If you walk into a bookstore looking for a Bible, chances are you won’t find
just one. You’ll likely find at least two or three ‘different’ bibles, possibly even more, and it’s common to find
more than one translation or version.
Walk into a religious bookstore,
you’ll likely to find more than just a few bibles. Religious bookstores typically have as many as 10 or more translations
or versions.
If you search far and wide
(including the Internet, etc), you might find as many as 100 or more versions.
Original languages of the Bible
Generally, the books of the
bible were three different languages. Old Testament books were written primarily in Hebrew (with some Aramaic).
Later, the Old Testament was translated into Greek, and referred to as the Septuagint.
Books of the New Testament
were written primarily in Greek, with a small amount of Aramaic.
It wasn’t until the 1400’s
that the Bible was translated into English.
Given this background of the Bible, a few questions
may arise.
Two Questions
Question 1 -
Why isn’t there just one version (English translation)?
This is a very good and simple question. The answer
is anything but simple. Consider the following points:
1) There are differences in the text used. In the case of the New Testament, three different
texts are frequently used. The Received Text, the Critical Text, and the Majority Text. Differences in these texts
can lead to different translations.
2) The approach to translation can lead to differences in Bible texts. Three common translation approaches
are: Word-for-word (literal), Thought-for-thought (dynamic equivalence), and Paraphrase. Note: The word “translation”
is used frequently throughout this article when referring to different Bibles. However, the author makes no claim
that thought-for-thought or paraphrase “Bibles” are true translations.
3) More than one word might be accurate in a word-for-word translation.
4) Ease of understanding (for the reader) can affect translation, making some translations easier to read
and understand).
5) Bias of the translators (or bias of writers in the case of paraphrases)
Question 2 -
Does it matter which translation I use?
If you consider why there are different translations (as outlined
above), it should be obvious that the translation used matters. For example, it seems doubtful that a truth seeker
would want a translators bias (perhaps better stated “writer’s bias” in the case of a paraphrase) to influence
his or her understanding of God’s Word.
Translation Notes
Consider the following translation notes from
chosen Bibles.(Words italicized by author). These statements give insight into the approach to translation
used by the “translators”.
From Today’s English Version (TEV):
- “seeks to express the meaning of the Greek text...”
From The Amplified Bible:
- “The following four-fold aim expresses the original purpose of this translation:
1) It should be true to the original languages.
2) It should be grammatically correct.
3) It should be understandable to the masses.
4) It should
give the Lord Jesus Christ His proper place which the Word gives Him.”
From the Contemporary English Version (CEV):
The translators of the CEV have not created new or novel interpretations of the text. Rather, it was their
goal to express mainstream interpretations of the text in current, everyday English.
From the New International Version (NIV):
- The first concern of the translators has been
the accuracy of the translation and its fidelity to the thought of the biblical writers.
- At the same
time they have striven for more than a word-for-word translation.
From the
New American Standard Bible (NASB):
- When it
was felt that the word-for-word literalness was unacceptable to the modern reader, a change was made in the direction
of a more current English idiom. In the instances where this has been done, the more literal rendering has been
indicated in the notes.
From the
New King James Version (NKJV):
- Complete
equivalence in translation
- The NKJV
follows the historic precedent of the Authorized Version in maintaining a literal approach to translation, except
where the idiom of the original language cannot be translated directly into our tongue.
From the
King James Version (KJV) translation notes:
- ...that,
out of the Original sacred Tongues, together with comparing of the labours, both in our own and other foreign
languages, of many worthy men who went before us, there should be one more exact translation of the Holy
Scriptures into the English Tongue;
- And now
at last, by the mercy of God, and the continuance of our labours, it being brought unto such a conclusion, as that
we have great hopes that the Church of England shall reap good fruit thereby,
Note the variety
in approach to translation as stated in the translation notes. Some translators felt that simply seeking to express
the meaning of the Greek text was sufficient, while others felt that complete equivalence in translation was needed.
In one case, translators felt fidelity to the thought of the biblical writers was the proper way to approach the
translation task, while in another translation, the translators generally felt a word-for-word translation was
the proper approach. What approach does the reader feel is proper? Does one wish to know, as closely as possible,
the words written (as directed by the Holy Spirit) by the author? Or would you rather read a translator’s interpretation
of that which was revealed by the Holy Spirit?
