Article: Acts 19:37 robbers of churches; 19:35 Diana or Artemis?

From Textus Receptus

Revision as of 09:20, 9 February 2010

Acts 19:37 Robbers of churches

KJB: "For ye have brought hither these men, which are neither ROBBERS OF CHURCHES, nor yet blasphemers of your goddess."

Some Bible correctors criticize the King James Bible for translating the word hierosulos as "robbers of churches", and insist the word should properly be translated as "robbers of temples" instead of "robbers of churches". With all the very serious errors found in the multitude of conflicting modern versions that depart from the Hebrew texts in scores of places and employ very different Greek texts than those of the King James Bible, this seems to me and many others as a case of "straining at gnats" in a vain effort to find just one little "error" in the KJB.

The NKJV, NIV, NRSV and NASB all unite in saying "robbers of temples", rather than "robbers of churches".

Actually, the word can have a wide variety of meanings, as is shown by the different ways various bible versions have translated this word. It comes from two different words, one meaning to rob or plunder, and the other word - hieros- can signify anything holy, consecrated, or hallowed. According to Kittle's massive lexicon the word can refer to a pagan shrine, a temple or a synagogue, or anywhere people meet for religious rites or services. Likewise Liddell and Scott's lexicon says the word can refer to any holy place, a temple, anything hallowed, consecrated, or holy and it can describe sacred objects or rites.

The Baer, Arndt and Gingrich lexicon tells us the word hierosulos can also have the general sense of "one who commits irreverant acts against a holy place; a sacrilegious person."

There are also several versions that translate this word as neither "robbers of churches" nor as "robbers of temples" but as "sacrilegious". Among these are the RSV, ESV 2001, Douay 1950, Geneva Bible, and the New English Bible 1970.

Other bible versions render this word in yet a different way.

New Life Version 1997 "do not rob houses of worship"

Bible in Basic English 1961 "not doing damage to the holy place"

Other Bible versions that read exactly like the King James Bible saying "neither robbers of churches" are Tyndale 1525, Miles Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible, the Bishop's Bible 1568, Green's Modern KJV, Webster's 1833 translation, the KJV 21st Century Version, and the Third Millenium Bible. Luther's German Bible reads: "Kirchenrauber"- Church robbers, as does the Dutch Staten Vertaling bible - 'kerkrovers'.

Bible commentators in the past have had no problem with the wording of the King James Bible. Matthew Henry notes in his commentary: (v. 37): "You have brought hither these men, and are ready to pull them to pieces; but have you considered what is their transgression and what is their offence? What can you prove upon them? They are not ROBBERS OF CHURCHES (caps mine), you cannot charge them with sacrilege, or the taking away of any dedicated thing."

John Calvin's translation and commentary reads Acts 19:37 as: "For ye have brought men which are neither church-robbers, nor yet blasphemers of your goddess." Then Calvin remarks: "He doth both truly and well deny that they be church-robbers."

Another reason why this phrase is correctly translated as "robbers of churches" is the simple context of the whole passage. The Greek word includes anywhere people met for religious purposes, whether pagan or Christian. The city was Ephesus. Were there Christian assemblies in the city of Ephesus at this time? Yes, very definitely.

At the beginning of Acts 19 we see the apostle Paul coming to Ephesus where he finds twelve disciples whom he baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Then Paul continues there in Ephesus and preaches for three months in the synagogue. Then he separates the believers and continues another two years of preaching "so that all they which dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks". Acts 19:18-20 tells us of "many that believed" and "so mightily grew the word of God and prevailed".

Part of the complaint made by Demetrius against Paul was that "not alone at Ephesus, but almost throughout all Asia, this Paul hath persuaded and turned away MUCH PEOPLE, saying that they be no gods, which are made with hands." There were at this time in Ephesus a great many Christians who were meeting daily in Christian home churches.

