THE POWERS PAPERS: BIBLE TRANSLATIONS

THE POWERS' PAPERS BLOG PAGE BY PERMISSION OF DR. LARRY POWERS

HERE ARE A FEW ARTICLES PENNED BY DR. POWERS ADDRESSING THE SUBJECT OF THE IMPORTANCE OF 'CHOOSING THE RIGHT BIBLE TRANSLATION.'

"As Long as I Live" or "Forever"? - Why We Use NKJV!

Recently I was watching one of the memorials held for President Jimmy Carter at the Carter Center in Atlanta. As a part of the service a pastor read Psalm 23, a precious and most important text for a funeral. However, this pastor read Psalm 23 from one of the popular modern translations. Though it was great, as he read the famous psalm, it just didn’t have the beauty of the NKJV. But then as the pastor finished, the translation ended with “I will dwell in the house of the Lord as long as I live,” rather than the familiar “I will dwell in the house of the Lord forever.”

When I heard this, it really grieved me. Though this modern translation might sound fresh and new, there is a huge difference between “as long as I live” and “forever.” God’s people have always loved the ending of Psalm 23 because it gives us the promise of heaven. After this life, we go and dwell in the house of the Lord, in heaven, forever. But many modern translations of the Bible do not give us this hope.

Do the research yourself. It will surprise you. According to my research, four modern translations of Psalm 23:6 say “as long as I live;” two say, “for the length of my days;” two say “for the rest of my life;” one says “all the days of my life;” one says “throughout all my days;” one says “for years and years to come;” one says “for a long long time;” one says “for a long season;” one says “for a very long time;” and one says “for my whole life.”
Though these translations might sound updated and modern, all of them fall woefully short here. “As long as I live” or “a long long time” is way different than “forever.” As believers, we’re not just going to dwell with God as long as we live, but forever and ever and ever. This is just one of the reasons why we use the NKJV. It’s simple, clear, time-tested, sound theologically, and accurate. Just my thoughts… Pastor Larry

NLT - Jesus Not Eternal?   By Pastor Larry Powers 

Recently I was studying one of the most precious doctrines of our faith, the doctrine of the deity of Christ. We believe that Jesus is God, and one of the reasons we believe this, is that Jesus is eternal, and only God is eternal. Jesus has no beginning. He is uncreated. A key text that shows this, is Micah 5:2. After foretelling that Jesus would be born in Bethlehem, Micah 5:2 in the NKJV says of Jesus - “Whose goings forth are from of old, from everlasting.” How awesome. Jesus existed from all eternity. Jesus is eternal.

But then in studying the Bible, I decided to do what we encourage all careful students to do - to compare Bible translations. I thought I’d see how Micah 5:2 read in the New Living Translation. After all, the NLT is one of the most popular modern translations; it’s used by Greg Laurie and other well-known pastors, and is given out to all the new believers at the Harvest Crusades.

Here’s what Micah 5:2 in the NLT says about Jesus - “whose origins are in the distant past.” I couldn’t believe what I was reading. That the “goings forth” of Jesus are “from everlasting” in the NKJV, means Jesus is eternal. But if His “origins are in the distant past” as the NLT says, that means Jesus is not eternal. It means that at some point Jesus did not exist. That Jesus had a beginning, that He was created. And if so, then He is not God.

The idea that Jesus had a beginning and is not God, is what the Jehovah’s Witness teach. They say Jesus is “a god” and was the first thing Jehovah created. This is also what the ancient false teacher Arius taught - that there was a time the Son did not exist. And the heresy of Arianism was condemned at the Council of Nicaea.

I know there are many people who really like the NLT, but here in Micah 5:2 the NLT really misses it. And it’s not the only translation that does. Below is a list of what some other modern translations say about Jesus in Micah 5:2. It will really surprise you. As you will see, what all these translations indicate is that Jesus had an origin. That Jesus had a beginning. His origin was only “from old, from ancient times, from the distant past, from antiquity.” But that means there was a time when the Son did not exist. That He’s not eternal. And if Jesus is not eternal, then He’s not God. And if He’s not God, then we have a huge problem.

