Truth Magazine

By Mike Willis

Socrates’ challenge to “Know thyself!” is as applicable to modern man as it was – to the men of his day. Sometimes in our attention to our own internal problems, we neglect some of the basic doctrines in the Scriptures, such as the Bible doctrine of man. Yet, one’s view of himself is going to affect his moral conduct. Whether consciously or unconsciously, man has a doctrine about himself, The mass media of television is communicating a doctrine of man. In addition to the specials on evolution, such regular series shows as “The Planet of the Apes” teach that man is a product of evolution. According to evolutionary theory, man originated from a one-celled amoeba in an oozy swamp. Since that time, through the operation of chance or the survival of the fittest, man has ascended into what he is today. Some think that man is developing toward some future superman.

Other doctrines of man have emerged, however. The theological liberals and humanists hold this view of man:

“As a return to the Renaissance and to the elements of Greek thought, liberalism stressed the continuity between God and man. In idealistic fashion man was regarded as essentially divine and Innately good. Man’s reason was considered autonomous and accordingly any need of divine revelation was rejected. A Pelgian view of man’s goodness joined forces with an optimistic view of evolutionary progress. Liberalism as a whole was anthropocentric rather than theocentric” (Fred H. Klooster, “The Nature of Man,” Christian Faith and Modern Theology, Carl F. H. Henry, ed., p. 162.-Klooster is writing from a Calvinistic point of view-MW.)

Diametrically opposed to this view of man is the Calvinistic point of view:

“Therefore all of us, who have descended from impure seed, are born infected with the contagion of sin” (Institutes of the Christian Religion, John Calvin, Book II, ch. 1, part 5). “Here I only want to suggest briefly that the whole man is overwhelmed-as a deluge-from head to foot, so that no part is immune from sin and all that proceeds from him is to be imputed to sin” (Ibid., Book II, ch. 1, part 9).

But, what is the Bible doctrine of man? Is man inherently good, morally neutral, or inherently evil? What is man?

A Creation of God

First of all, we must affirm that man is a creation of God. In Gen. 2:7, Moses said, “Then the Lord God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being-NASB.”This fact about man is antithetical to the evolutionary theory and liberal theological view of man. Evolution teaches that man has ascended from lower orders of animals; the Bible teaches that man is a creation of God. Man is not a superior form of animal life merely because he has a greater capacity for adjustment. We did not become such as we are by accident; God created us as we are.

In the Image of God

Secondly, man is created in the image of God. Moses also recorded, “Then God said, `Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.’ And God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them” (Gen. 1:26, 27). Compare the following statements by Leupold, and Keil and Delitzsch, about the meaning of “image of God”:

“He lists the following items as belonging to the outward side of the divine image: (a) man’s countenance which directs his gaze upwards; (b) a capacity for varying facial expressions; (c) a sense of shame expressing itself in the blush of man; (d) speech. It cannot be denied that all these are physical features which are noticeably absent to all animals. To the inner side of the divine image the same author assigns the following items: (a) on the material side of man’s inner make-up stands immortality; (b) on the intellectual side is self-consciousness, reason . . . ; (c) on the voluntative-moral side is the ability to discern good and evil, the freedom of the will, conscience, and the right use of his moral capacities-the most important of all . . . . To sum up from a slightly different angle we should like to append the thought that the spiritual and inner side of the image of God is, without a doubt, the most important one’ (H. C. Leupold, Exposition of Genesis, Vol. I, pp. 89-90).

“The image of God consists, therefore, in the spiritual personality of man, though not merely in unity of self-consciousness and self-determination, or in the fact that man was created a consciously free Ego; for personality is merely the basis and form of the divine essence. This consists rather in the fact, that the man endowed with free sell-conscious personality possesses, In his spiritual as well as corporeal nature, a creaturely copy of the holiness and blessedness of the divine life” (C. F. Kell and F. DeHtzsch, Bible Commentary on the Old Testament, Vol. I, pp. 63-64).

Although I would not agree totally with either of these comments, they constitute material worth consideration. For example, the fact that man differs p1hysically from other animals might be explainable from the fact that no two kinds of animals are alike. Man possesses some attributes because he is man and not because he is in the image of God. The problem one has in explaining “image of God” is in separating those attributes which man has which distinguish him from other animals from those which constitute the “image of God.” Personally, I would be more inclined to limit the “image of God” to the soul and moral consciousness of man.

