New Modern Translation Bible Omits the Term “Christ”

Posted on by wdednh
Image from the Book of Kells, a 1200 year old ...
Image from the Book of Kells, a 1200 year old book. Category:Illuminated manuscript images (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

There are many translations of The Holy Bible. Some are very accurate and some are not so. The copy right laws makes it very hard for translators to do their job properly, however there are some words and names which are not effected by any copy right laws, words and names such as God, Jesus Christ and Angels and few more. And when translation come about such as the following which omit or changes the above mentioned under the false pretense of “Easier Understanding,” we as believers have to be aware and expose these ungodly efforts!

  |  
Written by Dave Bohon
Tuesday, 24 April 2012 12:49

Another new Bible is making its way onto the shelves of Christian bookstores and the Sam’s Club religious section, touted by its publisher as a fresh and easy-to-understand translation for those who may own a Bible, but never read it.

The most recent Bible offering from religious publisher Thomas Nelson is entitled The Voice, and in an effort to make Scripture more palatable to 21st-century readers un-attuned to the customary language of the Christian faith, the translators have inserted some creative alternatives to age-old terms, causing some concerns among more tradition-minded Christians.

For example, the name “Jesus Christ” has been replaced with “Jesus the Anointed One or the liberating king,” reported USA Today. “That’s a more accurate translation for modern American readers, says David Capes, lead scholar for The Voice…. Capes says that many people, even those who’ve gone to church for years, don’t realize that the word ‘Christ’ is a title. ‘They think that Jesus is his first name and Christ is his last name,’ says Capes, who teaches the New Testament at Houston Baptist University in Texas.”

Similarly, the term “angel” is rendered “messenger,” and apostle comes out as “emissary,” Capes said that such terms can confuse and distract the modern reader so that the essential message of Scripture is missed. He told CNN that the target demographic of The Voice, an updated rendering of the King Kames Version of the Bible, is the “own but never read it” crowd, and is focused on providing a translation that emphasizes the meaning behind the words of Scripture.

“We asked, ‘What kind of questions are they coming to the text with,’” Capes explained to CNN of the translation process. “We … made that strategic decision, not to transliterate, but to translate everything, to give them the meaning of the text, and to give them the sense of where the story… is going.”

As explained on the promotional website for the new Bible: “The Voice considers the narrative links that help us to understand the drama and passion of story that is present in the original languages. The tone of the writing, the format of the page, and the directness of the dialog allows the tradition of passing down the biblical narrative to come through in The Voice.”

Unlike some other translations, such as the recently updated New International Version, The Voice “is formatted like a screenplay or novel,” explained USA Today. “Translators cut out the ‘he said’ and ‘they said’ and focused on dialogue.”

Cape said he hoped readers of the translation would come to see the Bible “not as an ancient text that’s worn out, but as a story that they participate in and find their lives in.”

The inspiration for the title The Voice actually comes from a re-rendering of the beginning of John’s Gospel, which reads in the King James Version: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (John 1:1). In The Voice, however, the beloved passage reads: “Before time itself was measured, the Voice was speaking. The Voice was and is God.”

Frank Couch, the executive editor and publisher of The Voice, said that “voice” better captures the meaning of the Greek logos than does “word,” an argument he makes for the entire translation. “The Voice has not claimed to be more accurate than any other translation,” Couch told the Christian Post. “Rather it is more easily understood than any other translation. When translators are limiting themselves to conveying the complete essence of a word from the Hebrew or the Greek with one English word, they have difficulty bringing in the nuances held in the original language.”

Couch told Christian Post that the literal renderings of the bulk of Bible translations has made it necessary “for commentators and preachers to spend so much time explaining what the words in the original language mean before the lay reader can understand fully a text of Scripture. Because we have a more expansive translating technique we can more fully develop the English translation and thus bring out the more difficult nuances found in the original language.”

Explained The Voice’s promotional website: “One of the byproducts of the information age in the church has been its focus on biblical knowledge. Many Bibles reflect this, packed with informative notes, charts, and graphs. While there’s nothing wrong with having a deep knowledge, a personal connection and deep relationship are far better. The Voice is focused on helping readers find (or rediscover) this connection with Him. Scripture is presented not as an academic document, but as an engaging story.”

