Saturday, March 31, 2012

Print Page Do We Need to Update Our Hymnals?

To be consistent if we are going to start using newer translations of the Bible we would need to update some of our long time beloved hymns as well. Our first example is with the word Calvary from Luke 23:33. This word doesn't exist in the ESV, NIV, NASB or other modern translations. Instead they use the words The Skull. So instead of calling the hymn At Calvary it would need to be updated to At the Skull. The first verse would go something like this:
Years I spent in vanity and pride,
Caring not my Lord was crucified,
Knowing not it was for me He died on The Skull. 
Mercy there was great, and grace was free;
Pardon there was multiplied to me;
There my burdened soul found liberty at The Skull. 
By God’s Word at last my sin I learned;
Then I trembled at the law I’d spurned,
Till my guilty soul imploring turned to The Skull.
The Old Rugged Cross would also have to be updated.
Oh, that old rugged cross, so despised by the world,
Has a wondrous attraction for me;
For the dear Lamb of God left His glory above
To bear it to dark The Skull.
Not only would we need to take out the word Calvary from our hymnals we need to remove mansions! If you have not heard yet God is not preparing mansions for us any longer in John 14:2. The latest word from modern translations (ESV, NIV and etc) is that we have be down sized to rooms! So we need to update Victory in Jesus.
I heard about a room
He has built for me in glory.
Don't  forget about Mansion Over the Hilltop, or should I say Room Over the Hilltop?
I've got a room just over the hilltop
In that bright land where we'll never grow old
And some day yonder we will never more wander
But walk on streets that are purest gold
Words are not the only things we need to change in our hymnals. The theology needs to change as well. According to the modern Biblical critics who wrote the ESV, NIV, NASB and other translations peace and good will in Luke 2:14 was not really meant for all men. It was only meant for those in whom he is pleased with. Here are just a couple of favorite Christmas hymns who's theology would need to be updated.
Hark the Herald Angels Sing 
Hark! the herald angels sing,
Glory to the new born King, peace on earth,
and mercy mild to whom God is pleased with, God and sinners reconciled!"
Joyful, all ye nations rise, join the triumph of the skies;
with th' angelic host proclaim, "Christ is born in Bethlehem!"
Hark! the herald angels sing, "Glory to the new born King!"

I Heard the Bells On Christmas Day 
I heard the belIs on Christmas Day
Their old familiar carols play.
And wild and sweet the words repeat
Of Peace on earth, good will to men whom God is pleased with.
This is just another of the many reasons we need to stick with the long trusted King James Bible when working in the English language. We don't need to update our hymnals and we don't need to update our Bibles.


Sunday, March 25, 2012

Print Page Are We Saved By the Blood of Jesus?

Are we saved by the blood of Jesus? If you believe the Bible we are.

Ephesians 1:7 In whom we have redemption though his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;

Romans 5:9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath though him.

Hebrews 9:22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without the shedding of blood is no remission.

Also make sure you check out 1 John1:7, Romans 3:25, 1 Peter 1:18-19, Revelation 12:11, Hebrews 9:12, Hebrews 9:14 and Revelation 1:5.

If you believe the hymn Nothing but the Blood we are saved by the blood of Jesus.
What can wash away my sin?
Nothing but the blood of Jesus;What can make me whole again?
Nothing but the blood of Jesus.
People like John MacArthur try to belittle the blood atonement of Jesus. MacArthur takes clear passages of scriptures and twists them. When you see blood he tries to say it really means death. In this audio clip he states:
It uses blood as a metaphor or a synonym for death because it conveys the violence of it. 
and
When the New Testament is talking about the blood of Christ it is talking about the death of Christ, but it uses blood because that is a metaphor that speaks of the violence of his death.
In his Study Bible for Hebrews 9:14 he clearly says:
Blood is used as a substitute word for death 
Again in Hebrews 9:22 he says:
“Shedding of blood” refers to death 
He also clearly denies we are saved by the blood of Jesus. In the same clip he states:
Having said that, you must stop short of saying that we are saved by the blood of Jesus.
Even back in 1976 MacArthur taught this. In an article titled Not His Bleeding, but His Dying he says:
It was His death that was efficacious, not His blood. Christ did not bleed to death. The shedding of blood had nothing to do with bleeding, it simply means death. Nothing in His human blood saves. It is not His blood that I love, it is Him. It is not His bleeding that saved me, but His dying. 
On April 4th of 1986 MacArthur repeats himself in a letter to Tim Weidlich, Paul Clark and Kevin Jolliff of Bob Jones University:
Obviously, it was not the blood of Jesus that saves or He could have bled for us without dying. It was His death for sin that saves. When Romans 3:25 speaks of ‘faith in His blood’ everyone understands that to be a reference to His death -- not the blood running through His body. In Romans 5:9, being ‘justified by His blood’ also refers to His death, as verse 10 makes clear in saying ‘we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son.’ In fact, the careful explanation of salvation in Romans 6 omits any reference to His blood at all. The point is that the shedding of blood was just the visible indication of His death, His life being poured out. ... I admit that because of some traditional hymns there is an emotional attachment to the blood -- but that should not pose a problem when one is dealing with theological or textual specificity. I can sing hymns about the blood and rejoice with them -- but I understand that reference to be a metonym for His death.
The Bible is clear. We are saved by Jesus' death and blood. Anything less is to reject the clear teaching of scripture.