Precisely because man is created in the image of God does he have dominion over the habitable earth. Utterly amazed at man’s exalted position in the creation of God, the psalmist said,

“When I consider Thy heavens, the work of Thy fingers,

The moon and the stars, which Thou hast ordained;

What is man, that Thou dost take thought of him?

And the son of man, that Thou dost care for him?

Yet Thou hast made him a little lower than God,

And dost crown him with glory and majesty!

Thou dost make him to rule over the works of Thy hands;

Thou host put all things under his feet,

All sheep and oxen,

And also the beasts of the field,

The birds of the heavens, and the fish of the sea,

Whatever passes through the paths of the seas.” (Ps. 8:3-8).

Even after the fall, man still bears the image of God, and is precious in the sight of God. God so loved man who was created in His image that He sent His only begotten Son to die on Calvary for us. One soul is more precious, according to Jesus, than the whole world (Mt. 16:26).

Evil or Good?

But, is man inherently evil or inherently good? This is not an easy question to answer. God created man as he is. Man is a creature subject to temptation. James said, “But each one of us is tempted when he is carried away and enticed by his own lusts. Then when lust has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and when sin is accomplished, it brings forth death” (1:14, 15). Man is composed of body and spirit; the two are at war with each other. I think William Barclay was right when he said,

“The essence of the flesh is this. No army can invade a country from the sea unless it can obtain a bridgehead. Temptation would be powerless to affect men, unless there was some thing already In man to respond to temptation. Sin could gain no foothold in a man’s mind and heart and soul and life unless there was an enemy within the gates who was willing to open the door to sin. The flesh Is exactly the bridgehead through which sin invades the human personality. The flesh is like the enemy within the gates who opens the way to the enemy, who is pressing In through the gates” (Flesh and Spirit, pp. 21-22).

Thus, man is a creature who is tempted by Satan; Satan attacks us through our flesh (i.e. the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the boastful pride of life).

Possessing free will, man sometimes chooses to do good and sometimes chooses to do evil. The Calvinistic doctrine which states that “no part (of man-MW) is immune from sin and all that proceeds from him is imputed to sin” is wrong. A person only needs to look at the unconverted Cornelius to see that (Acts 10:1-2). The optimism of theological liberalism forgets that man can, and frequently does, chose to sin. When he violates God’s will in choosing to do evil, he becomes a sinner condemned before God. Like Adam, every man is responsible for his choice to sin; he is not responsible for the sins of others; not even those of Adam (Ezek. 18:20). Here is a description of the man who has sinned:

“And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience” (Eph. 2:1-2).

“Therefore remember, that formerly you, the Gentiles in the flesh, who are called `Uncircumcision’ by the so-called `Circumcision,’ which is performed in the flesh by human hands-remember that you were at that time separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world” (Eph. 2:11-12).

“This I say therefore, and affirm together with the Lord, that you walk no longer just as the Gentiles also walk, in the futility of their mind, being darkened in their understanding, excluded from the life of God, because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the hard. ness of their heart; and they, having become callous, have given themselves over to sensuality, for the practice of every kind of impurity with greediness” (Eph. 4:17-19).

Since all have sinned (Rom. 3:23), all men are sinners condemned to hell.

Redemption of Man

Yet, God has not utterly given man over to Satan. We, by our choices to do evil, deserve hell and its punishments. But God loved us enough to send Jesus to save us (Jn. 3:16). God’s grace has appeared, bringing salvation to all men -(Tit. 2:14). Yet man must choose to accept that gift of God’s grace. When he does obey God, thus accepting the gift of God’s grace, he is redeemed. “But now in Christ Jesus you who formerly were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ” (Eph. 2:13).

What Is Man?

Man is a creation of God who is made in the image of God. Possessing a fleshly body, he is subject to temptation; possessing free will, he frequently succumbs to temptation. When he sins, he is responsible for it and stands condemned before God as a consequence. Nevertheless, through the blood of Christ, God has provided a means of redemption for fallen men. No, man is not the product of evolution. He is the creation of God. But because he has marred the original creation, man needs to become a new creature in Christ (Eph. 4:20-24).

