The Children vs The Sons of Israel and the Weakness of the King James Version

Deuteronomy 32:8 in the King James Bible and in the English Standard Version

A "King James Only" YouTube channel has posted a video accusing the English Standard Version of horrific error (its primarily crime, consistent with the channel, is that it's not the KJV). The host goes after its translation of Deuteronomy 32:8 which we will address shortly. Here is a quick blurb about the ESV from BibleStudyTools.com

The ESV is an "essentially literal" translation that seeks as far as possible to capture the precise wording of the original text and the personal style of each Bible writer. It seeks to be transparent to the original text, letting the reader see as directly as possible the structure and meaning of the original.

At issue is the ESV's use of "sons of God" as opposed the KJV's use of "children of Israel." in the verse.

Here is the KJV version of Deuteronomy 32:8

When the Most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel.

It's very important to understand why God inspires the idea of "children" or "child" in some passages and "sons" or "son" in others. As always, we are careful to note context where we are in scripture. If scriptures notes someone had a "son" (a male child) it may not carry the full weight it does in other passages, for example. 

Before we get lost in the weeds, we are talking about similar phrases and certain promises when we look to distinguish "sons" from "children," not merely a male child (e.g. Gen 32:22). That is, "son" referring to simply a male child does not carry the weight or figure "sons" carries when juxtaposed against "children," as we hope to establish.

Let's take a quick look at Deuteronomy 32:8 in other translations. I'm not a huge fan of the ESV (while I acknowledge it does have its good points), but it does list in its notes on this verse that the Textus Receptus (TR) reads "sons of Israel." It translates, then, from a minority text the phrase as "sons of God" and then acknowledges the TR reads "sons of Israel." Both depart from "children of Israel" as  the KJV reads. 

The ESV most likely is quoting the Septuagint (LXX), the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament. There we have "angels of God," which are also referred to a "sons of God" in scripture (e.g. Gen 6:2).

Let's first tun to the Geneva Bible and Wycliffe translation (TR) and NAS and NIV just FYC:

When the most high God divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he appointed the borders of the people, according to the number of the children of Israel. [Geneva]

When the highest parted folks, when he separated the sons of Adam, he ordained the terms of peoples by the number of the sons of Israel. (When the Most High God divided the nations, when he separated the sons of man, he ordained the borders of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God.) [Wycliffe]

When the Most High gave the nations their inheritance, When He separated the sons of man, He set the boundaries of the peoples According to the number of the sons of Israel. [NAS]

When the Most High gave the nations their inheritance,
when he divided all mankind,
he set up boundaries for the peoples
according to the number of the sons of Israel. [NIV]

Again, I don't think the ESV is particularly egregious here. We also note that John Wycliffe, "the morning star of the Reformation," uses "sons of God." This is due to his access only to the Latin texts .

Wycliffe supervised a handful of scholars at Oxford in the translation of the Latin Bible into the English language. This was the very first translation of the entire Bible into the English language. The only source that Wycliffe’s translators had to work with was a Latin hand-written manuscript of a translation made 1000 years previously.  

-ReformationSA.org

But we would never stand in judgment of Wycliffe who was condemned by the Catholic Church (as was his translation), yet unlike Tyndale later, he escaped imprisonment and death.

As a result of these activities and teachings, one pope issued five bulls against John Wycliffe for “heresy.” The Catholic Church tried him three times and two popes summoned him to Rome. However, Wycliffe wisely refused each summons and the political protection of the Duke of Lancaster and Queen Anne kept Wycliffe alive and free. He was never imprisoned. However, his followers were hunted down, expelled from Oxford and mercilessly persecuted.

        -ReformationSA.org 

The irony for the KJV-only people is that the 1611 KJV (or Authorized Version) contains most of the the extra-biblical books known as the Apocrypha. The Apocrypha is the backbone of several Roman Catholic doctrines including Purgatory and praying for the dead and indulgences. These extra books were not removed from the KJV for over two centuries.

The KJV Translation Choices in the New Testament are of a Far Greater Concern  

The KJV, even while relying on the Textus Receptus, makes an egregious error in its translation of the Greek words for "sons" and "children" from the Greek New Testament Textus Receptus texts. I find these far more serious to our understanding of God's plan for the ages and a source of confusion for those who may seek to rightly divide the Word of Truth (2 Tim 2:15).