Greek
New Testament Texts
When participating in bible studies,
someone will occasionally refer to the “original Greek”. Usually “original Greek” really means Greek Text.
The process that “created” the Greek texts in use today went something like the following. Paul, Luke, or James
etc. wrote a letter (probably only one original). The letters were read and copied (by hand) to facilitate circulation
and teaching. These copies are referred to as manuscripts. With time and use, more manuscripts were needed and
were made (hand copied from other manuscripts or perhaps the original).
Not all manuscripts (in many
cases manuscript fragments) that remain today agree 100%. This is due to copying error, damage to earlier
manuscripts, and, possibly, deliberate error (doctrinal error occurred in the earliest days - Acts 20:29 “savage
wolves”).
Greek texts are commonly used today to study the
bible in Greek and are also used to translate the bible from Greek to English (or other language). These texts
are not the “original” letters (none are known to exist) or manuscripts, but are a made by comparing existing Greek
manuscripts and manuscript fragments (which number in the thousands) and combining them into a Greek text. Basic
differences between the manuscripts (and fragments) have led to several “different” Greek texts. These Greek texts,
while different, agree over 85% of the time.
Three of the most prominent Greek texts in use
today are the Texus Receptus (TR) or “Received Text”, the Critical Text (CR) or Alexandrian Text, and the
Majority Text (M). A few notes regarding these Greek Texts are outlined below.
Critical Text - Based on Alexandrian
Text
- Used for most translations in the last 100 +
years (RV, ASV, RSV, NRSV, NASB, NIV)
- Made
primarily from 2 very early manuscripts - Co. Vaticanus & Co. Sinaiticus, two of the earliest known manuscripts
- These two manuscripts
disagree with each other many places, and Sinaiticus has many omissions when compared with Vaticanus.
Textus Receptus
(Also referred to as Received, Traditional, or
Byzantine Text)
- Used to translate KJV and NKJV
- Relatively
few manuscripts supporting the Textus Receptus were known at the time of the KJV translation, but many more TR
manuscripts were discovered later.
Majority Text
- This text basically represents a consensus of
the majority of existing Greek manuscripts
- There is relatively good agreement
between manuscripts in this group
- Many of the Majority Text manuscripts
are later (newer, not-as-old) manuscripts
- The Majority
Text is very similar to the TR, and attempts to correct some readings that have little support.
Some Popular Translations of Today
Below are some popular Bible translations that
exist today. Comments on the various translations are based on research, verse comparisons, use during Bible studies
and, of course, the author’s opinion.
- King James Version (KJV)
- Probably
number 2 in sales (2001)
- First
published in 1611
- Not
the first translation into English
- Proceeded
by:
Wyclif
~ 1384 (translated from Latin to English)
Tyndale
~ 1525
Coverdale
~ 1535
Matthews
~ 1537
The Great
Bible ~ 1539
Taverner’s
Bible ~ 1539
The Geneva
Bible ~ 1560
The Bishop’s
Bible ~ 1568
- Has been revised several times, the last in 1769
-Translators used the Received Text
Negatives:
- Many consider it harder to read and understand than more recent translations
- Some incorrect translations, for example: “Easter” in Acts 12:4, and “God forbid” in Romans and other books.
Positives:
- Generally regarded as an accurate translation.
- Has withstood considerable scrutiny and the test of time
- Beautifully and elegantly translated in many places (Psalm
23)
New International Version (NIV)
- Number
1 in sales (2001)
- Web site survey (obviously unscientific) poled visitors to vote for
the most accurate bible translation. Results:
1) NIV (by a wide margin)
2) and
3) NASB and KJV (don’t remember the order)
4) NKJV
- First published ~ 1973
- Translators used the Critical Text
- Touted as the best balance between accuracy and readability.
Negatives:
- Biased
against “works” as having any part in the christian’s salvation
- Another word (usually
‘deeds’) appears every place the word “works” normally occurs in the book of James.
The word “works” carries a certain urgency and responsibility with it, whereas the
word “deeds” tends to imply convenience and casualness.
-
Uses the phrase “sinful nature” in place of “flesh” over 20 places, primarily in Romans and Galatians. The phrase “sinful nature” does not appear in any of the other common
translations (such as KJV, NKJV, NASB, or NRSV).
Use of this phrase is extremely dangerous and disrespectful to God. “Sinful nature” implies that God created man with a desire to sin. If created with a desire to sin, why should God hold our sinful desires
or “sinful nature” against us? God created man in His image (Gen 1:26, Rom 1:20-28).
