Sharpening Your Tools
Choosing a Bible to
Read and Study
by David Churchill
[review previous article][advance to next article]
Why
are there so many kinds of Bibles?
Have
you ever asked, or been asked, these questions? Why
are there so many kinds of Bibles? What are some of the
differences that matter? Are there any Bibles that are
bad to use? What do I need when I buy a Bible? How
should I choose which to use?
Walk into almost any discount store
or general bookstore and youll probably find anywhere from
two to twenty of what appear to be different Bibles in a variety
of bindings, editions, and versions. Walk into a religious
bookstore and that number could easily approach 100 or more in
an colorful assortment of sizes and covers, and with included
study aids ranging from none to hundreds of pages.
Many so-called study Bibles
claim on their covers to target specific groups of readers such
as men, women, husbands, wives, parents, children, teenagers,
scholars, beginners, and even occupations such as teachers, students,
policemen, firemen, pastors, lay-ministers, pilots, and various
branches of the armed forces. Promotional claims vary from
soul-winners edition, how to share Jesus,
and how to get saved! to for new Christians,
daily devotional, life-study, and believers
study Bible, to topical, analytical,
and new & improved, easy-to- read version.
On top of all that, there are the
so-called Protestant editions and the denomination-specific
editions published by the Catholics, the Mormons, the Jehovah
Witness, and others.
Feeling flustered trying to pick
out an honest Bible you can actually trust from among all the
marketing ploys intended to lure your money? In that case
youve come to the right place for some clarity & perspective.
Lets spend a few minutes exploring together in depth
the basic facts about the important differences and the twelve
guidelines I use for selecting the Bibles I read & study.
(If youre in a hurry, you may save the indepth
discussion for later and jump down straight to a
list of the guidelines and the
versions I use the most and why.)
What are the important differences
that matter?
Versions -- Translation
vs. Paraphrase
A Bible version
simply identifies someones particular effort to create
either a translation or a paraphrase of the Bible.
According to the dictionaries I
keep in my office, to translate something
basically means to move or bring
that something from one place to another. For example,
the professor translated his lecture notes from his
office to the classroom. Therefore, a Bible
translation results from translating or moving the wording
from the original Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic languages directly
into a wording of English, Spanish, German, etc. Essentially,
a translated version offers what the Scriptures actually say,
but in the readers own language. The King James Version
is a familiar example of a translated version and dates back
to 1611.
According to my dictionaries, a
paraphrase is an expression of the
same thing in other words of something said or written
a form of interpretation or explanation in ones
own words. For example, the professor presented
his interpretation of the authors intent by paraphrasing
the novel. (Granted, I do understand that
many people often use interpret and translate
interchangeably when talking about expressing thoughts across
languages, but the difference between the two words is both real
and important.) Therefore, a Bible paraphrase results
from interpreting the Bible and substituting that explanation
into the place of Scripture someone replacing the Bibles
words with his own words. Essentially, a paraphrased version
offers opinions by its author about what he feels the Scriptures
meant to say or should have said, but didnt. Some
paraphrases are created by interpreting an already existing translation,
such as the popular Living Bible completed in 1971
was interpreted from the American Standard Version
of 1901. Paraphrases can also be created by closely attaching
the interpretative process to the translation process, as in
the case of the Good News Version completed 1974
& revised 1993 and as in the case of The Living Translation
completed in 1996 & based upon the paraphrase The Living
Bible. Occasionally a paraphrase will be honestly
identified and promoted as a paraphrase. Unfortunately,
most paraphrases are incorrectly titled and promoted as translations
which confuses and misleads many consumers.
In general, a revised version
is based upon an existing version, but has adjustments reflecting
changes of word usage in our modern languages or reflecting changes
in translation procedures. For example of a revised translation,
the New American Standard, Updated version completed
in 1995 is a revision of the New American Standard
version completed 1971 which in turn was a revision of the American
Standard Version completed 1901.
Guideline #1: Use a translated
version for your daily reading and routine meditation.
In theory, if we all could spend
a few years learning to read the ancient Hebrew and the Greek
languages used to write the Bible, then we wouldnt need
anyone to tell us what the original writers wrote we could
read it for ourselves. But, in practice, thats not
very realistic for most people
nor is it necessary. By
reading a reasonably accurate translation and by applying some
common-sense discretion while we read, with practice we can reliably
harvest the original writers intended meaning
as
we can with almost any other translated book of today or the
past.
