Note: The personal opinion contained in this post is intended
neither to represent nor to undermine the position of any organization of which
I am or have been a part; neither is my purpose to create controversy with
those of differing opinions. Rather, I desire to provide interested parties
with relevant information to aid in objective analysis and potential
decision-making.
The KJV translators recorded in their preface: "How
shall men meditate on that which they cannot understand?" These men hit
upon a central teaching found in I Corinthians 14:1-19. As Paul addresses the
speaking of tongues (known languages) in this passage, his emphasis is on
understanding. "Edification and
exhortation and consolation" (v. 3) cannot happen without
understanding. Only those who understand the language can profit from it (v.
4). Without interpretation, so that the listeners know the essence of the
communication, there is no edification (v. 5). Edification is again emphasized
in vs. 12 and 17, with the prerequisite being that listeners "know what you are saying" (v.
16).
Languages constantly change in both structure and
vocabulary. For many years the King James Version was updated in order to
remain current with changing speech. When Blayney produced a best-to-that-point
edition in 1769, known errors had basically been corrected and language had
been updated repeatedly; however, the practice of revision essentially stopped
there. Since then, successive generations of KJV readers have found the wording
to be increasingly antiquated.
A survey in the late 1900s found that 90% of Americans had a
Bible. Respondents owning a Bible were asked if they read it. Those who
answered negatively were asked why they didn't, and 40% said it was because
they didn't understand it. Obviously, there are other factors involved, such as
the natural man not understanding the things of God, but there is also a
language barrier that is part of the process when people are reading a Bible
with dated language and style.
I have personally seen the following examples of difficulty modern
readers have with the KJV text. People don't know what to do with "thee"
and "thou"; schoolchildren finding the words in assignments
substitute wrong pronouns. Children memorizing verses substitute words for what
are non-words to them. People are confused by "-est" verb endings and
irregular verb forms like "dost," "hast," and
"wilt." Long-time Christians admit to not reading the Bible at home
because they don't understand it. Some people adapt by using old dictionaries
for clarification. The spiritual insights of some teachers are primarily
limited to their learning the meaning of archaic English words. Even preachers base
messages on modern meanings of outdated words, sometimes changing the flavor of
the passage. Preaching requires extra time to explain words that are no longer
current.
Many KJV words are unknown to modern readers:
"wrought," "draught," "shamefacedness,"
"dissimulation," "mammon," and "lucre." The
meanings of some words have changed: "charity,"
"conversation," "temperance," "let," and
"prevent." Some words have changed so much that we don't want to have
to explain to our children why they shouldn't say them: "ass,"
"gay," or "piss." While many people have grown up with
these KJV words and have been taught their meanings over time, there are still
many cases in which long-term churched people read over such words without
understanding. The challenges to anyone new to the KJV are incredibly greater,
and each new generation is further removed from ready understanding.
In addition to the reality of changing language, the discovery
of new manuscripts also legitimizes new translations. Thousands of additional
manuscripts have been discovered since 1611. Three important discoveries
involve ancient Bible texts, each of which includes the New Testament and at
least large portions of the Old Testament: the Alexandrinus codex, dated the
fifth century AD; the Vaticanus codex, dated the fourth century AD; and the Sinaiticus
codex, dated the fourth century AD. Additionally, the Dead Sea Scrolls,
discovered in the 1940s, provide hundreds of manuscripts dating back to the
third century BC. While there is little variation in these newly discovered
ancient texts, in some cases they have provided clarification, improved
accuracy, or presented alternate readings.
Changing to a modern translation is not always easy for
various reasons. People feel comfortable with the style of what they have grown
up with. They cherish the familiarity of memorized verses. They are facilitating
institutional conformity. There can be time, cost, and inconvenience involved
in choosing and buying a new Bible and then in transferring notes. Many Bible
study resources are designed around the KJV.
For these reasons and more, some people prefer to continue
with the KJV. They want to stick with the language and style that is familiar
to them, whereas they may find the difference of modern language to be
distracting. A modern version may seem common and ordinary, rather than
reverent or holy in its language. Many people consider a change unnecessary,
having grown up with the KJV and having years of experience and teaching to
help them understand it. For some the deciding factor is simply sticking with
what they know to be good among all the questionable options. Sometimes
fear-based teaching or false information have made the KJV seem like the only
viable translation.
