The “King James Only vs. Modern translations issue” has always been close to my heart considering that I came out of the King James Only movement. After careful study of the facts and finding out that the position of the movement is not only filled with inconsistencies half truths and even out right lies, I decided I had enough. Since then I have made it some sort of a personal crusade not only study the issue in depth but to answer questions related to the issue in order that other believers might also be enlightened.
One of the favourite accusations that the KJV Only movement throws out to those who use modern translations are the alleged omissions, additions, revisions that modern translations commit when compared to the King James Version. Among the most favourite Bible verse they use is Daniel 3:25.
The following is an actual question asked of me in Facebook in relation to Daniel 3:25:
Your favorite version is NASB. So if that’s your favorite,do you believe NASB’s phrase in Daniel 3:25that the fourth person is like a son of the gods?
In KJV,”the fourth person is like the Son of God” and that is in reference in the fourth gospel John, Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
By the way , I just couldn’t resist posting this picture here, I find it so funny. (Jesus or Thor ? hahaha 😀 Son of God or son of the gods ?) Nevertheless take note this is a serious question. (I just found this picture posted by a friend in Facebook. I am so sorry I could not give attribution for this to anybody)
Anyway, Here is my response:
Excellent question as the response to this is both a privilege and opportunity to demonstrate the importance of the appreciating the nuances of Bible translations.
The question is, why does the NASB and other translation translate it as “. . . . like the son of the gods” while the KJV translates it as “. . . like the Son of God” ? Which is the most appropriate translation ? (A side question is asked and I shall address this in a side note)
To properly answer the question consider the following:
1.) The Aramaic word (Daniel is written in Hebrew and Aramaic with the Aramic sandwiched somwhere between chapter 2 to 7) used for “God” in Daniel 3:25 is the word “elahin” In the actual Aramaic the phrase in dispute reads as “bar-elahin” (“bar” which means “son of”)
2.) “elahin” is a masculine plural noun, which means “gods.” Such word is often used to describe the pagan gods during that time. In contrast the Hebrew God, the God of Daniel, Shadrach, Mishach and Abednego is referred to as just “elah” or “elaha” (with the definite article attached) the singular form of “elahin”
3.) Consider the following verses below in support of #2 (I have attached a screenshot of how it is rendered in the Aramaic to highlight the difference)
a. Daniel 2:47 – “The king answered unto Daniel, and said, Of a truth it is, that your God (elaha) is a God (elah) of gods (elahin), and a Lord of kings, and a revealer of secrets, seeing thou couldest reveal this secret”
b. Dan. 3:17 – “If it be so, our God (elaha) whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and he will deliver us out of thine hand, O king.”
So what should be the proper translation of Daniel 3:25 considering the above?
Argument #1 – Since the Aramaic rendering is “bar-elahin” and “elahin” is in the plural form hence the phrase should be translated as “son of the gods”
Argument #2 – As to who is making the statement should be considered here. People interpret events base on their cultural and religious biases. Nebuchadnezar was a pagan king who had a different idea about supreme being and deities. Considering that Chaldeans believed in families of gods, it is logical to assume that the words he uttered to describe the 4th person in the fiery furnace is a “son of the gods” as such phrase (according to the IVP OT Background Commentary) represents a common Semitic expression for identifying a supernatural being
Argument #3 – Most Bible commentators and scholars agree that the phrase should be rendered as “son of the gods” not “son of God.”
Argument #4 – The original KJV 1611 writes Dan. 3:25 as “sonne of God” without capitalizing “son.” No marginal notes has been provided by the KJV translators on this aspect so we are left to speculate as to why they capitalized “Son of God” in other instances where the phrase occurs in the KJV 1611 but in Daniel 3:25 they did not capitalize “son.” (Example of this is Mathew 27:54 and John 19:7 where we see the word “son” as capitalized) Perhaps they are unsure of its translation? We do not know, but this is something to be considered.
