I'll start with a disclaimer. I use the King James Version, "Textus Receptus" simply because it has the overwhelming volume of ancient documentation. Of course, this post is primarily about one verse that has been altered by what I would deem a misrepresentation for the sake of a more feel good effect. We must be open to the fact that to get a copyright you must have a ten percent alteration from the original and that the Bible is the most widely printed book in the world, not to mention the best seller. Hence one of the reasons behind the massive amount of versions with the accompanying assurance of retail success. I have to note here that even with the King James word for word translation, you still have an abundance of added words, identifiable by their italics, to attain their copyright. Money always seems to facilitate a basis for the ever, all encompassing, motive to enlighten and prosper for the seemingly never ending need of supplicating our appetite for revelation.
"We love, because he first loved us." Noticeably missing from many of the newer versions is the word "him" following "We love." I've always understood that love has to have an object, whether its being a cat, dog, movie, car, or a never ending host of things in which we place our affections on. Stopping at "We love" leaves it hanging, opening many doors for interpretation. Removing the object "him"as they have done opens the door to a lot of speculation and if we do that; why not remove the object of love from the following verse; which would be God, not to mention the object following, "for his hate", which also needs an object. "If a man say I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen.
I can understand the thinking behind those that chose to remove the
"him" and or "God" from the verse. If you read the verse from 1st John
with the objects removed, including the ones that follow hate, it still
makes sense as an extension in our behavior to our fellow man; but John
was specifically speaking here about our ability to love God and the
reciprocal benefits that come from loving him. Let's take it another step and place a different object in place of "him." "We love chocolate cake because he first loved chocolate." We could then sing a rousing chorus of the Beatles' "All we need is love, everybody, all we need is love, love, love is all you need." I'm getting somewhat ridiculous here, but someone opened the door and I had to step in. Our ability to love or show love is from God who created us with the capacity for choice or a will of our own in which we can choose where our affections lie. After all, "If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him?" There goes Jesus connecting our acts to His Father in heaven. My question is why then do some feel the need for the disconnect. My first thought comes from mans incessant attempts of independence from God; although I don't think that is what is going on here. It stems from a desire to focus on love. This isn't a bad thing in and of itself. It's the deviation of the intention of the verse which focuses on our ability to love God. It's relationally disingenuous to twist scripture on our part to ingratiate our selfish nature by the omission and intent on the part of the author. In my condition I really need to be able to rest in God's scripture and the ability to rightly apply it to my life. God, help guide me with my own intentions that I might align them with your intentions.
"And when you have attained this knowledge, with what joy do you think you will be filled? Or, how will you love Him who has first loved you? And if you love Him, you will be an imitator of his kindness. And do not wonder that a man may become an imitator of God." Mathetes - "The blessings that will flow from faith."
"But as regards His love and kindness to men, and because he can do all things, He grants to those who love Him the privilege of seeing Him. He says that it is love which makes man perfect, and that he who loves God is perfect in this world and in the world to come. We shall never cease to love God, but the more we behold Him, the more we shall love Him." Iranaeus - Against the Heresies
The early church fathers didn't seem to have a problem making the connection between God's love for us to facilitating an avenue to our loving him. Of course, they weren't worried about re-packaging a product to entice readers to a more progressive and competitive version. How many ways are there to saying the same thing over and over again without damage to intent. Things that are different are not the same. I thank God every day for being the rock upon which we stand; the same today and tomorrow and for eternity. Prudence demands a certain amount of diligence to the honor and integrity of the authors intent. If we profess that scripture is God's word, we must tread lightly to ensure that it stays that way, and leave it without twisting it to our own personal affinities.The danger is real and running amuck leaving us with a pick and choose rationale. If your intent is to have a best seller; stick to writing fictional novels and leave Gods word as he chose to write it.
