Can modern English support bible translation?

Not too long ago, I did an article titled “Those "evolving" modern bible versions” by which I demonstrated from evidence that the underlying text of modern bible versions is still in the process of evolving towards perfection, which of course, cannot happen. Well, if the underlying text is not perfect, and never will be, so the translations that come out of it will never be perfect. BTW, the underlying text of modern bible versions (NIV, ESV, NKJV, NASB, etc) is not the same as those of the 1611 King James Bible. That would account for most of the differences when we compare the verses side-by-side, for example:

Notice in the above example that the phrase “but by every word of God” is missing in all the modern bible versions? The reason for this is because the same words are also not found in their underlying text, and so no matter how faithful those evolving modern bible versions adhere to their underlying text, they are still wrong. But with the modern translations, we have another problem, and that is, the language by which the underlying text is translated. Can modern English support bible translation? Let us begin by considering the following question: Can a Holy Bible do without the thees, thous, thy, thine and ye?

The 39 books of the Old Testament are mostly given to us in biblical Hebrew, but some parts of the book of Daniel and the book of Ezra are given to us in biblical Aramaic. The 27 books of the New Testament are given to us in Koine Greek. Today, the Bible is translated for us into different languages.

In the English language, the pure word of God can be found in the 1611 King James Bible, which is given to us in biblical English (not modern English). Modern English is incapable of supporting the translation of the Holy Bible. For example, modern English is incapable of differentiating between the singular “you” and the plural “you.” Biblical English makes the distinction by using thee, thou, thy, or thine to refer to the singular “you” (thee, thou) or “your” (thine, thy). The plural form of “you” or “your” is you, your or ye. Consider the following example:

John 3:7 KJV "Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again."

Here, Jesus was speaking to Nicodemus alone (singular): "Marvel not that I said unto THEE (singular)." But then, Jesus continued "YE (plural) must be born again." In this, Jesus did not tell Nicodemus directly that he must be born again. Rather, he was addressing the whole world through Nicodemus that "YE must be born again." Every modern bible version has failed to capture this aspect, for example:

NKJV: Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’

NASB: Do not be amazed that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.

NIV: You should not be surprised at my saying, ‘You must be born again.’

ESV: Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’

None of the modern bible versions including the NKJV is able to accurately capture this distinction. Strictly speaking, this is a mis-translation due to the limitation of modern English. This goes to show that the suitability of the language is a very important aspect in the translation of the word of God because God's words cannot contain the slightest error. In the English language, only the 1611 King James Bible which was translated using biblical English has managed to capture this distinction. Let’s look at another example involving the terms “thou art” and “ye are.”

Psalms 90:2 KJV "Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God."

Psalms 90:2 NKJV "Before the mountains were brought forth, Or ever You had formed the earth and the world, Even from everlasting to everlasting, You are God."

God is a singular God, not a plural one. However, modern English makes no distinction between the singular pronouns and plural pronouns of “you.” The 1611 King James Bible (biblical English) is careful about the differences. For example, it is “thou art” (not “you are”) when “you” is the singular second-person pronoun as the subject, and “art” being the singular form of the verb “are.” It is “thou art God,” not “you are God” because you are speaking to God directly, and God being the second-person and a singular God.

BTW, a first-person pronoun (I, we) refers to the speaker(s), a second-person pronoun (thou, you, ye) refers to the person(s) being spoken to, and a third-person pronoun (he, she, it, they) refers to the person(s) being spoken of in a subjective sense. Subjects and objects have opposite functions in a sentence. While subjects are the “doers” of the action, objects are the opposite. Instead of doing something, they are being acted upon. Below is an example showing the difference between a subject pronoun and an object pronoun in a sentence:

Matthew 23:31 KJV "Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets."

Matthew 23:31 NIV “So you testify against yourselves that you are the descendants of those who murdered the prophets."

In the above example, Jesus (first-person) was speaking to the scribes and Pharisees (second-persons) as subjects. Notice the 1611 King James Bible uses the word “ye” (plural subjective), instead of “you” (plural objective) as translated in the NIV. Also, notice that it is “ye are,” not “you are.” The word “are” is the plural verb that accompanies “ye.” In the singular form, it would be “thou art.” Another example:

Psalms 82:6 KJV "I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High."

Psalms 82:6 NASB “I said, “You are gods, And all of you are sons of the Most High.”

It is “ye are gods,” not “you are gods” when “ye” is being used in a subjective sense (not objective sense). On the other hand, it is “all of you are,” when “you” is being used in an objective sense. The 1611 King James Bible managed to capture this aspect in the translation because it was translated in biblical English. Modern English used in the NIV, NKJV and other modern bible versions does not differentiate between subjects and objects used in a sentence.

In the same way, it is:

Genesis 42:14 KJV "And Joseph said unto them, That is it that I spake unto you [2nd persons as objects], saying, Ye [2nd persons as subjects] are spies:"

Exodus 20:3 KJV "Thou [2nd person as subject] shalt have no other gods before me."

Exodus 20:13 KJV "Thou [2nd person as subject] shalt not kill."

Psalms 5:2 KJV "Hearken unto the voice of my cry, my King, and my God: for unto thee [2nd person as object] will I pray."

John 3:7 KJV "Marvel not that I said unto thee [2nd person as object], Ye [2nd persons as subjects] must be born again."