Truth Magazine XIX: 18, pp. 284-285
March 13, 1975

By Donald P Ames

Perhaps the saddest words ever sung are, “Sad, sad, that bitter wail-`Almost-but lost!” To think that one can be interested, perhaps even striving as hard as he is able, to get so close, and then to lose out completely. The Bible is full of such characters, those who almost gained the prize.

Rich Young Man

Mark 10:17-22 records the story of a young man who “ran” up to Christ-so eager and interested in salvation he could not wait. When Jesus questioned him, Mark says, “He felt a love for him” (Mark 10:21). Here he was so close to the salvation he had sought, a man Jesus could even love for his zeal and love of what was right. Jesus pointed out, “One thing you lack: go and sell all you possess, and give it to the poor, and you shall have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.” But, the Bible says, “At these words his face fell, and he went away grieved, for he was one who owned much property.” So close! He had worked for so long-now it was right on the tips of his fingers, and he let it slip right through his hands.

Lot’s Wife

The angels came down into the wicked city of Sodom to rescue Lot and his family from the impending doom God was about to rain upon the city. They even had to take them by the hand and bring them out of the city as they hesitated (Gen. 19:16). Once safely out of the city, they were instructed to hurry and flee for their lives, and not to look back-which they did. They were nearly assured of safety-almost free of the impending doom, “But his wife, from behind him, looked back; and she became a pillar of salt” (Gen. 19:26). Almost safe, only to perish with the rest because she did not obey completely.

Moses

Moses led the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt and tolerated much abuse at their hand, as he sought to lead them to the promised land. He got all the way up to the edge of the land he had worked so hard to lead the people into, but was never permitted to actually enter the land himself. Moses relates how he pleaded with the Lord, ” `Let me, I pray, cross over and see the fair land that is beyond the Jordan, that good hill country and Lebanon.’ But, the Lord was angry with me on your account, and would not listen to me; and the Lord said to me, `Enough! Speak to Me no more of this matter.’ ” (Deut. 3:25-26). So close-he even got to go up into the mountain to see the land itself (Deut. 34:4), but he was not permitted to enter because he had failed to do what God had instructed him (Num. 20:7-12).

Herod Agrippa II

In reasoning before Agrippa, Paul appealed to the prophets and sought to reach the king. He drove his argument home-“King Agrippa, do you believe the Prophets? I know that you do.” Agrippa, feeling the effects of Paul’s logic, replied, “In a short time (almost-KJV), you will persuade me to become a Christian” (Acts 26:27-28). These words of Agrippa truly represent the condition of many living today-they are almost persuaded to obey the gospel and become children of God. They are so close to having the prize right there in their hands-and that is as far as they ever seem to go.

Conclusion

Almost has never been enough to please God. He told those of the Old Testament, “You shall thus observe all My statues, and all My ordinances, and do them: I am the Lord” (Lev. 19:37). And James says, “For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all” (Jas. 2:10). Do not let “almost” stand between you and salvation! :` ` Almost’ cannot avail; `Almost’ is but to fail! Sad, sad, that bitter wail-`Almost-but lost!’ ” Is that your condition?

Truth Magazine XIX: 18, p. 283
March 13, 1975

By Austin Mobley

Multitudes of sincere religious people believe that the many highways of religion shall eventually lead their travelers to heaven. Have you not heard it said many times that going to heaven is like entering into a large city? “There are many different routes,” they say, “but all lead to the same destination.”

That is what Satan would have us believe, but it is not what God has clearly declared in His word, the Bible. Please note the word SIN in SINcerity, and the word LIE in beLIEf. One can believe a lie and be wrong, even though sincere (2 Thess. 2:11-12).

It is true that one can reach most cities by more than one road. However, a careful study of any road map will show that all roads do not lead to the same destination. The same is true of heaven. Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me” (Jn. 14:6). A man traveling in unfamiliar territory came to a place where he had to cross some high mountains. Knowing it would be difficult, he looked for a qualified guide. When one man offered his services, the tourist asked, “Have you ever been to the village where I want to go?” “No,” he replied, “but I’ve been part of the way, and have been told how to proceed from there.” The traveler answered, “I’m sorry, but you won’t do.” Another was asked the same question by the traveler and replied, “Yes, I know the way. The village where you are going is my home!” The traveler knew immediately that this was the guide he needed. When Jesus said, “I am the way,” we can trust Him to lead us to the eternal city, because that is His home!

