Bible Translations Archives - Bible Authenticity

John 1:1

February 12, 2026 BibleAuthenticity Comments 4 comments

There is some controversy as to how should John 1:1 be translated. Trinitarians often use the verse to support their contention that Jesus is the eternal Almighty God.

The traditional rendering in English is:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

There are many other variations of rendering John 1:1 which are more accurate according to the Greek text, both in translation or paraphrase, John 1:1c also exist:

1808: “and the Word was a god” – Thomas Belsham The New Testament, in an Improved Version, Upon the Basis of Archbishop Newcome‘s New Translation: With a Corrected Text, London.
1822: “and the Word was a god” – The New Testament in Greek and English (A. Kneeland, 1822.)
1829: “and the Word was a god” – The Monotessaron; or, The Gospel History According to the Four Evangelists (J. S. Thompson, 1829)
1863: “and the Word was a god” – A Literal Translation of the New Testament (Herman Heinfetter [Pseudonym of Frederick Parker], 1863)
1864: “and a god was the Word” – The Emphatic Diaglott by Benjamin Wilson, New York and London (left hand column interlinear reading)
1879: “and the Word was a god” – Das Evangelium nach Johannes (J. Becker, 1979)
1885: “and the Word was a god” – Concise Commentary on The Holy Bible (R. Young, 1885)
1911: “and [a] God was the word” – The Coptic Version of the New Testament in the Southern Dialect, by George William Horner.^[17]
1924: “the Logos was divine” – The Bible: James Moffatt Translation, by James Moffatt.
1935: “and the Word was divine” – The Bible: An American Translation, by John M. P. Smith and Edgar J. Goodspeed, Chicago.^[19]
1955: “so the Word was divine” – The Authentic New Testament, by Hugh J. Schonfield, Aberdeen.
1958: “and the Word was a god” – The New Testament of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Anointed (J. L. Tomanec, 1958)
1970, 1989: “and what God was, the Word was” – The New English Bible and The Revised English Bible.
1975 “and a god (or, of a divine kind) was the Word” – Das Evangelium nach Johnnes, by Siegfried Schulz, Göttingen, Germany
1975: “and the Word was a god” – Das Evangelium nach Johannes (S. Schulz, 1975);
1978: “and godlike sort was the Logos” – Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Johannes Schneider, Berlin
1985: “So the Word was divine” – The Original New Testament, by Hugh J. Schonfield.
1998: “and what God was the Word also was” – This translation follows Professor Francis J. Moloney, The Gospel of John, ed. Daniel J. Harrington.
2017: “and the Logos was god” – The New Testament: A Translation, by David Bentley Hart.

GREEK ANALYSIS

“Jn 1:1 should rigorously be translated ‘the word was with the God [= the Father], and the word was a divine being'” (Dictionary of the Bible, 1965, by scholar John L McKenzie, S J). read more

Why Does The Legacy Standard Bible Use “Yahweh”?

December 15, 2025 BibleAuthenticity Comments 0 Comment

Is the Bible reliable? — Why does the Legacy Standard Bible use “Yahweh”?

The vast majority of translations of the Bible use “LORD” for God’s name. Why does the Legacy Standard Bible use “Yahweh” instead of the usual “LORD’ for God’s name?

TRADITIONAL VIEW

“‘Yahweh declares, ‘ . . . My people shall know My name'”—Isaiah 52:5,6 LSB

First of all, notice the reasons given for substituting “LORD” for “Yahweh” in the preface to to NRSV:

Careful readers will notice that here and there in the Old Testament the word Lord (or in certain cases God) is printed in capital letters. This represents the traditional manner in English versions of rendering the Divine Name, the “Tetragrammaton” (see the notes on Exodus 3.14, 15), following the precedent of the ancient Greek and Latin translators and the long established practice in the reading of the Hebrew Scriptures in the synagogue. While it is almost if not quite certain that the Name was originally pronounced “Yahweh,” this pronunciation was not indicated when the Masoretes added vowel sounds to the consonantal Hebrew text. To the four consonants YHWH of the Name, which had come to be regarded as too sacred to be pronounced, they attached vowel signs indicating that in its place should be read the Hebrew word Adonai meaning “Lord” (or Elohim meaning “God”). Ancient Greek translators employed the word Kyrios (“Lord”) for the Name. The Vulgate likewise used the Latin word Dominus (“Lord”). The form “Jehovah” is of late medieval origin; it is a combination of the consonants of the Divine Name and the vowels attached to it by the Masoretes but belonging to an entirely different word. Although the American Standard Version (1901) had used “Jehovah” to render the Tetragrammaton (the sound of Y being represented by J and the sound of W by V, as in Latin), for two reasons the Committees that produced the RSV and the NRSV returned to the more familiar usage of the King James Version. (1) The word “Jehovah” does not accurately represent any form of the Name ever used in Hebrew. (2) The use of any proper name for the one and only God, as though there were other gods from whom the true God had to be distinguished, began to be discontinued in Judaism before the Christian era and is inappropriate for the universal faith of the Christian church. read more

Is God’s Name Yahweh, GOD, the LORD, or Jehovah?

