WHICH BIBLE? - Part Four

 

WHICH BIBLE? - AN EXAMINATION OF TRANSLATIONS - Part Four

Having considered original manuscripts and subsequent copies, which then gave rise to textual traditions used in the production of Bible translations and the earlier English versions of those translations, we can examine the method of translation used in modern versions.

MODERN VERSIONS AND METHOD OF TRANSLATION

Modern Versions

 

Since the King James Version, many English versions have been produced, most of which were based on Wescott & Hort’s revision of the Greek text.  The first one was the English Revised Version (1881, 1885), followed soon after by the American Standard Version (1901).  Then, as a result of further manuscript research and revision of the Greek text, and the changes in English literary style, the Revised Standard Version (1946, 1952) was produced.  This version was severely criticised by conservative evangelicals and fundamentalists for its seeming liberal bias at some points of translation, such as Isaiah 7:14 where "young woman" was used instead of "virgin." 

 

The New American Standard Bible (1963, 1967) was a conservative attempt at providing the English-speaking world with a modern version true to the original languages.  It was popular, especially in the USA, and pioneered the way for many to follow, such as the New King James Version (1979, 1980, 1982), the New International Version (1973, 1978), the New Living Translation (1997) and more recently the English Standard Version (2001).  Along with these came paraphrases, the most famous of which is the Living Bible (1971) and a seeming unending number of study Bibles.

 

Method of Translation

 

Along with the revision of the biblical text, there has been a revision of the method of translation.  Traditionally, the translators would work on a word for word correspondence between the original text and the language of the translation, resulting in a so-called literal translation, exemplified in the NASB and NKJV.  Such translations tend to read less smoothly and require more effort in comprehension, because no intermediate steps have been taken by the translators to ensure ease of understanding.

 

More recently, a new approach has been advocated where the correspondence is between the meaning of the original text and the meaning of the language of the translation, resulting in a so-called dynamic equivalence translation, exemplified in the NIV.  This second method requires a large amount of interpretive work to ensure the original meaning is properly discerned, so that an appropriate expression of that meaning can be found in the language of translation.  Consequently, ambiguity and possible variations or options in interpretation are generally removed by the translators, leaving the reader unaware of these possibilities.  However, the benefit of this approach is a smoother, easier to read and understand translation.

 

All translations require decisions for expressing the biblical text, whether Hebrew or Greek, in the language of translation, which can be extremely difficult when that language lacks words that match the biblical text.  The difference between “literal” and “dynamic equivalence” translation methods is one of degree in the extent to which the translators exercise an interpretive role.

CONCLUSION:

So, in light of all this data, which Bible do we pick?  Having decided which textual tradition (Majority Text versus Nestle-Aland) you believe is best, bearing in mind there are only minor variations between them, may I suggest these guidelines for your consideration. 

In choosing a Bible for personal study, the most important quality is its accuracy and so a literal translation is best, as against dynamic equivalence.  The New King James and New American Standard Bibles, as well as the recent English Standard Version, are in this category.

If you want a Bible for devotional reading, where the primary concern is ease of understanding so that you can read fluently without stopping to dig deeper, then a good dynamic equivalence version would serve you well.  Both the New International Version and the New Living Translation are in this category.

If you want a Bible suitable for children, then the primary concern is the reading level of the translation so that it is understandable to them.  Specialist children’s Bibles are available that would best meet this need.

My final guideline is this – no matter what Bible you have, it is of little value unless it is regularly read, studied, and most importantly, applied.  Possessing the right Bible gains no commendation unless you practice what it teaches.  May God grant us grace to understand and then obey His Word.