While there has been little official backlash as yet from Bible scholars, expect the new translation to receive its share criticism from those pastors and church leaders who have grown wary of the plethora of Bible versions that have flooded the Christian market over the past decade or so. A foretaste of that feedback can be seen on various Christian blogs and forums, noted the Christian Post.

For example, noted the Post, the “blog ‘Extreme Theology,’ an apologetics website, declared that The Voice was a ‘distorted version of the Bible.’” Wrote the anonymous Orthodox evangelical blogger: “Unfortunately, not since the release of the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ New World Translation of the Greek Scriptures in 1950 has there been a bible published that so blatantly mangles and distorts God’s Word in order to support a peculiar and aberrant theological agenda.”

One may reasonably expect more condemnation of the new translation from conservative evangelicals in the coming months. (The Voice publisher offers a comparison of its new version to nine other popular Bible translations.)
Related articles

35 thoughts on “New Modern Translation Bible Omits the Term “Christ””

  1. Pingback: “God helps those who help themselves” « power of language blog: partnering with reality by JR Fibonacci

  2. Tommy,

    In response to your new Post, http://realgospeltalk.wordpress.com/2012/04/26/da-evil-of-changing-insert-gasp-here-da-bible/#comment-3. Your wording speaks for itself. Never have I seen a ‘pastor’ speak like you. I have grave doubts that you ARE a pastor. If you are, then you are a disgraced one. Of that, I have no doubt.

    I find it interesting that you paraphrase the entire exchange rather than print it in its entirety. All I can say is, “Praise God!” I prayed fervently this morning, worried that my response to you might be colored by my own feelings. I prayed that God would crush me, smash me, beat me down before I spoke wrongly or misled a single soul in my words to you. But the Holy Spirit spoke to me. He said, “Trust in God. He knows your flaws. He is able to work around and through them. You have given your life to him. He will not err when speaking through you. Continue trusting in his greatness. He is bigger than your flaws.”

    And I was comforted. Seeing your deceitful (and rather sneaky) blog today- the way you tried to cover my words and your words into a false paraphrase that leans your way- the way your anger, bitterness & sarcasm put themselves on full display there- I KNOW I spoke truly about you.

    That makes me so happy! To know that the Holy Spirit DID guide me. To know without a doubt that the words I heard during my prayer came from the Lord above- what majesty! What honor to bestow on my head! Praise God and Praise Jesus all the world. God is displaying his majesty again in the world of men. The times are growing to an end. I think I will see Jesus in my lifetime. If our generation sees him, the Bible calls us ‘blessed’. I sure hope so.

    Tommy, there is nothing more to say between us. I leave you with the Lord. He knows us both. He will judge both of us. I have nothing more to say on the matter.

    Like

  3. Pingback: Da Evil of changing (insert gasp here) Da Bible | realgospeltalk

  4. I can understand people being upset over the omission of the word Christ, but if we somehow think that’s going to dilute the effect of God’s Word, I think we’d be severely underestimating it. To me, the whole message of the Bible isn’t an exact literal word-for-word translation. If we split hairs about which word is more true and which word isn’t, then we miss the bigger picture of Christ’s sacrifice, death/burial/resurrection for all of humanity. To me, that is the greater impact of the Scriptures, not whether or not a word is 100% accurate.

    Like

  5. Pingback: New Modern Translation Bible Omits the Term “Christ” « New Beginnings Church
  6. Pingback: New Modern Translation Bible Omits the Term “Christ” « Short Little Rebel
  7. Pingback: Bible translator criticized over word substitution « My Spanish Translator

  8. hmm, as a student of Hebrew and Greek, it IS more accurate. And Christ was never part of Jesus’ name–ever. It is and always has been a title, which means, “The anointed one.” His name would have been Jesus of Nazareth or Jesus, son of Joseph. Jesus “the Christ” was announcing that he was the Messiah to the Jewish people, thus fulfilling Jewish Prophecy.
    As to Messengers vs angels–again, more accurate. The word in Hebrew IS messenger, no question about it. Just because someone changes something from an earlier translation does not mean that they have tried to fool the reading body of Christ. People had similar complaints about the King James Bible 400 years ago.