Is it important to have a careful, accurate translation of the Bible? Yes. Absolutely. In these days when many translations of the Bible are touted as new, fresh, modern, and updated; it is more important than ever before to stick with a literal, careful, accurate, word-for-word translation like the NKJV. May we handle God’s Word with the utmost care … Pastor Larry

Problematic Translations of Micah 5:2 
AMP - “his goings forth are from ancient days”
CSB - “his origin is from antiquity, from ancient times”
CEB - “his origin is from remote times, from ancient days”
CEV - he is “someone whose family goes back to ancient times”
ERV - “his beginnings are from ancient time, from long long ago”
ESV - “whose coming forth is from old, from ancient days”
EXB - “his origins are from ancient time, from days long ago”
GW - “his origins go back to the distant past, to days long ago”
GNT - “whose family line goes back to ancient times”
ISV - “he comes from very old times, from days long ago”
LEB - “his origins are from of old, from ancient days”
NCV - “he comes from very old times, from days long ago”
NET - “one whose origins are in the distant past”
NIV - “whose origins are from old, from ancient times”
NOG - “his origins go back to the distant past, to days long ago”
YLT - “his comings forth are of old, from the days of antiquity”

WHAT ABOUT THE LEGACY STANDARD BIBLE? 
BY DR. LARRY POWERS/ CALVARY CHAPEL GOLDEN SPRINGS/ NOVEMBER 2025

The translation of the Bible that one uses is very very important. But with so many new translations today, it’s difficult to know which translations are the best and most reliable. In 2022, a new translation came out called the Legacy Standard Bible (LSB). What is this translation, and how did it come about?

Building on the New American Standard Bible 
Way back in 1971, the Lockman Foundation produced one of the most literal and accurate translations of Scripture called the New American Standard Bible (NASB). For over 50 years it’s been a favorite of careful students of the Bible and for many years was used by the well-known pastor, John MacArthur. The NASB was revised in 1977 and 1995. Then in 2020, the publishers met with John MacArthur and professors from the Master’s Seminary and University to talk about a third revision of the NASB. MacArthur and his team would make the translation in honor of the “legacy” of the NASB, and so it was eventually called the “Legacy” Standard Bible. But instead of being a revision of the NASB, the LSB really ended up being a whole new and different translation. In some ways the LSB is a helpful translation, but there are a number of problems with it.

A Limited Team of Calvinistic Translators 
Because of the possibility that one translator or a small team could make mistakes, translations have usually been made by a committee of translators from varying denominations or schools. This helps to produce a more balanced and accurate translation. The KJV was made by a committee of 47 scholars who worked in 6 teams. The updated NKJV was made by a committee of 130 translators from different denominations and schools. The NASB 1971 was made by 50 scholars also from diverse backgrounds. But the LSB was only translated by 6 translators, all handpicked by John MacArthur, and all from the Master’s Seminary and University. The problem, is that the LSB slants toward the strongly Calvinistic theology of the small group of translators, favoring the ideas of election, predestination, limited atonement, irresistible grace, and perseverance.

Based on the Critical Greek Text 
One of the most important decision translators have to make is what Hebrew and Greek texts to translate from. For the most part, the Hebrew texts of the Old Testament that translators use are the same. But when it comes to the New Testament, there are two main texts that are used. A “received text” that the KJV and NKJV are translated from; and a “critical text” which almost all other modern translations are based on. Without going into all the technical details about the origin and reliability of these two different Greek texts, I believe it is better to translate from the “received text.” The major reason, is that the “critical text” leaves out many verses or parts of verses from the New Testament. The LSB brackets 18 texts as not being in the Bible. Virtually every other modern translation does the same thing. Translations like the NASB, the NIV, the ESV, the NLT and so on. All of them leave out verses from the Bible. This can undermine the reader’s confidence in the accuracy of God’s Word, making them wonder which parts of the Bible are really the Bible and which are not. This is the primary reason I recommend the NKJV, which is based on the “received text,” and leaves out no words or verses from the Bible.

