Making Sense of Different Bible Translations

Making Sense of Different Bible Translations

Dr. Joe Alain, 2016

 How We Got Our Bible

Contrary to what some might think, the Bible as we have it today did not drop out of the blue sky one day. What we have in the sixty-six books of our Bible developed over the course of several hundred years. Keep in mind, what we consider Scripture was being written during the first century as churches were being formed throughout the known world. Knowing what was truly authoritative Scripture was a daily concern for believers in the first century. There were many people peddling supposed authoritative texts in the first few centuries of the church. It was even quite common for some supposed gospel renderings to be written in the name of a famous person (e.g. Thomas, or Philip, or Mary). These false gospels might find their way into the hands of unsuspecting persons. How did early believers tell what was truly authentic Scripture over against what was false?

There were basically three criteria for discerning what was considered authoritative Scripture in the early church. (1) Was the book written by an apostle or an associate of an apostle? Obviously, who wrote the book had a huge bearing on its authenticity. (2) Was the book accepted universally among believers? A book that would not be accepted universally would be suspect. (3) Was the book theologically consistent with other biblical books in the accepted canon? When you read today some of the “so-called” gospels (e.g., The Gospel of Thomas or The Gospel of Mary), it’s quite obvious even to the non-discerning believer that these works are inconsistent with what the rest of the Bible has to say. With these three criteria, Christians early on began assembling our Bible. The development of the canon (the rule of faith) was a slow process substantially completed by A.D. 175 except for a few books whose authorship was disputed.

Early English Translations

The Latin Vulgate (Roman Catholic Version) was the primary Bible in use in Europe prior to the sixteenth century. During the sixteenth century there was an explosion of English versions of the Bible, due mainly to the following reasons: (1) The recovery of classical learning (especially the biblical languages of Hebrew and Greek) during the Renaissance period, (2) The development of Gutenberg’s printing press (ca. 1540), and (3) The Protestant Reformation with its emphasis on the language of the Bible being in the language of the people, and the emphasis of Sola Scriptura (Scripture Alone).

 The English translations of William Tyndale and Miles Coverdale stand above all the rest in the sixteenth century. The Authorized Version or King James Bible capped the series of translations begun by Tyndale (1611). Produced by a team of 54 scholars, the KJV became the Bible for English-speaking peoples for generations and a monument of the English language.

Why Is There a Need for New Translations?

            (1) Advancements in textual criticism.

Biblical scholars have so many more early manuscripts of the Bible that were simply not available to Bible translators before. And these new discoveries of ancient copies of Scripture have aided our understanding of the Scriptures (e.g., the Dead Sea Scrolls).

            (2) Our knowledge of biblical languages has increased. Since there are literally thousands of early Greek manuscripts of portions of the Bible, most modern translations are based on what is called a critical Greek text. Reliable and skilled biblical scholars have assembled these manuscripts into a text that can be trusted to be accurate. However, because not all scholars agree on the differing points of some specific passages, this explains why some translations differ at various points. A good translation will explain some of these additions, deletions, and differences in the margin or in a footnote in your Bible.

(3) The English language is continually changing. Words sometimes change meaning

over time and new words are continuing to come into common usage. For example, if I sat on a bench at the Grand Canyon and exclaimed, “What an awful sight” as I looked out, you would most certainly disagree; however, the word “awful” once meant “full of awe, awe-inspiring, impressive.” We certainly do not use the word “awful” in that way today. If I speak of a “text” today, I might be misunderstood because that word is used so often to refer to a message or conversation on a cell phone rather than words of written text in a document. In biblical times torches were used for light sources. While we still may understand this today, it’s doubtful that any of us are carrying torches around in the night. Instead, we might carry a flashlight. Updating translations to reflect contemporary usage of any language makes it easier to understand the Bible’s timeless message.

Evaluating Translations
Criteria for evaluating Bible translations.
1. The Identity and Qualifications of the Translators.
Just as the early church was concerned that authentic Scripture had to come from an apostle or associate of an apostle, so believers today want to know who is responsible for the translation that they are considering. Most modern reliable translations are developed out of committee of trusted biblical scholars which insures a higher concentration of skills than one or just a small group of persons. Most translations will reveal the translators and their qualifications in the opening pages (Introduction) of your Bible.