Listen to Jesus again as He speaks of the right way to heaven. “Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it” (Matt. 7:13-14). Notice that there are only two roads for men to travel. The road to hell is broad because the majority are traveling this expressway. The road to heaven is narrow, and only a few travel it. Both the broad and narrow ways are one way streets!

How glad all should be for this wonderful simplicity! Confusion can be avoided when one recognizes that there is one and only one way provided by the Lord for forgiveness of sins and heaven. It is not “just being religious,” or sincerity alone, but following the road that Christ himself has marked out in the Bible. The “Road” to salvation from past sins for the alien sinner is faith (Heb. 11:6); repentance (Acts 17:30); confession (Rom. 10:9-10); and baptism (Mk. 16:15-16; Rom. 6:3-4). The “Road” to eternal salvation for the Christian is adding to his faith virtue, knowledge, temperance, patience, godliness, brotherly kindness, and love- (2 Pet. 1:5-11). The road to heaven does not have a sign saying, “Once in grace, always in grace!”

Sadly, far too many are seeking their own way of salvation. Such are like. the woman who traveled the country selling housewares long ago. Whenever she came to a fork in the road, she would throw a straw into the air; and when it dropped to the ground, she would proceed in the direction it indicated. The residents of the area knew of her strange custom, but one day a friend saw her tossing the straw several times before choosing the road she would take. He inquired, “Why did you do that more than once?” “Oh, it kept pointing to the road on the left,” she replied, “and I wanted to go the other way because it looks so much smoother.” She had continued casting her straw to the wind until it fell in the direction she wanted.

If you are not certain you are traveling the “right road” to heaven, make sure, by stopping where you are and consulting the Divine Road Map, the Bible. Remember that men draw the maps which lead into the various cities of our nation, but God gave us the Map to Heaven, and His map says there is one road.

Truth Magazine XIX: 18, pp. 282-283
March 13, 1975

By Luther W. Martin

I Corinthians 15:24

“. . . when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God . . . when he shall have put down all rule, and all authority and power.” (King James Version).

“. . . when He delivers up the kingdom to God . . . when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power.” (New American Standard Bible).

Brother Wallace asserts that the NASB in this passage “violates the grammar, the diction and the literary excellence of a grand passage, and indicates that inordinate yen for needless changes in the .text.” Your attention is called to three translations that pre-dated the King James Version.

“. . . when he hath.delivered up the kyngdome to God . . . when he hath put donne all rule, auctorite and power.” (Tyndale’s Translation-1535).

“. . . when he hath delyvered up the kyngdome to God . . . when he hath put down all rule and all auctorite and power.” (The Great Bible-1540).

“Then (shalbe) the end, when he hathe delivered up the kingdome to God …. when he hath put downe all rule, and all autoritie and power.” (Geneva Bible-1562).

I have given the foregoing three versions (copied correctly), not because I have any great love for them, but simply to show that, in this instance, the NASB is very similar in reading to versions that are quite ancient. I would caution any of us to avoid being too wrapped up in any one version of the English Scriptures.

2 Corinthians 3:7, 13, 14.

“. . . which glory was to be done away . . . could not steadfastly look to the end of that which is abolished . . . which veil is done away in Christ.” (KJV).

“. . . the glory of his face, fading as it was . . . might not look intently at the end of what was fading away the same veil remains unlifted, because it is removed in Christ.” (New American Standard Bible).

Brother Wallace stresses that the words “done away” and “abolished” and “done away in Christ” were plain, simple and could not be misconstrued. While the expressions “fading,” “fading away” and “removed in Christ” show a weakness and unnecessary and needless changes and substitutions. I believe that Brother Wallace’s objections to this passage are valid. Marshall’s Interlinear uses “done away” for all three passages. Berry’s Interlinear uses the word “annulled” in each of the three passages.

Galatians 2:16

“. . . justified . . . by the faith of Jesus Christ . . . justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law. . .” (KJV).

“. . . justified . . . through faith in Christ Jesus . . . justified by faith in Christ, and not by the works of the Law; . . .” (NASB).

