Devoted to the Propagation and Defense of New Testament Christianity
VOLUME 21
February 5, 1970
NUMBER 39, PAGE 7

Questions And Answers

Send All Questions To: Eugene Britnell, P.O. Box 3012, Little Rock, Arkansas 72203

We have a letter from a reader in De Kalb, Texas who wants some information concerning a Bible called "The Holy Name Bible" printed by Faith Bible and Tract Society in Salem, West Virginia.

I have no information about that Bible and have been unable to learn anything about it. If any of our readers can furnish any information about it, please do so and we will pass it on to the one who needs it.

While we are on the subject, I would like to make a few observations concerning versions and translations of the Bible.

I am deeply concerned about the trend away from the authorized versions and the widespread acceptance of the modern translations. Many of the new Bibles are perversions rather than versions, and are mutilations rather than translations. For example, "Good News For Modern Man," also known as "Today's English Version" is a dangerous translation. It is wrong in many places. It teaches salvation by faith only, and many other doctrinal errors. In fact, it contradicts itself. In the translation of Romans 1:17 it reads, "For the gospel reveals how God puts men right with himself: it is through faith alone, from beginning to end. . ." But in James 2:24 it reads, "So you see that a man is put right with God by what he does, and not because of his faith alone." So one time it is by faith alone and another time it is not. As we have been telling the sectarians for years, it can't be both ways!

If the trend continues, the day will come when you can't tell if a person is reading from the Bible or the newspaper. The style and language will be the same. We have already reached the point that when many talk and pray they speak of and to God as if he were a man. To some he is "the man upstairs" or some comparable expression.

The modern and private translations may have a place, and I have several of them, but they should be used as one would use a commentary. I realize that the King James Version is not the "one the apostles used" but when it comes to beauty and style it has no equal. Millions have learned and obeyed the truth by studying it. Some of its words have become obsolete by a change in meaning in our time, but one can still determine the message which they should convey to us. And these obsolete terms have been corrected in the American Standard Version, which I also recommend.

Let us encourage people to stay with the authorized versions, and practice what we preach. When it comes to authority — and that's what we should read the Bible for isn't it — when you leave the King James and American Standard, you leave me. I believe that they reveal the will of God, and they represent the knowledge and work of approximately one hundred and fifty great scholars.