Tuesday, March 20, 2012

Print Page Is Water Baptism a Requirement for Salvation?

Baptism is something that brings definite separation to the different denominations and churches. Scripture is very clear that baptism is for believers only. We will be looking at the method and meaning of baptism from scripture and various theologians. We will also go over the different methods and meanings attributed to baptism.

Method
There are various methods used to administer water Baptism. As an infant in a Lutheran church water was sprinkled on my head. Twenty four years later my body was immersed in water at a Bible believing church. So which is it? Sprinkle or dunk? Should infants or only believers be baptized? These are the questions which will be answered.

The Word Baptize
The word Baptize is not really a translation but a transliteration. The Greek work is βαπτίζω (baptizō). It literally means to immerse. Gary Zeolla, the translator of the Analyttical-Literal Translation gives us some insight to the reason why many, but not all, English Bibles transliterate instead of translate the word for Baptize (emphasis mine):

“The lexical data definitely does favor “immerse in,” and in its early
stages, such a translation was used in the Analytical-Literal Translation.
However, I later changed it to “baptize in” for the following reasons:

1. I did not want the translation of one word to hurt the reputation of the
ALT as being a “bias” translation. But I did keep “immerse” as an
alternate translation. It is seen the first time verb baptizo and the noun
batisma occurs in a book. I’ve used the same pattern throughout. When
what I believe is the best translation differs from the traditional translation
and it affects an interpretation in favor of my own theological beliefs, then
I used the traditional translation in the text, and the “new” translation as an
alternate (See for another example John 15:2).”[1]

His list of reasons is long but the first two are mainly the same. It is about the reputation of his translation. People would claim he had a bias and not benefit from his translation. I find this as a compromise that should not have taken place. I although will give Zeolla credit for listing the word immerse along with the word Baptize.


If you believe Zeolla’s fear is unfounded one only needs to look at Baptist history. William Carey, a famous Baptist missionary to India, ran into resistance. Here is Edward Brand’s account (emphasis mine):

When William Carey and his colleagues at Serampore made their Hindu translation of the Bible, they translated the scripture word "baptizo" by a Hindu word meaning to immerse. Their only alternative was to leave it untranslated. By and by the pedobaptist missionaries began to discover that their people objected to sprinkling as a substitute for baptism on the ground that it was not in scripture. But if it was not in scripture it ought to be! So about 1827 a protest was sent to the British Bible Society against aiding in the circulation of the Serampore versions. Through some of the Baptist brethren pressure was brought to bear on Mr. Carey to induce him to transfer the offending word and let it alone, or to translate it by one of the many words which it did not mean. But he steadily refused to abandon his principle of translating every word of scripture into the native tongue. He held that the command to baptize was the command to do a certain act, that the act was defined in the word used in the command, and that his duty as translator was to make the command as plain in the translation as it was in the original. So in 1833 the British Bible Society declared that they would no longer aid versions in which "baptize" was translated. They did not realize that in so far as they succeeded in abolishing the symbol they would abolish that which the symbol stands for, viz: Death to sin and resurrection to a new life.” [2]

Biblical Practices
So we have looked at what the Biblical word for Baptize means. So how is it used in the Bible? Let us start with Phillip and the eunuch. The eunuch confesses his faith so Phillip Baptizes him. Let us see how this is done:

Acts 8:38-39 And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.  39 And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing.

Clearly Philip took the eunuch into the water and out of the water. John the Baptist went to Baptize where there was a lot of water. This wouldn’t have been needed if all he was going to do was sprinkle water on the heads of people.