The KJV translators stated, "We affirm and avow that
the very meanest [most common] translation of the Bible in English set forth by
men of our profession containeth the Word of God - nay, is the Word of
God." This is true for any translation sincerely done, which definitely
includes the non-modern KJV. If the KJV were the only English translation
available, we would still have a good and usable translation, but much depth of
Scripture remains unexplored while effort is expended in sifting through the
surface. Many people have profited greatly from changing to a modern
translation.
Those who choose to continue with the KJV should be left in
peace. Those who choose an accurate modern translation should also be left in
peace. Compassion and realism must be exercised in allowing an accessible and
understandable Bible for the un-churched and for younger generations, lest they
reject the Bible as obsolete.
God wants His Word to be understood. Rather than literary or
high Greek, the New Testament was given in common Greek. The Bible should be
accessible to individuals, not church-dependent as the Catholic church has
historically promoted.
(Some of this material was gleaned from teaching by Dr. Mark
Minnick. For additional resources, visit www.mountcalvarybaptist.org, choose
the Resources tab, then Translations.)
Saturday, January 25, 2020
Saturday, January 18, 2020
Bible Translation Part 3: Journey to the KJV
The history of English Bible translation is long and
somewhat rocky. England was one of the last European countries to have any
printed Scripture. Most steps faced opposition, but the work of successive translators
benefited those who followed them. Gradually, improvements were made in both
accuracy and readability.
Although portions of the Bible were translated into English as early as the 600s, the first complete English translation was not produced until the 1380s. John Wycliffe did the bulk of the work, and his translation was actually completed by others after his death. The Catholic church banned his Bible, and laws made it illegal to own or read an English Bible. Because it was hand-written, this Bible was not readily affordable.
The first printed English New Testament was translated by William Tyndale in 1526. Because of a law against translating the Bible into English, Tyndale was severely persecuted and fled to Germany, where he continued his translation work. Even in Germany, he had to print his New Testament secretly; it was then smuggled into England. He continued to face opposition, but also translated much of the Old Testament before being burned at the stake.
In 1535, Miles Coverdale was the first to produce a complete printed English Bible. Not knowing Hebrew or Greek, he relied heavily on Tyndale's work, as well as translating from German, Latin, and Swiss Bibles. Coverdale faced opposition as well, but by dedicating his Bible to the king, he got away with printing an unauthorized Bible.
In 1537, John Rogers published a printed English Bible under the pseudonym Thomas Matthew. He used manuscripts given to him by Tyndale for much of the Old Testament and revised Coverdale's work for the remainder. This Bible was able to be distributed more freely because it was licensed by the king.
The Great Bible, produced in 1539, was a revision of the Matthews (Rogers) Bible commissioned to Coverdale. Designed for public use, this large Bible was chained in churches, and all churches were ordered to purchase one. Illiterate people paid to have it read to them or to be taught to read.
When Bloody Mary became queen and favored Catholicism, reading the Bible was again banned. Many Protestants fled England, and a group of exiled scholars in Switzerland published the Geneva Bible in 1560. It was the first English Bible to be translated entirely from the original languages. It was well-loved and popular due to its portable size, affordability, and many features that aided readability and enhanced understanding.
The Bishop's Bible in 1568 was published as an official version to compete with the unauthorized Geneva Bible. This Bible, designed to please the monarchy and the established church, was neither exemplary nor well-received.
The King James Version was translated between 1607 and 1611. It was called the Authorized Version because the king commissioned it; he wanted a version amenable to him without the marginal notes that he found offensive in other existing versions. It was a new translation, utilizing the best manuscripts available at that time (younger, majority), as well as relying on previous English and several foreign translations. The translators' instructions were to follow the Bishop's Bible as much as possible, or any of the preceding English Bibles if they matched the text better.
The group of scholars who did the translation had careful rules and many checks to improve accuracy. Having learned from errors in earlier translations, they were able to correct previous mistakes. The KJV also excelled in elegance of language, catching the rhythm of Elizabethan English.
The marginal notes were not to provide commentary, but merely to clarify the text. Realizing that their knowledge was incomplete, especially for words appearing only once in the manuscripts, the translators used notes to indicate possible alternative readings. Other marginal notes provided literal readings or acknowledged variations among manuscripts.
In the preface the translators acknowledged, "Notwithstanding that some imperfections and blemishes may be noted in the setting forth of it." Just as the scribes of the Old Testament and the copyists of the New Testament were imperfect, so were the translators and printers. The translators welcomed corrections that would make their Bible more accurate and readable.
