Translating the Bible

There is a ton of Bible translations to choose from that require near spy-like skills to decipher their acronyms. Today, Carl Dixon cuts through the confusion in this article. Because of difficulties with the original link, I have included the complete article in this post.

Translating the Bible

Have you ever wondered about the difficulties of translating the Bible?

The Bible was originally written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Most of the Old Testament was written in Hebrew, parts of it in Aramaic, and the New Testament was produced in Koine Greek—a dialect which had a very short life span of about three centuries. Generally speaking, the biblical languages, as we see them presented in the Bible, remained stable for hundreds of years. That’s why we have a great deal of knowledge regarding these languages.

Going to the source

There are literally thousands of Greek and Hebrew manuscripts that scholars today can readily access due to the blessing of computer technology. When a new translation is produced, all of the available manuscripts are checked and rechecked.

There are those who say that some of the very old English translations come from better manuscripts than the newer ones we now possess. This is simply not true.

It is impossible to translate the Bible literally and have it make sense in English. While it is true that the King James Version (KJV) was a very good translation in its day and very accurate to the available Greek manuscripts, the new English Standard Version (ESV), for instance, takes advantage of those manuscripts, along with centuries of scholarship derived from the investigation of these as well as more recently discovered manuscripts. I have read accounts of personal attacks on some of the modern scholars on translation committees of various Bible versions, but these attacks are irrelevant unless someone can prove they subverted the meaning of the underlying biblical language. The personal life circumstances of a particular translator, or even his beliefs, are not immediately significant unless it can be proven he specifically intended to translate the text inaccurately. These modern translations are often the work of a large group of scholars, who check each other’s work.  Even after the translation is published, scholars from all sides are free to check the work for accuracy—and they do!

Building a bridge with words between yesterday to today

It is impossible to translate the Bible literally and have it to make sense in English. The biblical languages are governed by different rules of grammar and can even lack punctuation. Thus, if we were to take a supposed equivalent and translate it woodenly, it might not make any sense. There might not even be an English equivalent: maybe two or three English words might be needed to translate just one Hebrew, Greek, or Aramaic word. So, as you can see, translating requires careful scholarship and the ability to discern the right English words to adequately reflect every nuance contained in the Bible.

Translators even have to take into consideration how certain English words might be understood where the translation is produced. In America, a word can have completely different meanings depending on which part of the country you’re saying it in. For instance, some people can drink ”pop,” while others can choose to hang out with their ”Pop” while having a soda.

There are no “perfect” or “God ordained” translations.

The same is true internationally speaking. Consider the following sentence: “I am mad about my flat.” If I were saying this in America, you might think I was upset over my bike’s flat tire. But if my wife Valerie said the same thing while traveling in Scotland or London, you would hear her raving about her apartment.

Can you see how difficult it could be to translate the Bible literally?

To provide an example, here is a literal translation I produced on John 3:16 that preserves the Greek word order:

So for loved God the world that the Son his only he gave that whoever believes in him not should perish but have life eternal.

Now, if we’re familiar with the verse, we could probably see the meaning. But here’s another verse:

John 8:33, author’s translation

They answered to him seed Abraham we are and to no one we have been under bondage ever how you say free?

John 8:33, NIV

They answered him, “We are Abraham’s descendants and have never been slaves of anyone. How can you say that we shall be set free?”

One of my favorite examples of translating literally from one language to another is found in the biblical phrase, The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak. A computer translating the Russian literally ended up with this: The vodka was fine but the meat was weak. Imagine a Bible translated completely literally. It would probably be so cumbersome to read that sooner or later we’d give up in frustration.

Trying to hit a moving target

Another problem comes with diachronic changes, or changes that occur in a language over time. I recently decided to read through an early edition of the KJV—a very good translation first published in 1611—but gave up after one month of daily reading, the reason being I had spent a lot of time looking up unfamiliar words, only to discover that they had been made completely obsolete.

Here again is John 3:16, this time according to the KJV published in 1611. I assure you there is no spelling error. For God so loued ye world, that he gaue his only begotten Sonne: that whosoeuer beleeueth in him, should not perish, but haue euerlasting life. Aren’t you glad that even the venerable KJV has been vastly retranslated over the centuries?!

Why it’s good to sample from a variety

There is also the controversy over political correctness. For example, the Today’s New International Version (TNIV) has been cancelled by Zondervan Publishing because of the many complaints over the translation of Greek words such as adelphos, which means “brother.” (The translators translated the word “brother and sister” almost every time it appeared in the Bible, and inevitably they were correct some of the time and wrong at others.)

Read the Bible daily and ask God the Holy Spirit to help you understand the message he has for you.

The problem here is that our English language has changed. For example, the word ‘man’ or ‘mankind’ has now been changed to ‘humankind’ or ‘men and women’ rather than just man meaning both in the new NIV.

I understand the difficulty some of us experience with these changes. To my ear ‘humankind’ actually sounds silly. But that is not the case for those who have been raised with that word rather than ‘mankind.’ So I can choose to use a translation that maintains ‘man’ and ‘mankind’ but I must realize that the language does change and we should all desire to communicate as accurately as possible to our present culture.

This goes to show you don’t need to stick to just one version. I often point out failures in the new—not to mention trusted—New International Version (NIV) translation I preach from. After all, there are no “perfect” or “God ordained” translations: they all contain mistakes, but hopefully none are significant enough to cause us to stray from the important doctrines of faith. When I study, I read the passages in at least a dozen translations, in addition to referring to the original languages.

So, use the NIV, KJV, or ESV. Or, if you’d prefer, the New American Standard Bible (NASB), the New King James Version (NKJV), the New Living Translation (NLT), or the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV). Read the Bible daily and ask God the Holy Spirit to help you understand the message he has for you.