Home	Our Hope
Bible Study		June 16, 2013
Bible Translations

Introduction

For 200 years there was only one common English translation of the Bible, the King James Version, and it fought off the few competing translations for another 200 years. Now there are more translations than anyone can count. In this lesson we will look at the most common of these translations, how they differ from each other, and why they exist.

Lesson

When a person chooses a new English Bible there are many factors to consider. Probably the most important is how true it is to the original text. This turns out to be a very difficult question to answer. Part of the problem is that translation is a difficult thing to do well and is definitely more of an art than a science. Another part of the problem is that theologians disagree on the meaning of some parts and the translator is left to decide.

Another part of the problem is that we all have our own understandings of what the Bible says and this is also true of translators. These understandings can affect the translation work of even an honest translator. But some of the translations have been done with openly stated intentions to spin the translations a particular way.

With trueness being so hard to measure, we instead consider translation philosophy and bias. Translation philosophy falls into three areas:

• Word-for-Word,
• Thought-for-Thought, and
• Paraphrase.

A Word-for-Word translation is done by taking each word in the original text and replacing it with the best word in English. Then some cleanup is done to fix differences in sentence structure. This kind of translation tends to be truer to the original text because the translator has less opportunity to insert his own beliefs. When a word has multiple meanings, the worst he can do is make a poor choice from one of the possible meanings of the word. Generally, the readability of a word-for-word translation is poorer because the translation tends to retain some of the characteristics of the original language.

In a Thought-for-Thought translation the translator tries to understand the thought the original author was trying to express and then he expresses the same thought in modern English. In most cases the only difference between this type of translation and the Word-for-Word translation is that the parts of sentences may be moved around more. But there is, however, a greater opportunity for the translator to inject his own beliefs. Because he must try to understand the original thought, he must employ his own understanding. Even so he is limited in how much he can do to bias the translation. This kind of translation is more readable than Word-for-Word.

In a Paraphrase translation the translator tries to understand entire paragraphs or even larger sections and express the ideas in modern English. One result of this process is that the verse numbering can be lost. Moving around such large sections of text can make it impossible to keep the verse numbering. There also tends to be a lot of added text that helps make the point clearer. The translation becomes highly subjective, however, and there is a very great danger that the translator will insert his own beliefs, knowingly or unknowingly. But this kind of translation is also the hiding place of translators who intend to bias the translation. The ability to restructure the text so much gives them no restriction on what they can add. When Paraphrase translations are done well, these can be immensely readable translations.

There are many kinds of biases and this will be covered more later but one that is very common now is that idea of creeping modernism - inclusivity. The Bible was written in a male centered culture and many of the concepts are explained in male or traditional relationships such as father - son, man - wife, etc. This presents a problem for modernists who want to see the world in egalitarian, and gender neutral ways. Their solution has been to write their own Bibles and sometimes throw out a lot of text they find offensive. A small amount of inclusivity may be acceptable, for example using "he or she" where the original text only said "he" but obviously intended it to be applied to both men and women. But some translations go so far as to eliminate the gender of God the Father and God the Son and thereby destroy important meaning.

The following table shows the most common translations on a scale where the most strictly Word-for-Word translations are on the left.

²

Inclusive

* minimal and mostly only the addition of 'she' to go with 'he'

** heavy including elimination of the gender of God

Other translations not included above

New World Translation - Jehovah's Witness, interlinear known as the Kingdom Interlinear Translation

Inspired Version or "Joseph Smith Translation" (JST) - Mormon

Expositor's Bible - KJV with inline commentary by Jimmy Swaggart. Commentary is very biased to Jimmy Swaggart's the "Message of the Cross" doctrine. Due to the inline commentary, be careful of quotes that sound like KJV but are not from the Bible.

Good As New: A Radical Retelling of the Scriptures - very Liberal, includes the Gospel of Thomas, omits several epistles and the book of Revelation, and completely removes homophobic and misogynist references in the remainder

What's the Difference

The first question has to be how different are these translations and are those differences important. In the next two examples we'll see verses and how they are translated in some of these Bible translations

Proverbs 18:24

"Comments: The KJV follows the Septuagint (Greek OT) rather than the Hebrew text. The meaning of the Hebrew text [is] conveyed by the NASB, ESV, NIV, and more or less the NLT. The 'Message' is completely out in left field. I see no legitimate connection between the concept communicated by the Hebrew text and the text of the 'Message'."³

Romans 8:35-37

"Comments: I was flabbergasted at the audacity of The Message. This is nothing less than adding to God's Word support for one's theological position. Paul would never have said such a thing: (1) the worst sin listed in Scripture is unpardonable and, therefore, would without remedy separate one from Christ; (2) There is not one single passage of Scripture that supports the contention that no sin is capable of separating a believer from Christ. This is Eugene Peterson writing his own scripture; it is not God's Word."