    Like

    2. There is most definitely an effort afoot- an ancient effort- that attempts to generalize the Person of God and the Person of Jesus. The ultimate goal is to substitute Satan as God & Jesus. This is exactly what is being done in the Freemason society today. First, convince the naive Christians into believing that Christianity is the basis for the organization by swearing on the Bible & kissing it before pledges. Then reading scripture that has intentionally ommited the name of Jesus altogether. Then having the idea of the Universal Architect replace the name God. Then reject Christianity as the ONLY way to the Universal Architect. Lastly, introduce Satan as the true God and savior. It is an effort that has borne fruit amongst the weak Christian sect. Especially those who feel rejected, lonely or ostracized by previous events in their lives. They love the brotherhood and the way these organizations reach out and seduce them for their participation.

      This type of new Bible is attempting to make God’s commands and Person EASY for weak Christians. It is also inviting brotherhood by diminishing the requirements of faith. It attempts to seduce those who wish for the promises of God but do not wish to fulfill their end of the bargain.

      A great tool for Satan. We must pray for those seduced, pray for justice and do our part by alerting the world to these types of efforts. Thank you for the heads up. I will repost and spread the word…

      Like

      1. I suggest that if you are correct, we must go back to the oldest manuscripts and choose which one is more accurate, then publish only it, then not allow anyone to read the scriptures in their own language and thus be forced to believe the Bible says what the priests schooled in such languages tell them it means–oh wait, they tried that until Martin Luther came along. I wish you well with your efforts. The biggest thing hurting Christianity these days is the unwillingness to allow ourselves to learn something new–to acknowledge we might just be wrong. And more and more, the younger generation simply feels we are lying to them when we deny such understandings as Satanic conspiracies. New translations must not be seen as a bad thing, they simply are a different translation. When King James was FIRST published, its forward said that the purpose was to allow for multiple translations so people could actually SEE the different interpretations of Scripture and to allow the scriptures to be in the more “modern” language that people actually spoke. Then the forward was removed and somehow any translation since 1611 (despite new knowledge and understanding of Ancient Hebrew and Ancient Greek) is some Satanic attempt to change “God’s Word.” But in reality. JESUS is God’s word–says so in the Bible ;). And how we see him may change, but he never will. And based on this thought that these new ideas are somehow dangerous, Jesus (if he were living now) would be crucified all over again, but this time from Christians who refuse to adapt and always believe that they are right.
        Blessings!

        Like

        1. Tommy, I have to doubt your motives altogether. But not based on the actual content of your statements. I doubt you because of the sarcastic TONE of your comments. Also, your aggressive, attack-like demeanor. Christians don’t act this way – especially with so little provocation. If you believe what you are saying sincerely, then you wouldn’t need to get so upset. You would just explain yourself lovingly. I do not believe you are a Christian, but instead have other motives for your comment- and they are not in support of Christ.

          Like

          1. I have to disagree with you, Rebel. I get what Tommy is trying to say. He’s not attacking Christianity, but rather saying that Jesus is God’s Word in the flesh. THAT’S the Word that matters, Jesus. If we devote ourselves to a hair-splitting over words, we miss the entire point of Christ’s message, his teaching and his miraculous death/burial/resurrection. I think Tommy is trying to say (and please correct me if I’m wrong) is that we’re missing the big picture, instead of getting in squabbles over translation issues.

            Like

            2. Mr. Zissman,

              I do understand the idea of quibbling over small differences. But the kinds of re-wording described in the article are not small differences. They are doctrine differences. That can not be tolerated. Also, we must be very careful what the intent of the translation is- what the motive behind the new translation is. This new translation appears to be a watering down of the truth with the sole purpose of drawing in people who don’t with to hear the full intent of God- namely, a call to WORSHIP and a call to OBEDIENCE. Many, many people who call themselves Christians balk at those ideas. They are ‘religious’ people who go to church, as if their actions can save them.