Side note: I am not saying that the pre-incarnate Christ definitely did not appear in Daniel 3:25. Several well known theologians such as Jonathan Edwards, Mathew Henry and even the well beloved Charles Spurgeon and Christian tradition itself typically identifies the fourth man in the fiery furnace as the pre-incarnate Christ. Yes it is possible. Others say it is an angel. (I do know for sure that it was definitely not Thor :-D) Commentators and Bible scholars are really divided on this matter. My personal take on this, I rely on the evidence and since there is nothing in Scripture that says with definitiveness that it is the pre-incarnate Christ or it is not, hence for me I leave this as an open question and regard this as something that belongs to the “secret things of the Lord” and definitely an addition to the million questions that I would like to ask the Lord himself when we see him face to face.
Conclusion: Again the main issue here is not whether or not it is the pre-incarnate Christ that is the 4th man in the fiery furnace. The main issue here is what is the proper translation of the controversial phrase in Daniel 3:25 that varies between the KJV and modern translations. With the above arguments, I submit that “son of the gods” is a more proper rendering of this text.
Hi ! my name is Zigfred Diaz. Thanks for visiting my personal blog ! Never miss a post from this blog. Subscribe to my full feeds for free. Click here to subscribe to zdiaz.com by Email
You may also want to visit my other blogs. Click here to learn more about great travel ideas.
Excellent exposition of the said text yes indeed scholarly itemized with proofs. I just don’t know why people are so fanatic of their doctrine denying biblical truth. I am sorry to say that some are not actually ‘for the truth’ but ‘how they can defend their ‘truth’, cherish doctrine etc..
Thank you Pastor Levi Nueva. That is the problem, people are so fanatical of their doctrines like KJV Onlyism that they resort to unsound logical and make logical fallacies such as argument by assertion and or fallacy of deliberate ignorance. We need to level up the theological education not only of all pastors but all Christians ! I am so glad to have partnered with you through The Master’s Bible Institute. (www.mastersbible.institute)
While Nebucanezzer (in Aramaic) says:
“a son of the gods” he is a pagan.
In context, the three hebrew men would not be rescued by any of the pagan gods,
but are rescued by “their” “One God”…
So it follows that the one who rescued them IS “the son of God”
Hi saints. As you pointed out, there are many that DO believe it was the Son of God who was with them in the fiery furnace, and so do I.
Here is why I believe the King James Bible got it right. This is my own study on the verse and I compare lots of other Bible translations to show that many Bible translators also believe it was the Son of God.
“The Son of God” or “a son of the gods”?
Daniel 3:25 “and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.”
When the God fearing Hebrew children, Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego refused to bow down and worship before the image king Nebuchadnezzar made, he had them cast into a burning fiery furnace.
These three bold believers confessed: “If it be so, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and he will deliver us out of thine hand, O king.” These three believers in the one true God were cast into the flames and yet they were not harmed. King Nebuchadnezzar was astonished and said: “Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.” (Daniel 3:25).
“Then in Nebuchaddnezzar spake, and said, Blessed be the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, who hath sent his angel, and delivered his servants that trusted in him, and have changed the kings word, and yielded their bodies, that they might not serve nor worship any god, except their own God.” (Daniel 3:28)
When we read the entire historical event in the King James Holy Bible, we see that their God did indeed deliver them. However this truth of the true God working salvation for His people is obscured and perverted in numerous modern versions.
“The fourth is like THE SON OF GOD”
“And the form of the fourth is like the Son of God” is the reading of Wycliffe Bible 1395 – “the fourthe is lijk the sone of God.”, the Great Bible 1540, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587 – “the forme of the fourth is like the sonne of God.”, the Douay-Rheims of 1610 – “and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.”,the King James Bible 1611, The Bill Bible 1671, Webster’s translation 1833,the Brenton Translation 1851, the Calvin Bible of 1855, the Julia Smith Translation 1855, The Smith Bible 1876, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907 – “the fourth is like THE SON OF GOD”, the Douay of 1950, The Word of Yah 1993, Lamsa’s 1936 translation of the Syriac Peshitta – “the fourth is like that of the Son of God.”, The Word of Yah Bible 1993, the Third Millennium Bible 1998, the NKJV of 1982, The Koster Scriptures 1998 – “the fourth is like THE SON OF ELAH”, the 2009 Bond Slave Version, the Asser Septuagint 2009 – “the fourth is like THE SON OF GOD.”