Let's take a quick look at translations and the Greek source in regard to children/sons in the Gospels:

But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

-Matt 8:12 [KJV]


while the sons of the kingdom will be thrown into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

-Matt 8:12 [ESV]

Let's ignore for the moment that many preachers skip the first half of this verse and apply the "weeping and gnashing" to unbelievers in some fiery torture chamber and concentrate on the word translated "children" and "sons" respectively in this verse. The Greek word used is huiós.

In its strictest sense, the word should be translated "sons." The context of this verse is a comparative of uncircumcised and non-law-keeping Gentiles in the future kingdom on earth juxtaposed against the "heirs" of the Kingdom (Israel). "Sons" is better in regard to heirs. All sons are children, but not all children are "sons."

Now let's look at the opposite translation choice of a different word in John 1:1

But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name [KJV]

But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God [ESV]

Here the Greek word is "téknon" which better rendered "children," which is exactly how the KJV renders it in John 11:52. There, God prophetically gathers "the whole nation" (11:50), all the children. But, again, not all "children" are "sons."

We must separate the earthly program for the Kingdom in Israel with its promises and requirements from the program for the far above the heavens  (as revealed to Paul alone and taught in Ephesians and the seven post-Acts epistles). 

Salvation (redemption from the curse of death and decay) is, and has always been, by grace alone through faith alone. But there are rewards, crowns, a prize, etc. that are earned. There is a house to be built upon the foundation. There is a judgment of service.

For no one can lay another foundation than that which was laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if anyone builds on this foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, or stubble, each one’s work will be revealed. For the Day will declare it, because it will be revealed by fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each has done. 

-1 Cor 3:11-13 (MEV)

The "sons of the kingdom" in Matthew 8 are the Jews who were to inherit the full blessings of Abraham and David by covenant, but failed. So where are they cast? They are cast out of the kingdom. The comparative is to "recline at table with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom" in that passage. That is what they lose. These are not tortured by fire. They had an inheritance, but by LACK OF FAITH, they lose that inheritance (not the gift of life) in the earthly Kingdom (and they lose the New Jerusalem).

When Jesus heard it [the faith of a Gentile], He was amazed and said to those who followed, “Truly I say to you, I have not found such great faith, no, not in Israel. And I say to you that many [Gentiles] will come from the east and west and will dine with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven [in the land]. But the sons of the kingdom [Israelites] will be thrown out into outer darkness. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” 

-Matthew 8:10-12

All in faith are children of God, but only sons have the inheritance. One becomes a child by faith alone (John 1:12; 3:16; 5:24; 20:30-32; etc), but one can lose an inheritance while still remaining a son. Again, that "inheritance" concerns the promises to and covenants with Israel (Romans 9).

For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brothers, my kinsmen by race, who are Israelites, to whom belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God, and the promises, to whom belong the patriarchs, and from whom, according to the flesh, is Christ, who is over all, God forever blessed. Amen. 

-Romans 9:3-5

I speak to your [BELEIVERS'] shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren [BELIEVERS]? ... Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren [BELIEVERS]. Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

-1 Cor 6:5, 8-10 (KJV)

We are running an individual race and we may be disqualified from rewards, crowns, etc.

Therefore I run thus: not with uncertainty. Thus I fight: not as one who beats the air. But I discipline my body and bring it into subjection, lest, when I have preached to others, I myself should become disqualified.

-1 Cor 9:26-27 (KJV)

 

Could Paul "lose his salvation?" as some teach of believers? Absolutely not! Justification is a free gift. But he could find himself "disqualified" from an inheritance (Greek: adókimos = worthless). This is the "going on to PERFECTION (maturity)" spoken of in Hebrews 6:1 versus falling back into PERDITION (waste).

One can lose an inheritance by either wickedness or lack of faith without losing the free gift of reconciliation with God through Christ alone. The reward of the New Jerusalem, possible for inhabitants of the earthly Kingdom, is gained by faith and works. This reward is not speaking of Justification.

By faith [Abraham] sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise: for he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.

-Hebrews 11:10

When James speaks of faith without works (James 2:14), he gives two examples:

• Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
• Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?

What works are noted? Abraham's willingness to kill and offer his son upon an altar and Rahab hiding the spies and misleading her own people about their whereabouts. Human sacrifice, treason, lying. Is this what we need to emulate to "maintain" our free gift? God forbid. 