2. The Underlying Textual Basis of the Translation.

This concern has to do with what kind of text that the translators are starting with. For instance, early English versions of the Bible were being translated primarily from one Greek text assembled by Erasmus, a Renaissance era scholar. This was a vast improvement over translating from the Latin; however, it was still one person’s biblical text. Today, most modern translators work from what is called a critical Greek text that reflects an eclectic approach to textual questions. This critical Greek text has probably been the most evaluated document on the planet. There are over 5,000 extant (actual documents) New Testament fragments and writings that scholars have today to develop this critical text. Because of this, believers can have full confidence in their Bible. Because there are so many documents to work with, naturally there are minor differences in some passages. This usually means that some translations will differ on the points where a variant (a difference) is found in the biblical text. A good translation will explain some of these variants.

 Here is an example of a passage where there is a variant along with the explanation. Mark 5:1, NIV states, “They went across the lake to the region of the Gerasenes.” Some manuscripts have “Gadarenes;” other manuscripts have “Gergesenes.” Many variants are similar to this one which reflects minor differences in spelling and/or different ways of referring to a particular area.   

Why Translations Read So Differently from One Another

The challenge for Bible translators is that they are working with texts that are tied to ancient cultures that are vastly different from that of today. Each translator or team of translators must make a choice concerning how they will bridge the gap between the original language of the Bible (Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek) and the language that they are translating into (for us, English). The act of translation means that the translator will make judgments based on his or her understanding of the original languages and the language they are translating into. 

Three Theories of translation have been generally followed in bridging the gap between the original languages and the receptor language, in our case English.

Literal or Formal Equivalency (“Word Correspondence”). Following this process, the translator attempts to translate by keeping as close as possible to the exact words (Word Correspondence) and phrasing in the original language, yet still make sense in the receptor language (English). A formal equivalent translation will keep the historical distance intact at all points. This makes for a very good translation but sometimes it is disjointed sounding and awkward because of the differences between the two languages.

            Literal/Formal Examples

            KJV, NKJV, RSV, NRSV, NASB, HCSB, ESV

Dynamic Equivalency (“Functional”). Following this process, the translator attempts to translate words, idioms, and grammatical constructions from the original language into precise equivalents in the receptive language (English). This is considered a thought-for-thought translation. Such a translation keeps historical distance on all historical and most factual matters, but “updates” matters of language, grammar, and style. Meaning takes precedence over matters of structure and style.

            Dynamic Equivalent Examples

            NIV, NLT, CEV, GNB, NEB

Free (Paraphrases). Following this process, the translator attempts to translate the ideas from one language to another, with less concern about using the exact words of the original. Free translations, also called a paraphrases, are not technically translations and should not be treated as such. The Living Bible and The Message are representative of paraphrases.

            Free Examples

            The Message, The Living Bible                                                                     

Comparing the Different Types of Translations (Romans 12:1)

“I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship.” (ESV)

“Therefore, I urge you, brothers and sisters, in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God—this is your true and proper worship.” (NIV)

“And so, dear brothers, I plead with you to give your bodies to God. Let them be a living sacrifice, holy—the kind he can accept. When you think of what he has done for you, is this too much to ask?” (LB)

Tensions to Keep in Mind

As a general rule, the more “literal/formal” the translation, it may be characterized as objective, timeless, and tied to the original text. The potential downside is that these translations may sound archaic and read a little wooden. As a general rule, the more “free” the translations (paraphrase), the more readable, understandable and relevant to readers. The downside is that these translations may be subjective, temporal and inject commentary to the original text. 

Practical Considerations

A good literal/formal equivalency Bible with the focus on biblical words is indispensible for serious Bible study. Supplement your study with a dynamic equivalent translation like the NIV or NLT. Use translations that contain helpful notes in the margin that reflect modern scholarship. Paraphrases are helpful for devotional reading and for clarifying difficult passages. With so many excellent translations available today, the Christian has a variety of great choices for both devotional reading and serious study.