Question about the Bible

Exodus 20:13 and the KJB critics - "Thou shalt not kill."

There are those who argue that the King James Bible is in error for saying: "Thou shalt not kill." They insist it should be as the NKJV, NIV and NASB read with "You shall not murder."

It should be noted that ALL the versions, including the NKJV, NIV, and NASB, translate this same Hebrew word as " TO KILL" in other passages. One such example is found in Numbers 35:27. Throughout this chapter the same word found in Exodus 20:13, is used 16 times and variously translated as "kill, slayer, manslayer, murderer, and put to death."

In Numbers 35:26-27 we read: "But if the slayer shall at any time come without the border of the city of his refuge, whither he was fled; And the revenger of blood find him...and the revenger of blood KILL the slayer; he shall not be guilty of blood." The NIV, NKJV, NASB, ESV etc. all read: "the revenger of blood KILL the slayer".

Regarding Exodus 20:13, not only does the King James Bible read "Thou shalt not kill" but so also do Coverdale 1535, Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1599, the 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company version, the Catholic Douay 1950, the Douay-Rheims, Darby 1890, the American Standard Version 1901, the Revised Standard Version 1952, Lamsa's 1933 translation of the Syriac Peshitta, the St. Joseph New American Bible 1970, Webster's 1833 translation, the KJV 21st Century Version, Green's Modern KJV 1998, the Spanish Reina Valera (no matarás), the New Life Bible 1969, the Updated Bible Version 2003, and the Third Millenium Bible.

Dr. Thomas Holland on Exodus 20:13 "Thou shalt not kill."

Modern Versions and the Sixth Commandment

Recently I have been asked about the sixth commandment, "Thou shalt not kill," as compared with the majority of contemporary versions, "You shall not murder" (Exodus 20:13 NIV). Because I have had this question before, I thought it might be well to address it for the student's consideration.

Personally, as with so many renderings, I do not have a problem with either "kill" or "murder." Both are a proper translation of the Hebrew word "raw-tsakh" and have to do with putting another person to death. The King James Version translates this word as "kill" (Exod. 20:13 and Deut. 5:17) and as "murder" (Jer. 7:9 and Hos. 6:9). The two are used synonymously in English and the Scripture. For example, if a man shoots another man in front of a witness, the witness may say, "You killed him." That is true, but he will be charged with murder. Common sense and our English dictionaries demonstrate that these two words mean the same thing.

Nevertheless, those who oppose the Authorized Version have stated that the KJV has mistranslated the Hebrew word "raw-tsakh" as "kill" when it really should be "murder" or that the word "murder" is a better translation. But is that really the case? It may come as a surprise to those who make such claims against the KJV that the weight of the evidence is against them.

First we must consider the Hebrew. As mentioned above the Hebrew word "raw-tsakh" is translated as "kill" and "murder" in the KJV. There are also several other words translated as "kill" or "murder" in the KJV. But this word carries the idea of dashing in pieces, to slay, or to do violence in an unjust manner that causes death. It is never applied to the slaying of animals, such as in a sacrifice. Nor is it used in regard to the taking of life in war.

However, those who insist that the KJV has mistranslated the word have a problem when we see how other versions translate it in various additional passages. For example, the word "raw-tsakh" in Exodus 20:13 (and Deut 5:17 where the commandments are repeated) stands in the future tense. The same word in the same tense appears again in Deuteronomy 4:42. The text reads, "That the slayer might flee thither, which should kill his neighbour unawares, and hated him not in times past; and that fleeing unto one of these cities he might live."

If the KJV is incorrect in its translation of "raw-tsakh" as "kill" and the NIV has corrected it as "murder" in Exodus 20:13, then we would expect this same Hebrew word that the KJV "mistranslates" to be "corrected" in Deuteronomy 4:42 as well. However, the NIV reads in this passage, "to which anyone who had killed a person could flee if he had unintentionally killed his neighbor without malice aforethought. He could flee into one of these cities and save his life." So do the NKJV, RSV, ESV.

If translating "raw-tsakh" in the future tense as "kill" is wrong in Exodus 20:13, then it is also wrong in Deuteronomy 4:42, but there modern versions translate it as "kill." Why? Because the word can be translated either way; either one is therefore a correct translation.

Second, the same is true of the New Testament. In Matthew 5:21, the KJV states, "Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment." Clearly the Lord is quoting from the Ten Commandments. Here the Greek word used is "phoneuseis" a form of the word "phoneuw" and again means "to kill, slay, murder" (Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament). This Greek word appears several times in the New Testament and is translated as "kill" (Matt. 5:21; 23:31; Mark 10:19; Luke 18:20; Rom. 13:9; James 2:11; 4:2; and 5:6). However, it is also translated as "murder" in Matthew 19:18 and as "slew" in Matthew 23:35.