October 18, 2024 BibleAuthenticity Comments 20 comments

God’s name is often written as “the LORD” in most Bible translations. Some translations use “Jehovah” for God’s name. However, Lord is not a name but a title. “One of the titles for God is Lord, a translation of Adonai. There is yet another name for which is particularly assigned to God as His special or proper name, that is, the four letters YHWH (Exodus 3:14 and Isaiah 42:8)” [NASB, Principles of Translation).

“Indeed, there are many gods and many lords, yet for us there is but one God, the Father” (1 Corinthians 8:5,6 NASB). In the Old Testament, or Hebrew-Aramaic Scriptures, God’s name is Yahweh. “I am Yahweh, that is my name!” (Isaiah 42:8 NJB). The name Yahweh appears some 6,800 times in the manuscripts of the Old Testament, or Hebrew-Aramaic Scriptures. Yet, “this name has not been pronounced by Jews because of reverence for the great sacredness of the divine name. Therefore it has been consistently translated as LORD. The only exception . . . is when it occurs in immediate proximity to the word Lord, that is, Adonai. In that case it is regularly translated GOD to avoid confusion” [Ibed.]. Of course, there would be no worry about such “confusion,” if YHWH were translated accurately as Yahweh. read more

Advantages of Using Multiple Bible Translations

December 13, 2023 BibleAuthenticity Comments 1 comment

NT canon — Greek manuscript of the New Testament. Is using multiple Bible translations better than knowing Biblical Greek?

Does a person need to know Biblical Greek to understand the New Testament, or is using multiple Bible translations, just as good, or better?

“Get wisdom. Though it cost all you have, get understanding”—Proverbs 4:7 NIV

“By studying Biblical Greek, you can gain a deeper understanding of the original text and the cultural context in which it was written”—Quora, February 6, 2023

Some Bible teachers and preachers are big on the idea that knowing Biblical Greek (Koine’) is important, even vital, in getting the best understanding of the Bible. While this may have a lot to do with their ego, we must grant that some are very sincere in holding and promoting this belief. It is certainly fine for anyone who has the inclination, the time, the resources, and the opportunity, to do so, that is, to learn Biblical Greek. It is a good thing that some have become scholars in Biblical Greek, and have been active in Bible translation and have written Biblical commentaries. But it takes many years of intensive study to become proficient in Biblical Greek. read more

Appearance of Jesus’ Robe at Trial – Various Translations Help

May 3, 2018 BibleAuthenticity Comments 0 Comment

What exactly was the appearance of the robe put on Jesus during his “trial” before king Herod, an administrator of the Roman Empire, as recorded at Luke 23:11?

“Then Herod and his soldiers began mocking and ridiculing Jesus. Finally, they put a royal robe on him and sent him back to Pilate”—Luke 23:11 NLT

Pilate could not find anything wrong with Jesus, and hoped to evade responsibility for what would happen to Jesus by shifting him over to Herod, who happened to be in town for the major festival of Passover. But to Herod Jesus is only a curiosity (Luke 23:8,9), and a joke (Luke 23:11). His curiosity, however, goes unrewarded, because Jesus “gave him no answer” and refused to perform any sign (Luke 23:11 NIV). Since Jesus refused to answer Herod’s many questions, Herod gets tired of it after awhile, and sends Jesus back to Pilate. But before he does, they put a robe on Jesus to crown their mockery of him. The appearance of the robe is difficult to describe, at least in English. This is only a minor detail, of course, but notice how many different ways and colors this robe is described as being in various Bible translations at Luke 23:11:

