The love of money is THE root of all Evil or A root? 

The love of money is THE root of all Evil or A root? 

Does the Bible say that the love of money is “THE root” of all evil as is found in the KJV or does it say “A root” as per many modern versions such as the NIV ?

1 Timothy 6:10 For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows. KJV

1 Timothy 6:10 For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs. NIV

Before we answer this question, let’s just look at what the verse definitely DOES say. 

The first thing that we need to deal with is the common incorrect quotation of this verse which you may find online, usually followed by a question regarding why they ask for it at church (the answer to this question is actually irrelevant to this writing so I wont be dealing with it here) 

Money is the root of all evil. 

ALL main versions of the Bible read the LOVE of money, not simply money. This is because the originality of the Greek word φιλαργυρία philargyria is NOT disputed. φιλαργυρία philargyria means the love of money or avarice. The original reading in this verse CLEARLY demonstrates that it is indeed the LOVE of money that is in reference not simply money itself. This part of the verse is just not debated by textual critics because there is no textual variant at this point of the text that would bring its inclusion into doubt. Those that quote the verse without the wording “the love of money”, do so either because they have not checked the original wording of this verse or they are doing so deliberately to support whatever point it is that they are trying to demonstrate, which is nothing more than disingenuous and should be treated as such. 

So now let’s get back to whether the verse says “the root” or “a root”.

If you go online and use a search engine for an answer to this question you will probably find many websites giving an answer to this question. This is a very well known verse when it comes to textual criticism and there have been a great many people who have argued for one side or the other. this may end up being just another writing arguing for one side. 

I am going to focus on one specific person’s argument and use it to see if we can establish how the verse should read. The person in question is a very well known Christian apologist, author and Radio show host, James White. 

In his book, the King James Controversy, James White addresses the difference of translation in this verse. You can find this on pages 139 and 140. His address of this verse starts half way down page 139 and finishes half way down page 140. He basically dedicates one single page  (in length) to explain the difference in translation. I shall address the entirety of his “argument”. 

He starts by drawing the attention to what he claims is “another favourite passage of the KJV only adherents”

He then has the verse as it is found in the KJV, NASB and NIV laid out side by side. 

I’m not sure if James White deliberately uses language that makes it seem that it is the KJV adherents that push their position upon others and not also the other way around, but it most certainly should be pointed out that, this is not just a “favourite of the KJV only adherent”, but actually, it is a favourite of the non KJV only adherent also. It is a verse that non KJV adherents use to disprove the KJV only position, just as much as the KJV adherents use it to prove their position. 

He then points out that “two issues are readily seen by comparing these translations. First, is the love of money the root of evil, or a root of evil? Secondly, is it a root of all evil or of all kinds of evil?” 

So we have two issues to deal with when it comes to this verse. 

James White then states :

“Once again we encounter a situation in which something can be said for each translation. The word for “root” in the Greek does not have the article before it, hence the more literal translation in this case would be “a root” not the definitive “the root”. The text is not saying that the love of money is the only origin or source of evil, but that it is one of great importance.”

I guess we can at least applaud Mr White here for stating that there is a case to be made for both readings rather than just dismissing one. However, what Mr White does, despite his previous statement, is actually ONLY giving his reasons as to why “a root” is correct. He totally ignores, by failing to present, the argument as to whether the reading “the root” could be correct.

James White is though, 100% accurate in his statement here, the Greek word for root, ῥίζα rhiza, does not have the definitive article before it, this is a fact and is undeniable. 

However, this does not paint the full picture and I rather think Mr White knows this seeing he has already stated that a case could be made for both, but analysing the text further isn’t something that Mr White has done in his book nor is it in his interest to do so, seeing he is actually only trying to demonstrate why using “the” here would not be correct and why the use of “a” is.

However, analysing the text further is exactly what we are going to do here in this writing. Let’s look at another verse where we find the word ῥίζα rhiza. Mark 11:20. In this verse we have the plural form ῥιζῶν rhizōn (roots) being used. 