Is God’s image a sinful one?
- Contains
careless translation errors
Positives:
- Easy to read and understand. Perhaps this leads more people to read their bibles, and read them more often. It is much better to read the NIV translation of the bible than to
not read the bible at all!
- Reasonable translation in most places.
New American Standard Bible (NASB)
- Relatively recent translation ~ 1963
- Translators
intended this Bible to be a very accurate word-for-word translation
- Translators used the Critical Text
Negatives:
- Slightly harder to read and understand than recent thought-for-thought
and paraphrase versions
Positives:
- Accurate
New King James Version (NKJV)
- Relatively recent translation ~ 1980
- Intended to be an update of the KJV into current English
- Translators used the Received Text
Negatives:
- Slightly harder to read and understand than recent thought-for-thought
and paraphrase versions
Positives:
- Accurate
- Reads like the highly regarded KJV in many places
- Very thorough textual notes (may not be in all versions)
Verse Comparisons of Selected Translations
Below
is a comparison of five verses from selected Bible Translations. Not
all Bible Translations are included. Those included represent the
translations owned by the author. The verses chosen were selected
to demonstrate traits common to the various translations.
11 Translations of 1 Samuel 15:33
(KJV) And Samuel said, As thy sword hath made women childless, so shall thy mother be childless among
women. And Samuel hewed Agag in pieces before the LORD in Gilgal.
(NKJV) But
Samuel said, "As your sword has made women childless, so shall your mother be childless among women."
And Samuel hacked Agag in pieces before the LORD in Gilgal.
(ASV) And
Samuel said, As thy sword hath made women childless, so shall thy mother be childless among women. And Samuel
hewed Agag in pieces before Jehovah in Gilgal.
(NASB) But
Samuel said, "As your sword has made women childless, so shall your mother be childless among women."
And Samuel hewed Agag to pieces before the LORD at Gilgal.
(RSV) And
Samuel said, As your sword has made women childless, so shall your mother be childless among women. And Samuel
hewed Agag in pieces before the LORD in Gilgal.
(NRSV) But
Samuel said, "As your sword has made women childless, so your mother shall be childless among women."
And Samuel hewed Agag in pieces before the LORD in Gilgal.
(CEV) But
Samuel said, "Agag you have snatched children from their mothers’ arms and killed them. Now your mother will be without children." Then Samuel chopped
Agag to pieces at the place of worship in Gilgal.
(TLB) But
Samuel said, "As your sword has killed the sons of many mothers, now your mother shall be childless."
And Samuel chopped him in pieces before the LORD at Gilgal.
(NLT) But
Samuel said, "As your sword has killed the sons of many mothers, now your mother will be childless."
And Samuel cut Agag to pieces before the LORD at Gilgal.
(Amplified) Samuel
said, As your sword has made women childless, so shall your mother be childless among women. And Samuel hewed
Agag in pieces before the LORD in Gilgal.
(NIV) But
Samuel said, "As your sword has made women childless, so will your mother be childless among women."
And Samuel put Agag to death before the LORD at Gilgal.
Everyone except the NIV translators agreed that Agag was chopped, hewed, cut, or hacked into pieces.
12 Translations of John 16:31
(KJV) Jesus
answered them, Do ye now believe?
(NKJV) Jesus
answered them, "Do you now believe?
(ASV) Jesus
answered them, Do ye now believe?
(NASB) Jesus
answered them, "Do you now believe?
(RSV) Jesus
answered them, "Do you now believe?
(NRSV) Jesus
answered them, "Do you now believe?
(TEV or Good News) Jesus
answered them, "Do you now believe?
(CEV) Jesus
replied: "Do you
really believe me?
(TLB) “Do
you finally believe this?” Jesus
asked.
(NLT) Jesus
asked, "Do you finally believe?
(Amplified) Jesus
answered them, "Do you now believe- do you believe it at last?
(NIV) "You
believe at last!" Jesus answered.
Instead of translating Jesus’ question, the NIV translators chose to
have Him answer it.
12 Translations of 1Cor. 11:16
(KJV) But if any man seem to be contentious,
we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.
(NKJV) But if anyone seems to be contentious,
we have no such custom, nor do the churches of God.
(ASV) But if any man seemeth to be contentious,
we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.
(NRSV) But if anyone is disposed to be contentious--we
have no such custom, nor do the churches of God.