So, when the townclerk of Ephesus arises to quell the uproar in the city, he appeals to the known character of Paul by saying he was "neither a robber of churches, nor yet blasphemers of YOUR goddess." This would include both the Christian churches and also their pagan religion.

The apostle Paul was not a robber of churches. He wasn't taking financial advantage of the many Christian believers who lived in Ephesus and everyone knew this. In fact, in the very next chapter of Acts 20 it is recorded that Paul later sent for the elders of Ephesus to come to him so he could give them one last charge. There already were established churches in Ephesus and the surrounding regions with elders feeding the flock.

Paul reminds them that he had been preaching among them for three years. He says: "Ye know, from the first day that I came into Asia, after what manner I have been with you at all seasons...I have coveted no man's silver, or gold, or apparel. Yea, ye yourselves know, that these hands have ministered unto my necessities, and to them that were with me...It is more blessed to give than to receive."

It was well known that Paul was no robber of churches. The King James Bible is correct.

It is more than just a bit hypocritical for the modern versionist to insist the word hieron must be translated only as "temple". All the modern versions frequently translate the same word in a wide variety of ways. The word hieron itself in the NASB is variously translated as "temple, sanctuary, and shrine". The NIV has both "temple" and "shrine".

A couple more examples of how the modern versions give a variety of meanings to a single word is shown in the following. In Hebrew, the word binar # 1002, is used 17 times and always translated as "palace" in the KJB. The NASB complete concordance defines the word as "a castle or palace", and then translated this word as "capital" 10 times, "capitol" 1 time, "citadel" 1 time, "fortress" twice and "temple" 2 times. The word ekklesia is usually translated as "church" yet both the NASB, NIV have also rendered this word as "assembly" and "congregation". Likewise the word vaos is usually translated as "temple", yet the NASB has also rendered this word as "sanctuary" and "shrine".

There is nothing wrong with the way the KJB and several other Bible versions have translated this word as "robbers of churches". It fits the context of the whole chapter since there were many Christians meeting in this city and the character of Paul was well known by everyone. Those who insist that it is wrong, are straining at gnats and swallowing a camel.

Will Kinney

Acts 19:35 Diana or Artemis - Jupiter, Zeus, or Heaven?

"And when the townclerk had appeased the people, he said, Ye men of Ephesus, what man is there that knoweth not how that the city of the Ephesians is a worshipper of the great goddess DIANA, and of the image which fell down from JUPITER?"

There are a growing number of Christians today who no longer believe in the inerrancy of Scripture. Some reluctantly and others boldly come right out and tell us that "No Bible and No single text in any language, (be it Hebrew, Greek, English, Swahili, or whatever) IS NOW the complete, inerrant, and 100% true and accurate words of God." I believe this is one of the predicted signs of the falling away from the faith that occurs before the glorious return of our Lord Jesus Christ. (See 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4)

At a particular Bible Club I belong to, a fellow Christian brought up the following accusation against those of us who believe the King James Bible is the providentially preserved, complete and inerrant word of God in the English language. He said: "There are some KJV-Onlyists who actually argue - when it is demonstrated that the KJV text departs from the traditional (or even any) Hebrew or Greek text - that, yes, the KJV does not agree with the underlying original language, but, they assert, by some miraculous, magical process the KJV variant (even though unsubstantiated by any mss in the original languages) is somehow flawless and the original language sources wrong."

I then asked him the following: "First of all, do you personally believe in the inerrancy of any Bible in any language? Do you believe there is such a thing as a complete, inerrant, 100% true and accurate Bible in any language on this earth today? If so, which one is it?

Secondly, could you please show us one or two examples of where the King James Bible allegedly follows NO Hebrew or NO Greek text in any of its readings? Thanks, Will Kinney"

This Christian brother then responded to my first question by saying: "I don't believe anything available NOW can be called inerrant. But I do believe that the TEACHINGS of the Bible have come down to us intact, even though there are many defects in the surrounding narratives."