However
if you seek a difficult,
but rewarding challenge AND if you have the opportunity, ambition,
and persistence to learn the language,
then do get hold
of a copy of the Greek New Testament, a good textbook on Koine
Greek (the Greek of the New Testament), and a good lexicon (like
Thayers Greek-English Lexicon or Mounces
Analytical Lexicon). Many times Ive
found that if Im having trouble understanding a difficult
passage in English, examining the Greek text will help clear
away much of my confusion. (Occasionally when I am discussing
a passage, you may hear me mention that some Greek word literally
means such and such
like the Greek word eis
literally means into
and then point
out how that knowledge helps me understand the passage more clearly.)
Guideline #2: Use paraphrased
versions either sparingly as a source of commentary or else avoid
them entirely.
I discourage people from using
a paraphrased version for daily Bible reading because its
not really a copy of the Scriptures, but rather only a copy of
someones opinions on the Scriptures. Please understand
what Im saying. Personally, from time to time I enjoy
reading good commentaries because sometimes learning how other
people understood a particular passage can help me understand
that passage better for myself. And, as you know, I frequently
share with other people my comments and opinions about Bible
passages. But, I strongly feel and firmly believe that
it is deceptive, fraudulent, and unchristlike for anyone to disguise
a book of religious commentaries by presenting it as a book of
the Scriptures. Since a paraphrased version is such a book,
then I have to consider it as being deceptive, fraudulent, and
unchristlike. For me, reading the Bible is an issue of
trust, and paraphrased versions are far, far, far from being
trustworthy.
Translation methods
Word-for-word translating
attempts to literally express each word of the original language
into our own language and aims to preserve the original word
order and sentence structure as much as possible. Also
known as complete equivalence or formal equivalence,
this method seeks to preserve accurately all of the information
in the text, while still presenting it in a readable form. A
few versions of this type of translation are: the King
James Version of 1611; the New King James Version
1982; the American Standard Version 1901; the
New American Standard Version 1971 & 1995; the
Revised Standard Version 1952; the Reina Valera
1909 & 1960; the Las Biblia de las Americas
1986.
Thought-for-thought translating,
sometimes called dynamic equivalence or functional
equivalence, attempts to have the same impact on modern
readers as the original had on its own audience by interpreting
the thought of the original language and rendering in understandable
idiom at least, thats the theory of the principle.
In practice, however, because of its required interpretative
nature, this method easily produces passages that are the translators
commentaries or paraphrases instead of being translated texts.
For example, a word-for-word phrase such as Behold,
I gave you cleanness of teeth might be presented as you
were hungry. or you skipped dinner or see
here, I brushed your teeth for you or notice
I withheld food from you all depending upon the
translators interpretation of the phrase. A few examples
of this type of translation are: the New International
Version 1978; the New Revised Standard Version
1990; the New American Bible 1970, 1986, 1992;
the Simple English Bible 1980.
You can identify a versions
translation method by checking the preface page or the About
this version page, usually located at the front of the
book. Some versions, such as the Holman Christian Bible,
may claim a mix of both methods (which to me still puts them
under the thought-for-thought category). Please
note that some versions which are essentially word-for-word translated
do use a few thought-for-thought techniques for a few passages
or words
some more so than others for example,
the New American Standard Version is essentially a word-for-word
translation, but compared to the 1971 version, the 1995 update
applies a couple more thought-for-thought guidelines making it
overall the slightly less literal of the two versions.
Some Bible retailers offer charts
comparing the different versions, their translation methods,
and their background information (such as publisher, project
sponsors, production goals, etc.).
Guideline #3: Use a word-for-word
translated version for daily reading and routine meditation.
In Habukkuk 2:3, I read Behold the proud, his
soul is not upright in him; but the just shall live by his
faith. How
do the just gain their faith? Romans 10:17 tells me, faith comes by hearing,
and hearing by the word of God.
If I want to have a genuine faith, then I need to be reading
what the word of God genuinely says and I need to be understanding
it for myself. Therefore, I want to be reading a word-for-word
translation of the Bible.
Guideline #4: Use so-called
thought-for-thought translations either sparingly
as a source of commentary or else avoid them entirely.