Mark 11:20 And in the morning, as they passed by, they saw the fig tree dried up from the roots. KJV

What is important to note here is that there is NO article before ῥιζῶν rhizōn, yet BOTH versions of the Bible that Mr White cited in 1 Timothy 6:10 include the article before roots in this verse and translate it as “the roots”. 

Mark 11:20 As they were passing by in the morning, they saw the fig tree withered from the roots up. NASb

Mark 11:20 In the morning, as they went along, they saw the fig tree withered from the roots. NIV 

So clearly we can see that the article is not always required to be present in the Greek for it to be included in the English translation. 

There is probably no better attestation to this fact than a verse from the very same book as our verse in question, 1 Timothy 3:16 

Here I shall post the three versions, the KJV, NASB and NIV. 

1 Timothy 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory. KJV 

1 Timothy 3:16 Beyond question, great is the mystery of godliness: He who was revealed in the flesh, Was vindicated in the Spirit, Seen by angels, Proclaimed among the nations, Believed on in the world, Taken up in glory. NASB 

1 Timothy 3:16 Beyond all question, the mystery from which true godliness springs is great: He appeared in the flesh, was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory. NIV

Notice in this verse, that preceding the words “flesh”, “spirit”,  “Gentiles” and “world” ALL three versions include the definitive article “the”. The KJV is not the only version to include it.
However, let us take a look a the Greek of this verse 

καὶ ὁμολογουμένως μέγα ἐστὶν τὸ τῆς εὐσεβείας μυστήριον· Θεὸς ἐφανερώθη ἐν σαρκί ἐδικαιώθη ἐν πνεύματι ὤφθη ἀγγέλοις ἐκηρύχθη ἐν ἔθνεσιν ἐπιστεύθη ἐν κόσμῳ ἀνελήφθη ἐν δόξῃ (Stephanus 1550) 

For the sake of honesty I will even give the same verse in the NA27/UBS4 Greek text lest someone accuse me of being dishonest by only giving the Greek text that supports my claim.

καὶ ὁμολογουμένως μέγα ἐστὶν τὸ τῆς εὐσεβείας μυστήριον· Ὃς ἐφανερώθη ἐν σαρκί, ἐδικαιώθη ἐν πνεύματι, ὤφθη ἀγγέλοις, ἐκηρύχθη ἐν ἔθνεσιν, ἐπιστεύθη ἐν κόσμῳ, ἀνελήμφθη ἐν δόξῃ. NA27/USB4

There simply is no article before any of the 4 words previously referred to. It is not just the KJV that includes the article where it doesn’t appear in the Greek. The NSAB and the NIV, the same two versions that Mr White cited in 1 Timothy 6:10 also INCLUDE the article before ALL four words, perfectly highlighting the fact that the English translation of the Greek does not require the article to be present in the Greek text for it to be included in the English translation, which formulated the reasoning behind the rejection of “the root” by James White in that verse. 

Remember this is from the SAME book written by the same Paul.

Interestingly, the NIV fails to include the definitive article earlier on, not just in the same book written by the same Paul, but actually in the exact same chapter, 1 Timothy 6,  where it DOES appear in the Greek. There is an article before “their masters”, “name” and “teaching”.  

1 Timothy 6:1 All who are under the yoke of slavery should consider their masters worthy of full respect, so that God’s name and our teaching may not be slandered. NIV 

Ὅσοι εἰσὶν ὑπὸ ζυγὸν δοῦλοι, τοὺς ἰδίους δεσπότας πάσης τιμῆς ἀξίους ἡγείσθωσαν, ἵνα μὴ τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἡ διδασκαλία βλασφημῆται. NA27/USB4

On 3 separate occasions in one verse the article is present in the Greek and yet the NIV does not translate any of these articles in the English. 

The NASB does translate ONE of these articles, before the word “name”, 

1 Timothy 6:1 All who are under the yoke as slaves are to regard their own masters as worthy of all honor so that the name of God and our doctrine will not be spoken against. NASB 

The KJV does likewise translating one of the articles, the one that precedes “name”.