This Christian does not believe there exists any Scripture that is the inerrant words of God. He has no infallible Bible in any language to use or recommend to anyone else. He then shows the complete breakdown of the logic of his thinking by telling us that the "teachings are intact", even though there are many defects. Fellow saints, isn't it obvious that the teachings of the Holy Bible are made up of individual words, and if these words are either "omitted or added, confused, contradictory, taken from another source, or incorrectly translated", that the subsequent "teaching" is also perverted and not at all the same?

Once a person abandons the position of faith in an inerrant Bible, providentially preserved by Almighty God according to His promises found in the Book itself, he then becomes his own "Final Authority". He becomes a Bible Rummager, digging around in all the variant readings and picking out those he personally favors and translating them according to his own understanding. His resultant and ever-changing "bible version" will differ in countless ways both large and small from everybody else's. This is the position modern scholarship has gotten itself into.

As for the second question where I asked him to provide a couple of examples where the King James Bible allegedly does not follow any Hebrew or any Greek text, he replied: "Oddly enough this one was already answered, indirectly, by Gail Riplinger in her book, when she fulminated about how modern versions didn't have "Lucifer" in Isaiah, and had Artemis instead of "Diana" in Acts 19 which the KJV picked up from the Latin Vulgate."

I appreciate the fact that this brother was willing to give a couple of concrete examples of what he perceives to be errors in the King James Bible. The purpose of this present article is to address the example he brought up about Diana or Artemis as found in Acts 19:35.

As for the Lucifer example, I have already addressed this in a separtate article which can be seen at my site here: Lucifer or Morning Star?

Diana or Artemis - Jupiter, Zeus, or Heaven?

King James Bible Acts 19:35 - "And when the townclerk had appeased the people, he said, Ye men of Ephesus, what man is there that knoweth not how that the city of the Ephesians is a worshipper of the great goddess DIANA, and of the image which fell down from JUPITER?"

NIV, NASB Acts 19:35 - "The city clerk quieted the crowd and said: "Men of Ephesus, doesn't all the world know that the city of Ephesus is the guardian of the temple of the great ARTEMIS and of her image, which fell from HEAVEN?"

NKJV - Acts 19:35 - "And when the city clerk had quieted the crowd, he said: "Men of Ephesus, what man is there who does not know that the city of the Ephesians is temple guardian of the great goddess DIANA, and of the image which fell down from ZEUS?"

In this little study we will be looking primarily at two different Greek words and their resultant translations. The first word artemis is variously translated as either Artemis or Diana. The second word is a compound Greek word (Diopetous), which is composed of the word Dios and the verbal form petous, meaning "fallen".

Both Diana and Artemis refer to the same pagan goddess. Smith's Bible dictionary tells us that Artemis was the Greek goddess of hunting, corresponding to the Roman goddess Diana. It then tells us that Diana was the Roman goddess of the moon, and of the fields and woods, and that she corresponds to the Greek Artemis. In other words, Artemis was the Greek name and Diana was the Roman name.

In Acts 19 the apostle Paul is preaching at the city of Ephesus, which at this time, as Smith's Bible dictionary and many other sources tell us, was "the capital of the ROMAN province of Asia." Easton's Bible Dictionary says of the word Diana - "So called by the Romans; called Artemis by the Greeks."

If you look up the Greek word for Diana in a modern Greek dictionary like Diury's Modern Greek-English Dictionary 1974, it clearly tells us that the way to say "Diana" is the Greek word artemis.

