This is the first of my series of articles devoted to debunking the claims of several well known KJV Onlyists actively promoting their false man made doctrine of KJV Onlyism.
In particular this is response to the article written by Will Kinney in his website https://brandplucked.webs.com. In there he wrote an article entitled: “1 Corinthians 14:38 – the Farce they call the “science” of Textual Criticism. ” Kinney and I has constantly been interacting in an online forum on his position on KJV Onlyism.
I will not copy paste the entire article here, you could just check it out in his website. In summary it is his usual rant that only the KJV (and other Textus Receptus Bibles) got the translation of 1 Cor. 14:38 right and that all other modern translations are wrong. As he always does, he further promotes his “modern Bible versions – Roman Catholic conspiracy theory,” insisting that the mistranslation of modern translations is deliberately done in order to corrupt God’s Words.
Kinney’s full article can be found here: https://brandplucked.webs.com/1cor1438beignorant.htm
Here is my full response to this unfounded accusations against modern translations.
Philip Comfort discusses the variant in this text as follows:
VARIANT / GREEK TEXT: WH NU εἰ δέ τις ἀγνοεῖ, ἀγνοεῖται
TRANSLATION: “but if anyone ignores [or, does not recognize] this, he himself is ignored [or, not recognized]”
SUPPORTED BY MANUSCRIPTS: ℵ✱ A✱vid D (F G) 048 0243 33 1739
SUPPORTED BY TRANSLATIONS: RSV NRSV ESV NASB NIV TNIV NEB REB NJB NAB NLT HCSB NET
VARIANT / GREEK TEXT: variant/TR ει δε τις αγνοει, αγνοειτω
TRANSLATION: “but if anyone ignores this, let him ignore this [or, if he is ignorant, let him be ignorant]”
SUPPORTED BY MANUSCRIPTS: 𝔓46 ℵ2 Ac B D2 Ψ Maj
SUPPORTED BY TRANSLATIONS: KJV NKJV NASBmg NIVmg TNIVmg NEBmg REBmg NJBmg NLTmg HCSBmg
“The WH NU reading does not necessarily have better documentary support than the variant. Furthermore, the WH NU reading makes it sound as if the person who does not recognize Paul’s words as being authoritative or divinely inspired is a person who will be ignored—perhaps by the church or by God (Paul does not specify). In any event, such a curse seems too harsh for this context. Zuntz (1953, 108) said, “this exposition credits Paul with an unbelievable recklessness in cursing his adversaries (3:15 is mild by comparison): the refusal to acknowledge his claim ipso facto excludes the doubters from the grace of God!” For these reasons, one should not be too hasty in abandoning the variant reading, which has early and diverse support, and which makes good sense. However, all modern English versions favor the WH NU reading over the variant, while many note the alternative reading.”
Ronald Trail also discusses the variants in this text and comments as follows: “Instead of the indicative verb ἀγνοεῖται ‘he is not recognized’, some manuscripts have the imperative mood ἀγνοείτω ‘let him not be recognized’. GNT selects the indicative mood ‘he is ignored’ with a B rating, indicating that the text is almost certain. The indicative mood ‘he is not recognized’ is also taken by AB, EGT, Herm, HNTC, Lns, NCBC, NIC, NIC2, NTC, TG, TNTC; NET, NIV, NJB, NLT, and REB. The imperative mood ‘let him not be recognized’ is taken by Gdt, Ho, ICC, LN (30.38), Vn; CEV, ISV, KJV, NAB, NRSV, TEV, and TNT.”
Marvin Vincent in his Word Studies in the NT also comments on the variant in the text “Let him be ignorant (ἀγνοείτω). Let him remain ignorant. The text is doubtful. Some read ἀγνοεῖται he is not known; i.e., he is one whom God knows not”
The Expositor’s Bible Commentary Notes cites Greek Scholar Bruce Metzeger’s comment on this passage explaining how modern translations render this passage better than the KJV, “Important representatives from the Alexandrian, Western, and Palestinian texts support the reading of the indicative passive form (probably futuristic in force) άγνοεῖται (agnoeitai, “he will be ignored”). This is against the imperative, active ἀγνοείτω (agnoeito, “let him ignore it,” as followed by KJV. It is better to take the reading agnoeitai, as NIV does, and observe that the alternative in the two occurrences of the word in this verse, one active and other passive, agrees with Paul’s usage in 1 Corinthians 8:2, 3 (cf. Metzger, A Textual Commentary).”
With regards to Bruce Metzger’s take on this text, Leon Morris of the Tyndale commentary writes, “There is a very difficult textual problem with this verse. Many MSS support the text behind AV (and LB), ‘if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant’ (agnoeitō), but probably most students now agree with Metzger that we should read agnoeitai. This can mean ‘he is not recognized’ (RSV, NASB). But not recognized by whom? JB reads ‘you should not recognize him’, while NEB has ‘God does not acknowledge him’. It is also possible to take the verb as future, in which case the meaning is as Moffatt, ‘Anyone who disregards this will be himself disregarded’ (i.e. on judgment day). Any one of these is possible and we have no way of knowing for certain which should be accepted. Fortunately the main thrust is clear: any spiritual person [Vol 7: 1 Co, p. 195] will recognize the voice of God in what Paul says and will ignore this at his peril.”
So as you can see there is no deliberate and or intentional “manipulation” of the text because of some Roman Catholic influence over modern translations. The text is translated differently in modern translations because of manuscript variants.
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.
Leave a Reply