Some Unknown Bible Versions

W. J. Chamberlin

Being a member of a Bible Translation Discussion Group, I stumbled onto an unknown fact/practice
which all Bible collectors should be made aware. It is a dangerous practice for it mis-leads people
into believing something that is not true and can affect people’s faith/theology.

What I am talking about is the wrongful practice of making changes to a Bible translation and then
continuing to pass it off as that well known translation. I am talking about the motel Bibles by the
Gideons who got caught in the act but are trying to explain it away.

Asnipped reply to an inquery

Dear Pastor [name removed]:
We appreciate your suggestions and want to relate to you the policy of The Gideons
International in selecting what versions we distribute. We use only those versions of
Scripture in any language which have been translated by recognized evangelical
scholars, who believed the very words in the Bible, in the original languages (Hebrew
and Greek) in their entirety were supernaturally inspired or given by the Holy Spirit,
using the human authors. This translation version policy is known as verbal plenary
inspiration. In short, any version distributed by The Gideons International must have
been translated by men who were born again, who were scholars and who believed that
God gave the words without error or mistake to those who wrote the Bible. In other
words, we are simply old-fashioned Bible believing men.

With all the more than 20 modern English versions on the market today, The Gideons
International researched to find which one was the most suitable for our purposes. In
the 70s we distributed, in addition to the KJV, a revised Berkley version (revised by
The Gideons International with approval of copy write holders). In the early 80s we
distributed, in addition to the KJV, a revised New International version (revised by The
Gideons International with approval of copy write holders). Because of many
complaints from pastors, churches, evangelical Christians, etc. (they were unaware that
we had revised the NIV and that it was not exactly what was sold in the Christian Book
Stores), we thoroughly researched modern English versions and found that the New
King James Version was best for the purposes of The Gideons International. It needed
no revisions and was widely accepted by evangelicals as a conservative, fundamental,
accurate translation. It has stood the test of time, as has the King James Version. The
Gideons International is not in a crusade for versions. Currently, The Gideons
International is printing Bibles and New Testaments in 80 languages. We are
distributing God’s Word in 175 countries at the rate of 1 million free every 7 days.

Grace to you all,

David Wilson
New Hope Baptist, Valparaiso, FL, USA
I have presented the reply from the Gideons not for comment on the wisdom of the decision of these
men in what versions they choose to distribute. Rather, I’m placing before you collectors, who work
so intimately with the text, a behind the scenes look at how a version is chosen, and by what criteria.
And interestingly note the fact that they changed with permission certain verses prior to their
distributions. Is that something that should happen without it being noted on the title page (as a
revised text)? Not that they didn’t do it totally ethically - no criticism here - just that if I pick up an
NIV do I need to check to see whose NIV it is? Or any other translation for that matter.

Some time ago, I had written about another example, “The Emphatic Diaglott by Benjamin Wilson.”
There are two different 1942 editions both published by the Watchtower Society in New York, in
which, neither has any statement to the fact that they revised one. I stumbled onto the two editions
when reading one of their home study books. They were using Wilson’s NT to back up one of their
teaching in 1 John 5:7 footnote. While checking my copy to see if he really stated what they said he
started, I found that my copy read different than what they had in their study book. In researching
further, I obtained a revised copy which did not say it was revised by them. So, what is the big deal?
The WT Society was quoting themselves and not Wilson and was passing it off as coming from
Wilson. This mis-leads people into believing something that may or may not be true about a given
Scripture, God’s Word. Its deceptive, it’s a lie, its wrong.

This holds true as well when publishers, such as the Gideons, revised a well known translation and
do not indicate somewhere that they revised it, thus, mis-leading the reader into thinking that this
is the way, such-and-such translation reads, therefore, it must be so. Its deceptive, it’s a lie, its
wrong.