It is also the reading of The Revised Webster Bible 1995, The Complete Apostle’s Bible 2005, The Revised Geneva Bible 2005, the 2011 Orthodox Jewish Bible – “and the form of the fourth is like the Bar Elohin (Ben Elohim, Hebrew).”, the Biblos Interlinear Bible 2011 – “the form of the fourth is like the Son of God”, Conservative Bible 2011, The Work of God’s Children Illustrated Bible 2011, The New Brenton Translation 2012, The Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2012 – “the form of the fourth is like the Bar-Elahin”, the Jubilee Bible 2010, The Revised Douay-Rheims Bible 2012, the 2012 Natural Israelite Bible – “the fourth is like THE SON OF GOD.” and The Holy Bible, Modern English Version 2014 – “And the form of the fourth is like the Son of God!”
This online Interlinear Hebrew Old Testament – “the fourth is like THE SON OF GOD.”
http://studybible.info/IHOT/Daniel%203:25
Jewish Virtual Library The Tanakh [Full Text] 1998
“and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.”
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/daniel-chapter-3
It is even the reading found in the so called Greek Septuagint copy I have which is translated as “the fourth is like the Son of God.”
The so called Greek Septuagint stands with the KJB in its translation.
It says: “the fourth is like the Son of God”
You can see it online here –
http://www.ecmarsh.com/lxx/Daniel/index.htm
24 And Nabuchodonosor heard them singing praises; and he wondered, and rose up in haste, and said to his nobles, Did we not cast three men bound into the midst of the fire? and they said to the king, Yes, O king. 25 And the king said, But I see four men loose, and walking in the midst of the fire, and there has no harm happened to them; and the appearance of the fourth is like the Son of God.
Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010 – “and the form of the fourth is like the Bar-Elahin”
Foreign language translations that say the fourth is like the Son of God are the French Sainte Bible of 1759 by Louis Lemaistre de Sacy – ” le quatrième est semblable au Fils de Dieu.”, the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras of 1569, the 2010 Reina Valera Gomez – “y el parecer del cuarto es semejante al Hijo de Dios.”, the Check BKR Bible – “jest synu Božímu.”, the Lithuanian Bible – “kaip Dievo s?nus!”, the Russian Synodal Version – “??????? ???? ?????.”, the 2009 Romanian Fidela Bbile – “ca a Fiului lui Dumnezeu. ”
and the Modern Greek Bible -“?? ???????? ????? ????? ?? ???? ????.”
The NKJV 1982 also reads: “the fourth is like the Son of God” but then it has a footnote that reads: “Or a son of the gods”. A son of the Gods, would not be the Son of the only true and living God. “A son of the gods” would not be the Lord Jesus Christ who was with them in the fiery furnace.
The Second Person of the divine Trinity often appeared in the Old Testament as “the angel of the Lord” and was worshipped as God. (See the references below in Poole’s Synopsis.)
“A son of the gods” is the reading of the ASV, NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV, Holman Standard, the Jehovah Witness New World Translation, and many other modern versions. You cannot believe nor teach the same truth using these conflicting versions.
Daniel Wallace and company’s ridiculous NET version goes off virtually all by itself and actually says: “And the appearance of the fourth is like that of a god!”
And the 1998 Complete Jewish Bible and the critical text 2011 Common English Bible actually say: “and the fourth looks like one of the gods!”
Holy Scriptures VW Edition 2010 – “And the form of the fourth is like the son of a god.”
And not to be outdone for novelty, the brand new 2012 International Standard Version says: “and the appearance of the fourth resembles a divine being.”
The 2004 Judaica Press Tanach says – “and the form of the fourth one is like [that of] AN ANGEL.”
God’s First Truth 1999 – “and the fourth is like AN ANGEL to look upon. “
The Ancient Roots Bible 2008 has – “and the form of the fourth is like A DESCENDANT OF God.”