In fact, due to the size of the initial printing in 1611, two simultaneous editions were produced to accommodate the order, and the two had differences between them. In the first three years, there were seventeen editions, with sometimes hundreds of corrections made in each edition. There was a constant effort to correct translation and printing errors, while hopefully not introducing new errors. Some shocking printing errors occurred, such as the Wicked Bible's "Thou shalt commit adultery" in 1631 and the Unrighteous Bible's "The unrighteous shall inherit the kingdom of God" in 1653. By 1800, there had been approximately 1,000 editions of the KJV, introducing tens of thousands of minor variations in an effort to enhance accuracy by correcting known problems.
The KJV translators also stated that there was "no reason therefore why the Word translated should be denied to be the Word or forbidden to be current." In addition to correcting translation and printing errors, they also engaged in periodic revisions to update wording as the English language changed. Numerous language changes were made, including one in 1755 by John Wesley; he made 12,000 translation changes in order to update the text into current speech. Eventually the process of updating the language stopped. The KJV Bible currently used by most people is based on Benjamin Blayney's 1769 edition, with few changes being made since then.
The KJV faced opposition from the Catholic church, which still did not want an English Bible, as well as from conservatives, because most of the very conservative men were left off the translation committees. The Geneva Bible was previously popular with the common people, but with the KJV's authorized status, high quality, and ready availability, it became the Bible of choice, was widely received for hundreds of years, and has stood the test of time.
(Much of this information is taken from "A Pictorial History of Our English Bible" by David Beale.)
Although portions of the Bible were translated into English as early as the 600s, the first complete English translation was not produced until the 1380s. John Wycliffe did the bulk of the work, and his translation was actually completed by others after his death. The Catholic church banned his Bible, and laws made it illegal to own or read an English Bible. Because it was hand-written, this Bible was not readily affordable.
The first printed English New Testament was translated by William Tyndale in 1526. Because of a law against translating the Bible into English, Tyndale was severely persecuted and fled to Germany, where he continued his translation work. Even in Germany, he had to print his New Testament secretly; it was then smuggled into England. He continued to face opposition, but also translated much of the Old Testament before being burned at the stake.
In 1535, Miles Coverdale was the first to produce a complete printed English Bible. Not knowing Hebrew or Greek, he relied heavily on Tyndale's work, as well as translating from German, Latin, and Swiss Bibles. Coverdale faced opposition as well, but by dedicating his Bible to the king, he got away with printing an unauthorized Bible.
In 1537, John Rogers published a printed English Bible under the pseudonym Thomas Matthew. He used manuscripts given to him by Tyndale for much of the Old Testament and revised Coverdale's work for the remainder. This Bible was able to be distributed more freely because it was licensed by the king.
The Great Bible, produced in 1539, was a revision of the Matthews (Rogers) Bible commissioned to Coverdale. Designed for public use, this large Bible was chained in churches, and all churches were ordered to purchase one. Illiterate people paid to have it read to them or to be taught to read.
When Bloody Mary became queen and favored Catholicism, reading the Bible was again banned. Many Protestants fled England, and a group of exiled scholars in Switzerland published the Geneva Bible in 1560. It was the first English Bible to be translated entirely from the original languages. It was well-loved and popular due to its portable size, affordability, and many features that aided readability and enhanced understanding.
The Bishop's Bible in 1568 was published as an official version to compete with the unauthorized Geneva Bible. This Bible, designed to please the monarchy and the established church, was neither exemplary nor well-received.
The King James Version was translated between 1607 and 1611. It was called the Authorized Version because the king commissioned it; he wanted a version amenable to him without the marginal notes that he found offensive in other existing versions. It was a new translation, utilizing the best manuscripts available at that time (younger, majority), as well as relying on previous English and several foreign translations. The translators' instructions were to follow the Bishop's Bible as much as possible, or any of the preceding English Bibles if they matched the text better.
The group of scholars who did the translation had careful rules and many checks to improve accuracy. Having learned from errors in earlier translations, they were able to correct previous mistakes. The KJV also excelled in elegance of language, catching the rhythm of Elizabethan English.
The marginal notes were not to provide commentary, but merely to clarify the text. Realizing that their knowledge was incomplete, especially for words appearing only once in the manuscripts, the translators used notes to indicate possible alternative readings. Other marginal notes provided literal readings or acknowledged variations among manuscripts.
