Author: Johan Brand
Introduction
Since the ancient manuscripts of the Old- and New Testament were written in Aramaic, Hebrew, and Greek, it seems natural that they had to be translated, explaining the thousands of copies that exist today. Before we look at our modern-day translations, it is imperative to understand the formation of the biblical canon (explored in the previous article, Canon ‘Who’ from the Council of ‘What’?). It is also vital to comprehend how these texts were originally carried over, which is what we will examine in this article. The Bible has been translated into roughly 2200 languages, and many of those languages have several distinctive versions of the Bible as well. For instance, there are 98 mainstream versions of the Bible in the English language, exclusively. Moreover, there are approximately 900 different English translations, if all the paraphrased versions are considered. This could lead to the illusion that Scripture’s message had been distorted, or that some versions of the Bible are more accurate than others (notwithstanding, the latter statement could debatably be true in regards to a minority of these translations).
The Transmission of the Text and Textual Criticism
First, in getting to the modern Bible translations, it is vital to be acquainted with the manner in which the Bible was passed down throughout the ages. Amongst historians, this “passing down” process is more commonly known as the transmission of the text. This is important, especially because the books within the Bible are of the oldest literature in human history. Thus, if the core doctrines of one’s belief system are based on this set of books, surely one would want to be assured that the text is accurate and reliable. The text of the Bible – as we have it today – is the product of many years of copying and re-copying by mainly the scribes of the Jewish and Christian faiths.
To give some context, most individuals in ancient times did not have the ability to read and write. If you were a woman, you would never be able to be educated. If you were a man, you could learn the art of reading and writing if you were lucky, since most young men would follow in the footsteps of their fathers – adopting the family business (such as being a carpenter, a fisherman, a farmer, etc.). Thus, most people would learn by ear, listening to parables and stories narrated to them by rabbis in synagogues, if we look at the Jewish culture, for example. Stories were told around campfires. That is how young Jewish boys would know the Torah off by heart … they would memorise it (often in the form of poetry and song), since these stories were repeated over and over again. Scribes were lucky enough to be educated, since they would follow particular rabbis, prophets, or apostles, writing down segments of their teachings, sermons, and life-events. In fact, most of the books in the Bible was written by scribes, and not necessarily by the book’s author. This possibility would be true, especially if one considers scriptural authors such as James and John, who were mere fishermen. Typically, they would never be educated in reading and writing.
Now, the later scribes (especially the Jewish scribes) who would copy the texts of earlier scribes would take meticulous care when copying to avoid errors. Unfortunately, none of the original copies are in existence anymore. Nevertheless, there are approximately 27 000 copies – based on the original copies – in existence today. These manuscripts were thoroughly copied by hand. Although considerable effort was made to copy accurately, mistakes did creep in and none are exactly alike. In authorising whether a copy was reliable, it had to be criticised. This process is known as textual criticism. Factors that would be taken in consideration would be the quality and age of the manuscripts, early translations of the Bible into other languages, and who the copyist was and what is known about the original author's writing style. You are probably asking by now, “Okay, can we get to the Bible on my nightstand … can I trust it?”
What about All Those Translations Then?
There are a certain set of rules that scholars have to adhere to, when translating these early copies of the Bible into all our modern-day languages. Those rules apply to every version you could think of, ranging from your old-school King James Version, to the New International Version, and even to The Message by Eugene Peterson. I know right? Shocking … (pun intended).
What then are those rules? Well, the difference between the original language (Aramaic, Hebrew, or Greek) and the receptor language (e.g. English, Afrikaans, and Russian) has to be considered. Languages differ with regard to the meanings associated with words, grammar and idioms. This is true not only in regards to different languages, but also within one language. Greek today, for example, is very different from ancient Greek. Similarly, English today differs immensely from English 300 years ago. The same applies to Afrikaans, Spanish, siSwati, and every other language. A modern-day example is that the word “gay” bears a very different meaning today, opposed to what it meant from the 1200s until about 50 years ago. It would be commonly understood to mean “joyful” where, in contemporary English, it refers to a person with a same-sex orientation. In getting back to the point, in light of the discussion above, words should be changed as time passes by. If everything was directly and literally translated from the original texts, the message of the text would in fact be distorted. We simply don’t comprehend the idioms that were used by the biblical authors, in modern language. Thus, explaining the change of wording in the translation process. Words change in meaning over time and so do customs and culture.
Another factor that scholars should consider is the historical distance between the time when the original copy was composed and the present day. This box is ticked in all the modern-day translations. The original copies that were in use and circulated over the centuries are exclusively used in getting to our versions of the Bible, today. 85% of the New Testament’s 27 000 original copies are identical, which leaves 15% variation between them. Hence, 99% of these variants make no difference at all in the meaning and general message of the text. Almost 75% of these variants are spelling mistakes, and 25% are word-ordering and grammatical errors. To the translation, this leaves only about 1% of the variations to be of any concern at all. This is encouraging, and it gives one reason to believe that what we have today is extremely close to what was originally composed. So, in answering your question … yes! You can trust the various modern translations of the Bible.
Numerous English Versions, Yet One Consistent Message
There are three major theories of translation, namely literal translations (a.k.a. “word-for-word” translations), dynamic equivalent (a.k.a. “thought-for-thought” translations), and free translations (a.k.a. “paraphrased” translations).
With literal translations, the translator attempts to keep as close as possible to the wording and phrasing of the original language. This kind of translation keeps the historical distance at its lowest, and it keeps the translator’s viewpoint at a minimum. Examples include the King James Version (KJV), New King James Version (NKJV), English Standard Version (ESV), and the New American Standard Bible (NASB).
The goal of dynamic equivalence is generally to translate grammatical constructions, words, and phrases into exact contemporary equivalents. The factual and historical matters are typically kept intact. Nevertheless, language, style, and grammar are usually updated, so as to simplify the original ideas for the present-day reader. Examples include New International Version (NIV), New Revised Standard Version (NRSV), New Living Translation (NLT), and the Good News Bible (GNB).
Last, but not least, with free translations, the translator tries to translate ideas from the original language to the receptor language, with no intention of using the precise wording or structure. Thus, the historical distance is eliminated. These versions are popular for its simplicity, as they are easy to read and comprehend. Examples include The Message (MSG), The Living Bible (LB), The Passion Translation (TPT), and the Phillips Version.
Take note that some Bible translations won’t necessarily fall into a particular category, as they might have characteristics of more than one of the theories. For instance, The Amplified Version (AMP) would fall somewhere between dynamic equivalence and free translations, since its historical distance is kept intact, however, opinions of commentators are offered throughout its pages, in brackets.
Conclusion
If you come from a culture or tradition where you were perhaps warned against certain Bible translations, I hope that this article was somewhat helpful for you. Thinking back to when I was a young Christian, I certainly came across individuals with this worldview. Some of these Christians base their arguments for instance on comparisons between a later translation and an earlier translation of the Bible in the very same receptor language. This kind of argumentation is inconsistent and misinformed, for every recognised modern Bible translation is in fact translated from the original languages, and moreover, textual criticism is imposed on the work of each translator. May you find that God still works and speaks through the ancient stories that are combined in this book. May you also find that much of the wisdom and principles offered therein can be learnt from and applied in the modern world we find ourselves in.
References:
King D 2019. Complete Guide to the Three Types of Bible Translations. Online article. Accessed from https://bibledude.life/types-of-bible-translations/, 2020-07-10.
UNLEARN the lies 2018. Why are there so many different Bible translations, and which ones should we use? Online video. Accessed from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gb67KvD8LRk,
2020-07-10.
Comments