Review

So far we've looked at the reasons why there are so many translations:

• Even well-intentioned translators disagree
• Producing a more readable translation
• Targeting reading level
• Pushing a modernist agenda
• Supporting extraordinary theological views

We've also looked at the translation approaches that are used and how personal beliefs and agendas get into translations.

We've also seen comparisons of translations from word-for-word to paraphrase.

We also talked about the Aramaic language and how it came to be the main language in Israel in Jesus time.

We also talked about the Tetragrammaton "YHWH" and how the Masoretes changed it to Adonai (Lord). One more note on that is how that makes for silly sentences. This one comes from Isaiah 42:8.

⁸ I am the Lord, that is My name; I will not give My glory to another, nor My praise to graven images.

The problem is that "Lord" is a title, not a name.

Part 2

Missing Verses

Some translations of the New Testament are missing verses that are in other translations. In most cases this isn't malicious. The English New Testament is translated from Greek, but many different Greek manuscripts for the New Testament have been found. Some of these have verses that other manuscripts don't have.

The problem for the translator is this. Were the extra verses added after the original writing or were the missing verses removed? Some translators have decided one way, some the other way. They base their decisions on the agreement between manuscripts and on the believed age of manuscripts.

One of these missing verses comes from Matthew 17:21 which the NIV sometimes leaves as only the verse number (no text) or renders the verse in square brackets.

[[j]But this kind does not go out except by prayer and fasting."]

The footnote referenced says "Early mss do not contain this v." So NIV, and others, are not trying to do something sneaky. They just believe the verse was not written by the original author.

Translators Gone Wild

Even in word-for-word or thought-for-thought translations, translators sometimes head off into the weeds. The NASB is supposed to be a word-for-word translation, so you wouldn't expect them to invent an entire sentence. Here is Mark 7:18-19

And He said to them, "Are you so lacking in understanding also? Do you not understand that whatever goes into the man from outside cannot defile him, ¹⁹ because it does not go into his heart, but into his stomach, and is eliminated?" (Thus He declared all foods clean.)

The problem here is that the Greek does not say that part in parenthesis. This is what the English from the Greek interlinear does say.

… but not it enters of him into the heart but into the belly and into the draught [latrine] goes out purifying all the food

Roughly half the translations on BibleHub have this or a similar statement that Jesus contradicted Jewish law here by declaring that all foods were clean. That is not what Jesus was saying.

How do we fight against reliable publishers with bad translations? Make use of sites like BibleHub.com that list the same verse from a large number of translations, so you can compare them.

Interlinear

The interlinear translation is the most Word-for-Word translation. It shows the original text with the translated text word by word. Sometimes the two languages are on separate lines with one below the other; sometimes they are mixed on the same line as they are in the example below

Below is an interlinear of Aramaic text, a sister language to Hebrew. Like Hebrew it is written from right to left. In this interlinear you need to read the English from right to left. So it begins with "when she heard".

Verse 28 really highlights the difference in Aramaic word order. Being an interlinear the word order is left this way but a Word-for-Word translation would do some cleanup on word order. The result would be something like "for she had said 'even if I [only] touch his garment, I shall live.'" Note how it is improved by adding the word ('only') that is implicit in the original. And there is the danger. Once you start cleaning up the text it is sometimes hard to know when to stop.

Why so Many Translations

Why don't we just have one standard Bible that everyone uses? There are many reasons. The most obvious is that it is now easily possible to make your own translation. The first wave of new translations appears just after the arrival of word-processing systems and photocopiers. The second wave appears after the arrival of personal computers and the internet.

Some reasons for creating new translations have been good, for example children's versions. Also, translation is difficult and even translators don't always agree among themselves. So sometimes a translation has been created where a person honestly felt there was a systemic error in an earlier translation.

But in many cases the reason has been to intentionally introduce a bias into the text. In other cases the reason has been to achieve credibility or glorify an ego.

Limits of Translation

Some things are always lost in translation. Two of them are rhyme and meter. You probably didn't know that many parts of the prophetic books are written as poems. That's because there is no way to retain rhyme or meter in a translation. Also, if the author is using the rhythm of the words for emphasis, that is lost. For example we sometimes use a series of short staccato words to indicate seriousness, for example "Get in the car now". Short words don't always translate into short words.