              I have no objections to most of the translations of the Bible. This one stands out and this one provokes the Holy Spirit within me to speak out.

              My objection to Tommy stemms from the WAY he spoke. It indicates something wrong in him and his motivation. Hope that clears my intention up.

              Like

            3. “instead of getting in squabbles over translation issues.”
              There is a great danger in reading and being thought from a book that is not properly translated. Yes Christ message is the important part, but if that message is distorted due to ignorant or on purpose for what ever reason the body of Christ will suffer!

              Like

          2. I am not upset, nor attacking, rather speaking from my experience as one who actually does minister to and work to bring the disenfranchised back into a loving relationship with Jesus, as one who works to bring the marginalized into a safe and loving community of the Body of Christ without judgment, and as a long time pastor and preacher of the gospel of Jesus the Christ, Son of God, as an ordained elder in The United Methodist Church, a graduate of a fully accredited seminary with a 90 hour Master of Divinity, a student of Hebrew and Greek, etc., etc…. (If it helps, let me say, “Jesus is Lord!”–check 1 Corinthians 12:3). I have nothing but love of God and neighbor in my heart. Judging whether or not I am a Christian is the same as judging my eternal destination, which I do believe is scripturally frowned upon and picture perfect definition of what one is not to do. Again, Blessings to you and Good luck in your endeavor.

            Like

            1. Tommy, you may be all those things. You may even be a sincere Christian. But your sarcasm and aggression in your first response would say otherwise. I am fully aware that quibbling over small matters of translations are meaningless. But the kinds of changes indicated in this article are unacceptable to me. They are more doctrinal than mere translation issues.

              The fact that you feel the need to list your titles and experience shows me that you actually believe these things to matter one bit when seeking the truth. The Pharisees and Sadducees were extremely educated men with lifetimes within their ministries. They were great leaders of their time. And yet, their ideas and words were sepulchers of death.

              The Bible also speak of false prophets in the end times. I believe we are in the end times. It was the Holy Spirit that alerted me concerning your comment. Being a bonafide minister means zero. You know that. So why list them? This isn’t right or Biblical.

              As for your support of the new translation: the INTENT of the translation bothers me- to make Jesus and God more palatable to modern people.

              God and Jesus were quite clear that they had NO INTENTION of making their message palatable or easy for any human. In fact, they used words to confound people. So the intent of the book is not biblical. This is why I feel compelled to speak out against it. The fact that you, a minister, believe this is a good thing makes me doubt you.

              You speak of having a ministry without ‘judgment’ and accuse me of ‘judging’ you, against Jesus’ command. Once again, as a minister, you should know better than that. Jesus spoke of judgment in the sense where one man believes himself better than another. More holy than another. More righteous before God than another. It is the motive behind why one man would correct another that Jesus condemns. If judgment is completely forbidden in the Bible, how could anyone say ‘this is wrong and this is right?’ This would negate the validity of all human laws. How could we say that some did wrong or right, based on your version of ‘judgment’? My DOUBT of your Christianity was based on your first comment- the sarcasm & aggression in it and your support for a watered down version of Christianity that is unbiblical at heart. Your second comment only reinforces my previous feelings on the matter. It is not the type of judgment Jesus condemned.

              As a minister, you should be very aware of Peter’s reaction to Simon when he tried to buy the gifts of the Holy Spirit in the book of Acts.

              20 Peter answered: “May your money perish with you, because you thought you could buy the gift of God with money! 21 You have no part or share in this ministry, because your heart is not right before God. 22 Repent of this wickedness and pray to the Lord in the hope that he may forgive you for having such a thought in your heart. 23 For I see that you are full of bitterness and captive to sin.”

              Was this ‘judgment’ or discernment? Was this Peter thinking himself better than Simon or was Peter using his powers of discernment to ‘judge’ Simon’s heart? Simon, too, called himself a Christian! And Peter set the foundation for the churches! He is an example to all Christians.