My problem with using a thought-for-thought
translation for my regular reading is two-fold. 1) I really
cannot afford to steer my faith astray by basing it on a paraphrase
of Gods word, and the risk of paraphrasing is very high
with this method of translating. 2) The ability to correctly
translate the words of a passage is separate from the ability
to correctly interpret (i.e. understand & explain) the meaning
of a passage. My understanding the meaning of any particular
passage is my own personal responsibility. Therefore, I
need a translator only to tell me the passage I dont
want a translator to explain that passage to me, especially if
that person forgets or refuses to let the Bible interpret itself.
If a translator really thinks an explanation of a passage
is critical for me to read the passage with understanding, then
that explanation should be in a footnote or in some form that
lets me distinguish the interpretation from the translation.
(Please dont misunderstand me. I am not
saying I have no interest in how good translators understand
passages theyve translated. Im saying that
I have no interest in substituting what is merely mans
opinions into the place of Gods Scriptures.)
Major committee translations
vs. translations by single denominations, small groups and individuals
Some translation projects involve
large groups or major committees of people (from several different
churches and denominations) checking and double-checking each
other work. The wording of each passage of the translation
requires exact agreement among the several translators assigned
to that passage as well as a general agreement from the other
project translators.
These committee versions
usually tend to be more true to the original text because of
the fact of having so many people translating & proofreading
each passage. Although not always totally fool-proof, the
system of checks & counter-checks does help safeguard the
integrity of the text by preventing any single individual or
small group from deliberately or accidently inserting their own
personal or doctrinal bias. (In other words, they all
help keep each other honest.) For any mistaken bias
to affect the text, it would have to be very widespread accepted
among most or all the project members or else stipulated as a
project guideline.
In contrast, versions produced
or published by single denominations, small groups or individuals
have no such safeguards. Generally speaking, such versions
typically tend to be less true to the original text, often to
the point of qualifying as paraphrased versions. While
much of this deviation is somewhat unintentional, some is quite
deliberate and even boldly promoted. In particular, versions
produced by any single denomination (1) tend to have project
guidelines forcing the published text along with its accompanying
study aids & explanations to support that denominations
doctrines and (2) are subject to the approval of the denominations
leadership, thus reversing the proper roles of authority. (As
Gods word, the Bible tells us what to teach. If anyone
starts telling the Bible what to teach, then they are tampering
with Gods word seems to me, thats something
He might not take kindly to.)
Guideline #5: For daily
reading and routine meditation, use a committee translated
version.
Guideline #6: For enhanced
reading & mediation, use several translations to compare
wording.
Greek and Hebrew words dont
always have an exact fit into English. And often, as in
English, the original words meaning is affected by how
the word is used. Several English words may each have a
certain sense or flavor of usage that could legitimately convey
some of the sense and flavor of the original. Then
the translation committee must choose which English word they
agree approaches closest to the original words usage
and meaning. Therefore, different, but similar words might
be correctly used to express the same word in different translations
or even in different locations in the same translation.
For example, our English words
awesome and aw(e)ful have the same definition,
but we often use one as having a more positive sense and the
other more negative. Likewise, good, fair,
wonderful, great, excellent,
ok, and nice have subtle similarities
and differences in English that a translator would need to consider
carefully before using.
As another example, according to
Vines Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament
Words, there are three Greek verbs commonly translated
as our English verb to judge. Two words have
the flavor of to discern or to examine
and the other to condemn. Suppose my regular
translation used judge in a particular passage and
I wanted to be more certain which meaning of judge the author
intended. Looking in other word-for-word translations
of the same passage, I might find judge, discern,
examine, measure. By comparing
these four choices used by different translations, I gain a better
appreciation of how the author used the original word in that
passage and the meaning he intended to communicate.
Guideline #7: Avoid versions
produced or published by a single denomination, small group or
individual.
Limited exceptions: (1) When
researching the church doctrines of a denomination that has translated
its own version of the Bible or its own study edition of an edited
approved version, or (2) when discussing Bible teaching
with a member of such a denomination. Then I find it useful
to have a copy for reference purposes and for making myself familiar
with the other persons perspective. However, I still
refrain from depending upon such a version when developing my
own understanding.
Comparing editions
Most versions come in a variety
of editions, often from different publishers. Some editions
are published by printing houses interested simply in making
Gods Word available to people while many other editions
are published by groups promoting a particular church or doctrine.
Of course, the sales-income potential can also be a powerful
motivator when publishing Bibles.
Basic editions of
a version limit themselves to the translated or paraphrased text,
a bare minimum of footnotes & cross-references, perhaps a
few pages of maps, and perhaps a few pages of a Bible-words dictionary
and/or concordance. Aside from these, and aside than chapter
& section headings, there are no extensive supplemental materials.