1 Timothy 6:1 Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honour, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed. KJV 

It is very clear, and demonstrably so, that there are times that an article is not present in the Greek but is required in the English and vise versa. The same translations that James White cites in his argumentation attest to this fact. It is often the context that determines if the article is required in the English translation. 

Mr white further argues, 

“And is it all evil or all kinds of evil? Literally the Greek reads “of all the evils,” the terms being in the plural. The modern translations see this as referring to all kinds of evil, while the KJV takes all evil as a whole concept.”

It is important to note here that despite Mr Whites appeal to the literal Greek and how it reads, neither the NASB nor the NIV translate the plural evils as evils. Both render this in the singular “evil”. Mr white does not mention this.  In fact, there are very few modern Bibles that do render this in the plural as “evils”, the ESV and NET Bible being amongst the vast minority to do so. 

While using the plural evils, the Net Bible actually incorporates the definite article in the verse 

 1 Timothy 6:10 For the love of money is the root of all evils. Some people in reaching for it have strayed from the faith and stabbed themselves with many pains. Net Bible. 

Also worthy of note is that the word “sorts” in the NASB and “kinds” in the NIV are not present in the literal Greek. So neither translate the literal Greek text….. literally. 

It works just as well by flipping Mr Whites statement, putting emphasis on the KJV by saying,  the KJV takes all evils as a whole concept while the modern versions see this as referring to all kinds of evil. The statement itself has no bearing on the accuracy of the translation. The use of evil is all inclusive. The KJV translates the plural evils as the singular evil as it simply encompasses all the different types of evils as all being evil. 

Mr White does at least state that the translation in the KJV is a grammatical possibility even if he then adds that it seems to miss Paul’s point. 

“The KJV translation is a possibility grammatically speaking, but it seems to miss Paul’s point.” 

So again Mr White highlights that the KJV reading could be correct while totally ignoring actually giving an explanation of why it could be correct grammatically, rather, immediately pointing out why it isn’t correct. 

This is where Mr White then proceeds to give his reasons as to why he thinks that the KJV translation misses Paul’s point. 

“The love of money gives rise to all sorts of evil things, but there are, obviously, evils in the world that have nothing to do with the love of money. A minister friend of mine, pointed out with reference to this passage that it is difficult to see how rape, for example, can be blamed on “the love of money.” Such is surely a good question for a person who would insist upon the KJV rendering.” 

Dr White then adds one final sentence before he finishes his argumentation against the KJV rendering of 1 Timothy 6:10 saying that the modern versions are faithful to the text. 

“In any case, the modern translations are certainly faithful to the text of scripture and adequate in their translation of the passage.” 

And so concludes the entirety of Mr Whites writing in his book on this verse. 

What we have seen so far is that, while Mr White is correct in his statement regarding the absence of the definite article in this verse, it is far too simplistic and in fact, dishonest, to stop at this statement without further analysis and advocate “a” as the correct reading based on the absence of the article in the Greek. We have seen places where the definitive article does not appear in the Greek text but, modern versions DO, in fact, include one, and also places where modern versions exclude the definitive article despite it being present in the Greek text. When it comes to 1 Timothy 6:10, the modern versions add words that are not in the “literal Greek text” and most do NOT translate the plural evils in the plural. So actually it could be argued that they are quite the opposite than faithful to the text of scripture creating readings that simply do not align with the literal Greek text. 

So what about Mr Whites, assertion regarding the love of money not being the root of all evil. 

While I most certainly agree with Mr White that the love of money would not be the root of evils such as rape, or at least most certainly not in the majority of cases, we cannot rule it out as a possibility in a minority of cases, his own argument simply backfires on him here, and it is Mr Whites understanding of what the meaning of the verse refers to that is actually incorrect. 

Let’s look at the NASB translation of this verse again. 

1 Timothy 6:10 For the love of money is a root of all sorts of evil, and some by longing for it have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.

The NASB includes the word ALL. All is translated from the Greek πάντων pantōn  which is a plural form of the Greek πᾶς pas which literally means all, the whole of, every kind of. An inclusive, not exclusive word. 