In the preface the translators acknowledged, "Notwithstanding that some imperfections and blemishes may be noted in the setting forth of it." Just as the scribes of the Old Testament and the copyists of the New Testament were imperfect, so were the translators and printers. The translators welcomed corrections that would make their Bible more accurate and readable.
In fact, due to the size of the initial printing in 1611, two simultaneous editions were produced to accommodate the order, and the two had differences between them. In the first three years, there were seventeen editions, with sometimes hundreds of corrections made in each edition. There was a constant effort to correct translation and printing errors, while hopefully not introducing new errors. Some shocking printing errors occurred, such as the Wicked Bible's "Thou shalt commit adultery" in 1631 and the Unrighteous Bible's "The unrighteous shall inherit the kingdom of God" in 1653. By 1800, there had been approximately 1,000 editions of the KJV, introducing tens of thousands of minor variations in an effort to enhance accuracy by correcting known problems.
The KJV translators also stated that there was "no reason therefore why the Word translated should be denied to be the Word or forbidden to be current." In addition to correcting translation and printing errors, they also engaged in periodic revisions to update wording as the English language changed. Numerous language changes were made, including one in 1755 by John Wesley; he made 12,000 translation changes in order to update the text into current speech. Eventually the process of updating the language stopped. The KJV Bible currently used by most people is based on Benjamin Blayney's 1769 edition, with few changes being made since then.
The KJV faced opposition from the Catholic church, which still did not want an English Bible, as well as from conservatives, because most of the very conservative men were left off the translation committees. The Geneva Bible was previously popular with the common people, but with the KJV's authorized status, high quality, and ready availability, it became the Bible of choice, was widely received for hundreds of years, and has stood the test of time.
(Much of this information is taken from "A Pictorial History of Our English Bible" by David Beale.)
Saturday, January 11, 2020
Bible Translation Part 2: Manuscripts and Variants
A controversial point regarding Bible translations is
textual sources. The original manuscripts, or autographs, were inspired by God,
but none of those originals remain in existence. The autographs were copied,
and copies were made of copies for centuries. Most of those
"in-between" copies have also passed from existence, with no traceable
unbroken chain back to the originals.
For both the Old and New Testaments, there are relatively small numbers of ancient copies and more plentiful numbers of newer copies. The OT majority texts are from AD 500-1000, with the oldest complete Hebrew OT dated 1010. Almost no ancient manuscripts were available until the 1940s-1950s, when the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, containing hundreds of manuscripts and portions of every OT book except Esther. The Dead Sea Scrolls range from three centuries BC to one century AD. A complete scroll of Isaiah, dated two centuries BC, is 1000 years older than the previous oldest copy.
Most of the Greek majority texts come from the 11th-14th centuries, (although a few texts as old as 350 are included in the majority group), and there can be over 500 per century. The minority Greek texts have closer to fifty copies per century, but the oldest are a copy of John only 35 years after the original and a collection of Paul's letters from AD 100. Some translators promote the older texts as being closer to the original, while others prefer the newer texts due to more plentiful material.
The Old Testament scribes were meticulous in copying Scripture. They had to have a uniform number of lines per page. They could not write from memory but had to say the words aloud as they wrote. Finished manuscripts were checked, and if more than three errors were found on a page, that copy was rejected. The scribes counted every word and letter, and some counted the middle word and letter of a book.
The New Testament copyists weren't as strict, but the volume of evidence is enormous. There are over 5,000 Greek manuscripts of the NT, 15,000-30,000 Latin versions, over 1,000 ancient versions in other languages, and many quotations of the NT in writings of early Christians.
For both OT and NT, the huge amount of material that has been compared provides overwhelming evidence that we have God's message accurately preserved. The Dead Sea Scrolls are very close to the younger manuscripts. For example, the Isaiah scroll was 95% identical to manuscripts 1000 years younger, with almost all differences being spelling changes and obvious slips of the pen. NT manuscripts dated less than a century after the apostles wrote have incredible agreement with later copies.
The Greek NT manuscripts that have been compiled agree at an estimated 95% or higher. The most liberal estimate (Wade) is 7% differences, and conservatives place the number at 1-2%. A conservative pastor compared Wade's differences to versions translated from opposite textual sources and found that only about 40% of Wade's variants even show up in translation; when they do, there is usually no difference in how the passage is preached. As affecting translation, older and younger manuscripts are 98-99% identical. When Westcott and Hort released their Greek NT in 1881, utilizing newly discovered older manuscripts, they admitted that nearly thirty years of work had resulted in substantial variations that were "less than 1/1000th of the text." No teaching is missing or in doubt; anything that might be in question in the 1-2% is taught elsewhere in the Bible.
