In the book of Revelation, I discussed a translation issue in Revelation 5:9 that stems from theological concerns and an attempt to change how the twenty-four elders seated on the throne in heaven are understood. The NASB, ESV, and even the NIV are among the modern translations that alter the text from its original form. This change is intended to detach the direct connection between the twenty-four elders and those whom God has redeemed by removing or modifying the word “us.” In the KJV and NKJV, Revelation 5:9 reads: “And they sang a new song, saying: ‘You are worthy to take the scroll, and to open its seals; For You were slain, and have redeemed us to God by Your blood out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation.’” The pronoun directly connects what is said to the twenty-four elders. The ESV and similar translations read: “And they sang a new song, saying, ‘Worthy are you to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were slain, and by your blood you ransomed people for God from every tribe and language and people and nation.’” The issue is the pronoun “us.” Though small, this change may have a catastrophic impact on how the context is understood.
The basis for this change is found in the translations themselves. The justification for removing the pronoun “us” comes from the chosen Greek text supporting the translations. However, the addition of the word “people” rests solely on the translators’ opinion. In the Nestle-Aland and UBS Greek text, also known as the Critical text, the Greek pronoun us (ἡμᾶς) was removed. When we examine the evidence for its inclusion, we find a problem with this decision, and the authors of the UBS and Nestle-Aland violate their own hermeneutical rules by doing so.
Let’s take a look at the original text to understand this change. There are three primary Greek text families: Alexandrian, Byzantine, and Western. These three families make it impossible to introduce a change in secret into the original text, because there is no way to influence all three families to make the same modification. This is important because when examining the evidence for a reading in Scripture, all the evidence must be considered. That is the general rule for both the Nestle-Aland and UBS versions of the Greek text. In addition to the manuscripts, the context and Greek grammar must also be considered. Given the substantial evidence we possess today regarding the original writings of the New Testament, proper hermeneutical principles can determine the original reading with extreme accuracy. This may seem a bit boring, but it shows we have a solid basis for determining the original reading of any passage of Scripture.
Since we can identify a specific reading of Scripture from the original text, the question arises: why did the authors of the Critics Text omit text from Revelation 5:9? We may surmise that their decision to omit it was based on textual evidence, in accordance with their own hermeneutical standards. However, when we examine the evidence they provide for the reading, we find that the only manuscript to omit the pronoun was a single Alexandrian text. This means the evidence for including the pronoun is overwhelming, not just plausible. The only reason to modify a reading with this much evidence is for theological purposes, not for textual evidence.
Removing the pronoun also causes another issue, which the English versions that follow the omission address by adding a noun or pronoun not in the original. For example, the ESV reads, “and by your blood you ransomed people for God” to overcome this issue. When it comes to proper hermeneutics—the science behind translation and interpretation—context and grammar must also be considered. The textual evidence for “us” to be in the original reading is immense, but that alone does not determine whether it is included. The Greek grammar and context must also be taken into consideration. What the Critical texts have done by removing “us” is to create a grammatical issue. There is no longer an object for the verb in the sentence. The sentence is incomplete: “by your blood you ransomed to God.” Who did Christ ransom to God by His blood? The ESV, NASB, and other translations provide an object, implying there is an ellipsis in this sentence. In the original Greek, an ellipsis may be used when the missing word is directly implied by the context. This is common in inflectional languages, such as Russian or Spanish. One of the most ordinary words that is often left out is the verb “to be” because it is naturally supplied by the context. However, pronouns are not used for an ellipsis since, without them, the object cannot be directly implied. The ESV and other translations that follow this omission supply “people” based on the prepositional phrase “Out from every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation.” Prepositional phrases modify nouns and pronouns. Where is the noun or pronoun that this phrase is modifying? When “us” is left out, the object of the sentence is missing. “People” cannot be used as the ellipsis because it includes every tribe, tongue, people, and nation, not just people. And each of these terms has significance, so “people” cannot be used synonymously.
Therefore, based on the textual support, context, and grammar, Revelation 5:9 reads, “And they [the twenty-four elders] sang a new song, saying, ‘You are worthy to receive the scroll and to open its seals, because you were slain as a sacrifice and redeemed us [the twenty-four elders] to God by Your blood out from every tribe and tongue and people and nation.’” Thus, the twenty-four elders are redeemed. Since only humans are redeemed, the direct link to the elders and the Church performing its priestly service in heaven before the tribulation begins is directly stated in Revelation 5:9.
This does not mean we should reject translations that omit or modify the pronoun in this passage. Rather, we should know and understand our translations. Read the introduction and preface. Understand what denominations and theologies are behind the translation, along with what type of translation it is. With this knowledge, we may be able to identify the small changes imposed by the translators’ theological preferences rather than the original text and make the appropriate corrections. Many prefer reading the ESV, NASB, or NIV, especially over the KJV. Most people who hold to the KJV as the only proper translation do not themselves comprehend its language, for it is an archaic form that cannot be discerned from modern usage. When the translation is difficult to understand, cross-referencing it with other translations can help clarify matters. However, the best method is to have a good interlinear and to be part of a congregation where the pastor can help you grasp the meaning of the original language, for it is the basis for understanding.