John 3:23 And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there: and they came, and were baptized.

When John Baptized Jesus in the river Jordan Jesus came out of the water in which he was immersed.

Matthew 3:16  And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:

So are you can see anytime the mode of Baptism is given in the Bible it is always by immersion. Nowhere in the Bible will you see Baptism done by sprinkling.

Early Churches Practice
The Didache is a late first century writing that contains instructions on many things, from Baptism to fasting. Even though it is not on the same level as scripture there is much we can learn from it. On Baptism it states (emphasis mine):

“Chapter VII
    1.  Now concerning baptism, baptize thus: Having first taught all these things, baptize ye into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living water.
    2.  And if thou hast not living water, baptize into other water; and if thou canst not in cold, then in warm (water).
    3.  But if thou hast neither, pour [water] thrice upon the head in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.
    4.  But before Baptism let the baptizer and the baptized fast, and any others who can; but thou shalt command the baptized to fast for one or two days before.”[3]

As we see here that the pouring of water for Baptism was used only as a last resort.
Let us next read the words of the pedobaptists (emphasis mine):

"Their (the primitive Christians) general and ordinary way was to baptize by immersion, or dipping the person, whether it were an infant, or grown man or woman, into the water. This is so plain and clear by an infinite number of passages, that as one can not but pity the weak endeavors of such Pedobaptists as would maintain the negative of it, so also we ought to disown and show a dislike of the profane scoffs which some people give to the English Antipedobaptists, merely for their use of dipping. it was, in all probability, the way by whichour blessed Savior, and for certain was the most usual and ordinary way by which the ancient Christians did receive their baptism. ’Tis a great want of prudence, as well as of honesty, to refuse to grant to an adversary what is certainly true, and may be proved so. It creates a jealousy of all the rest that one says. As for sprinkling, I say, as Mr. Blake, at its first coming up in England, ‘Let them defend it who use it.’ They (who are inclined to Presbyterianism) are hardly prevailed on to leave off that scandalous custom of having their children, though never so well, baptized out of a basin, or porringer, in a bed-chamber, hardly persuaded to bring them to church, much further from having them dipped, though never so able to bear it."[4]

"The baptism of John the Baptist, which served for a preparative to that of Jesus Christ, was performed by plunging. When Jesus Christ came to john, to raise baptism to a more marvelous efficacy in receiving it, the Scripture says, that he went up out of the water of Jordan, (Matt. iii : 16; Mark i : 10). In fine, we read not in the Scripture that baptism was otherwise administered; and we are able to make it appear, by the acts of councils, and by the ancient rituals, that for thirteen hundred years, baptism was thus administered throughout the whole church, as far as was possible."[5]

Finally two quotes from John Wesley, the founder of the Methodists (emphasis mine):

"Mary Welsh, aged eleven days, was baptized according to the custom of the first church, and the rule of the Church of England, by immersion. The child was ill then, but recovered from that hour.”[6]

We are buried with him - Alluding to the ancient manner of baptizing by immersion."[7]

Meaning
The method of Baptism is important but the meaning is even more so.

Forgiveness of Sins
Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox believe Baptism forgives sin.

1263 By Baptism all sins are forgiven, original sin and all personal sins, as well as all punishment for sin.  In those who have been reborn nothing remains that would impede their entry into the Kingdom of God, neither Adam's sin, nor personal sin, nor the consequences of sin, the gravest of which is separation from God.”[8]

“He who is baptized is cleansed from original sin and from all other sins that he has committed up to the time of his baptism.”[9]

How does the Bible say we are forgiven? Let us start with the Old Testament.

Romans 4:2-3 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.  For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.

The Bible is clear that Abraham was saved by his faith in God. Not by any works he did. What about New Testament cases?

Ephesians 2:8-9 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:  9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

Luke 7:50 And he said to the woman, Thy faith hath saved thee; go in peace.

Luke 18:42 And Jesus said unto him, Receive thy sight: thy faith hath saved thee.

How was the woman saved?  By faith. How was the man saved? By faith. Neither was Baptized. Faith alone saves. The thief that believed in Jesus was not Baptized while dying on the cross yet he went to be with Jesus in Paradise.

Luke 23:42-43 And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom.  43 And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.


