I love the King James Version. I even use it for our Scripture readings during both our worship services every Lord’s Day. I preach from the New King James. I say this lest I be accused of having a bias against the KJV. It’s one of my favorite translations. But, as Christians, we pursue the truth. In this brief post, I want to compare two variant readings of the same verse. The first is from the KJV:
For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist (2 Jn. 1:7, KJV).
The second is from the New American Standard Bible:
For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist (2 Jn. 1:7, NASB).
Depending on the authorial intent and how you might take these passages in light of the rest of Scripture, this variation could have implications upon our doctrine of eschatology. Some eschatologies place an emphasis on a future antichrist while others admit the present existence and influence of the antichrist in the here and now. These two readings are based on two variant Greek New Testaments. In this case, however, the two often differing texts agree with one another. The first, for the KJV, is the Textus Receptus which reads:
ὅτι πολλοὶ πλάνοι εἰσῆλθόν εἰς τὸν κόσμον οἱ μὴ ὁμολογοῦντες ἸησοῦνΧριστὸν ἐρχόμενον ἐν σαρκί οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ πλάνος καὶ ὁ ἀντίχριστος
The second, for the NASB, is the mGNT:
ὅτι πολλοὶ πλάνοι ἐξῆλθον εἰς τὸν κόσμον οἱ μὴ ὁμολογοῦντες ἸησοῦνΧριστὸν ἐρχόμενον ἐν σαρκί οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ πλάνος καὶ ὁ ἀντίχριστος
The latter phrase is what’s important for our purposes here, “ὁ πλάνος καὶ ὁ ἀντίχριστος.” The KJV renders this phrase, “a deceiver and an antichrist.” Notice, however, the definite articles “ὁ” preceding both “πλάνος” and “ἀντίχριστος.” The definite article, in this case, should translate to “the” in the English, especially since there is no word for an indefinite article (e.g. “a”) in the Greek. If there was no definite article “ὁ” preceding these terms, “a deceiver and an antichrist” might be an appropriate translation should the context allow for it. But, here, there is no question. The proper translation, given the presence of the definite article for both terms, ought to be, “the deceiver and the antichrist.”