James quotes the same verse Paul quotes in regard to Abraham's gift of life ("Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness.") In regard to justification for the free gift, Paul leaves it there. In regard to fulfilling one's purpose unto reward, James states that the sacrifice of Isaac was the mark of faith and obedience. 

Abraham didn't suddenly put God in his debt. His "justification by works" in James 2 was unto his "perfection" (Maturity in the faith). James writes his epistle to the "twelve tribes" (Jas 1:1) who were promised a land and kingdom and awaited "restoration of all things" and "the return of Jesus Christ" to earth, if and when Israel repents and turns to Christ (as Peter offered and promised in Acts 3). 

We move on from the free gift  of justification to perfection and conditional rewards (based on the hope before the believer in the age he lives). Here again is Hebrews 6:1

Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection

-Hebrews 6:1

 

ALL the children of Israel came out of Egypt under the blood, but only the faithful were able to step into the blessings of the land. Caleb and Joshua BELIEVED God could give them the land and professed that faith.

And the Lord spake unto Moses and unto Aaron, saying, How long shall I bear with this evil congregation, which murmur against me? I have heard the murmurings of the children of Israel, which they murmur against me. Say unto them, As truly as I live, saith the Lord, as ye have spoken in mine ears, so will I do to you: your carcases shall fall in this wilderness; and all that were numbered of you, according to your whole number, from twenty years old and upward, which have murmured against me, doubtless ye shall not come into the land, concerning which I sware to make you dwell therein, save Caleb the son of Jephunneh, and Joshua the son of Nun.

-Numbers 14:26-30

Carcasses is the Hebrew word "peger" which is the same word used of those tossed into the fire which is not quenched, on earth, in a future age, from among the children of Israel and those that have transgressed in a future age (Isaiah 66:24 quoted by the Lord in Matthew).

And they shall bring all your brethren for an offering unto the Lord out of all nations upon horses, and in chariots, and in litters, and upon mules, and upon swift beasts, to my holy mountain Jerusalem, saith the Lord, as the children of Israel bring an offering in a clean vessel into the house of the Lord. And I will also take of them for priests and for Levites, saith the Lord. For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the Lord, so shall your seed and your name remain. And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the Lord. And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh.

-Isaiah 66:20-24

Related Translation Failures in the King James Bible

So, while the KJV-only crew focus in on the variation in Deuteronomy 32:8, they overlook far more serious translation choices in regard to the sons and children of Israel in the gospels and elsewhere. This is in addition to the failure of the KJV to translate and rightly divide the Hebrew words "katabolḗ" or "kósmos" correctly.  

God has revealed some things from or since "the throwing down and beginning of the ages" and some things from "before the throwing down and beginning of the ages." As we have noted in other studies, 

Young in his literal translation gives us a clearer view than does the KJV when he renders these verses as "age of the ages" and similar. As just one example, 1 Peter 5:11 (an epistles from an apostle to the circumcision preaching the gospel to the circumcision in the Acts age, addressed to the Jewish "dispersion" which is a parallel to James' "twelve tribes scattered abroad").

to Him [is] the glory, and the power -- to the ages and the ages! Amen. [YLT]


To him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen. [KJV]

The concept of "for ever" in English causes many problems for those who fail to rightly divide. A number of statutes in the Law of Moses are said to be "a statute for ever" [KJV]. yet we know these are not practiced today and if we did practice them we would be in serious error.  This is covered elsewhere, but we note it here to further show how the KJV should be understood as a translation completed by those with preconceived doctrines and understandings which failed to "rightly divide the Word of Truth."

Just one example:

Do not drink wine nor strong drink, thou, nor thy sons with thee, when ye go into the tabernacle of the congregation, lest ye die: it shall be a statute for ever throughout your generations: and that ye may put difference between holy and unholy, and between unclean and clean...

-Leviticus 10:9-10

You might recognize the last part of this passage as it is sometimes referenced to condemn things like  electric guitars. We will leave that there (as it should be understood as silly on its face) and only note that we do not hear the first part of the passage being screamed from any pulpits today. If the "church" is in fact somehow "Israel," then this statute is "for ever."

If the argument is made that the Law was somehow replaced, then we must include in that the Ten Commandments (which is fine by me, but those who ignore some of the law conveniently choose the parts they don't like, but not all).

Those interested in this topic, especially the Greek usage in the New Testament, might find the following link helpful:

[Uses of] Everlasting, Eternal, and Forever

We also recommend the Far Above All translation