on, remember the words of Peter when he said to Jesus, "Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life."

Announcer: Now, stay tuned as we revisit these timeless discussions and join us in celebrating the wealth of knowledge that continues to encourage and educate.

To learn more, please visit jashow.org. That is jashow.org. Or subscribe to us on YouTube.