              Again, Paul encourages the new churches to ‘judge’ their fellow Christians based on their actions. He advocated direct confrontation with people who were committing egregious sins. If the person would not stop, they were to be kicked out of church! Churches without ‘judgment’ can be churches that are permissive and unbiblical. People misuse Jesus’ command all the time to avoid confrontation, loss of membership, loss of revenue and loss of personal peace in the church. But this type of church is dead in its tracks.

              Tommy, as a pastor, why would you use sarcasm to make your point? Why should you list your credentials as if they mattered? Why should you support a book with the unbiblical intent on making Christianity ‘easier’ for modern people? Why should you call my doubt on your rightness with God based on your actions, ‘judgment’? Shouldn’t you have rather patiently explained your position on the new translation? You entered the conversation willingly. No one forced you to state your opinion. True leaders of the Christian church do not respond as you have. It just doesn’t jibe. Sorry.

              In any case, you have your path, I have mine. God will judge us both. Perhaps our meeting here will have meaning for both of us one day. Good luck to you and God bless.

              Like

              1. my you are in a snit, aren’t you. Look, I don’t know WHY you chose to respond as you did to my post instead of the OP, but you did. You responded to MY post about satanic influence, etc. I was not (and as of yet, have not) replied to the article, but rather to the OP’s comment about changing the NAME Jesus Christ, meant only to reassure him that what he said about changing the name of Jesus was not the case. My response to you was more tongue in cheek than anything, which you interpreted as an attack (but detailing satanic influence in response to my simple post on the definition of the word “Christ” was not an attack? So, you then choose to JUDGE my salvation. Yes, you can interpret scriptures to the point of judging behavior or even false prophets but you are NOT allowed to judge one’s salvation–that rests in Christ’s hands alone. So I respond not only am I a Christian, I’m a Disciple, a trained and certified, licensed and ordained minister and that means I’m bragging. Nothing will please you. Yes, I entered in willingly–not sure what that has to do with anything, but my response was to the OP, not you and didn’t deserve or even have anything to do with your elevated response to me. And I’m enjoy the quote from Peter, but not sure how in the world it applies here. I have offered no support for the new translation–I haven’t read it–again, my response was to the OP’s concern of changing the NAME of Jesus by changing Christ, which is NOT part of his name, it is a title. And funny you mention Pharisees…I was just thinking of them as I read your post.
                good day

                Like

              2. Rebel, ty so much for your comments, and it is very important to take a stand on enemies subtle attacks. God Bless you and yours , keep up the great work.

                Like

            2. Tommy With all due respect, and in Gods Love, when one starts throwing credentials around, one has no substance in their argue, and all they doing is saying lesson to me i can not be wrong for I have such and such!
              Blessing

              Like

              1. blessings and thank your for your response. quite to the contrary, I am completely assured that I CAN be wrong, thus I am open to learning NEW translations and studying them. I “threw around” my credentials because someone on your page stated categorically that I am not even a Christian, which is bearing false witness. Be well

                Like

                1. Blessing and you are welcome, one thing ive learned in lif if any thing and that is “Every day is a school day, regardless of ones age or schooling.”

                  Like

                2. YOU:

                  ” I “threw around” my credentials because someone on your page stated categorically that I am not even a Christian, which is bearing false witness. Be well”

                  A pastor who lies as well. Let me reprint my comment:

                  “I do not believe you are a Christian, but instead have other motives for your comment- and they are not in support of Christ”

                  A far cry from ‘stating uncategorically that [you] are not even a Christian’.

                  TRUTH supports those who walk with God. Tommy, you reveal yourself over & over again.

                  Like

                  1. “I do not believe you are a Christian”
                    “someone…said categorically that I am not a Christian” (you added the “un” in your reply, tsk, tsk, let’s be truthful)
                    I don’t see any real difference, but if it makes you feel better to claim the moral high ground, I won’t stop you. Feel free.
                    blessings (didn’t you already say you had nothing more to say to me? I do wish you’d honor your words” God loves you and so do I
                    Signed sincerly,
                    fake pastor, not a real Christian, lying anti-scriptural in league with the devil minion of all that is evil Tommy. I can take the name calling–go ahead 🙂 dear God, how do you turn off the subscriptions, I’ve tried twice. Let me try again to leave you all in peace.