Not only does the King James Bible translate Acts 19:35 as DIANA but so also do the following Bible versions: Wycliffe 1395, Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535, Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1599, Daniel Mace's N.T. 1729, Wesley's N.T. 1755, the Revised Version 1881, the American Standard Version 1901, Luther's German Bible 1545, and 1912, the German Schlachter 1951, Webster's translation 1833, Rotherham's Emphasized Bible 1902, Weymouth's translation 1902, the Douay Version 1950, the Bible in Basic English 1960, New Life Bible 1969, the New English Bible 1970, the Living Bible 1981, the NKJV 1982, the Italian Diodati 1649, Italian Riveduta 1927, the French Louis Segond version 1910, French Martin 1744, Ostervald 1996, Finnish bible 1776, Norwegian Det Norsk 1930, the Portuguese Ferreira de Almeida, the Romanian Corniescu, the Dutch Staten Vertaling, the Spanish Reina Valera 1909 and 1960, La Biblia de las Americas 1997, the KJV 21st Century, and the Third Millenium Bible.

The first major English version to translate this Greek word as Artemis instead of Diana was the liberal RSV, and it is now followed by the NASB, NIV, NRSV, ESV and the Holman Standard. There is nothing wrong with either translation, but since Ephesus was at this time a Roman city, the King James translators and many others apparently thought it was better to give the Roman name of this particular goddess rather than the Greek name.

The first major English version to translate this Greek word as Artemis instead of Diana was the liberal RSV, and it is now followed by the NASB, NIV, NRSV, ESV and the Holman Standard. There is nothing wrong with either translation, but since Ephesus was at this time a Roman city, the King James translators and many others apparently thought it was better to give the Roman name of this particular goddess rather than the Greek name.

The Catholic versions are the usual mixed bag, with the Douay version of 1950 saying: "the city of the Ephesians is a worshipper of the great Diana and of Jupiter’s offspring?", while the 1970 St. Joseph New American Bible reading: "Artemis and of the image that fell from the sky." Then the New Jerusalem version of 1985 goes back to: "Diana and of the statue that fell from heaven."

It should be noted that the second Greek word we are looking at in this passage is not "literally" rendered in any of the versions, and in fact, many of the modern ones have gotten it wrong.

The second word we are dealing with is the compound Greek word Diopetous. JUPITER is the name of the chief Roman god, and he corresponded to the Greek god Zeus. Again, any good modern Greek dictionary or lexicon will tell us that the way to say "Jupiter" is either zeus or the Greek word used here in Acts 19:35 - Dios.

Versions such as the NASB, RSV, NRSV, ESV, NIV and the Holman Standard have all mistranslated this as "the image fallen FROM THE SKY (or "from Heaven"). Then the RSV, ESV and NRSV all footnote that "the Greek meaning is uncertain". The Greek word used here is not the word for "sky" or "heaven" at all, but rather is the word used for the chief god of the Romans known as Jupiter, and by the Greeks as Zeus.

Those Bible versions that read: "and of the image that fell down from JUPITER" are the following: Wycliffe, Tyndale, Bishops', the Geneva Bible, Wesley, Rotherham's Emphasized Bible, the Revised Version 1881, the American Standard Version 1901, Webster's, the Bible in Basic English 1960, the Updated Bible version of 2003, the French Martin 1744, Spanish Reina Valera 1909, 1960, Sagradas Escrituras 1569, Italian Diodati, Italian Riveduta 1927, Portuguese Almeida Actualizada, the KJV 21st Century, and the Third Millenium Bible.

Those that read "that fell down from ZEUS" are the NKJV and Youngs, but they disagree as to Diana or Artemis.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the translation found in the King James Bible and many other English and foreign Bible versions as well. It is totally correct and accurate. People who do not believe in any inerrant Bible often bring up examples like this one to try to prove that the King James Bible is wrong, when it isn't wrong at all. If they only studied out the issues before them a little more, they would see that there are very good reasons why God guided the King James Bible translators in both the correct underlying texts and the proper translation of those texts.

The Authorized King James Holy Bible is the inerrant, complete, and 100% true words of the living God. Accept no substitutes.

Will Kinney

External Link

• Acts 19:37 robbers of churches; 19:35 Diana or Artemis? by Will Kinney