John 14:29 KJV "And now I have told you [2nd persons as objects] before it come to pass, that, when it is come to pass, ye [2nd persons as subjects] might believe."

James 2:8 KJV "If ye [2nd persons as subjects] fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou [2nd person as subject] shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye [2nd persons as subjects] do well:"

Note: [insertions] added.

Next, we consider the use of the pronouns thy, thine, your and yours. Refer again to the following table:

“Thy” is used if the following word in the sentence begins with non-vowels (or consonants) such as Z, B, T, G, and H. “Thine” is used if the following word in the sentence starts with a vowel A, E, I, O, U and sometimes Y. Consider the following application:

Romans 11:3 KJV "Lord, they have killed thy [singular ‘your’] prophets [begins with a consonant], and digged down thine [singular ‘your’] altars [begins with a vowel]; and I am left alone, and they seek my life."

Note: [insertions] added.

“Thy” is the singular form of the word “your” and “thine” is the singular form of the word “your” or “yours.” These are distinctions that modern bible versions are incapable of representing. It would be inaccurate to use “your” in this verse because the Lord is a singular term. Only biblical English used in the 1611 King James Bible is capable of showing us the subtle differences. Next, we look at words ending with “-est” and “-eth,” for example:

Romans 14:15 KJV "But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died."

Proverbs 13:20 KJV "He that walketh with wise men shall be wise: but a companion of fools shall be destroyed."

The “-est” and the “-eth” ending in a word are used to denote actions at the singular personal level in present tense. In the above examples:

Romans 14:15 KJV "But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest [verb, 2nd person (singular), present tense] thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died."

Proverbs 13:20 KJV "He that walketh [verb, 3rd person (singular), present tense] with wise men shall be wise: but a companion of fools shall be destroyed."

Examples of words ending with “-est” are: “thou prayest,” “doest thou,” “believest thou,” “thou lovest,” “thou hatest,” “thou judgest,” “why smitest thou me,” “thou condemnest thyself,” “Or despisest thou,” “Thou that makest thy boast,” and “thou puttest thy nest in a rock.” These are applications of verbs in the present tense used in conjunction with the second person singular pronoun (thou, thee, thine, thy).

Examples of words ending with “-eth” are: “he that believeth,” “whosoever believeth in him,” “he that doeth these things,” “he judgeth those,” “my soul hateth,” “thy servant prayeth,” “whoso pleaseth God,” “he that worketh deceit,” “their worm dieth not,” and “God putteth in my mouth.” These are applications of verbs in the present tense used in conjunction with the third person singular pronoun (he, she, it, him, her, etc).

Psalms 101:7 KJV "He that worketh deceit shall not dwell within my house: he that telleth lies shall not tarry in my sight."

The “-est” and “-eth” are also useful in differentiating certain singular verbs from plural nouns. For example, the plural form for “work” (noun) is “works,” but “works” is also a singular verb. So to make the distinction, biblical English renders the singular verb as “workest” (use with 2nd person pronoun) or “worketh” (use with 3rd person pronoun). Is this all that important? Consider the following example:

1 Corinthians 16:10 KJV "… for he worketh the work of the Lord, as I also do."

The word “worketh” is a singular verb used with a 3rd person pronoun (he), and “work” is a noun as in “work (noun) of the Lord.” Modern bible versions is not capable of making that distinction, resulting in confusion:

NKJV: "for he does the work of the Lord, as I also do"

NASB: "for he is doing the Lord’s work, as I also am"

NIV: "for he is carrying on the work of the Lord, just as I am"

ESV: "for he is doing the work of the Lord, as I am"

Notice that modern bible versions replace the singular verb "worketh" with other words that are not word-for-word the same as that in the Greek manuscript “ergazomai” which is literally translated as “work” (verb). The meaning of the word is not faithfully translated across because of the limitations of modern English, and so they used some other words as substitutes. The words "do," "does," "carrying on," or "doing" are not exactly the same as the word "work" (verb) in that these are just general terms used to describe someone performing an action, and not necessarily performing a work with a purpose in mind.

Ecclesiastes 12:14 KJV "For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil."

It is the “work” that God is going to judge. It is the intention behind the “work” (every secret thing) that God is going to judge, whether it be good, or whether it be evil. Moreover, modern bible versions are also confusing between themselves in that the words "do," "does," "carrying on," or "doing" are not exactly synonymous terms. Another example to consider:

Proverbs 11:18 KJV "The wicked worketh a deceitful work"

The word “worketh” is a singular verb used with 3rd person pronoun “the wicked,” and “work” is a singular noun as in “a deceitful work (noun).” Other bible versions translate the verse this way:

NKJV: "The wicked man does deceptive work"

NASB: "The wicked earns deceptive wages"

NIV: "A wicked person earns deceptive wages"

ESV: "The wicked earns deceptive wages"

The same explanation that we have discussed before also applies in this example. Notice the NKJV replaces "worketh" with "does" which reduces from the original meaning of the word. Other modern bible versions (NASB, NIV, ESV) have changed this verse completely having substituted the word "worketh" with "earns" and "deceitful work" with "deceptive wages." Can the Holy Bible contain error? The answer is ‘No.’ If the Holy Bible can contain error, it cannot be holy and true. That’s why only biblical English used in the 1611 King James Bible can support bible translation.

Read also: