|
A
Guide to Modern Versions of the Bible
New
King James Version New American Standard Bible English
Standard Version Revised Standard Version New International
Version New Living Translation New English Bible
By
Dr. Herbert Samworth
If you
had been looking to purchase a Bible fifty years ago, your choices
would have been between the King James Version and one or two others.
However, today you are faced with shelves and shelves of Bibles
that command their own section in your local Christian bookstore.
It is easy to be overwhelmed by the sheer number of available options.
Which one should you acquire? What factors should be taken into
consideration before making your decision?
We will
look at a short list of seven of the most popular versions of the
Bible that are available today. But why these seven? First, these
versions, with one exception, include only translations that use
the most current versions of the Hebrew and Greek texts as the bases
for the translations. Second, the translation work on the Bibles
listed has been done by a committee, not by just one person. Experience
has demonstrated that in a multitude of translators, as well as
counselors, there is wisdom. Third, we must also state that only
translations have been selected for inclusion. Paraphrases of the
Scriptures have increased in popularity in recent years but they
tend to be the work of an individual. Finally, all of the versions
and translations that will be noted are for Protestants and Evangelicals.
While there has been an increase in English translations for Roman
Catholics, they have not been included in this list.

METHODS
OF TRANSLATION
Before
we look at the various versions, a reminder is needed concerning
how the translation of the Bible is done. The translator of Gods
Word has an awesome responsibility. On the one hand there is the
concern to be faithful to the original source languages. The Scriptures
were originally given in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. This necessitates
a thorough knowledge of the original language in both its culture
and context. In addition, in the case of the Scriptures, there is
an additional difficulty because there is both a chronological and
cultural gap between the world of the Bible and the world of the
twenty-first century.
The translator
also has the responsibility to communicate meaningfully the authors
message to the reader in the readers culture and context.
Therefore the translator must be skillful in the understanding of
the receptor language and be acquainted with his audience.
If the
items noted above were the only obstacles, the task would be daunting
in itself. However, we must add another factor to the translation
process. That is the factor of the theory or method used in the
translation. There are two basic theories of translation although
there may be a great amount of overlap between them.
The first
is known as the formal or verbal equivalence translation
theory. In this method the translator selects a word in the receptor
language that is the equivalent to the one found in the source language.
If this principle is applied in a slavish manner it can result in
an awkward literalistic translation. However, if done in order to
assure meaningful communication, the result is a translation that
effectively communicates the original sense of the source language.
The second
translation theory is called the functional or dynamic
equivalence method. The translator attempts to reproduce in
the receptor language the thoughts and ideas of the source language
in equivalent concepts. While this may result in meaningful communication,
there is the danger of distorting the meaning or sense of the source
language.
It is important to state that the two theories of translation are
rarely accomplished perfectly. However, one or the other will predominate
in the translation.
THE
LIST
The NEW
KING JAMES VERSION: This is the only translation that does not
use the latest critical editions of the Greek and Hebrew texts.
The Textus Receptus remains the primary textual base of this translation.
Perhaps some of the history of this King James Version, also known
as the "Authorized Version," will be helpful to the reader.
|
WHAT
IS THE TEXTUS RECEPTUS?
The
Textus Receptus (TR), or "Received Text," is the
term used to refer to the first printed editions of the
Greek New Testament as they appeared from 1516-1633. Most
prominent of these publications are editions by Erasmus,
Robert Stephanus, Theodore Beza, and the Elzevir brothers.
These editions all drew from a mix of available Greek manuscripts
and became the text basis of the Bible for centuries. But
throughout the nineteenth century, scores of manuscripts,
dated earlier than those used by the TR scholars, were coming
to light, and the age of the "critical text" had
begun. By 1882 the Wescott-Hort Greek New Testament had
supplanted the TR as the standard edition of the Greek text.
|
There is
no doubt that until recently the dominant version of the Bible in
the English language has been the King James Version. Originally
printed in 1611, it has undergone several revisions, although minor,
during its history. It has been praised for the majesty of its language
and beauty of expression. However, with newly discovered editions
of the Greek texts and subsequent translations, the King James Version
began to decline in popularity. Changes have taken place in the
English language that rendered the Shakespearian language and cadence
of the King James outdated. Complaints were voiced that its language
was unintelligible to an increasing number of people.
However,
among certain groups the King James Version has retained its popularity.
Some have gone so far as to adopt what has been called a "King
James only" mentality. Thus the King James Version is not only
considered to be the best translation of the Scriptures but the
only acceptable one. This position has escalated to the point where
there are some who believe that the translation of the King James
Version was providentially guided by the Holy Spirit and the translation
is without error. Even the original texts of the Hebrew and Greek
can be corrected by it. Although this is an extreme position, many
people, especially of the older generations, are convinced that
no other version is worthy to dislodge the King James Version from
its dominant position.
In an attempt
to safeguard the position of the King James, Thomas Nelson published
what is called the New King James Version. The translators of the
New King James emphasized their concern to continue the same tradition
as the King James Version. However, the translators have updated
the English in a more contemporary manner while seeking to preserve
"for todays readers the spiritual treasures found especially
in the Authorized Version of the Holy Scriptures."
The New
King James Bible would be a good choice for someone who is looking
to retain the elevation of language and diction found in the original
Authorized Version.
All the
remaining versions surveyed use the critical editions of the Greek
New Testament and the Hebrew Text. We will note them in a spectrum,
beginning with those that use the formal translation theory to those
that are translated using the dynamic equivalence theory.
The
NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE has received high marks for its
fidelity to the original meaning of the original text while being
criticized for its cumbersome English. This version can be traced
back to the first translation made from the Westcott and Hort text
in 1881-85. This translation was called the English Revised Version
and was printed in 1885. The translation committee included members
from England and the United States. The American committee disagreed
with a number of choices selected by the British committee but agreed
not to publish them for sixteen years. In 1901 the American Standard
Version (ASV) was published which included the changes made by the
American committee. It proved to be an accurate, albeit literal
and somewhat cumbersome, translation. In the 1960s an updating
of this version was undertaken by the Lockman Foundation which holds
the copyright. The Foundation was distressed that the use of the
American Standard Version was "fast decreasing from the scene."
In the words of the Lockman Foundation, they felt "an urgency
to rescue this noble achievement from an inevitable demise, to preserve
it as a heritage for coming generations, and to do so in such a
form as the demands of passing time dictate."
The New
American Standard New Testament was published in 1963 and the entire
Bible in 1971. The NASB continues the rigid verbal equivalence translation
as found in the ASV. In its favor it can be stated that it reflects
the wording of the original languages and is a good version for
Bible study. However, it also shows the defects of the ASV in that
it is not as readable for devotional and worship purposes. Later
editions of the NASB have sought to correct its wooden style by
removing archaic words and improving its vocabulary and style.
The
ENGLISH STANDARD VERSION is the latest translation to be
issued from the press. It is too early to tell if it will be successful
but initial sales have been very encouraging. The ESV claims to
be "an essentially literal translation, emphasizing word-for-word
precision." Thus it is to be considered a formal translation.
The ESV also has an interesting history. It is an updating of the
Revised Standard Version (see below). The Revised Standard Version
has never been accepted by the evangelical community because of
its association with the World Council of Churches and translations
that appear to deny the virgin birth of Christ. While the RSV has
not been popular among Evangelicals in the United States, it has
been received with a greater appreciation in England.
The strength
of the English Standard Version is its combination of formal adherence
to the text of Scripture and beauty of language. It is also in a
position to benefit from the controversy surrounding the gender
inclusive policies being followed by Todays New International
Version. In addition there appears to be a waning of interest in
the functional or dynamic equivalence theory of translation. If
one is looking for a balanced combination of scholarship in translation
and fluency of language, one might consider this version.
The parent
to the English Standard Version was the REVISED STANDARD VERSION.
First published in 1946 in the New Testament and 1952 in the Old
Testament, it has received mixed reviews. Several unfortunate translations
of key verses have tainted it with charges of liberalism and the
fact that the copyright is owned by the National Council of Churches
has reinforced the negative image. This is rather unfortunate because,
on balance, the version is an admirable attempt to balance fidelity
of translation in a formal manner and beauty of language.
The Revised
Standard Version has been updated to include changes in the text
base and to update language. This version has also received criticism
for its inclusion of the Apocrypha that makes it more acceptable
in ecumenical circles and gender inclusive language. Despite these
criticisms, many are convinced that this version is the most up
to date in biblical scholarship.
The fifth
version of the Bible that we wish to consider is the NEW INTERNATIONAL
VERSION. This Bible and the two that follow are translated according
to the functional or dynamic equivalence theory.
The New
International Version project was undertaken because of dissatisfaction
with the Revised Standard Version. A committee was formed in 1963
to prepare a new translation for the conservative/evangelical community.
Additional support for this translation came from the International
Bible Society and the Zondervan Publishing House.
The New
Testament was printed in 1973 and the Old Testament followed in
1978. As stated above this translation was done in the dynamic equivalence
method and this limits its use for Biblical study and word analysis.
None of this has hindered its acceptance because the New International
Version has become a best seller and is the most popular version
today both in evangelical and the larger Christian circles.
Controversy
has dogged this translation, however. Several years ago there were
plans to produce a gender neutral edition of the NIV. Strong conservative
pressure prevented these plans from going forward and an agreement
to cancel the edition was signed by both parties. However, within
the last several months, this agreement was formally disavowed by
the International Bible Society and an edition called Todays
New International Version (TNIV) was announced. This edition will
use "inclusive language." The announcement raised an outburst
from the conservatives who also were parties to the original agreement.
As of this date the controversy continues and whether or not this
edition comes to the market remains to be seen.
The plans
to produce this version have opened again the whole question of
Bible translation and the correct manner of doing it. While it is
regrettable that this issue has divided many evangelicals, there
is the real possibility that the long term effect will be for good
because Bible translation theory, the implied catering to contemporary
and cultural pressures, and the marketing of various versions that
are part of Bible production will now be examined with greater scrutiny.