Infants
Methodists, Presbyterians, Lutherans, Anglicans and many others Baptize infants. If Baptism is a testimony of how Jesus buried our old man (Romans 6:6) and made us a new creature (2 Corinthians 2:17 and John 3:3) wouldn’t the testimony of an infant be false? Infants have no way of making a conscious decision to accept Jesus as their Lord and Savior. A verse often used use to promote infant baptism and salvation requiring baptism is Mark 16:16.


Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

One must look carefully at the second half of the verse. It is not the lack of baptism that damns but the lack of belief. This brings us the all important question. What then is the true meaning of Baptism?

The True Meaning of Baptism
Paul and Silas where in jail and a jailer asked them the most important question in life. What must I do to be saved? Read to see how they replied.

Acts 16:30-31 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?  31  And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

Then after there was belief and salvation was there baptism.

Acts 16:33 And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway.

So we see in the Bible that the meaning of Baptism is not salvation. What does the Bible say is the meaning?

Colossians 2:12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.

Baptism is a symbol of what Jesus did for us. We are dead to our old selves and are now new creatures in Christ.

2 Corinthians 5:17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.


[1] Companion Volume to the Analytical-Literal Translation Third Edition 2007, Gary F. Zeolla
[2] History of the Baptists of Illinois 1930, Edward P. Brand, pg 128-129
[3] English translation by Peter Schaff 1885
[4] History of Infant Baptism, Part II, Chapter ii, p. 462, Dr. Wall (Episcopal)
[5] In Mr. Stennett against against Russen, p. 145-76, Bossuet (Catholic Bishop)
[6] Extract of Mt. John Wesley’s Journal, from his embarking for Georgia, p. 10
[7] John Wesley’s Explanatory Notes on Romans 6:4
[8] The New Catholic Catechism
[9] Orthodox Catechism Basic Teachings of the Orthodox Faith, Metropolitan Archbishop Sotirios


Thursday, March 15, 2012

Print Page Are You A Christian?

The reason for this post is my concern that there probably are many people that think they are Christian but really are not. I believe it is important that we all, this includes myself, check ourselves to make sure we really are saved (1 John 5:13).

Things that don't make you a Christian:

1. Being a good person. So many people think they will go to Heaven because they don't really do many bad things. That doesn't matter. If you ever looked or even thought about a person with lust you have committed adultery (Matthew 5:28). If you ever hated someone you have committed murder (Matthew 5:22). If you ever stolen anything, even something small, you are a thief. To top things off here if you even break one commandment you are guilty of breaking them all (James 2:10)! God says there is no one that does good, no, not even one (Romans 3:12). Our "good" works are like filthy rags to him (Isaiah 64:6).

2. Being raised by a Christian family. All because you may have saved family members doesn't mean you get a free ride. I can promise you that you won't find a verse in the Bible to support that kind of thinking.

3. Going to church and/or getting baptized and/or making a confession to a priest. No amount of works will get you into heaven. It is a gift of God so no one can boast God tells us (Ephesians 2:9).

I'm sure some of you by now are thinking "So what does make someone a Christian?". This list is just one item long.

1. You must trust in Jesus as your Lord and Savior (Romans 5:1).I don't want to just leave it at that since people sometimes read some bizarre things into statements like that. Some people may just simply not know what that means.

Jesus who is God took human form. He lived a sinless life 
(Hebrews 4:15). Something we all know we can't do (Romans 3:23). He paid the penalty for us by dying on the cross (Ephesians 1:7). Ever since Adam and Eve first sinned we have all been tainted (Romans 5:14). This pain and suffering in the world is because of our sin. Even the earth has been effected by sin (Romans 8:22). The great thing is things will be made the way God intended. There will be no fighting or cancer. We won't have people starving or worrying about paying their bills. We won't be messing up in life like we do now.

This may sound too easy, well think about it. To be saved you have to deny that your good works won't help you to get saved. You have to say I'm sorry of my sin and Jesus, you are my Lord (Luke 13:3). That means there has to be a very humble heart involved otherwise a person will never be saved (James 4:6). Being humble doesn't come easy in this culture.

I hope people take what I have to say at heart. If I was given the choice to lead a person to belief in a young earth or lead a person to knowing Christ as their Lord and Savior I would always pick the second choice.




Sunday, March 11, 2012

Print Page Is the Gap Theory full of holes?

Because of the Scofield Reference Bible and people like Clarence Larkin, Donald Barnhouse, Peter Ruckman and J. Vernon McGee the Gap Theory view of creation is held by several in Baptist circles. We are called to be followers of God and his Bible and not followers of men. So let us look at the Bible to see if the Gap Theory has solid Biblical support or if it is just another case of compromise by fallible men.