All of these last mentioned modern versions reject the clear Hebrew reading of SON – Hebrew bar.
The Catholic Versions
The Catholic Versions are, as always, in disagreement with each other. Not only do the Catholic versions continually disagree with each other, but if you look at Daniel chapter 3 in the Catholic bible versions you will see that they have all added some 66 entire verses allegedly taken from the Aramaic and some Greek copies to this single chapter. The older Catholic translations like the 1610 Douay-Rheims as well as the 1950 Douay read like the King James Bible – “and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.”
But the 1968 Jerusalem bible says “the fourth looks like a son of the gods”, the 1970 St. Joseph New American bible has “the fourth looks like a son of God” and the 1985 New Jerusalem has “a child of the gods!”. And the 2009 Catholic Public Domain Version has – “the fourth is like a son of God.”
Coverdale of 1535 and Matthew’s Bible of 1549 were off the mark with: “and the fourth is like an angel to loke vpon.”
Bible Commentators
Bible commentators like bible versions are all over the board when it comes to understanding Who this fourth Person was who appeared with the three Hebrew believers. However there are several that support the reading found in the King James Bible and many other translations that this Person was none other than the Son of God.
At our Facebook King James Bible Debate forum, and common sense Bible believer posted this simple and logical explanation – “Look at a verse previous to Daniel 3:25, which is Daniel 2:47 “The king answered unto Daniel, and said, Of a truth it is, that your God is a God of gods, and a Lord of kings, and a revealer of secrets, seeing thou couldest reveal this secret.”
It seems king Nebuchadnezzar learned a lesson at this point and when another miracle took place, the deliverance from the fiery furnace, that he recognized the power of Almighty God, and said in Daniel 3:25 … Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.”
John Gill – “And the form of the fourth is like the Son of God; MANY OF THE ANCIENT CHRISTIAN WRITERS INTERPRET IT OF CHRIST THE SON OF GOD, whom Nebuchadnezzar, though a Heathen prince, might have some knowledge of from Daniel and other Jews in his court, of whom he had heard them speak as a glorious Person; and this being such an one, he might conclude it was he, or one like to him; and it is highly probable it was he, since it was not unusual for him to appear in a human form, and to be present with his people, as he often is with them, and even in the furnace of affliction;to sympathize with them; to revive and comfort them; to bear them up and support them; to teach and instruct them, and at last to deliver them out of their afflictions.”
Jamieson, Fausset and Brown – “like the Son of God–Unconsciously, like Saul, Caiaphas, and Pilate, he is made to utter divine truths… REALLY IT WAS THE “messenger of the covenant,” WHO HEREIN GAVE A PRELUDE TO HIS INCARNATION.”
Matthew Henry – “Some think it was the eternal Son of God, the angel of the covenant, and not a created angel. He appeared often in our nature before he assumed it in his incarnation, and never more seasonable, nor to give a more proper indication and presage of his great errand into the world in the fulness of time, than now, when, to deliver his chosen out of the fire, he came and walked with them in the fire.”
John Wesley – ” The Son of God – Jesus Christ, the Angel of the covenant, did sometimes appear before his incarnation.”
Matthew Poole – ” Like the Son of God; a Divine, most beautiful, and glorious countenance; either of a mere angel, or rather of Jesus Christ, the Angel of the covenant, who did sometimes appear in the Old Testament before his incarnation, Gen. xii. 7; xviii. 10, 13, 17, 20, &c.; Exod. xxiii. 23; xxxiii. 2; Josh. v. 13—15 ; Prov. viii. 31; in all which places it is Jehovah; Gen. xix. 24; Exod. iii. 2 ; Acts vii. 30, 32, 33, 38.”