Generally speaking, basic editions tend to be cheaper to
buy, although pricing is affected by the binding (paperback,
hardback, leather, etc.) and the size of the printing.
On the other hand, study
editions have much larger assortments (often hundreds of
pages) of maps, charts, outlines, concordances, Bible-dictionaries,
and commentaries. Some editions prefer to weave these aids
in and among the Bible text. Others prefer to position
the related aids at the beginning and end of each Bible-book
or in distinct sections clearly separating the aids from the
Scripture text. Like the reference materials in any other
area of study, some are both useful & helpful for the sincere
Bible student while many must be carefully weighed and sifted
to separate truth from fiction, but most are better qualified
as garden fertilizer than as reliable study aids.
As we mentioned earlier, many so-called
study Bibles claim on their covers to target specific
groups of readers or specific purposes of usage. Such claims
are usually marketing ploys to increase sales for the publishers
or else to promote the writings of particular authors. Likewise,
much of the variety of decorated bindings are simply marketing
efforts to appeal to the various customer concerns & interests.
And some edition-styles (such as the magazine
and comic book presentations) really have nothing
to with study aids or even cultivating proper respect for the
Bible, but are simple expanding a commercial product line into
new market niches whose consumers previously lacked interest
in the product.
As we pointed out earlier, the
versions in a few editions have been deliberately adjusted in
*translating* to present the sponsoring groups view. As
an extreme example, one main-stream denomination actually forbids
its members to read any version of the Bible except for versions
that it has officially approved (i.e. corrected)
the wording and commented upon to avoid mis-interpretation (i.e.
any understanding that disagrees or disaproves of that denominations
teachings). Some so-called study editions leave
the translated text untouched, but then provide so much extra
material & commentary alongside the Bible text that the reader
is hard-pressed to distinguish whether his understanding came
from reading Scripture or from reading the so-called aids.
Guideline #8: For daily reading
and meditation, use a basic edition of your preferred
translation
for enhanced meditation of a particular passage,
also read the same passage from your second choice of translation.
For my daily Bible reading, I want
only Gods word to influence my thinking as I meditate upon
what Ive read. Remember Romans 10:17, faith comes by hearing,
and hearing by the word of God.
Therefore, if I can only afford
to purchase one Bible to read and study, then I want to purchase
a basic edition with no added study aids or only a very small
amount.
The size of the printing affects
your reading comfort level. For my daily reading, I prefer
the Giant Print or Large Print basic
editions its not huge print compared to other reading
materials, but it is much larger and easier for me to read than
the usual small-to-tiny print in Bibles.
Guideline #9: For expanded study,
first reference a trust-worthy study edition in your second-choice
translation, and then if possible, also reference one in the
same translation you use for daily reading.
If I can only afford to buy one
good study edition, then guidelines #6 and #8 suggest to me that
I might want to get it of the version that was my second choice.
That way, between my two bibles Ill be able to compare
wording when I want to study a passage more deeply.
Guideline #10: Before purchasing
any Bible-study materials, ask the people you know (who study
the Bible regular and seem to be good at it) what they use.
Like I said earlier, most available
materials out there labeled as Bible study are just
garden fertilizer Im not trying to be mean here,
but am just stating a plain and simple fact and a lot
of that fertilizer is sold by adding it between the covers of
Bibles. Eventually, youll buy some and then realize
its no good. But, hopefully, by asking around first,
you can keep your wasted purchases to a minimum.
Guideline #11: Develop some
tests for yourself to use when evaluating study materials for
purchase.
When Im considering to purchase
any Bible-study materials, I first look through them briefly
to see how they handle certain subjects and topics. In
general, I usually check out baptism, how to become a Christian,
miracles, inspiration & authority of the Bible, deity of
Christ, and hermeneutics (i.e. bible-study skills & principles).
My thinking is that if the materials are off-track about
these basics I do know about, then they are probably off-track
about the stuff I dont know about. On the other hand,
if they seem solidly reliable about the basics, theyre
more likely to have some reliability about the other stuff, too.
Guideline #12: If you own a
computer, get hold of a good Bible collection on CD- ROMs or
downloadable from the Internet.
