“Satan’s Got Our Bible!” – A Brief Survey of the KJV, NIV, ESV and NASB

Recently, rumors have been circulating among Christians that attack the trustworthiness of certain modern English versions of the Bible, such as the NIV, ESV, and NASB. In these rumors, the modern English versions are often compared to the KJV, with claims that these versions have verses “intentionally omitted,” and that such omissions prove satanic control of modern Bible publishers. Thus, they are said not to be trusted. It is this “satanic” language that alerts me and prompts me to address these rumors. I believe a brief survey of how the modern English versions of the Bible came to be will be helpful in countering misunderstandings and lies, and in defending our faith.

As you may know, the original writings of the Bible were in Hebrew for the Old Testament, and Greek and Aramaic for the New Testament. It was through handwritten copies of these original writings that the Scriptures were circulated among early Christians. In the late 4th and early 5th century, the patristic biblical scholar Jerome was commissioned to produce the Latin version of the Bible, known as the Vulgate.

Up until the 15th century, during the Renaissance, the humanist movement demanded a return to the original sources of theology. They believed that the Old Testament should be studied in Hebrew, and the New Testament in Greek. Based on the Byzantine text, Dutch humanist priest Erasmus produced Novum Instrumentum Omne in 1516, a Greek version of the New Testament, also known as the Textus Receptus. The Byzantine text consists of a large number of Greek New Testament manuscripts written in the Byzantine text-type, but these are by no means the oldest manuscripts.

As mentioned above, a biblical manuscript is a handwritten copy of a portion of the original writings of the Bible. But it is not just a single copy of the original text - it is a copy of a copy of a copy, often many generations removed. Therefore, the later the copy, the more scribal errors it may contain.

During the Protestant Reformation, in order to make the Bible more accessible to all God’s people, Luther published his German New Testament in 1522 based on Erasmus’ Textus Receptus. At the dawn of the English Reformation, English scholar Tyndale published his English New Testament in 1525, also based on the Textus Receptus. In the early 1600s, King James I demanded a new English version of the Bible in contemporary English, and thus the first edition of the King James Version (KJV) was published by the Church of England in 1611. The KJV New Testament was based largely on Erasmus’ Textus Receptus, Luther’s German Bible, Tyndale’s English Bible, and to some extent the Latin Vulgate. The KJV went on to become the most popular English Bible for centuries.

Nevertheless, since the time of the KJV, new discoveries of ancient manuscripts have continued to be made. For example, in 1844 Codex Sinaiticus - one of the oldest and most complete Greek Bibles dating from AD 325 - was discovered. The Alexandrian text consists of older manuscripts such as Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Vaticanus, and other fragments written in the Alexandrian text-type. While most Byzantine manuscripts originate from the 5th to 9th centuries, the Alexandrian manuscripts are largely dated to before the 5th century. In other words, the Alexandrian manuscripts are much older than the Byzantine manuscripts, and therefore presumably closer to the original writings.

Based on the Alexandrian text, German biblical scholar Nestle published the first edition of the Greek New Testament Novum Testamentum Graece in 1898. In 1975, one of its principal editors, Aland, revised it based on new discoveries of the earliest known New Testament fragments. His work became the basis of the United Bible Societies’ 3rd edition of the Greek New Testament (UBS3), and later the 26th edition of Novum Testamentum Graece (NA26). The UBS and NA texts are the primary sources of most modern English Bible versions.

By 1950, the English of the KJV was no longer “contemporary” for American readers. Its old style had become an obstacle to the spread of the gospel. This time, however, the demand for a new English translation did not come from royalty or scholars but from a General Electric engineer named Howard Long. His request moved from his pastor to his congregation, then to his denomination, eventually leading to a translation committee with members from the Christian Reformed Church and the National Association of Evangelicals. Based largely on the UBS and NA texts, and with the collaboration of over 100 scholars, the first edition of the New International Version (NIV) was published in 1978. Since then, the NIV has become one of the most popular English Bibles.

Besides the NIV, the first editions of the New American Standard Bible (NASB) and the English Standard Version (ESV) were also published in the 1970s. The late Dr. Robert Saucy of Talbot, whom I highly respected, was one of the three scholars who worked on the NASB’s first edition and its 1995 update. The Dean of Talbot, Dr. Clinton Arnold, is one of the translation review scholars of the ESV. Both the NASB and ESV also based their New Testament texts primarily on the UBS and NA texts.

At this point, it is important to note that the Christian doctrine of biblical inerrancy refers ONLY to the original writings of the Bible - not to manuscripts, not to vernacular translations, and not to our interpretations. Since we do not have the original writings, biblical scholars use all available manuscripts and fragments to reconstruct texts as close to the originals as possible. They do so with the help of archaeology and textual criticism, carefully evaluating the trustworthiness of manuscripts based on origin, historicity, and consistency.

As you can now see, although the KJV is the older English version, its New Testament sources are actually later than those of the NIV, NASB, and ESV. Moreover, the modern versions clearly indicate disputable verses and variations in the footnotes. To be faithful to the originals sometimes requires that certain verses found in the KJV, but absent from the most reliable manuscripts, be omitted in modern translations. I applaud the courage of these scholars, who chose faithfulness to the truth even though they knew it might upset some readers.

At present, we have more than 6,000 manuscripts and fragments of the Greek New Testament that witness to the reliability of our text sources. However, a perfect vernacular translation simply does not exist. The differences between the KJV, NASB, ESV, and NIV are largely a matter of translation philosophy. On a spectrum between formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence, the NASB is the most formal, followed by the KJV, then the ESV, while the NIV strikes a balanced middle. For seekers or new Christians I would recommend the NIV, for small group meetings the ESV, and for serious Bible study I would recommend using them all with reference to the NASB.

What is truly dangerous to our faith is not choosing the “wrong” version of the Bible. If you want to see evidence of Satan, look for divisiveness - you will find his traces there. Christians, I urge you not to call your brothers and sisters in Christ demons or accomplices of Satan. We are sinful human beings in a fallen world, and our ability to grasp the Truth is corrupted by original sin. None of us understands God perfectly, and that is why we need each other. It is nothing but spiritual pride for any one person or group to claim the whole Truth. Let us humble ourselves before God and before one another.