Q. How many English translations of Scripture are there?
How many shouted out, "Too many!"
I'm not going to disagree. But allow me to share my thoughts.
First, let's fly to Fullerton, California of almost 60 years back. I forget when I received it, but I was given a Revised Standard Version from the Disciples of Christ church I attended. I was curious on what "Revised Standard Version" meant, both as individual words and as a combination. I wasn't aware what a translation was, nor was I aware there were any others.
Then, I moved to Skull Valley, and there received a Christian Life New Testament and Psalms, King James Version from Skull Valley Community Church, which was followed by the Gideons visiting the school I attended, where I got another KJV, this time New Testament, Psalms, and Proverbs.
I'm not sure if it's when I moved from Skull Valley to Prescott and attended a Free Methodist Church, or if it was sometime later, but I then received a Bible that did not use "Bible" in the title, but rather was titled "Good News For Modern Man." I eventually figured out it was a Bible (make that New Testament), and that it had interesting stick figure illustrations. I wasn't aware the real name for the translation was "Today's English Version" (TEV).
Another move, another treanslation. I spent most of Junior High and all of High School in Cottonwood, Arizona, and while there I received first the Living New Testament (titled "Reach Out) and then the whole Bible (or "The Way"). I also picked up a Spanish version of "Good News for Modern Man."
After graduating high school, I spent a year at community college, and mostly studied art and writing, but also took a class on "Literature of the Bible." There were a lot of new things I never heard of (e.g. JEPD method, 2nd Isaiah), but what makes this part of the story is that I received yet another translation, this one being "The New English Bible."
Allow me to interject a thought. I still wasn't clear that the Bible was translated from Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. I didn't really know what the differences between them, let alone if those differences had any affect on theology.
Hallelujah! I started going to Southwestern Conservative Baptist Church. My first sememster included a class titled "Doctrine of Scripture and God," and learned how off the JEPD method was. I learned that the Living Bible was not a translation but a paraphrase. I got introduced to more Bible translations: The pastor of the church I attended did a series on the 23rd Psalm, each week dealing with half a verse, and he selected a different version each week where the translation brought something out of the text for the week. By the way, that Pastor could be called "King James Only.
When I started, I never heard of the New American Standard or the New International Version, which were fairly recent. In my first year, the New King James Version came out (my KJV Only pastor, unlike most KJV Onlys, had no problem with the NKJV - his concern was more textual than keeping the Thees and Thous). I saw parallel Bibles, and I saw the "New Testament from 26 Translations," which gave the text in the KJV and then shared variations from the other translations.
At this point, though, I looked at translations as an artist. I liked having a lot, so I can compare them. But then I discovered that for the most part, what the text says in Translation A is what it says most of the time in Translations B-Z. As I matured, I realized that's the way it should be. If it was paraphrases, that would be a different story, but translating done right basically agrees.
But why are there so many translations? And how do I find which one to use?
I'm thankful to Dr. Dennis Wretlind, who taught a class on Biblical Criticism, where I learned about inspiration, canonicity, textual criticism, translations, and Bible tools. On the translation, he gave 5 things to look for.
- Number of translators. Some are done by a committee, to make sure they have the translation correct. Others are translated by one person (e.g. Ken Taylor's Living Bible).
- Text used. This is more an issue for New Testaments. There are two major types of texts - those that resemble the Textus Receptus used for the King James, and those which are based on two nearly complete Greek texts dating from the 300's. The former have more texts, the latter are closer to the original. Most translators take the latter. Reality? No major and no minor doctrine is affected by thse differences.
- Type of translation. There are formal (word for word) equivalents like the KJV, NKJV, ESV, and NASB. Others are dynamic (thought for thought) eqivalents. A verse to find the difference is Luke 9:44. Formal equivalents say, "Let these words sink into year ears." Dynamic equiavelents are more like "Listen carefully to what I'm saying." Both say the same, but one is more like how we talk today. There are also paraphrases, which the author is putting the text into his own words.
- Modernity of text. The biggest complaint against the KJV is that me and thou speakest not in the manner our fathers didst speak in sixteen hundred and eleven.
- Theology of translation. The Geneva Bible was an English version that come out before the King James, but a lot of church leaders felt it was too Calvinistic. More of an issue was when modernism crept into the Church in the 1800's, which is when the number of translations equipped. One example of a verse affected is Isaiah 7:14 - the King James says, "The virgtn shall conceive. The Revised Standard and others read "The young woman shall conceive." There claim is that "young woman" is a more accurate to the text, claiming there was no Hebrew word which meant virgin. The counter is that the original audience saw "young woman" and "virgin" as one and the same. It may sound like it's a textual issue, but belief in the Virgin Birth was all over this.
So now I've focused on a handful of translations when I'm studying: the New King James Version (my go to for almost 45 years), the Legacy Standard Bible, the Christian Standard Bible, the Complete Jewish Bible, and the Jubilee Bible 2000, translated into English and Spanish by a missionary to Columbia, whose goal was to go back to the reformation era.
Thank you for taking the time to read this. Hope you were blessed and that it gave you something to think about.
No comments:
Post a Comment