The Gap Theory is the belief that there is a long gap (millions if not billion of years) between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2. They believe that during this time Satan fell from Heaven and went on to rule the Earth which was inhabited by a bunch of soulless men. Then at the end there was a Lucifer's flood which they claim is mentioned in 2 Peter 3:5-6 and explains the fossils we have today.

There are many problems with the Gap Theory. First off it doesn't match the creation account given in Genesis 1. Exodus 20:11 makes this clear.
Exodus 20:11  For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
There is no room for any kind of gap. In six days God made everything. He didn't just repopulate the planet.

Another problem with the Gap Theory is that it puts death and suffering before the fall of Adam. The Bible is clear that death and suffering came about because of Adam's sin (Romans 5:12, Romans 8:22 and 1 Corinthians 15:22). The Bible also tells us Adam was the first man (1 Corinthians 15:45). You can't have a soulless race of men who end up getting wiped out by some supposed flood. 2 Peter 3:5-6 is talking about Noah's flood (Genesis 7:23 and Genesis 9:15). The ironic thing is that people hold to the Gap Theory because they think secular science has proven the Earth to be million if not billions of years old. At the same time they claim there was a world wide Lucifer's flood even though secular scientists claim there never was never a global flood on Earth.

Lastly I would like talk about Genesis 1:28. In that verse it talks about how God replenished the Earth. We need to keep in mind what the words meant when they were printed in 1611. If you look at the 1828 Webster's Dictionary you will see that replenish means:
1. To fill; to stock with numbers or abundance. The magazines are replenished with corn. The springs are replenished with water.
Which is different than today's commonly used definition in Webster:
a : to fill or build up again
To make this a little more apparent the word let in our King James Bible meant the opposite of what we would think of today. Back then it meant to hinder. Even by 1828 Webster mentions that definition is nearly obsolete. Also, imagine reading James 2:3 and replace gay with the definition commonly used today.

There is no reason to believe in the Gap Theory. A literal young Earth view is both Biblical and scientific. There are many evidences for a young Earth if we approach the evidences with a mind not tanted by common secular opinion.


Monday, March 5, 2012

Print Page Is the ESV a trustworthy translation?

The ESV has quickly become popular in Baptist circles. This certainly is the case among Calvinists. Many Calvinists have even gone as far as saying the ESV is the Bible of Calvinists. So how trustworthy is this translation? Should pastors use it to preach from the pulpit and teachers in their classroom?

I will start out by pointing out one obvious problem with the ESV. The ESV contradicts itself in parallel passages. They resort to using the corrupt LXX Greek text in 2 Chronicles 9:7 instead of sticking with the trustworthy Hebrew text. I asked one of the members of the ESV translation committee about this and he couldn't give me an answer.

KJV - 1 Kings 10:8 Happy are thy men, happy are these thy servants, which stand continually before thee, and that hear thy wisdom. 

KJV - 2 Chronicles 9:7 Happy are thy men, and happy are these thy servants, which stand continually before thee, and hear thy wisdom. 

ESV - 1 Kings 10:8 Happy are your men! Happy are your servants, who continually stand before you and hear your wisdom! 

ESV - 2 Chronicles 9:7 Happy are your wives! Happy are these your servants, who continually stand before you and hear your wisdom!

As far as I am aware of the ESV is the ONLY translation that changes it from the proper translation of men to wives based off of the LXX. This is an obvious contradiction.

Many verses are completely missing from the ESV:

Matthew 12:47, Matthew 17:21, Matthew 18:11, Matthew 23:14, Mark 7:16, Mark 9:44, Mark 9:46, Mark 11:26, Mark 15:28, Luke 17:36, Luke 23:17, Luke 24:40, John 5:4, Acts 8:37, Acts 15:34, Acts 24:7, Acts 28:29, Romans 16:24



The ESV often gets it's numbers wrong:

KJV - 1 Samuel 13:1 SAUL reigned one year; and when he had reigned two years over Israel,
  
ESV - 1 Samuel 13:1 Saul was … years old when he began to reign, and he reigned … and two years over Israel.

KJV- 2 Samuel 23:18 And Abishai, the brother of Joab, the son of Zeruiah, was chief among three. And he lifted up his spear against three hundred, and slew them, and had the name among three.

ESV - 2 Samuel 23:18 Now Abishai, the brother of Joab, the son of Zeruiah, was chief of the thirty. And he wielded his spear against three hundred men and killed them and won a name beside the three.