Translation of the Divine Name as “Yahweh” 
The most unique feature of the LSB is the translation of the divine name of God as “Yahweh.” In Exodus 3:14, God revealed His divine name to Moses as “I AM.” The Hebrew translated “I AM” is 2 the four consonants of YHWH or YHVH. Most translations of Exodus 6:3 translate this divine name as LORD, and consistently that way throughout the Old Testament. But the Jews never pronounce that name, not even to this day. Some Hebrew scholars guess it was pronounced “Yahweh,” others “Jehovah” (KJV), and others various ways. But the best Hebrew scholars tell us that no one, absolutely no one, knows for sure how it is pronounced. But some 7,000 times in the Old Testament, the LSB translates this name of God as “Yahweh.” To the Jews who would never pronounce the name of God, this is a problem. And in many places, is a little wonky, it just doesn’t sound right. Like Psalm 23:1 - Yahweh is my shepherd (LSB), instead of - The LORD is my shepherd (NKJV). Or Isaiah 40:31 - they that wait upon Yahweh shall renew their strength (LSB), instead of - they that wait upon the LORD shall renew their strength (NKJV). Or Isaiah 61:1 - The Spirit of Yahweh is upon me (LSB), instead of - The Spirit of the LORD is upon me (NKJV). Almost 7,000 times the LSB does this. But there’s something special and important about the English translation - LORD. It’s a constant reminder that God is sovereign, that He’s our master, and we are His humble servants.

“Slave” Rather Than Servant”
One of the most famous words in the New Testament is the Greek word doulos, which literally means “slave.” Because readers might misunderstand the Bible as promoting slavery, most English translations render doulos as “servant” or “bondservant.” But John MacArthur favored the translation “slave” so much, that he even wrote a book about it called - Slave. For example, Romans 1:1 says - Paul a slave of Jesus Christ (LSB), rather than - Paul a bondservant of Jesus Christ (NKJV). James 1:1 says - James a slave of Jesus Christ (LSB), rather than - James a bondservant of Jesus Christ (NKJV). The LSB does this, some 125 times. Most translators think it’s better to translate doulos as “servant” or “bondservant,” then explain doulos, rather than translate it as “slave.”

An Anti-Charismatic Perspective
John MacArthur and the translators at Master’s Seminary and University are “cessationists,” believing that the gifts of the Holy Spirit “ceased” when the original apostles died and the New Testament was complete. This perspective affects their translation of 1 Corinthians 12-14. For example, the gift of the “interpretation” of tongues (12:10; 14:5; 13) is rendered the “translation” of tongues. And an “interpreter” is a “translator” (14:27-28). Now it’s clear that the tongues in Acts 2 were known earthly languages. But the gift of tongues as described in 1 Corinthians 12-14 could also be unknown languages, even heavenly languages. Translating a known earthly language is not a spiritual gift. If someone knows Spanish, they can translate Spanish without the help of the Spirit. But to translate unknown languages, even heavenly languages, takes more than just a “translator,” it takes the spiritual gift of “interpretation.” LSB shows its anti-Charismatic perspective here.

NKJV is Still the Best Overall Translation
Though there are many helpful translations in our day, all things considered, NKJV is still the best. It is not the only translation or a perfect translation, but it is the best. NKJV is based on the “received” text, not the “critical” text like almost every other modern translation. This means it doesn’t leave out words or verses from the Bible. NKJV is also a careful, word-for-word, literal translation. Most modern translations are also thought-for-thought. We believe the exact words of the Bible are inspired, not just the thoughts. And finally, the NKJV is also very easy to read. The LSB and NASB are translated at an 11th grade reading level, the ESV at a 10th grade level, the NIV at an 8th grade level, and the NLT at a 6th grade level. The NKJV is translated at only a 7th grade reading level. Contrary to what some think, the NKJV is just as easy to read as the NLT. All things considered, the NKJV is still the best overall translation.