Therefore, the NASB is saying that the love of money IS a root of ALL, EVERY kind of evil, it is fully inclusive of ALL evils, ALL here in the English is also not an exclusive word. There are not any evils being excluded from ALL evils. Now, it may not be saying that it is THE root of all evil like the KJV, but it most certainly does include ALL evils which would incorporate rape seeing rape is an evil. 

It would seem very hypocritical to assert that the KJV misses Paul’s point only to advocate the reading in versions of the Bible, that in Mr Whites understanding of the verse, state the very same thing as the KJV which Mr White claims misses Paul’s point. This is literally an example of a self-defeating argument even if he has not realised it to be such. 

Inadvertently, It would seem that the only disagreement Mr White would actually be championing, would be whether or not the verse should include the article “the root” as per the KJV or exclude the article and read “a root” as per the versions referenced by Mr White. 

We should at least acknowledge that this ISN’T just a KJV only issue. There are many versions of the Bible that include the article in this verse.

They include but are not limited to (pre KJV) 

The Wycliffe Bible (1395), Tyndale’s (1534) , The Coverdale Bible (1535), The Great Bible (1540), Matthew’s Bible (1549), The Bishop’s Bible (1568) and the Geneva Bible (1587). 

And as already demonstrated so does the NET Bible.

“A root” would obviously indicate that there are other roots besides the love of money, whereas “the root” would indicate it is the sole root. 

It is plainly obvious that the understanding that the love of money is the root of all evils in the world, rape, murder, adultery, lust etc or even “a root” of, is incorrect. The correct meaning of the verse simply CANNOT mean every single evil in the world. To understand this verse to be referring to every evil in the world is inaccurate and could very well be the main reason as to why Mr White cannot comprehend why the KJV translators decided to translate the verse with “the” instead of “a”.

To answer which reading is correct it is important to get an accurate understanding of what the verse is actually saying and to do that we must take a look at the CONTEXT of the verse not simply take the verse as a stand alone verse and insert our preconceived understanding into it. This verse CANNOT be read in isolation.  In order to obtain a true understanding of verse 10 it is vitally important that we understand exactly who Paul is referring to. 

Paul starts this chapter with a continuation of his teaching of chapter 5 where he had been giving Timothy instructions on how followers of Christ should act. 

In verses 1-2, Paul is giving instructions to Christians who would have servants (these servants are NOT slaves). That servants who serve non Christians should still honor them so that the name and doctrine of God be not blasphemed. Paul also gives instruction to those servants who serve Christians, that they should not despise them as they are brethren, and he instructs that these should be taught and insisted upon. 

1 Timothy 6: 1Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honour, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed. 2And they that have believing masters, let them not despise them, because they are brethren; but rather do them service, because they are faithful and beloved, partakers of the benefit. These things teach and exhort

Then, in verse 3 Paul specifically refers to those that are teaching otherwise, those that are not consenting to wholesome words and even the words of Jesus AND to the doctrine according to godliness.

1 Timothy 6: 3If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; 

Godliness is the Greek εὐσέβεια eusebeia which means piety towards God or devotion. 

This is a clear reference to those people that were teaching contrary to wholesome words, the words of Jesus and the doctrine according to godliness. Those teaching false doctrines that are contrary to the doctrine of godliness. THESE now, are the people that Paul is specifically alluding to. In the context of this verse it is obvious that Paul is not referring to all people but instead a specific set of people. 

Paul then says that HE is proud and knows nothing, referring to those preaching against wholesome words, the words of Jesus and the doctrine according to godliness as verse 3 has already indicated. 

1 timothy 6:4He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, 

From verse 5 Paul refers to those that see GAIN, the Greek word is  πορισμὸν porismon, (meaning a financial gain or a livelihood) as godliness. This verse shows us that Paul is specifically referring to those that see a financial gain as what constitutes as godliness, contrary to what the true doctrine of godliness is, as already established in the verses prior. Paul says these men have corrupt minds and that they are completely without truth.

