Hi, there.  I had a question about translation, specifically the KJV vs. NRSV and NIV.  Numbers 11:25 KJV: "They prophesied, and they did not cease."  Whereas the NRSV/ NIV: "They prophesied and did not do so again.”  Seems like a major difference.  What is up with that?  I am trying to make some decisions regarding which Bible to choose, and things like this make it difficult.

Sincerely,
Word Works

Dear Word Works,

You are right that the King James Version (KJV) translates that verse as “did not cease”, and others translate it as “did not repeat”.  However, the translators of other versions often put into the footnotes that the KJV’s rendering is also appropriate.  Num 11:25 is a case where the Hebrew word being translated can mean either “add to over and over again” or “to add so as to alter behavior” – context defines which way it is used.  Therefore, there is some debate over which translation is correct.  All good translations will recognize that difference and usually provide a footnote.

As for which translation to use, we ALWAYS recommend a strict, literal, word-for-word translation.  The King James, New King James, American Standard, and New American Standard versions are all word-for-word translations.  ‘Word-for-word’ means that the translators did everything they could to translate each word separately and accurately; they did everything possible to not take liberties with the original text.  The New International Version (NIV) and the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) are a mix between word-for-word and thought-for-thought translation.  ‘Thought-for-thought’ translations allow the translators to change the words and simply convey the general idea of the sentence.  This allows the translators to instill their personal attitudes and theological perspectives into the text.  God gave us the Bible with precision.  The apostle Paul said that God conveyed the exact words that the apostles should speak and write (1 Cor 2:13).  Jesus said that not even the smallest stroke of the Bible would perish (Matt 5:18).  Translations need to be as precise as God was… word for word.  We recommend you read “New International Version” for a more specific breakdown on the flaws in that translation – we would put the NRSV in the same category.

If Jesus is supposed to have a 'name above all names', why do people name their kids 'Jesus'?  I don't want to call them by their name then.  Is it even okay?  Would the real Jesus feel that I am being disrespectful?

Sincerely,
Hey, You!

Dear Hey, You!,

As hard as it is to comprehend in our American minds, Jesus wasn’t the only Jesus – even in His day.  When Jesus walked this earth, He was often referred to as “Jesus of Nazareth” (Matt 26:71) or “Jesus, son of Joseph” (Jhn 1:45).  The reason for this was because they needed to be specific when they talked about Him because multiple people had that name.

Whether it is wise to name your child ‘Jesus’ is an entirely different question, but it isn’t a matter of being right or wrong.  When the Scriptures say that Jesus has a “name above all names” (Php 2:9), it isn’t specifically addressing His literal first name… but His reputation and identity.  There is no person more exalted than Jesus.  You are not being disrespectful to God in calling others by their given name, even if it is ‘Jesus’.  It is clear by context that it is Jesus of Nazareth that you revere, not Jesus of Topeka, Kansas.

I am curious to know your thoughts on what the Bible shows us to be the best nutritional choices for our bodies.  What about diets that more closely match those during the life of Christ?  We are surrounded by so many chemically-altered foods.  Thank you.

Sincerely,
Organic Origins

Dear Organic Origins,

God has given mankind dominion over the earth (Gen 1:26-28).  That gives humans the freedom to alter and adapt our food supplies and crops however we see fit.  Whether or not genetically altered foods are healthy is an issue for science and not the Bible.

God says very little about the health of the human body.  Paul says that exercise is useful, but only minimally so in comparison to spiritual matters (1 Tim 4:8).  God also says that all food is clean and should be accepted with thanksgiving (Mk 7:19, 1 Tim 4:3-4).

In regard to food, the only thing that God clearly condemns is gluttony.  Gluttony brings poverty (Pr 23:21).  God says to “put a knife to your throat” if you are given to gluttony (Pr 23:2), which is another way of saying be careful about not letting food control you.  The only clear Biblical command on the subject of eating is “moderation”.

My question is regarding the needy, specifically panhandlers and homeless folks, and our obligations per the Bible to help them.  Hebrews 13:2 says that we may be entertaining angels without knowing it.  Matthew 25:35-39 also sounds like it is encouraging helping those in need, but where do we draw the line?  Are we obligated to give to everyone with their hands out?

Sincerely,
Wallet Watcher

Dear Wallet Watcher,

Christians must always do what they can to help the poor (Pr 14:21), but they must also balance that with the importance of not supporting laziness (Pr 21:25).  This becomes a constant battle as christians interact with the homeless and panhandlers.

Matt 25:35-39 is not applicable in this issue because it is specifically dealing with needy brethren, but there are other verses that we should consider.  Pure and undefiled religion is to care for widows and the fatherless in their distress (Jas 1:27).  When we have pity on the poor, we are pleasing to God (Pr 19:17).  If we don’t listen to the cry of the poor, our prayers will be hindered (Pr 21:13).  God blesses those who care for the poor (Pr 28:27).  God puts immense emphasis on having compassion for those less fortunate.

God also tells us not to support someone who won’t work.  If someone won’t work, neither should they eat (2 Thess 3:10).  Someone who will not provide for his own is worse than an unbeliever (1 Tim 5:8).  Some people are financially destitute because they simply will not work for a living (Pr 24:30-34).

When giving out money to help the poor, a christian must make sure that they are actually helping the people.  Some people (especially people in third-world countries) are willing to work but are unable to find work.  Other people are willing to work, but health problems keep them from doing so.  And yet others are working but aren’t able to make enough to sustain themselves.  In all of these circumstances it would be a wonderful thing to help someone financially.  Unfortunately, some panhandlers are simply vagrants that are wasting their money on alcohol and drugs and have chosen a lifestyle of poverty – in that case, you would be wrong to help support them. You must use wisdom to decide in each individual case whether you will give and how much you will give.

Should a pastor prepare his own sermons or buy them on-line?  What is the common practice?

Sincerely,
Pulpit Prep

Dear Pulpit Prep,

We get our sermons at IKEA; you have to assemble them yourself… but they cost less.  In fact, we got a great deal on a book of sermons at Amazon – click here to buy your own copy of the Bible!

All joking aside, we can’t tell you what the “common practice” is; we can only tell you what should be done.  Preachers and pastors (read “Elders” to find out what a pastor is; a preacher is simply someone who preaches) should be searching the Scriptures daily to see God’s Will (Acts 17:11).  They should be studying to show themselves approved, rightly handling God’s Word (2 Tim 2:15).  Anyone who preaches needs to hold firmly to the sound words of the Bible (2 Tim 1:13).  A preacher needs to be immersed in the Word of God in order to be fully equipped for the work at hand (2 Tim 3:16-17).

None of this specifically excludes buying your sermons on-line… but if you are doing all that work anyway, you might as well just write it yourself.  This way you don’t need to go back and double-check and fix a store-bought sermon to make it Biblically accurate.  We here at AYP have a hard time seeing the preachers of the first century being really happy about a preacher paying for a sermon that he should have studied for and wrote himself.  Seriously, it smacks of laziness (Pr 21:25).