Was it an angel, or was it the second person of the Trinity, “the” Son of God? That this was the Son of God – the second person of the Trinity, who afterward became incarnate, has been quite a common opinion of expositors. So it was held by Tertullian, by Augustine, and by Hilary, among the fathers; and so it has been held by Gill, Clarius, and others, among the moderns. Of those who have maintained that it was Christ, some have supposed that Nebuchadnezzar had been made acquainted with the belief of the Hebrews in regard to the Messiah; others, that he spoke under the influence of the Holy Spirit, without being fully aware of what his words imported, as Caiaphas, Saul, Pilate, and others have done. – Poole’s “Synopsis.”
John Trapp Complete Commentary (English Puritan) – “This fourth person here in the fiery furnace is by many held to be Christ the Son of God, who appeared at this time in human shape.”
Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers – “(25) The Son of God.—These words, let us remember, are uttered by a heathen king, who calls this same Person, in Daniel 3:28, “an angel” of the God whom the three children worshipped. Probably Nebuchadnezzar thought that He stood to Jehovah in the same relation that he himself did to Merodach. His conceptions of the power of Jehovah were evidently raised by what he had witnessed, though as yet he does not recognise Him as being more than a chief among gods. He has not risen to that conception of the unity of God which is essential to His absolute supremacy. But still the question has to be answered, What did the king see? THE EARLY PATRISTIC INTERPRETATION WAS THAT. IT WAS NONE OTHER THAN CHRIST HIMSELF. We have no means of ascertaining anything further, and must be content with knowing that the same “Angel of God’s presence” who was with Israel in the wilderness watched over the people in Babylon.”
Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary – “Probably the impious wretch was struck with astonishment at the distinguishing providence of God, that while God’s servants received no hurt, the very heat of the furnace struck dead those who had laid their hands upon them. But what, did the fire loosen the cords, With which Shadrach and his companions were bound, and yet not touch their persons? Yes! so distinguishing was the mercy, that not a hair of their heads was singed. Oh! what tokens are these of JESUS looking on, guiding all, and controlling all! But all is explained to us in what follows. JESUS was with them.”
Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible – Unabridged – “The form of the fourth is like the Son of God. Unconsciously, like Saul, Caiaphas (John 11:49-52), and Pilate, he is made to utter divine truths, the full import of which he did not himself understand. “Son of God” in his mouth means only an “angel” from heaven, as Daniel 3:28 proves, “Blessed be the God of Shadrach, etc., who hath sent his angel.” (Compare Job 1:6; Job 38:7, where “the sons of God” mean the angels; Psalms 34:7-8, “The angel of the Lord encampeth round about them that fear him, and delivereth them;” and the probably pagan centurion’s exclamation, Matthew 27:54, “Truly this was the Son of God”). The Chaldeans believed in families of gods: Bel, the supreme god, accompanied by the goddess Mylitta, being the father of the gods: thus by the expression he meant one sprung from and sent by the gods. Really it was the “messenger of the covenant,” who herein gave a prelude to His incarnation.”
The King James Bible is always right and it exalts the Lord Jesus Christ like no other bible translation. Friends don’t let friends use the modern versions.
Thank you for the long comment. However take note your statement “there are many that DO believe it was the Son of God who was with them in the fiery furnace, and so do I” is just a personal belief. The truth is we do not know who appeared there if it was Jesus Christ or an angel. The truth is we don’t know. Our beliefs should be based on the evidence and the evidence does not tell us who it was. There are many commentators that you cited but again these are just base on their personal beliefs. There is no evidence that it was indeed the pre-incarnate Christ that was there. I am not saying he was not there at all. He could be the one that was there. But again we have no evidence for that so were best left to speculate on the matter no matter what the Bible commentators say. Further the as I emphasised, both the textual and contextual evidence show that it should be properly translated as “son of the gods.” Again we should rely on the evidence, not base our beliefs on what we believe or make arguments by assertion as this is a logical fallacy.
I am former Inner City Pastor Hobson of First Baptist Church of Dallas. I subscribe to Daniel 3.25 as THE SON OF GOD not understood as a pagan king fully, though subscribing later to that fact in the chapter.