If the KJV was incorrect with the Hebrew by translating it as "kill" in Exodus 20:13, we must say that it is also incorrect when translating the Greek word in Matthew 5:21 as "kill." However, as with the Old Testament Hebrew word, modern versions translate the Greek "phoneuw" as both "murder" and "kill." Yet in James 4:2 the NIV translates this Greek word as "kill." Again, this demonstrates that it means either.

Finally, we come to the English. Both my 1828 and 1975 Webster Dictionaries inform me that the word "kill" means, "to deprive of life." The word "murder" means, "the crime of unlawfully killing a person." Both can be used interchangeably, in that it is impossible to murder a person without killing them. However, there are those who still object to the phrase, "thou shalt not kill" insisting that it must be "you shall not murder." Therefore, so they state, modern versions have clarified the difference for us. But have they really?

The English word "kill" means to deprive of life. The word "murder" means to unlawfully kill a person." Therefore, by English definitions, the word murder involves an unlawful act. However, if it is lawful it would not be murder to deprive someone of life. With this in mind, I certainly think the phrase "thou shalt not kill" is much better. For this simple reason, abortion is the law of the land. It is not illegal for a doctor to deprive a living child of its life if the mother consents to this act. I can almost hear the liberal theologian justifying abortion on the grounds that it is not murder because it is not unlawful. The same may be said of euthanasia. While it is not the law of our land yet, it is the law of the land in many countries and it not an unlawful act in those nations. Nevertheless, both acts deprive a living being of their life. Both acts KILL. With this in mind, which do you think is really the better translation?

Yours in Christ Jesus, Dr. Thomas Holland

In addition to Dr. Holland's comments about the word correctly being translated as either to kill or to murder in the King James Bible, I would like to add some additional support for his position.

If, as the KJB critics affirm, there is a distinct difference between "to kill" and "to murder", they are contradicted by the very versions they promote. Other words are also translated as both "to kill" and "to murder", and often when describing the clear act of what we would call "murder", the NKJV, NIV, NASB use the word "to kill".

The Hebrew word 'harag' # 2026, is translated by all these versions as both to kill and to murder, showing them to be synonymous terms. Notice these few examples of the many that could be given.

Genesis 4:8 "And Cain talked with Abel his brother: and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and SLEW him." NASB, NIV, NKJV - "KILLED him". See also Genesis 4:23, 25.

Genesis 27:41 "And Esau hated Jacob because of the blessing wherewith his father blessed him: and Esau said in his heart, The days of mourning for my father are at hand: then will I SLAY my brother Jacob." NASB, NIV, NKJV - "I will KILL my brother Jacob."

Genesis 34:25-26 This incident occured when Shechem the Hivite had taken Dinah, the sister of the sons of Jacob, and lay with her. He then wanted to take her as his wife and the sons of Jacob lied to the people, saying they would join them if they were circumcised. "And it came to pass on the third day, when they were sore, (after being circumcised, and were defenseless), that the two sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi, Dinah's brethren, took each man his sword, and came upon the city boldly, and SLEW all the males. And they SLEW Hamor and Shechem his son with the edge of the sword, and took Dinah out of Shechem's house, and went out." NKJV, NIV, NASB - "KILLED all the males", "KILLED Hamor and Shechem".

Genesis 37:20 Here the brothers of Joseph envied him and wanted to kill him. Another clear case of what we would call "murder". "Behold, this dreamer cometh. Come now therefore, and let us SLAY him, and cast him into some pit, and we will say, Some evil beast hath devoured him; and we shall see what will become of his dreams." NIV, NASB, NKJV - "let us KILL him".

Exodus 21:14 "But if a man come presumptuously upon his neighbor, TO SLAY him with guile; thou shalt take him from mine altar, that he may die." NKJV, NIV, NASB - "KILL HIM".

These are just a few of many examples found in the modern versions where the clear act of "murder" is referred to as "killing". The King James Bible is not in error in Exodus 20:13 and the Bible critics have not done their homework. It can rightly be said of the KJB critics as of other false teachers: "understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm." 1 Timothy 1:7.

Will Kinney

I actually started writting to explain some of his questions. Because he asked so many question it would be difficult to adress them all. This is often a tatic of the left. They raise so many question so fast you can not possibly answer them all in a well reasoned way.

It is sufficient to say Biblical slavery and our understanding of slavery are completely different. Any one who understands personal ownership should look into this subject more deeply. God respects choice and personal responsibility deeply.
Jesus is the fulfillment of OT sacrifice.

I thought it was just a pretty funny little poke at the old testament.

A little lesson to all patriots, dont allow yourselves to be offended! Offense leads to anger, which leads to irrational thought, and ultimately revenge. You will never win with anger, it is through a clear mind that your opinions will make a difference.

quotes the bible that says that Dec. 25 was the day of conception! And that Jesus was born 9 months later in Sept. or Oct.