Paul warns to stay away from such people, arguing that it is godliness with contentment (αὐτάρκεια autarkeia meaning a self sufficiency) that is the great gain. A Christians gain is not financial gain but rather a Christians godliness with contentment is their gain. 

1 timothy 6:5Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.6But godliness with contentment is great gain. 

In verse 7 we see that Paul is referring to worldly goods saying we came into the world with nothing and we take nothing out of it when we die. 

1 Timothy 6:7For we brought nothing into this world, and it is certain we can carry nothing out. 

Surely, in light of understanding the true purpose of Paul’s argument, a simple reference to the meaningless of material gain in this life once we have left it. 

Paul then refers to food and clothing and being satisfied with such. 

1 Timothy 6:8And having food and raiment let us be therewith content. 

It is evident that Paul is arguing against seeing financial gain as something that should be sought after as being godliness, literally the opposite of those who were preaching financial gain being godliness at the time of Paul’s writing. It is also an argument against the many prosperity preachers that can be seen preaching today who preach this very thing, that God will financially bless Christians who are godly.  

It is then, in the preceding verse to verse 10 that Paul refers to the rich who fall into temptation and into foolish and hurtful lusts, these which drown men in destruction.

 1 Timothy 6:9But they that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition

The clear context of Paul’s writing here is the context of those that are rich and seek out money for themselves for their godliness. By doing so they are preaching a false doctrine and will lead men away from the true faith and into destruction. Which is why Paul warns to stay away from them. It is for THESE people, the people seeking to show their godliness through financial gain and preaching the gain of finances, and those that would be seduced by the preaching and would strive after that financial gain over the true doctrine of God, it is for THESE people that the love of money is the root of all evil, being driven by their love of money and not their love of God. 

He is NOT referring to the love of money being the root of all evil that exists in the world or for every person, as Mr White would seem to have concluded. Rather Paul has a specific set of people in view who he is referring to. Those that are seeking a financial gain from their godliness.

Following his statement that the love of money is the root of all evil in verse 10, Paul uses the verb  ὀρέγω oregó which means to long for, hanker after, yearn after, and then refers to those that have been seduced away from the faith. The KJV translates oregó as coveted. 

The love of money is the root of all evil, while some have coveted, hankered after, yearned after and longed for (money) that they have fallen away from the true faith because they strive after money rather than God, which has led them into distress and their own destruction.

Paul later in the same chapter warns against those that be rich that they should not think too much of themselves and that they should not trust in those riches but rather in God. He instructs the rich to do good works and distribute. 

1 Timothy 6:17Charge them that are rich in this world, that they be not highminded, nor trust in uncertain riches, but in the living God, who giveth us richly all things to enjoy; 18That they do good, that they be rich in good works, ready to distribute, willing to communicate; 

In verse 19 Paul refers to the rich laying up for themselves a good foundation against the time to come. 

1 Timothy 6: 19 Laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on eternal life.

This is very similar to what Jesus had also taught regarding the storing up of wealth in this life: 

Matthew 6: 19Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal: 20But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal: 21For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.

The whole argument is about not seeing godliness as a means to become rich, to strive after money, to store it up for yourself but rather to be content with having God, to strive after God and to do good and that if a person does have financial wealth to use that blessing for good and to help others. It is important to note this is not a condemnation of money itself but to not long for money over the longing for God

Paul is not saying that all evil in the world stems from the love of money but rather it is the root of all evil for those that seek financial gain from godliness and that are seduced away from the faith itself while wanting to obtain financial gain.  His argument is that the love of money for these people is THE root of all the evil for these people. Their evil is dictated to by their love of money, which is why “the root” rather than “a root” is the accurate translation. 

The verse is not in any way saying that the root of all evil in the world such as rape, murder, adultery ect is money.

I think it is Mr White and not the KJV (translators) that has totally and completely missed Paul’s point.

If you liked this study please subscribe here

You can buy my books on Amazon there is a link here 

Join our Patreon membership here or you can buy me a coffee through paypal