Demonstrable Errors in Modern Versions Part 1: Mark 1:2

It has been quite some time since I’ve made any posts on Bible versions or bibliology in general. I thought it would be worth-while to come back with some posts going on the offensive, rather than the defensive for a change. Those who follow this blog regularly know that the author cares a great deal about this particular subject. The authority of Scripture is under attack on multiple fronts in our modern day, both from without and from within various churches, including Reformed and Presbyterian churches. One such method that the devil has used is to distort and attempt to overthrow the historic, orthodox Protestant doctrine of providential preservation. He has done this through the rise of modern Reconstructionist Textual Criticism (RTC) which has been widely accepted since the 19th century in reputably “conservative” Evangelical academic circles. As a result, the Traditional text of the Old & New Testaments have been under severe attack, and consequently so has the King James Bible, which God has providentially blessed and used for over 400 years now to bring many of His elect to salvation in Jesus Christ.

Beginning in this post, I want to begin by highlighting proveable, demonstrable errors in the modern versions. I will primarily focus upon the ESV & NIV as these are two of the most popular, although we will also mention other versions when neeful. Today’s demonstrable error is found in the first chapter of Mark’s Gospel. I will first cite from the KJB:

Mark 1:1–3 THE beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God; (2) As it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee. (3) The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.

This passage, when read in the correct translation, is perfectly clear and straighforward. Mark is quoting the prophets. Particularly he is quoting, first, the prophet Malachi in chapter 3:1 of that book. He then quotes from chapter 40 verse 3 of the book of Isaiah.

Now we will read the same text from the ESV:

Mark 1:1–3 The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. (2) As it is written in Isaiah the prophet, “Behold, I send my messenger before your face, who will prepare your way, (3) the voice of one crying in the wilderness: ‘Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight,’”

Here we have in the ESV a demonstrable error. Rather than citing “the prophets”, the ESV would have the reader believe that Mark is citing from one prophet, namely Isaiah. Yet the very first citation given is from the prophet Malachi! Expositors and critics have barely attempted to justify this reading, other than appealing to the manuscript witnesses which contain this erroneous reading, as if this justifies its inclusion. No doubt, evaluation of external evidence is helpful, but it also highlights a fundamental issue with the Reconstructionist methodology — namely — that one simply cannot determine with certainty what the original text said solely based upon the empirical data. The reason being that one does not have the original autographs with which to compare the present MS data. The MS data requires interpretation, and different interpretations may be offered to favor either reading. For instance, the most valuable MS that is appealed to in support of this reading is Codex Sinaiticus. However, Codex Sinaiticus also inserts Isaiah’s name into other verses where Isaiah is not even quoted. Below is a screenshot of Matthew 13:35 taken from the Sinaiticus website:

Here is a digitized layout of the whole verse as it appears in Sinaiticus:

The obvious problem here is that Matthew 13:35 is quoting from the Psalms, not the prophet Isaiah! If Sinaiticus shows a pattern of wrongly inserting names where they do not belong, then it can hardly be considered a reliable witness. James E. Snapp Jr. has written an excellent study defending Mark 1:2 in the Traditional Text where he demonstrates this same scribal habit being present throughout the MS tradition, including other MSS which agree with Sinaiticus at Mark 1:2. This was a surprisingly common occurance. If the reader is interested in a more in-depth study on the external evidence, this study is recommended.

Additionally, others have speculated that Mark was combining the two quotations and simply citing Isaiah as the chief prophet. The issue with such an explanation, however, is that the critical text says that “it is written” in the prophet Isaiah. The use of the present-perfect tense (which is a perfect passive indicative in the Greek — γέγραπται), indicates that what he is quoting was written in the book of Isaiah the prophet at some point in the past and continues to be written there in the present. Mark is explicitly stating that the book of Isaiah contains this written prophesy. Honest exegesis of the text will simply not allow such an ad-hoc interpretation.

Related to this point, we also find quite a strong evidence for providential preservation in this verse. As noted above, the King James Bible correctly translates the perfect passive verb γέγραπται as the present-perfect “it is written”. When coupled with the correct reading of “prophets”, we find a clear statement that the author of Mark’s gospel clearly understood that what had been written down by Isaiah and Malachi hundreds of years prior was still written in the available copies of his own day.

So too ought the child of God to be strong in faith and unhesitatingly affirm the same. When he or she picks up their King James Bible, they can be certain, in understanding by faith, that what is written in their Bibles is exactly what was written by the apostles and prophets of old. God in His providence has made sure of it.

Stay tuned for the following posts. We are just getting started.