For much less than the price of
a leather-bound high-end printed study edition of one version,
you can get a digital collection with anywhere from four to twenty
& more versions available on a single CD with concordance
and word-search features. Most also have Bible dictionaries,
and several commentaries often including entire sets of works
by famous denominational founders & teachers such as John
Wesley, Charles Spurgeon, Matthew Henry, etc. Some collections
have locked Bibles and books that require paying
additional fees for the codes to unlock them. Unfortunately,
as with printed collections, only a few of these supplemental
materials will be genuinely helpful to the sincere Bible student.
If a collection has multiple Bible
versions I want to use, I like being able to do word searches
across the different versions at the same time and being able
to compare on screen the same passage in several versions.
While some Bible collections can
cost as much as $100 or more, many can be had for less than $50.
A digital Bible collection I highly recommend is called
the Berean Bible. This bare-bones collection
(Bibles only) is provided by its publisher as shareware for free
distribution and is Windows-compatible. The basic texts
are provided for one Spanish word-to-word translation (LBLA --
Las Biblia de las Americas) and eight English versions,
including the three word-to-word translations I use the most
for my own bible reading / study and lesson preparation
NASB -- New American Standard Bible, 1995rev.; NKJV --
New King James Version; and ESV -- English
Standard Version. [You
may download an executable installer copy of the Berean Bible
here.]
For use online, several websites,
such as www.biblegateway.com, provide extensive collections of
both English and foreign language versions.
Why you need determines
what you need
What
motivates you as you select and purchase a copy of the Bible?
As we noted earlier in this series, if the Bible really
is from God, then He had a purpose in providing it to us to read.
Therefore, if we are going to study the Bible as Gods
Word, then we should read looking for His message and His meaning
of the message, and not for what we (or someone else) want to
think His message is or means. In particular, we want to
cultivate the salvation God is offering us.
Show me Your ways, O LORD; teach
me Your paths. Lead me in Your truth and teach me, David expresses this idea in Psalm
25:4-5, for
You are the God of my salvation; on You I wait all the
day.
Remember, O Lord, Your tender mercies
and Your lovingkindnesses,
David then goes on to describe in verse 6-11 what else he appreciates
about Gods salvation, for they are from of old. Do not
remember the sins of my youth, nor my transgressions; according
to Your mercy remember me, for Your goodness sake, O Lord.
Good and upright is the Lord; therefore He teaches
sinners in the way. The humble He guides in justice, and
the humble He teaches His way. All the paths of the Lord
are mercy and truth, to such as keep His covenant and His testimonies.
For Your names sake, O Lord, pardon my iniquity,
for it is great.
Notice Davids motivations
here he wants Gods instruction, Gods truth,
Gods generosity, and Gods mercy. Very strong
incentives for a person to study Gods Word. Very
strong incentives for a person to obtain Gods Word in as
pure and unaltered a version as he can get it.
So,
what versions
do I personally use the most?
~~ For my regular Bible reading,
I prefer the New American Standard Bible (NASB); the New King
James Version (NKJV) of 1982; and the English Standard Version
(ESV). All three are very literal word-for-word translations
done by major committees. All three are fairly easy to
read with the reading level of the NKJV at about 8th-grade, the
NASB at about 11th-grade, and the ESV at about 10-grade. (I
also like using the printed NKJV because the translators
footnotes seem to me more objective when informing about significant
variations in the New Testament Greek manuscripts. More
on that below.) I mainly use the digital Berean Bible
collection which provides quick and searchable access to the
basic texts of all three translations. My main printed
copies I use when away from my computer are a giant-print NKJV
basic edition, a giant-print NASB basic edition, a hard-bound
study edition of the ESV, and a bilingual edition with the NASB
and the Las Biblia de las Americas (LBLA) of 1986.
~~ When the NASB of 1971 was still
readily available, it was my preferred choice to use because
of its exceptionally literal translating. While the NASB,
Updated revision of 1995 is slightly more dynamic and slightly
less literal, its still a much more reliable translation
than most other versions currently published. For the Spanish-speaking,
the LBLA and the Reina-Valera (RV) version of 1960 appear to
me reliable translations and I recommend those when asked, but
I also admit my opinion is based on very limited study.