Connotations and Double Meanings are also lost. A word that has two meanings in one language may not have the same two meanings in another language. an example of this comes from a phrase that Jesus spoke in John 3:8 that really confuses Nicodemus. Most Bibles render it something like this.

⁸ The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit.

But the next translation renders it completely differently because the sentence can be read two ways because some of the words have a second, spiritual, meaning.

⁸ The Spirit breathes where he will, and you hear his voice, but you do not know from where he comes and where he goes; thus is everyone who is born from the Spirit.

Translators notes: Our Lord used three words with double meanings: Rukha (Spirit or Wind), Nshaba (Breathe or Blow) and Qala (Voice or Sound). The verse could be translated, "The wind blows where it will and you hear its sound …"

Alliteration is the literary technique of beginning a series of words with the same letter of the alphabet, for example "Dan's dog dove deep in the dam". These don't retain the alliteration when translated. Acrostics have the same problem.

Idioms are groups of words that have a meaning that can't be understood literally, for example "He bought the farm" which is about dying, not farming, or "rubbed him the wrong way." These don't translate.

KJV Only

There are some people who think the only Bible people should use is the King James Version. They claim many things about it, some of which are debatable and others are just false.

It's important to understand that the KJV has been revised many times since it was first translated in 1611. Without these changes it would be even more difficult to read. Many of the words it used are completely gone from the English language now. That's even true of many of the words in the modern revision. The spelling of many words has changed. Even the alphabet has lost characters. The 1611 written version contains the character thorn.⁴

Many people like the Gothic sounding KJV and think that makes it sound more formal and official. But when it was written that was how people spoke. That was the language of the common English man.

The KJV also isn't without biases, though they are small. King James, the sponsor of the translation, set some interpretive goals for its translators.⁵ It also suffers from having been translated from a smaller set of original manuscripts than are available now and from more recent manuscripts.

For a person who grew up with KJV and now knows all the words, it's OK to keep using it. New believers, I think, should start with a modern translation. But those using KJV should consider what will happen when non-Christians ask you a question and you want to show them what the Bible says. Will you have to decode the sentences in the KJV first before you can explain what they mean? The words you've come to know like hath, sayest, compassed, and hungred are going to be like a foreign language to them.

How to choose a Bible

We've seen all the things that go into making a translation and now have a better idea of what we want in a Bible. Some people will want a word-for-word translation so they can get as close as possible to the original text. Others will want an easier to read translation, perhaps a paraphrase. We've discussed how paraphrases can be dangerous but that doesn't mean they are all bad.

The major translations like NKJV, NIV, NASB, and others are reliable, and honestly, not that different from each other.

There are many other variations of the major translations. They often also publish:

• Children's Bibles
• Teen Bibles
• Red Letter Bibles (where all of Jesus' words are written in red
• Study Bibles (which add additional information like pictures, maps, historical accounts, commentaries, concordances, etc.)
• Large Print Bibles

The first step in choosing a Bible should be praying for God's guidance. The next step should be looking through the Bible names in the chart above to get a list of ones you would like to try. With that in hand you can go to a site like BibleGateway.com or to a Bible bookstore and read some from each. If you are looking for a special Bible, like a teen version of the NIV, you may need to search a little bit.

How to read the Bible

Begin reading your Bible by praying that God will reveal it to you. Few people understand that the Bible is a closed book to those who approach it the wrong way. We should approach the Bible humbly, as a student seeking to learn. Someone who approaches it arrogantly, as though he already knows everything or to find support for his own ideas, will find nothing. Perhaps worse than nothing would be finding something foolish and thinking it was wise.

Summary

There isn't a best translation of the Bible, though there might be a "best for you" translation. But only you can decide that. But the truth is that that there might be a best translation for you now and later on a different best translation. In fact people should work from more than one translation, with the translations being of different types. That way if they have trouble understanding a passage they can go to the other translation. This usually works best if they normally read from a translation that tends toward Word-for-Word and check a more Thought-for-Thought translation when they need to.

Just as there isn't a best translation of the Bible there isn't a worst, but many are competing for the title. When considering a new Bible translation be sure to do some research on it.

References

http://www.tateville.com/translations.html

http://www.compassdistributors.ca/topics/compare.htm

http://carm.org/how-should-choose-bible-version

¹ Google Translate

² http://notjustanotherbook.com/biblecomparison.htm

³ http://www.apbrown2.net/web/TranslationComparisonChart.htm

⁴ http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org

⁵ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_James_Version