Hopefully, this will result in a greater emphasis being placed on
the importance of a translation that is both faithful to the text
in all areas and its readability. However, a good translation must
also lead further to the reading, studying and application of the
Scriptures to the life of the individual.
Another
version that has captured the attention of the Evangelical community
is called the NEW LIVING TRANSLATION. This version also has
an interesting history. In the early 1970s, Kenneth Taylor
of Tyndale Publishing House produced a paraphrase known as the Living
Bible. This attempt was to make the Scriptures as meaningful in
the modern English idiom as possible to the general reader from
a position of rigid orthodoxy.
The commercial
success of the Living Bible was overwhelming and it became very
popular among Evangelicals despite its limitations as to coherence
with the original text. In the mid-1990s a decision was made
to update the Living Bible. A translation team was assembled to
rework the translation and modify it from a paraphrase to a dynamic
equivalence translation. The language was also improved to make
it more accurate and readable. This is the first case where a paraphrase
was modified to become a dynamic equivalence translation. The New
Living Translation has been marketed extensively and has proven
to be popular among Evangelicals.
The final
version that we will note is called the NEW ENGLISH BIBLE.
This version was originally conceived in the late 1940s. It
was one of the first British attempts at a dynamic equivalence translation
and was well accepted in England because of its attempt to retain
formal and traditional English vocabulary and diction. However,
its popularity with British readers was not matched by readers from
other countries due to its British character.
This version,
like many of the others we have noted, has also been updated to
remove some of its limitations and to improve its style. It has
never been popular in the United States and the reader may encounter
some difficulty in locating a copy.
TRANSLATION
COMPARISON
Romans
3:23-26
| NKJV |
NASB |
ESV |
RSV |
NIV |
NLT |
NEB |
| For
all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, |
For
all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, |
For
all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, |
Since
all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, |
For
all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, |
For
all have sinned; all fall short of God's glorious standard.
|
For
all alike have sinned, and are deprived of the divine splendour,
|
| being
justified freely by His grace through the redemption that
is in Christ Jesus, |
being
justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which
is in Christ Jesus; |
and
are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption
that is in Christ Jesus, |
they
are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption
which is in Christ Jesus, |
and
are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that
came by Christ Jesus. |
Yet
now God in his gracious kindness declares us not guilty. He
has done this through Christ Jesus, who has freed us by taking
away our sins. |
and
all are justified by Gods free grace alone, through
his act of liberation in the Person of Christ Jesus. |
| whom
God set forth to be a propitiation by His blood, through faith,
to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance
God had passed over the sins that were previously committed,
|
whom
God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through
faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness,
because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins
previously committed; |
whom
God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received
by faith. This was to show God's righteousness,
because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former
sins. |
whom
God put forward as an expiation by his blood, to be received
by faith. This was to show God's righteousness,
because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former
sins; |
God
presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in
his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because
in
his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand
unpunished; |
For
God sent Jesus to take the punishment for our sins and to
satisfy Gods anger against us. We are made right with
God when we believe that Jesus shed his blood, sacrificing
his life for us. God was being entirely fair and just when
he did not punish those who sinned in former times. |
For
God designed him to be the means of expiating sin by his sacrificial
death, effective through faith. God meant by this to demonstrate
his justice, because in his forbearance he had overlooked
the sins of the past |
| to
demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He
might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in
Jesus. |
for
the demonstration, I say, of His righteousness at the present
time, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who
has faith in Jesus. |
It
was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that
he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith
in Jesus. |
it
was to prove at the present time that he himself is righteous
and that he justifies him who has faith in Jesus. |
he
did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so
as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith
in Jesus. |
And
he is entirely fair and just in this present time when he
declares sinners to be right in his sight because they believe
in Jesus. |
to
demonstrate his justice now in the present, showing that he
is himself just and also justifies any man who puts his faith
in Jesus. |
CONCLUSION
On the
one hand, there is reason to lament the proliferation of versions
because the reason for the new translations appears to be market
driven. On the other hand, there is reason for thankfulness that
the Word of God is available to us in so many versions.
However,
we must understand two things. First, we must keep in mind that
the Bible must be prayed over, studied, and committed to the heart
in order for it to function in the manner that God intended. The
truth of Scripture is given to us for living. We may own every version
of the Scriptures that is available and not be profited one bit.
We must be doers of the Word. Debates can be multiplied regarding
the correct way to translate the Bible. It certainly is a topic
that merits serious consideration. But it is the power of the Word
of God that effects the changes in thinking and doing that are so
critical today.
In the
second place we must remember there remain countless peoples in
the world today who have never owned or even seen a copy of the
Scriptures. Gratitude should flow from our hearts to God for the
privilege of having the Word of God in our own language. However,
in addition to gratitude, there must be the determination to make
the Word of God available to all the peoples of the world in a language
they can understand.

|