~~ The one thought-for-thought
or dynamic equivalence translation I like to use
as a source of useful commentary is the Easy-to-Read Version
(ERV). Published in 1989 by the World Bible Translation
Centerfounded in 1973 in Arlington, Texaswas initially
prepared to meet the special needs of the deaf and was first
published by Baker Book House as The English Version for
the Deaf. On one hand, the reduced vocabulary and
simpler grammar makes the ERV very easy to understand. On
the other hand, fitting a bible passage into these limitations
creates the opportunity to interprete the passage instead
of strictly translate it. 2 Timothy 4:2 is a good
example of the mixed blessing & risk associated with this
process of dynamic equivalence. The NKJV reads
Preach
the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince,
rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching. Translated essentially word-for-word
from the original Greek. But the ERV reads Tell everyone Gods
message. Be ready at all times to do whatever is needed.
Tell people what they need to do, tell them when they are
doing wrong, and encourage them. Do this with great patience
and careful teaching.
Did you notice that to fit the passages thought into
easy to read vocabulary & grammar how the ERV
translator went beyond simply repeating what the author
wrote to suggesting or explaining what the author
intended? In short, he provided the reader with man-made
commentary instead of divinely-inspired Scripture
good commentary and even very useful, but still just commentary
nonetheless.
~~ For additional printed study
editions, I have a Nelson Study Bible
of the NKJV and the Dickson New Analytical Study
Bible of the King James Version. The Dicksons
800+ pages of study aids have been exceptionally reliable and
useful. Ive also had a couple others that I enjoyed
and misplaced over the years, but when I find them Ill
use them again, too.
~~ While I do have printed editions
of several other English and foreign language versions for reference
as the need arises, I usually access them online at www.biblegateway.com.
~~ One other source I had used
in the past to obtain digital copies of various Bible versions
and translations is the Internet site www.e-sword.net.
The base program includes the King James Bible module. Several
of the popular Bible versions in various languages are available
as well several versions that are not longer in print or otherwise
hard to locate. Also available is a huge selection of modules
with comentaries, dictionaries, maps, and other religious writings.
Some of these resource modules require purchase, but many
are free of charge to use with the e-Sword application. This
application is available for Windows computer, Apple computers,
iPad, and iPhone.
(back to What are the
important differences that matter?)
Heres a brief review of our 12
suggested guidelines for selecting a Bible for daily reading
and study:
Guideline #1: Use a translated
version for your daily reading and routine meditation.
Guideline #2: Use paraphrased
versions either sparingly as a source of commentary or else avoid
them entirely.
Guideline #3: Use a word-for-word
translated version for daily reading and routine meditation.
Guideline #4: Use so-called
thought-for-thought translations either sparingly
as a source of commentary or else avoid them entirely.
Guideline #5: For daily
reading and routine meditation, use a committee translated
version.
Guideline #6: For enhanced
reading & mediation, use several translations to compare
wording.
Guideline #7: Avoid versions
produced or published by a single denomination, small group or
individual
Guideline #8: For daily reading
and meditation, use a basic edition of your preferred
translation
for enhanced meditation of a particular passage,
also read the same passage from your second choice of translation.
Guideline #9: For expanded study,
first reference a trust-worthy study edition in your second-choice
translation, and then if possible, also reference one in the
same translation you use for daily reading.
Guideline #10: Before purchasing
any Bible-study materials, ask the people you know (who study
the Bible regular and seem to be good at it) what they use.
Guideline #11: Develop some
tests for yourself to use when evaluating study materials for
purchase.
Guideline #12: If you own a
computer, get hold of a good Bible collection on CD- ROMs or
downloadable from the Internet.
(back to What are the
important differences that matter?)
One more
thing,
comparing the manuscript sources
So
far, we have
(1) discussed most of the significant
differences among the Bibles available in stores; (2) shared
the guidelines I consider when purchasing a Bible for daily reading
and deeper study; and (3) mentioned which versions I use
most and why. One more distinction among Bibles that might
interest some of you is the source of the manuscripts used when
translating, especially for the New Testament.
The three main groups of NT manuscripts
that translators examine are (1) the Textus Receptus (or Received
Text), (2) the Alexandrian Text, and (3) the Majority Text. As
I understand it, the Textus Receptus manuscripts are what scholars
have been studying for centuries and were used to translate the
King James Version of 1611, while the Alexandrian Text manuscripts
were discovered during the late 19th early 20th centuries
and generally are dated as being older than the Textus Receptus.