(RSV) If anyone is disposed to be contentious,
we recognize no other practice, nor do the churches of God.
(NASB) But if one is inclined to be contentious,
we have no other practice, nor have the churches of God.
(NIV) If anyone wants to be contentious
about this, we have no other practice--nor do the churches of God.
(TEV or Good News) But if anyone wants to
argue about it, all I have to say is that neither we nor the churches of God have any other custom in worship.
(NLT) But if anyone wants to argue about
this, all I can say is that we have no other custom than this, and all the churches of God feel the same way about
it.
(CEV) This is how things are done in all
of God’s churches, and that’s why none of you should argue about what I have said.
(TLB) But if anyone wants to argue about
this, all I can say is that we never teach anything else than this--that a woman should wear a covering when prophesying
or praying publicly in the church, and all the churches feel the same way about it.
(Amplified) Now if anyone is disposed to
be argumentative and contentious about this, we hold to and recognize no other custom [in worship] than this, nor
do the churches of God generally.
In this passage, the first four translations (KJV, NKJV, ASV, and NRSV) seem
to differ with the remaining eight translations with respect to the connection between “contentious” and “custom”
(or “practice”). Many Bible students disagree on the meaning of this passage. In this verse example, we can see
how a thought-for-thought translation or paraphrase might shed light on a passage that can be difficult to translate
word-for-word.
12 Translations of James 2:14
(KJV) What doth it profit, my brethren, though
a man say he hath faith, and have not works? Can faith save him?
(NKJV) What
does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him?
(ASV) What
doth it profit, my brethren, if a man say he hath faith, but have not works? Can that faith save him?
(NASB) What
use is it, my brethren, if a man says he has faith, but he has no works? Can that faith save him?
(RSV) What
does it profit, my brethren, if a man says he hath faith, but has not works? Can his faith save him?
(NRSV) What
good is it, my brothers and sisters, if you say you have faith but do not have works? Can faith save you?
(NIV) What
good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save him?
(NLT) Dear brothers and sisters, what's the use of saying you have faith if you don't prove it by your actions?
That kind of faith can't save anyone.
(CEV) My friends,
what good is it to say you have faith, when you don’t do anything to show that you really do have faith? Can that kind of faith save you?
(TLB) Dear
brothers, what's the use of saying that you have faith and are Christians if you aren't proving it by helping others?
Will that kind of faith save anyone?
(TEV - Good News) My
brothers! What good
is it for someone to say, “I have faith,” if his actions do not prove it? Can that faith save him?
(Amplified) What
is the use (profit), my brethren, for any one to profess to have faith if he has no [good] works [to show for it]? Can [such] faith save [his soul]?
This verse example shows the bias against
works that exists within many of today’s “translators”. Rather than use the word “work” or “works”, they resort to other, gentler, words or phrases.
12
Translations of 1 Peter 4:11
(KJV) If any
man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God;
(NKJV) If
anyone speaks, let him speak as the oracles of God.
(ASV) If any
man speaketh, speaking as it were oracles of God;
(NASB) Whoever
speaks, is to do so as one who is speaking the utterances of God;
(RSV) whoever
speaks, as one who utters oracles of God;
(NRSV) Whoever
speaks must do so as one speaking the very words of God;
(TEV or Good News) Whoever
preaches, must preach God’s words;
(CEV) If you
have the gift of speaking, preach God’s message
(TLB) Are
you called to preach? Then
preach as though God himself were speaking through you.
(NLT) Are
you called to be a speaker? Then speak as though God himself were speaking through you.
(Amplified) Whoever
speaks, [let him do it as one who utters] oracles of God;
(NIV) If anyone
speaks, he should do it as one speaking the very words of God.
In this verse, nearly all the translations stress the need to be very careful with God’s word, His revelation. Apparently the NIV “translators” believe that strictly adhering to
God’s word (speaking as the oracles of God) is somewhat optional, stating only that it “should” be done.
And the best translation is…
the KJV according to many. Others believe the ASV is the best,
being both relatively old, and accurate. Many say the NASB, is
the even more accurate than the ASV, and therefore is the best. Perhaps
most believe the NIV is the best, believing it to be both accurate and easy to read.
All of the popular translations have areas
of weakness. Hopefully
some of them have been clearly pointed out in this article.
The author most often uses the NKJV, but also makes considerable use of the KJV, ASV,
and NASB during study.