Using different sources results in different wording in some cases, particularly between older and newer texts. The differences that exist between manuscripts are called variants. This is a point of contention, with allegations that some manuscripts are corrupted. Thousands of manuscripts have been classified, and centuries of study have identified and codified textual variants. No two manuscripts are exactly alike, but the vast similarity of the manuscripts assures the accuracy of the Word of God.
Textual criticism is the practice of comparing manuscripts to identify the variants. Most variants are easily recognizable and explainable. Some involve obviously transposed letters or other obvious copying errors. These mistakes are rare, and the agreement of the vast majority of texts confirms the correct reading. There can be changed word order ("Jesus Christ" instead of "Christ Jesus") or added words in later copies ("Jesus" to "Lord Jesus" to "Lord Jesus Christ" to "our Lord Jesus Christ"). Though not identical in wording, there is no significant difference.
Other variants that are a bit trickier have also been analyzed and compiled. Either the context of the passage or the weight of evidence usually clarifies the correct reading. There are very few variants that cannot be explained or definitively nailed down, and none of them affect any doctrinal truth or practical teaching. When there are variants, most scholars document them in the footnotes or marginal notes so that all possible readings are provided.
Translation differences have sometimes been used as causes for alarm, particularly when it seems that a translation is leaving out words of the Bible. The differences in translation are not arbitrary or sinister; they are merely reflections of the manuscripts being used. Because no two manuscripts agree even within the same manuscript family, all translators have to make decisions about variants.
Differences between translations work both ways. One translation will have "missing" words in some verses when compared to a second translation; however, the second translation will have "missing" words in other verses when compared to the first. It all depends on the decision made based on textual evidence. The NASB, for example, does not deny the blood of Christ because it uses the word "blood" only 97 times compared to the KJV's 101 times. Both versions teach the Messiah-ship of Jesus, even though the KJV has "Jesus Christ" or "Christ Jesus" 254 times compared to the NASB's 228.
Even through the passing of centuries and the multiple times the manuscripts were copied, there is incredible consistency between them, confirming that God has preserved the accuracy and authority of the Bible over the spectrum of time. Rather than being in opposition, the older and newer manuscripts support each other in affirming God's truth.
(Much of this material was gleaned from teaching by Dr. Mark Minnick. For additional resources, visit www.mountcalvarybaptist.org, choose the Resources tab, then Translations.)
For both the Old and New Testaments, there are relatively small numbers of ancient copies and more plentiful numbers of newer copies. The OT majority texts are from AD 500-1000, with the oldest complete Hebrew OT dated 1010. Almost no ancient manuscripts were available until the 1940s-1950s, when the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, containing hundreds of manuscripts and portions of every OT book except Esther. The Dead Sea Scrolls range from three centuries BC to one century AD. A complete scroll of Isaiah, dated two centuries BC, is 1000 years older than the previous oldest copy.
Most of the Greek majority texts come from the 11th-14th centuries, (although a few texts as old as 350 are included in the majority group), and there can be over 500 per century. The minority Greek texts have closer to fifty copies per century, but the oldest are a copy of John only 35 years after the original and a collection of Paul's letters from AD 100. Some translators promote the older texts as being closer to the original, while others prefer the newer texts due to more plentiful material.
The Old Testament scribes were meticulous in copying Scripture. They had to have a uniform number of lines per page. They could not write from memory but had to say the words aloud as they wrote. Finished manuscripts were checked, and if more than three errors were found on a page, that copy was rejected. The scribes counted every word and letter, and some counted the middle word and letter of a book.
The New Testament copyists weren't as strict, but the volume of evidence is enormous. There are over 5,000 Greek manuscripts of the NT, 15,000-30,000 Latin versions, over 1,000 ancient versions in other languages, and many quotations of the NT in writings of early Christians.
For both OT and NT, the huge amount of material that has been compared provides overwhelming evidence that we have God's message accurately preserved. The Dead Sea Scrolls are very close to the younger manuscripts. For example, the Isaiah scroll was 95% identical to manuscripts 1000 years younger, with almost all differences being spelling changes and obvious slips of the pen. NT manuscripts dated less than a century after the apostles wrote have incredible agreement with later copies.