Some Bible versions, such as the
New King James Version, do an excellent job with footnotes indicating
significant differences between the three Texts. Most offer
no mention of these differences. However, a few others
may indicate, for example, that some word or sentence is omitted
in the better texts, usually referring to the older
Alexandrian Text. Unfortunately, this can be somewhat misleading
by implying that the word or sentence never existed in the older
manuscripts, which then causes the reader to question the reliability
of the passage. The real fact of the matter is that these
old documents are very delicate and quite fragile and have experienced
a lot of damage over the years. While a few omitted
items may have been added by a few copyists over the years, oftentimes
the questionable omitted word or sentence is missing
because the document actually has a hole or even a piece of fabric
torn off where the word or sentence or even the whole section
had been!
Personally, I try to avoid undue
bias or prejudice about the three Texts. As I understand
it, they are in general agreement overall aside from a few minor
passages and the missing-words issue mentioned above. I
cope with the differences between the Texts partly through my
choice of versions. The New American Standard Bible is
based upon the Alexandrian Text, and has very few footnotes about
manuscript differences. The New King James Version is based
upon the Text Receptus and has the useful footnotes I mentioned
earlier in fact, Ive sometimes anticipated how the
NASB might read simply by looking at the NKJV footnotes. [dgc: After first posting
this article, I did come across a NKJV pew edition (an edition
intended for use in the church pews) that lacked these translators
footnotes. Likewise, when I discussed this article with
someone who regularly uses an older NASB edition, he was surprised
that my current copy of the NASB was lacking such footnotes because
his copy has several useful translators notes about manuscript
differences.]
For those of you who want to know
more about the source manuscripts, Ive included below a
selection from the preface of the New King James Version. [This selection is provided
in compliance with the NKJVs quotation guidelines, and
is identical between the electronic and printed editions I have
(except whereas the electronic edition here mentions Popup
Notes, the printed edition mentions Footnotes).]
The Old Testament Text
The Hebrew Bible has come down
to us through the scrupulous care of ancient scribes who copied
the original text in successive generations. By the sixth
century a.d. the scribes were succeeded by a group known as the
Masoretes, who continued to preserve the sacred Scriptures for
another five hundred years in a form known as the Masoretic Text.
Babylonia, Palestine, and Tiberias were the main centers
of Masoretic activity; but by the tenth century a.d. the
Masoretes of Tiberias, led by the family of ben Asher, gained
the ascendancy. Through subsequent editions, the ben Asher
text became in the twelfth century the only recognized form of
the Hebrew Scriptures.
Daniel Bomberg printed the first
Rabbinic Bible in 151617; that work was followed
in 152425 by a second edition prepared by Jacob ben Chayyim
and also published by Bomberg. The text of ben Chayyim
was adopted in most subsequent Hebrew Bibles, including those
used by the King James translators. The ben Chayyim text
was also used for the first two editions of Rudolph Kittels
Biblia Hebraica of 1906 and 1912. In 1937 Paul Kahle published
a third edition of Biblia Hebraica. This edition was based
on the oldest dated manuscript of the ben Asher text, the Leningrad
Manuscript B19a (a.d. 1008), which Kahle regarded as superior
to that used by ben Chayyim.
For the New King James Version
the text used was the 1967/1977 Stuttgart edition of the Biblia
Hebraica, with frequent comparisons being made with the Bomberg
edition of 152425. The Septuagint (Greek) Version
of the Old Testament and the Latin Vulgate also were consulted.
In addition to referring to a variety of ancient versions
of the Hebrew Scriptures, the New King James Version draws on
the resources of relevant manuscripts from the Dead Sea caves.
In the few places where the Hebrew was so obscure that
the 1611 King James was compelled to follow one of the versions,
but where information is now available to resolve the problems,
the New King James Version follows the Hebrew text.
The New Testament Text
There is more manuscript support
for the New Testament than for any other body of ancient literature.
Over five thousand Greek, eight thousand Latin, and many
more manuscripts in other languages attest the integrity of the
New Testament. There is only one basic New Testament used
by Protestants, Roman Catholics, and Orthodox, by conservatives
and liberals. Minor variations in hand copying have appeared
through the centuries, before mechanical printing began about
a.d. 1450.
Some variations exist in the spelling
of Greek words, in word order, and in similar details. These
ordinarily do not show up in translation and do not affect the
sense of the text in any way.
Other manuscript differences such
as omission or inclusion of a word or a clause, and two paragraphs
in the Gospels, should not overshadow the overwhelming degree
of agreement which exists among the ancient records. Bible
readers may be assured that the most important differences in
English New Testaments of today are due, not to manuscript divergence,
but to the way in which translators view the task of translation:
How literally should the text be rendered? How does
the translator view the matter of biblical inspiration? Does
the translator adopt a paraphrase when a literal rendering would
be quite clear and more to the point? The New King James
Version 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.