                    Like

    3. I am an Assyrian. I read write and translate the Language Jesus spoke: “Aramaic”, Assyrian Churches to this day preach and teach in Aramaic. I have seen the misrepresentation of many word in many translations. It is not just substituting Christ to anointed one, which in fact incorrect by it self, The word Christ comes from Greek word “Christos”, which means the anointed one. Please read and examine the new translation before you make any conclusions. Do read and see how smooth the work present it self and support new
      doctrine.

      Like

      1. that is fascinating. There are so few words in the original manuscripts that are in aramaic, but for those few, I am sure that is helpful. I do not understand your comment that the changing of Christ to Anointed one is incorrect but then saying it means anointed one–forgive me for not understanding. Again, I have made no conclusions of the new translation, I haven’t read it. I was merely addressing your stated concern of the change of names. By the way, have you read the new translation or just the article about it? With your knowledge of Aramaic, how knowledgeable are you in Hebrew. I would think it would be of some help. What about Greek? Do you know Ancient Greek, or do you have to rely on lexicons? Blessings

        Like

        1. Actually you are incorrect by saying “There are so few words in the original manuscripts that are in Aramaic”, Jesus spoke read and wrote Aramaic and Hebrew, Greek Influence came many years later. Christ does not means Anointed one, Christos Means anointed one. As a student of Greek and Hebrew you should know that! But as far as drawing conclusions, again; you are already have, for the argument you are presenting here. Once more as a pastor and or teacher please read the new translation and if, and I mean if you truly find it correct, come back and teach us, where we went wrong. I speak Hebrew fluently and also Greek, how ever when it comes to Scriptures I relay On Peshta Manuscript. You should look it up. And just a reminder Hebrew is a off shoot of Aramaic. I have read the new translation and my friend, beware of wolf in sheep clothing! God Bless.

          Like

          1. This seems like an odd argument, er discussion. Yes, I am aware that “Christ” came from Christos–that is my point. You keep replying by saying the same thing. I don’t understand. I recognize that Jesus spoke Aramaic, but the oldest texts and fragments are NOT aramaic, they are greek and hebrew, but I suppose we will disagree on that. Blessings again

            Like

            1. It seems that you are the one keep repeating your self, here is some info for you:
              Version Examples Language Date of Composition Oldest Copy
              Dead Sea Scrolls Tanakh at Qumran Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek(Septuagint) c. 150 BCE – 70 CE c. 150 BCE – 70 CE
              Septuagint Codex Vaticanus, Codex Sinaiticus and other earlier papyri Greek 300-100 BCE 2nd century BCE(fragments)
              4th century CE(complete)
              Peshitta Syriac early 5th century CE
              Vulgate Codex Amiatinus Latin early 5th century CE
              early 8th century CE(complete)
              Masoretic Aleppo Codex, Leningrad Codex and other incomplete mss Hebrew ca. 100 CE 10th century CE
              Samaritan Pentateuch Samaritan alphabet 200-100 BCE Oldest extant mss c.11th century CE, oldest mss available to scholars 16th century CE
              Targum Aramaic 500-1000 CE 5th century CE

              Like

          2. wdednh,

            Thank you for reading this new translation. It gives me greater heart to oppose it. I have learned to trust in your wisdom in these matters. The Holy Spirit prompted me to speak- but I had not read it yet. Only the translations in the above article spurred my thoughts. You have done a great service to God in reading this new version. I am glad & praise God that you can speak authoritatively on the matter. I am more like a soldier to God. You are a wise, calm leader. I thank God for you.

            Like

            1. Thank you very much Rebel, thank you so much for humbling words, We are the same if not you be in higher level. Thank you so much for exposing and putting up with the fakers. God Bless you and you can never go wrong whit the Holy Spirit! No Mam, never. God Bless you and thank you for your Kind words. 😀

              Like

Comments are closed.