The Greek NT manuscripts that have been compiled agree at an estimated 95% or higher. The most liberal estimate (Wade) is 7% differences, and conservatives place the number at 1-2%. A conservative pastor compared Wade's differences to versions translated from opposite textual sources and found that only about 40% of Wade's variants even show up in translation; when they do, there is usually no difference in how the passage is preached. As affecting translation, older and younger manuscripts are 98-99% identical. When Westcott and Hort released their Greek NT in 1881, utilizing newly discovered older manuscripts, they admitted that nearly thirty years of work had resulted in substantial variations that were "less than 1/1000th of the text." No teaching is missing or in doubt; anything that might be in question in the 1-2% is taught elsewhere in the Bible.
Using different sources results in different wording in some cases, particularly between older and newer texts. The differences that exist between manuscripts are called variants. This is a point of contention, with allegations that some manuscripts are corrupted. Thousands of manuscripts have been classified, and centuries of study have identified and codified textual variants. No two manuscripts are exactly alike, but the vast similarity of the manuscripts assures the accuracy of the Word of God.
Textual criticism is the practice of comparing manuscripts to identify the variants. Most variants are easily recognizable and explainable. Some involve obviously transposed letters or other obvious copying errors. These mistakes are rare, and the agreement of the vast majority of texts confirms the correct reading. There can be changed word order ("Jesus Christ" instead of "Christ Jesus") or added words in later copies ("Jesus" to "Lord Jesus" to "Lord Jesus Christ" to "our Lord Jesus Christ"). Though not identical in wording, there is no significant difference.
Other variants that are a bit trickier have also been analyzed and compiled. Either the context of the passage or the weight of evidence usually clarifies the correct reading. There are very few variants that cannot be explained or definitively nailed down, and none of them affect any doctrinal truth or practical teaching. When there are variants, most scholars document them in the footnotes or marginal notes so that all possible readings are provided.
Translation differences have sometimes been used as causes for alarm, particularly when it seems that a translation is leaving out words of the Bible. The differences in translation are not arbitrary or sinister; they are merely reflections of the manuscripts being used. Because no two manuscripts agree even within the same manuscript family, all translators have to make decisions about variants.
Differences between translations work both ways. One translation will have "missing" words in some verses when compared to a second translation; however, the second translation will have "missing" words in other verses when compared to the first. It all depends on the decision made based on textual evidence. The NASB, for example, does not deny the blood of Christ because it uses the word "blood" only 97 times compared to the KJV's 101 times. Both versions teach the Messiah-ship of Jesus, even though the KJV has "Jesus Christ" or "Christ Jesus" 254 times compared to the NASB's 228.
Even through the passing of centuries and the multiple times the manuscripts were copied, there is incredible consistency between them, confirming that God has preserved the accuracy and authority of the Bible over the spectrum of time. Rather than being in opposition, the older and newer manuscripts support each other in affirming God's truth.
(Much of this material was gleaned from teaching by Dr. Mark Minnick. For additional resources, visit www.mountcalvarybaptist.org, choose the Resources tab, then Translations.)
Saturday, January 4, 2020
Bible Translation Part 1: Reason for Caution
Some people consider all versions of the Bible alike, while
others have strict opinions about a particular version. Due to the wide variety
of Bibles available and the varying philosophies behind them, there is a need
for caution and evaluation.
Ridiculous versions. Some versions of the Bible are for entertainment rather than legitimate attempts to provide God's truth. While serious Christians are unlikely to be confused into buying one of these Bibles, they do add to the frustration of feeling like there are too many options, most of them not good.
For example, the Bible has been translated into Klingon and other author-invented languages that people don't even speak. There is the "Bible Emoji: Scripture 4 Millenials (sic)," which is composed mostly of emoticons. There is the "Lolcats Bible," stemming from a website of cartoons with cats speaking baby talk; it uses colloquial online verbiage and abbreviations and refers to God as Ceiling Cat. There is the "Stinque Zombie Bible," which permeates the text with references to zombies .
Versions with agendas. People or groups have made Bible versions with particular objectives in mind that cause them to manipulate the Scriptures rather than earnestly trying to accurately convey God's Word.
A common objective is simplifying the Bible; this lowers the Bible to match man's preferences and includes more story-telling than doctrinal teaching. "The Word on the Street," which gets the Bible down to 500 pages, reads like a stand-up routine. "First off, nothing. No light, no time, no substance, no matter. Second off, God starts it all up and WHAP! Stuff everywhere!" The "Cotton Patch Version" is a paraphrase that changes the setting from Bible lands to the deep South of the USA, freely renaming books, characters, and locations of the Bible, and using simplified, colloquial Southern speech.