KJV - 1 Chronicles 11:20 And Abishai the brother of Joab, he was chief of the three: for lifting up his spear against three hundred, he slew them, and had a name among the three.

ESV - 1 Chronicles 11:20 Now Abishai, the brother of Joab, was chief of the thirty. And he wielded his spear against 300 men and killed them and won a name beside the three.

KJV - Judges 14:15 And it came to pass on the seventh day, that they said unto Samsons wife, Entice thy husband, that he may declare unto us the riddle, lest we burn thee and thy fathers house with fire: have ye called us to take that we have? is it not so?

ESV - Judges 14:15 On the fourth day they said to Samson's wife, "Entice your husband to tell us what the riddle is, lest we burn you and your father's house with fire. Have you invited us here to impoverish us?"

KJV - 1 Samuel 1:24 And when she had weaned him, she took him up with her, with three bullocks, and one ephah of flour, and a bottle of wine, and brought him unto the house of the LORD in Shiloh: and the child was young.

ESV - 1 Samuel 1:24  And when she had weaned him, she took him up with her, along with a three-year-old bull, an ephah of flour, and a skin of wine, and she brought him to the house of the LORD at Shiloh. And the child was young.

KJV - 2 Chronicles 36:9 Jehoiachin was eight years old when he began to reign, and he reigned three months and ten days in Jerusalem: and he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD .

ESV - 2 Chronicles 36:9 Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he became king, and he reigned three months and ten days in Jerusalem. He did what was evil in the sight of the LORD.


Important doctrine is weakened by the removal of phrases and words:

Blood Atonement 

KJV - Colossians 1:14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:

ESV - Colossians 1:14  in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.

Deity of Jesus

KJV - 1 Timothy 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

ESV - 1 Timothy 3:16 Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of godliness: He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated by the Spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory.

KJV - Philippians 2:6  Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

ESV - Philippians 2:6  who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,

Believer's Baptism 

KJV - Acts 8:36-37  And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?  37  And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

ESV- Acts 8:36 And as they were going along the road they came to some water, and the eunuch said, "See, here is water! What prevents me from being baptized?" 37 MISSING


Other terrible translations:

Who killed Goliath?


KJV - 2 Samuel 21:19  And there was again a battle in Gob with the Philistines, where Elhanan the son of Jaare-oregim, a Beth-lehemite, slew the brother of Goliath the Gittite, the staff of whose spear was like a weavers beam.

ESV - 2 Samuel 21:19  And there was again war with the Philistines at Gob, and Elhanan the son of Jaare-oregim, the Bethlehemite, struck down Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver's beam.

Heart or mind?

KJV - Daniel 4:6 Let his heart be changed from man’s, and let a beast’s heart be given unto him; and let seven times pass over him.

ESV - Daniel 4:6 Let his mind be changed from a man's, and let a beast's mind be given to him; and let seven periods of time pass over him.

People complain that the new NIV changed the gender from the original languages so that instead we have politically correct gender neutral translations. Well, the ESV does the same thing.

In some place they neuter Jesus right out of the Bible in prophetic Old Testament passages that speak of him:

KJV - Micah 5:2  But thou, Beth-lehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.

ESV - Micah 5:2  But you, O Bethlehem Ephrathah, who are too little to be among the clans of Judah, from you shall come forth for me one who is to be ruler in Israel, whose coming forth is from of old, from ancient days.

KJV - Isaiah 53:9 And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.

ESV - Isaiah 53:9 And they made his grave with the wicked and with a rich man in his death, although he had done no violence, and there was no deceit in his mouth.



Here are a few more examples of the ESV translators neutering the Bible:

KJV - Romans 2:28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:

ESV - Romans 2:28 For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical.

KJV - Romans 3:4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.

ESV - Romans 3:4 By no means! Let God be true though every one were a liar, as it is written, "That you may be justified in your words, and prevail when you are judged."

KJV - Romans 3:28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

ESV - Romans 3:28 For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law.

KJV - 1 Corinthians 3:3-4 For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?  4  For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal?

ESV - 1 Corinthians 3:3-4 for you are still of the flesh. For while there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not of the flesh and behaving only in a human way?  4  For when one says, "I follow Paul," and another, "I follow Apollos," are you not being merely human?


In conclusion I believe the answer to the opening questions should be obvious. Is the ESV a trustworthy translation and should it be used from the pulpit? I'll let you decide.