|Home: Questions and Answers: Do you believe that there are contradictions among the translations?
Do you believe that there are contradictions among the translations?
It depends on what a person is calling a "contradiction." King James only advocates tend to argue (this is how I would
argue when I was a KJV only advocate) that if a particular verse read slightly different in a modern translation than how
it reads in the KJV, it was considered a "contradiction." This is not a contradiction at all, but translators choosing to
re-translate a specific rendering of words into English that may better convey the original intent of the author, and that
best reflects the original language of the text.
Even more seriously, KJV only advocates will exaggerate differences due to the translators' textual choice from which to
translate their Bible. So, if a textual difference exists between the original language text used by the modern
translators and the TR, the original language text used as the base for the KJV, that difference is considered a
contradiction. Let me give an example: Colossians 1:14 reads in the KJV, In whom we have redemption through his blood,
even the forgiveness of sins. In the New American Standard, Colossians 1:14 reads, In whom we have redemption, the
forgiveness of sins. Note that the phrase through his blood is added in the KJV translation. King James Only advocates
argue (quite hysterically, I might add) that this is an example of modern Bible versions, like the NASB, removing an
important biblical doctrine, in this case, Christ's atoning work by his blood on the cross. They will point out that such
an omission by the modern version "contradicts" the Word of God and what it teaches about Christ's atonement. But, such
an argument is highly exaggerated. First, it assumes that the KJV is the standard by which all other Bible versions are
to be judged as orthodox. Second, the modern versions only "contradict" the translation of the KJV as it is based upon
the TR text. Modern versions are based upon a Greek text that biblical scholars believe with good reason better reflects
Paul's original letter to the Colossian Christians. Thus, the "contradiction" claimed by the KJV only advocates is really
between two different text types. And third, the modern versions do not contradict what the Bible teaches on the atonement
of Christ by his blood, because those translations affirm it in other passages that give biblical revelation concern
Christ's work on the cross. The NASB has "through his blood" in Ephesians 1:7, a verse that is almost identical to
Colossians 1:14. Thus, these kind of so-called "contradictions" are truly fabricated, and all attempts to use passages
like Colossians 1:14 as evidence to argue that modern versions contradict the Bible, or even each other, do not take in
all of the relevant information regarding textual criticism and translational methodology.