The "Silent Voices Bible" reverses gender, changing all men to women and all women to men, including presenting God as feminine. It wants people to be in touch with their feelings and identify prejudice by gauging their response toward characters when they are presented with the opposite gender. Attempts to appeal to certain groups of people cheapen the Word of God; the "Hippie Version" and the "Hip Hop Version" are examples that undermine both the universality and the seriousness of the Bible.
Paraphrases. A paraphrase captures the essence of God's Word but lacks the precision of a translation. A paraphrase may be done from an existing translation rather than original-language manuscripts. Paraphrases allow for creativity in the author's wording, which could tend either toward verbose or simple; they also allow for the author's interpretation, either of specific passages or overall themes of the Bible. Because they are not actual translations, their authority and dependability are diminished. Examples include Eugene Peterson's "The Message," Kenneth Taylor's "The Living Bible," the "Contemporary English Version," and "Good News for Modern Man."
Specialized variations. Some Bible versions are merely adjustments of other existing versions. They add to the number of choices without necessarily presenting different content. A prophecy Bible could highlight prophetic passages and fulfillments. The words of God might be colored in the Old Testament. Old Testament references to Christ could be highlighted. A version could use transliterated names of God, corresponding to the Hebrew, rather than translating the names into common English words.
Translations based on approach. The above considerations still leave out numerous modern English translations. Various people or groups have prepared translations in efforts to improve accuracy or readability. Often specific characteristics make existing translations not quite ideal, and people try to create one that specifically matches their preferences.
Translation philosophy.
Traditionally, translations have used literal equivalency. This philosophy attempts to come as close as possible to a word-for-word translation, rendering words, word order, and structure as much like the original languages as is practical and understandable. The emphasis is on accuracy, and the desire is to communicate just what the original communicated, with no more and no less.
With the growth of global translation, especially into tribal languages, translators have discovered languages that don't have certain aspects of language (such as passive voice), that lack vocabulary words (like "snow" or "love"), or that have cultural stigmas that negatively color the Bible (like a negative view of sheep). To accommodate these challenges, translators have utilized dynamic equivalence, which focuses on concepts and ideas more than literal translation. It tries to give people the same overall picture, although expressing the passage in a different way.
This philosophy has carried over to some English versions, with an application being interpretation rather than translation. Where the meaning of a verse might be open to different interpretations, dynamic equivalence makes a judgment call, allowing the risk of a wrong interpretation. Sometimes simpler words are also substituted for theological terms, such as "propitiation" or "sanctification." Examples are the "Easy-to-Read Version," "Good News Bible/Today's English Version," and the "New Living Translation" (The Book).
Level of conservatism.
The background of the translators can vary. Some groups are comprised of conservatives who affirm their belief in Bible doctrines ("New American Standard Bible"), while others are comprised mostly of liberals who may not even believe in inspiration or miracles ("Revised Standard Version"). The "New World Translation" was done by Jehovah's Witnesses.
Size of group.
Translations done by individuals (Phillips, Moffat) rely on the expertise of one person and lack checks and balances, while translations done by committees have numerous experts who can support, verify, or correct each other's work.
Breadth of committee.
Some translations have been done by specific denominations, which can color the wording or even doctrinal positions. Many modern translations are done by committees with a wide variety of backgrounds and denominations; this can prevent a single group from unduly influencing the process.
Manuscript sources.
For both the Old and New Testaments, there are smaller groups of older manuscripts and larger groups of newer manuscripts. Translators must choose which group to use, whether to use both, and how much weight to give to each group.
(Some of this material was gleaned from teaching by Dr. Mark Minnick. For additional resources, visit www.mountcalvarybaptist.org, choose the Resources tab, then Translations.)
Ridiculous versions. Some versions of the Bible are for entertainment rather than legitimate attempts to provide God's truth. While serious Christians are unlikely to be confused into buying one of these Bibles, they do add to the frustration of feeling like there are too many options, most of them not good.
For example, the Bible has been translated into Klingon and other author-invented languages that people don't even speak. There is the "Bible Emoji: Scripture 4 Millenials (sic)," which is composed mostly of emoticons. There is the "Lolcats Bible," stemming from a website of cartoons with cats speaking baby talk; it uses colloquial online verbiage and abbreviations and refers to God as Ceiling Cat. There is the "Stinque Zombie Bible," which permeates the text with references to zombies .