brilliant—HCSB

elegant—NIV; NRSV

rich—NJB

royal—NLT

splendid—ESV

gorgeous—KJV; NKJV

“brightly shining”– NASB

fine—GNB; Berean Study Bible

bright—CSB

colorful—GWT

white—Douay

luxurious—WEB; New Heart English Bible

resplendent garb—NAB

kingly–NCV

purple – Aramaic Bible in Plain english

colorful – GWT

magnificent – ISV

radient – LSV

splendid – Hart

This is a good example of one of the many advantages a person who uses multiple translations has, over a person using only one translation. While this is a very minor point, we can see that there are various ways to translate from the ancient Koine’ Greek into modern English, and also various ways describe something, which can help us to get a better mental picture of what the Bible is describing. After all, vivid mental pictures help us to remember things better. Knowing and remembering what the Bible says is vital to knowing God and Jesus. Knowing them, the Bible says, results in eternal life (John 17:3). Also, very important to Christians who want to fully ‘imitate God, Jesus and Paul’ (Ephesians 5:1; 1 Corinthians 11:1), vivid mental images of things in the Bible better equip us to effectively witness, and teach the Word of God, to others (Acts 1:8; Matthew 28:19,20; 2 Timothy 3:16,17).

Gospel writer Luke tells his readers:

“Just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. With this in mind, since I have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, I too decided to write down an orderly account“—Luke 1:2,3 NIV [Italics added] read more

What is Textual Criticism? Has the Bible Been Changed?

February 23, 2015 BibleAuthenticity Comments 0 Comment

Is Textual Criticism something that is critical of the Bible’s text, something that shows the Biblical text is unreliable? Or, is Textual Criticism something positive, or, favorable, toward authenticating the Bible’s text as being genuine, reliable, and trustworthy?

It is popularly believed today that the Bible has been copied and re-copied so many times over the centuries that is text is unreliable, and no one can be sure of what was in the originals. Is there any truth to this?

“All people are like grass, and all their glory is like that of the field; the grass withers and the flowers fall, but the word of the Lord endures forever” (1 Peter 1:24,25 NIV). In this text, the thought is conveyed that “the Word of the Lord endures forever”, which implies that the scriptures would be faithfully preserved over time. If we believe that, “in the beginning God created the heavens and earth” (Genesis 1:1), and also empowered men to write the 66 books of the Bible over a period of about 1,500 years, then he would surely have the power to accurately preserve his word forever. But what are the facts in more detail?

Problem? – “We Do Have the Originals” – Are They =&0=&

Not surprisingly, there are copyists’ errors (called textual or scribal errors) in ancient Biblical manuscripts. The original copies of the books were lost long ago.

It is true, we don’t have the originals, and sometimes we hear this objection as to the validity of the Biblical text. Why don’t we have the originals? They were written on perishable materials, and handmade copies were meticulously and accurately made and distributed.

If we had the originals and no copies, suppose one or more of the originals was lost, destroyed, stolen, or deviously, but cleverly altered? Then what?

If we had the originals written by Moses, David, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, etc., they may likely would have become idols, or objects of worship, the way “the bronze serpent . . . Nehushtan” was (2 Kings 18:4 LSB).

The New Testament books were written in various places and quickly copied and distributed all over the Roman Empire, long before there was any controlling body with the power to gather up these copies and have them deliberately altered. The very rapid copying and distribution also made it impossible for any authority to gather up and alter all the copies to make them say the same thing. By the time such powerful authority in or over Christianity emerged in the 4th century, extremely valuable manuscripts that are extant today, were long since buried in the sands of Egypt or tucked away in obscure places in Palestine and the Roman Empire.

So not having the originals solves these potential problems, rendering having the originals unnecessary, but it does mean that we have textual variants among the thousands of ancient Biblical manuscripts.

What About the Many Thousands of Textual Variants?

Any book copied by hand thousands of times over a period of a thousand plus years is likely to contain errors. The term textual variant derives from this fact. Thus, our sources for the Biblical materials are limited to handwritten copies (of copies) of the originals. We do also have access to copies of ancient translations of the Bible into other languages, as well as citations of the Bible by early rabbis and church fathers. Thus Hebrew and Greek manuscripts of the Bible, together with early translations and citations of Scripture, witness to the correct reading of a particular text.

How did scribal errors arise? Poor memory, impaired judgment, mishearing and errors of sight or misunderstanding often caused the best-intentioned scribes to omit, substitute or repeat letters or entire words. Sometimes scribes made matters worse when they deliberately altered the text in an attempt to rectify something they perceived as a problem (deliberate alterations are probably very rare, however). In time, the result was a series of accidental corruptions or intended “improvements” that departed from the original text.

Is this a problem? No. Why not?

In fact, scribal errors are actually one of the many proofs that the Bible is not a work of fiction, nor is it the a result of collusion among conspirators to make it seem to be the word of God , when it actually is of human origin. Once variants appeared among the many copies of the Bible, they didn’t just go away. They were copied and recopied many times. But it also means that we still have the original readings of the New Testament texts.

How can we sure of this? How do we know what the original reading was?

What is Textual read more