Brother Wallace points out that the verse states “we have believed in Christ that we might be justified by the faith of Christ.” Even the American Standard Version (1901) misses the point in this passage. Again, Brother Wallace is right.

Galatians 3:27

“. . . for as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.” (KJV).

“For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.” (New American Standard Bible).

Here, Brother Wallace points out that the NASB simply adopts the wording of the Amplified Bible. He would call it guilt by association, I presume. The Greek word for “put on” or “clothe” is enduo. It is used in Gal. 3:27; but it is also used in Mark 1:6 “John was clothed with camel’s hair . . .;” in 2 Cor. 5:3 “If so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked.” Therefore, I must suggest that the NASB rendering of enduo is just as accurate as that of the King James.

Colossians 2:12

“Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God . . .” (King James Version).

“Having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, . . .” (New Americana Standard Bible).

Brother Wallace states: “but the faith of the operation of God does not refer to faith in the sense of believing, but to the system of faith operating in baptism. The phrase `the faith’ is always significant and to change it to faith in vitiates all of the passages in which it occurs.” Brother Wallace’s point is well taken. He is correct.

2 Thessalonians l:6

“Seeing it is a righteous thing ‘with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you; And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels . . .” (KJV).

“For after all it is only just for God to repay with affliction those who afflict you, and to give relief to you who are afflicted and to us as well when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels . . .” (NASB).

Brother Wallace comments: “In this passage the one verb `recompense’ has two objects-`tribulation’ (or affliction) and `rest’. The word rest here is not a verb, but a noun, and is the second object of the verb recompense. When the Lord comes he will recompense tribulation to one class-the wicked; but he will recompense rest to the other class-the saved. In this New American Standard Bible two verbs are inserted, a different verb for each objective noun, substituting `repay’ and `to give’ for the one verb recompense, which aside from changing the grammar and sentence structure of the passage, it modifies the meaning-the substituted verbs do not fulfill the import of the verb recompense. “

In support of Brother Wallace’s teaching on this point, I submit the following translations:

“Or do you doubt that there is justice with God, to repay with affliction those who afflict you, and you, the afflicted, with that rest which will be ours too?” (Ronald Knox Translation, 1951 Edition).

“If at least it is a righteous thing with God to recompense affliction unto them that afflict you, And unto you that are afflicted release with us, . . .” (J. B. Rotherham’s Translation, 1897).

“Hence it is right with God to repay your afflictors with affliction; and to you, the afflicted-rest, with us, at the manifestation of the Lord Jesus from heaven, with messengers of His power; . . .” (Ferrar Fenton’s Translation, 1903).

Each of the above translations uphold Brother Wallace’s teaching concerning that passage. I think he is right.

Hebrews 6:1-6

“Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation . . .” (King James Version).

“Therefore leaving the elementary teaching about the Christ, let us press on to maturity, not laying again a foundation . . .” (New American Standard Bible).

I copy as follows, Brother Wallace’s exegesis and application of this passage:

“Hebrews 6:1-6-the exhortation of the apostles to the Jewish Christians to leave `the principles,’ or rudiments, of the Mosaic system which brought them to Christ, and to `go on unto perfection’-the new covenant-is changed completely in its meaning to `leaving the elementary teaching about Christ, let us press on to maturity.’ As in Galatians 3:24-25 and 4:1-4 the apostle contrasts the Mosaic system with the New Covenant -exhorting them to leave the elements of the Old Covenant, which he specified as the ordinances of Judaism: (1) repentance from dead works (the dead sacrifices of the Mosaic law); faith toward God (for Christ had not come); the doctrine of baptisms (plural, the divers washings of the Mosaic law); laying on of hands (the priestly and prophetical ceremonies of the Mosaic system); resurrection of the dead (reviving the dead ordinances of Judaism); of eternal judgment (no remission under the law, judgment pending during the whole of the old dispensation). We never leave any `teaching about Christ’ not any part of the gospel, and the rendering of this passage by the New American Standard Bible is a mutilation of the text and context. Moreover it departs from the rendering of the American Standard Version which it proposes to represent. in revised form.” (page 592.)