Versions with agendas. People or groups have made Bible versions with particular objectives in mind that cause them to manipulate the Scriptures rather than earnestly trying to accurately convey God's Word.
A common objective is simplifying the Bible; this lowers the Bible to match man's preferences and includes more story-telling than doctrinal teaching. "The Word on the Street," which gets the Bible down to 500 pages, reads like a stand-up routine. "First off, nothing. No light, no time, no substance, no matter. Second off, God starts it all up and WHAP! Stuff everywhere!" The "Cotton Patch Version" is a paraphrase that changes the setting from Bible lands to the deep South of the USA, freely renaming books, characters, and locations of the Bible, and using simplified, colloquial Southern speech.
The "Silent Voices Bible" reverses gender, changing all men to women and all women to men, including presenting God as feminine. It wants people to be in touch with their feelings and identify prejudice by gauging their response toward characters when they are presented with the opposite gender. Attempts to appeal to certain groups of people cheapen the Word of God; the "Hippie Version" and the "Hip Hop Version" are examples that undermine both the universality and the seriousness of the Bible.
Paraphrases. A paraphrase captures the essence of God's Word but lacks the precision of a translation. A paraphrase may be done from an existing translation rather than original-language manuscripts. Paraphrases allow for creativity in the author's wording, which could tend either toward verbose or simple; they also allow for the author's interpretation, either of specific passages or overall themes of the Bible. Because they are not actual translations, their authority and dependability are diminished. Examples include Eugene Peterson's "The Message," Kenneth Taylor's "The Living Bible," the "Contemporary English Version," and "Good News for Modern Man."
Specialized variations. Some Bible versions are merely adjustments of other existing versions. They add to the number of choices without necessarily presenting different content. A prophecy Bible could highlight prophetic passages and fulfillments. The words of God might be colored in the Old Testament. Old Testament references to Christ could be highlighted. A version could use transliterated names of God, corresponding to the Hebrew, rather than translating the names into common English words.
Translations based on approach. The above considerations still leave out numerous modern English translations. Various people or groups have prepared translations in efforts to improve accuracy or readability. Often specific characteristics make existing translations not quite ideal, and people try to create one that specifically matches their preferences.
Translation philosophy.
Traditionally, translations have used literal equivalency. This philosophy attempts to come as close as possible to a word-for-word translation, rendering words, word order, and structure as much like the original languages as is practical and understandable. The emphasis is on accuracy, and the desire is to communicate just what the original communicated, with no more and no less.
With the growth of global translation, especially into tribal languages, translators have discovered languages that don't have certain aspects of language (such as passive voice), that lack vocabulary words (like "snow" or "love"), or that have cultural stigmas that negatively color the Bible (like a negative view of sheep). To accommodate these challenges, translators have utilized dynamic equivalence, which focuses on concepts and ideas more than literal translation. It tries to give people the same overall picture, although expressing the passage in a different way.
This philosophy has carried over to some English versions, with an application being interpretation rather than translation. Where the meaning of a verse might be open to different interpretations, dynamic equivalence makes a judgment call, allowing the risk of a wrong interpretation. Sometimes simpler words are also substituted for theological terms, such as "propitiation" or "sanctification." Examples are the "Easy-to-Read Version," "Good News Bible/Today's English Version," and the "New Living Translation" (The Book).
Level of conservatism.
The background of the translators can vary. Some groups are comprised of conservatives who affirm their belief in Bible doctrines ("New American Standard Bible"), while others are comprised mostly of liberals who may not even believe in inspiration or miracles ("Revised Standard Version"). The "New World Translation" was done by Jehovah's Witnesses.
Size of group.
Translations done by individuals (Phillips, Moffat) rely on the expertise of one person and lack checks and balances, while translations done by committees have numerous experts who can support, verify, or correct each other's work.
Breadth of committee.
Some translations have been done by specific denominations, which can color the wording or even doctrinal positions. Many modern translations are done by committees with a wide variety of backgrounds and denominations; this can prevent a single group from unduly influencing the process.
Manuscript sources.
For both the Old and New Testaments, there are smaller groups of older manuscripts and larger groups of newer manuscripts. Translators must choose which group to use, whether to use both, and how much weight to give to each group.
(Some of this material was gleaned from teaching by Dr. Mark Minnick. For additional resources, visit www.mountcalvarybaptist.org, choose the Resources tab, then Translations.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)