The King James New Testament was
based on the traditional text of the Greek- speaking churches,
first published in 1516, and later called the Textus Receptus
or Received Text. Although based on the relatively few
available manuscripts, these were representative of many more
which existed at the time but only became known later. In
the late nineteenth century, B. Westcott and F. Hort taught that
this text had been officially edited by the fourth-century church,
but a total lack of historical evidence for this event has forced
a revision of the theory. It is now widely held that the
Byzantine Text that largely supports the Textus Receptus has
as much right as the Alexandrian or any other tradition to be
weighed in determining the text of the New Testament. Those
readings in the Textus Receptus which have weak support are indicated
in the side reference column as being opposed by both Critical
and Majority Texts (see Popup Notes).
Since the 1880s most contemporary
translations of the New Testament have relied upon a relatively
few manuscripts discovered chiefly in the late nineteenth and
early twentieth centuries. Such translations depend primarily
on two manuscripts, Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus, because
of their greater age. The Greek text obtained by using
these sources and the related papyri (our most ancient manuscripts)
is known as the Alexandrian Text. However, some scholars
have grounds for doubting the faithfulness of Vaticanus and Sinaiticus,
since they often disagree with one another, and Sinaiticus exhibits
excessive omission.
A third viewpoint of New Testament
scholarship holds that the best text is based on the consensus
of the majority of existing Greek manuscripts. This text
is called the Majority Text. Most of these manuscripts are in
substantial agreement. Even though many are late, and none
is earlier than the fifth century, usually their readings are
verified by papyri, ancient versions, quotations from the early
church fathers, or a combination of these. The Majority
Text is similar to the Textus Receptus, but it corrects those
readings which have little or no support in the Greek manuscript
tradition.
Today, scholars agree that the
science of New Testament textual criticism is in a state of flux.
Very few scholars still favor the Textus Receptus as such,
and then often for its historical prestige as the text of Luther,
Calvin, Tyndale, and the King James Version. For about
a century most have followed a Critical Text (so called because
it is edited according to specific principles of textual criticism)
which depends heavily upon the Alexandrian type of text. More
recently many have abandoned this Critical Text (which is quite
similar to the one edited by Westcott and Hort) for one that
is more eclectic. Finally, a small but growing number of
scholars prefer the Majority Text, which is close to the traditional
text except in the Revelation.
In light of these facts, and also
because the New King James Version is the fifth revision of a
historic document translated from specific Greek texts, the editors
decided to retain the traditional text in the body of the New
Testament and to indicate major Critical and Majority Text variant
readings in the popup notes. Although these variations
are duly indicated in the popup notes of the present edition,
it is most important to emphasize that fully eighty-five percent
of the New Testament text is the same in the Textus Receptus,
the Alexandrian Text, and the Majority Text.
Popup Notes
Significant explanatory notes,
alternate translations, and cross-references, as well as New
Testament citations of Old Testament passages, are supplied as
popup notes.
Important textual variants in the
Old Testament are identified in a standard form.
The textual notes in the present
edition of the New Testament make no evaluation of readings,
but do clearly indicate the manuscript sources of readings. They
objectively present facts without such tendentious remarks as
the best manuscripts omit or the most reliable
manuscripts read. Such notes are value judgments
that differ according to varying viewpoints on the text. By
giving a clearly defined set of variants the New King James Version
benefits readers of all textual persuasions.
Where significant variations occur
in the New Testament Greek manuscripts, textual notes are classified
as follows:
1. NU-Text
These variations from the traditional text generally represent
the Alexandrian or Egyptian type of text described previously
in The New Testament Text. They are found in
the Critical Text published in the twenty-seventh edition of
the Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament (N) and in the United Bible
Societies fourth edition (U), hence the acronym, NU-Text.
2. M-Text
This symbol indicates points of variation in the Majority Text
from the traditional text, as also previously discussed in The
New Testament Text. It should be noted that M stands
for whatever reading is printed in the published Greek
New Testament According to the Majority Text, whether
supported by overwhelming, strong, or only a divided majority
textual tradition.
The textual notes reflect the scholarship
of the past 150 years and will assist the reader to observe the
variations between the different manuscript traditions of the
New Testament. Such information is generally not available
in English translations of the New Testament.¹
1.The New King James Version,
(Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers) 1998, c1982.
[review previous article][advance to next article] |