I must respectfully disagree with Brother Wallace’s handling of the above passage. First, I copy from M. R. Vincent’s Word Studies In The New Testament”:

“Some difficulty attaches to the first three verses, because the writer combines two thoughts: his own intention to proceed from elementary to more advanced teachings, and his readers’ advance to that higher grade of spiritual receptiveness on which the effectiveness of his teaching must depend.” (page 441.)

The Hebrew writer spoke of Christ being called of God, a high priest after the order of Melchisedec. “Concerning him we have much to say, and it is hard to explain, since you have become dull of hearing. For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you have need again for some one to teach you the elementary principles of the oracles of God, and you have come to need milk and not solid food.” (Heb. 5:11-12). So these Hebrew Christians who should, by this time, have matured and developed to the point where they could teach the fulness of the gospel of Christ to others, were still weak and untaught. This is the argument that the Hebrew writer then makes in the sixth chapter-that they need not expect ,, or look for yet another Savior, Messiah and Redeemer! By their lack of growth and development, they were essentially again crucifying the Son of God, shaming Him openly.

Vincent states: “Aphentes, leaving or dismissing does not imply ceasing to believe in elementary truths or to regard them as important, but leaving them ‘as a builder leaves his foundation in erecting his building’ ” (Bruce-page 441.)

Moses Stuart’s Commentary states on this point: “Quitting the mere initial stage of pupillage, advance forward to a maturer state of instruction and knowledge;” or, “Make such advances, that it shall be unnecessary to repeat elementary instruction in the principles of Christianity.” . . . “Omitting now to insist on the first elements of Christian doctrine, let me proceed to the consideration of the more difficult principles of religion, not discussing, at present, the subject of repentance, baptism, etc. . .” (pages 367-368.)

I cannot accept Brother Wallace’s assertion that the subjects listed in Hebrews 6:1-2 and 4-5, are all ordinances of Judaism. Instead, these Hebrews had become Christians, but were not progressing and advancing in wisdom, knowledge and maturity as Christians. Even the King James Version does not support Brother Wallace’s explanation of this passage.

I Peter 3:19-20

“By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison . . .” (KJV).

“. . . in whom also He went and made proclamation to the spirits now in prison . . .” (NASB).

Brother Wallace objects to the insertion of “now” in the NASB. Brother Wallace is right!

Revelation 1:1-3

“. . . he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John . . .” (KJV).

“. . . He sent and communicated it by His angel to His bond-servant John . . .” (NASB).

Brother Wallace objects to this change of words . . . and again, he is correct. The Greek word for signified is semaino, and means to “give a sign” or “express by a sign.” Exactly the same word is used in Acts 11:28 wherein the prophet Agabus “signified by the Spirit that there would be a famine.” This word is used some six times in the New Testament, in one form or another. The passage to which Brother Wallace made reference, Heb. 9:8, uses the word deloo, meaning to “make plain” or “evident.” It is sometimes translated “signify” in the King James Version.

The New American Standard Version falls in accurately translating semaino, in Revelation 1:1.

Revelation 20:4-5

“. . . and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years . . .” (KJV).

“. . . and thev came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years . . .” (NASB).

“. . . the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.” (King James Version).

“The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were completed This is the first resurrection.” (New American Standard Bible).

Brother Wallace charges that the NASB alters the text in these verses with a premillennial slant. I agree with him. The “came to life” or “restored to life” expression seems to lend support to some of the various premillennial theories that are held by false teachers. Simply as a point of information, I have twenty-three other versions and translations in my library that use “came to life” or “restored to life.”

Conclusion

In general, I believe that the NASB is superior to the other “modern” versions. This is not to say that it does not have its faults Similarly, there are passages that I do not agree with in the American Standard Version (1901), just as I do not consider the King James Version to be accurate in all passages.

As for Brother Wallace’s review of the NASB, I consider it to be overly critical and lacking somewhat in objectivity. However, this is his right and privilege. Incidentally, I agree with his conclusions concerning the NASB about fifty percent of the time.

One of the very best methods of Bible study is to compare the readings of numerous versions and translations of a given passage. When one becomes wedded to almost only one version . . . watch out! It is my sincere hope and prayer that this study will prove beneficial to those who requested it.

Truth Magazine XIX: 18, pp. 280-282
March 15, 1975