I once had a young JW who knocked on my door. He was by himself, that day. He seemed to have a “pet thing” about the existence of Jesus, before
his birth in Bethlehem. I had no trouble agreeing with that. And I quoted
scriptures such as “He is the Alpha and Omega”. Then I directed his attention
to Daniel 3:25 in the King James Bible (where it says..”and the fourth man
looks like the Son of God”) I asked him..”Who do you think that fourth man was”? I wish you could have seen his reaction! He floated out of my house on a cloud, as if I had led him to an Angel of Light!
Great sharing your personal testimony on that one and thank you brother. Thank you for sharing.
The important question here is one of “HONESTY”. The KJV is the most honest of all Biblical translations. If you believe That King James I set up a puppet council to produce a Bible for his own nefarious reasons, you have not done your homework. You know nothing of church history. You know nothing of the men charged with the task of producing this translation, men who would have gone to the gallows, the stake or the guillotine before they would alter one jot or tittle of holy writ. But most importantly, you impugn the infinite wisdom of God who is not only the writer, editor and publisher of His Own Book, but Thee One Who has seen fit to use it for hundreds of years as His tool for the dispensation of the Gospel throughout the world God almost exclusively used the KJV for evangelizing virtually the entire world for almost 500 years. Is He some bungling oaf who knew not how to disseminate the Gospel? Of course not!
He is in total control of His Book and has shown repeatedly with council after council after council that His book astonishingly trustworthy! He let the whole world witness every single step of the proliferation of His Book throughout History! The KJV is hands down thee most trustworthy version of delivered to mankind. Think about this…
Prior to the onslaught of versions we now have, the Gospel had actually reached the known world as per Jesus’ command by way of the KJV. It wasn’t until the early 60’s that a couple of translation existed. In the 70’s a few more. The 80’s, 90’s and thereafter saw countless versions appear.
By the early 60’s TV evangelism (KJV being the primary source) was well underway. By the 70’s the known world was saturated by TV waves and the Gospel had clearly enveloped the planet (and even outer space!) It was only after that that the flood gates were opened to the chaos we now have with all of these versions. (I personally believe this chaos of versions is a sign of the end times. Another story altogether.)
QUESTION: Why? Why so many versions? And who has deemed it necessary to call for so many of these versions? ANSWER: Profit and bias. What is the greatest selling book of all time? Therefore it is quite profitable to produce a “translation” (most are clearly “interpretations”) to raise money for whatever noble cause one might proclaim.
Read the preface of translations. It is usually stated in black and white that that bible is an “interpretation” of scripture. But it is usually very brief and obscured so you must read carefully. Many translations are exceedingly biased and they change scripture to reflect their views on doctrine.
You have to be blind not to see the egregious differences from one translation to another. The overt contradictions from version to version. Blatant changes of massive chunks of scripture that has stood for centuries that now have been changed by smart people (Haman; from the gallows to being impaled Esther 7).
Have you ever sat in church and tried to follow a reading of scripture when the version is different than yours? Or anywhere else for that matter? It is a victory for Satan when he throws dust in your eyes obscuring your vision from seeing the Word of God as it is being read and you are unable to take it in because you are too busy scurrying back and forth through the verses trying to figure out where you’re supposed to be in the passage! Too late! Satan just beat you! There’s no way to comprehend what is going on during that reading. No way.
To think all of these versions somehow enhances the Christian experience is utter foolishness! This is one of Satan’s greatest works. This is the biggest disaster that could have ever happened to the Word. Things have been added. Things have been taken away. The Bible has been egregiously altered in every way that the critic could have ever dreamed of
or hoped for. We gave him everything.
So I ask you, what does the KJV say about Daniel 3:25? “Son of God”, right? Look within. Look hard. Remove all the noise and clear the garbage. What does your heart say? I’ll tell you exactly what it says, it says that that is Jesus in there, (the furnace with S,M & A.) God has not left you without the answer. A scholar doesn’t need to tell you. God has already told you.
God has not left you wanting on this. Look into your heart. Does it not tell you clearly that that is Jesus in there? That is what faith is all about.
As Paul Harvey would say,
“…..and that’s the REST of the story!”
Good Day!
Great read, thank you!
Do you think that Daniel was a Polymath too?