I’ve noticed for a long time that many objections (not all mind you) to the Bible which come from atheists or skeptics stem from their reading the Bible in English.

The Bible wasn’t written in English. Meanings get shaded or misunderstood when you don’t pay attention to the original definitions of the words and instead concentrate on the English definitions of the translation.

Not reading a verse in context will also get you flying around on some tangents, as many skeptics unwittingly find themselves doing as well. Personally, I believe this stems from their assumption that taking the Bible literally is so ridiculous and so obviously wrong. This assumption seems to make them careless from time to time when accusing it.

People would be surprised, in my opinion, if they realized how many of the “errors” in the Bible cited by a skeptic here or there were simply nothing more than superficial accusations which don’t hold an ounce of water. Often, these type of accusations often would not even have been made if not for a particular wording in an English translation.

The phrase “lost in translation” often applies. Translating from Greek to English isn’t so cut and dried. The meaning can be shaded one way or another depending on the English word used, or the way a sentence is structured in the English. As you can expect, some versions of the Bible are more accurate than others, generally due to the decision of the translators to make the text easier to read while sacrificing accuracy, or vice-versa, as well as the bias of the translators.

Yes, bias plays a role. A particular passage will often be worded in a way the translator believes is consistent with what the author is trying to say, and amazingly, the translator almost always has an opinion on this before even beginning. Why? Because most translators are Christians who grew up in Church being taught their doctrines and beliefs. It’s only natural to have a few assumptions affecting your perception. That’s just life.

That’s also why I’m glad there are many different translations, and thousands upon thousands of ancient manuscripts to verify and double check any version of the Bible.

If you study carefully, you’ll see these places from time to time that have been shaded one way by the New American Standard Bible, another way by the New Living Translation, and yet another by the New International Version.

Generally speaking, the more “readable” a version is, the more bias you’ll see in the wording. The more accurate to the original Greek or Hebrew, the less.

Bored yet? Sorry.

All this brings me to baptism. We first read about it when John the Baptist shows up just before Jesus starts doing His thing.

Luk 3:3 And he went into all the region around the Jordan, preaching a baptism of repentance for the remission of sins,

This is the first time we hear about baptism in the Bible, but baptism had been around for awhile previous to this. The Jews started using the rite after the Babylonian captivity. They began to baptize Gentile converts to Judiasm, and at that time, baptism symbolized they were leaving behind their old way of life, leaving behind their former nationality, and becoming one of God’s chosen people dedicated to following God’s law.

John started using baptism on everyone, not just Gentiles. With John, baptism wasn’t leaving behind your nationality with another people, but leaving behind your old way of life in regards to sin. It was a “baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.” Everyone who came to John was making a commitment to leave sin behind, to recommit himself to God and living a life worthy of repentance. Here’s how John described it himself:

Luk 3:8 “Therefore bear fruits worthy of repentance…”

…So the people asked him, saying, “What shall we do then?”

He answered and said to them, “He who has two tunics, let him give to him who has none; and he who has food, let him do likewise.”

Then tax collectors also came to be baptized, and said to him, “Teacher, what shall we do?”

And he said to them, “Collect no more than what is appointed for you.”

Likewise the soldiers asked him, saying, “And what shall we do?”

So he said to them, “Do not intimidate anyone or accuse falsely, and be content with your wages.”

-Luke 3:8-14

Start doing good stuff! Change your life! Etc… It makes it obvious that being baptized was simply an outward display of their decision to start living right -to put their old way of life behind them just as the Gentiles had done when they became Jews and were baptized into the nation.

And then an interesting verse:

Then Jerusalem, all Judea, and all the region around the Jordan went out to him and were baptized by him in the Jordan, confessing their sins. -Matthew 3:5-6 (New King James Version)

The word “confessing” means to acknowledge or agree fully. To do this, they didn’t have to specifically name every sin, but merely had to acknowledge their sin. They had to agree they were indeed sinful people. Same as we do today by the way.

When do we do that? In the Sinner’s Prayer?

Yes, exactly. We often tell people to pray, “Lord, I know I haven’t followed you like I should…” or some version of that.

And that prayer is nowhere to be found in the Bible. Not one single time does anyone in the Bible ever pray the Sinner’s prayer. Today, if we forgot the Sinner’s Prayer, people would question whether or not we were saved! Those guys and gals in the Bible never said it, however. Were they saved? Hmmmmm….

The crazy fact is, what we do today in Churches all across America, isn’t really what they did in the Bible. Doesn’t that give you a bit of a pause? It should. So it’s not surprising that a couple of the more “modern” versions of the Bible have added a few things and flipped this verse around.

Confessing their sins, they were baptized by him in the Jordan River. -Matthew 3:6 (New International Version) Flips the sentence around. Here they confess their sins, then they get baptized. After all, Romans 10:9 says with our mouth we confess and are saved… so flipping the sentence in this way takes the emphasis off of baptism.

And when they confessed their sins, he baptized them in the Jordan River. -Matthew 3:6 (The popular New Living Translation) Flips the sentence, and adds the words “and when” to emphasize baptism came only after they confessed.

There at the Jordan River those who came to confess their sins were baptized into a changed life. -Matthew 3:6 (The Message Bible) Now they didn’t even come to be baptized, but showed up to confess their sins!

But the literal translation simply goes like this:

and they were baptized of him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins. -Matthew 3:6 (American Standard Version 1908, considered the most accurate of all)

Here’s the deal:

Baptism itself IS confessing/acknowledging/recognizing you are a sinner. Baptism means that you are a sinner, and you are putting your old life behind you. It’s the whole point of baptism in the first place.

It’s no wonder in the early church, people didn’t mess around with prayers and coming forward at a church gathering to make the “good confession” etc… They believed and got baptized.

Act 2:41, Act 8:12, Acts 22:15-16, etc… etc… etc…

Believe literally meant (and still does) to put your faith in something, and baptism was (and is) admitting your sin, leaving it behind, and surrending your life to Christ. It was and is confession of sins. It was and is repentance unto life. It was and is a command of Christ.

Saying the sinner’s prayer is not wrong in my opinion, nor is confessing your belief in front of the church, but we’ve placed so much emphasis on these two things, that we’ve stripped baptism of its full meaning and made this whole salvation thing a little more complicated than it used to be.

Are you willing to put your faith and trust in Jesus Christ? Then be baptized in His name, and remember, if you get baptized it means you’re leaving your old life behind and starting a new one with God?

Got it? Okay go for it.

Sounds pretty straightforward when put that way doesn’t it?