FAQs

Are there "good" and "bad" versions of the Bible?

Yes, there are good and bad versions of the Bible. This can be put down to three main factors: 1. The original languages are not spoken any longer; 2. The original manuscripts (MSS) of the Bible are long gone (what has survived are thousands of copies, each with slight to slightly-significant variations); 3. The motives, methods and ability of translators will vary.

      1. The original languages are not spoken any longer

The Bible was originally recorded around 2,000 and more years ago, in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. Quite simply, it takes a great deal of study to be able to read and understand these anywhere near as well as the original writers understood what they were writing. Take the New Testament as an example. Written entirely in 2,000 year old Greek, which no one speaks today, a scholar must study not only the language, but also seek to understand the culture, writing customs, phrases specific to locales and time periods, and significant uses of individual words in order to better grasp intended meanings of phrases.

As an example, I'm looking at the can of fly spray near me, which bears the phrase: "Shake can well." Now we understand this to mean to give the can a good shake in order to mix up the contents. Someone examining our language from afar, however, may only be familiar with the medical inference of "well", and interpret it to mean that shaking the can will make it healthier. An even more energetic interpretation may note the capital letter in "Shake" and assume it is a proper noun (or name) and interpret the phrase to the effect of "Gee, Shake is really good at welling" (and then derive a theory about what "welling" is - perhaps making someone well?); or possibly the use of "well" to describe a hole in the ground from which you draw water could add further confusion.

I hope with this I have demonstrated the need for rigour and a balanced approach in attempting to translate languages that are no longer spoken. But it also means that as further studies are done, and as more old manuscripts are found and analysed, our collective knowledge of the language will increase and become more accurate - so a Bible translated four hundred years ago lacks the combined advantages of four hundred years of archaeological finds and scholarship that a modern translation may enjoy.

      2. The original manuscripts of the Bible are long gone - though we have thousands of copies

The original authors either wrote or dictated the Bible onto parchment, and either had it passed around, or sent it as a letter (or both). When recipients realised the value of the writings, they would have them copied. As time passed and the writings became Scripture, more and more copies were made - and copies of the copies. As centuries passed, copies of copies of copies of copies were made. You can imagine, if a mistake were made in a "third generation" copy, it would spread to every copy made from it, and every copy made from every copy after it.

The Church today, then, has been presented with thousands of manuscripts, dating from various time periods and each having different variants. There is great effort, by incredibly skilled and passionate people, placed into tracking these variants, and placing them in time, and working out which "family" of manuscripts a particular manuscript comes from. The "most reliable" manuscripts, are those which date from the earliest time and match up with other manuscripts most accurately. As time passes, new manuscripts may be found or new light may be shed on existing manuscripts making it clear or clearer what the original renerding of a phrase was.

      3. Sometimes the motives of the translators will vary

Translators will translate the Bible for differing reasons. The eventuating Bible may be meant for kids, for teens, for theologians, for study or for devotioanal use. One, such as J.B. Phillips (who translated for the benefit of the youths in his parish during World War 2), may translate so that his parishioners could understand the NT in their day to day language. Major Study Bible translations may aim to produce a product as close to the original as possible, so as not to confuse any theology. Others may be translating in order to produce a Bible that is readily understood by new Christians. Others may have a political influence on their translation that will help them decide which way to translate certain expressions (e.g., whether or not to specifically insert reference to females in the text where it originally only referred to men, but likely was meant to include women as well).

Others may be influenced by their idea of God and theology, and tailor their translation to their existing idea of God, rather than simply translate as accurately as possible. These latter include, as far as i can see, those who translated the Jehovah's Witness translation of the Bible - the New World translation. There are actually words mixed up, added and removed in order to change the text just enough so that their preconceived idea of God can fitinto the Bible. Quite obviously, I would not recommend any translation that fits into this category!

All of this explains why there are differing translations. The good ones are the ones written for the purpose which you intend to use them for, and translated without the influence of politics or a preconceived notion of theology. The mediocre ones are the ones that use or used manuscripts now revealed to be less trustworthy. The bad ones are those produced by people who want God to be the way they imagine Him and so change little things here and there to suit their theology.

I discuss different translations in some detail here, but I will say that I believe the NASB, NIV, ESV, RSV to be majoritively good translations (I personally use the ESV the most). The KJV was a God-send in its time, it was a breakthrough and a great gift of God to his people, but it is based on less reliable manuscripts and the scholarship involved is four hundred years old. The updated versions of the KJV may be better, I haven't had much opportunity to study them.

Different translations may employ different philosophies in finding the most accuracy. Some will try to translate literally (i.e., word for word), and this may come out very stiff and hard to read, for a Greek sentence is very different to an English sentence. Others will read a statement in the Greek, understand it and put it down in English words that match the meaning to the greatest possible extent (this is called "Dynamic Equivalence"). Still others may look at a large passage, and translate and restructure it to make it as free flowing as possible. Generally, these are not as highly accurate as the others, but are good for devotions etc, where individual sentence structures are not examined for deeper meaning.

   More Information  (top)

Check out various Translations of the Bible for more information on different translations. Also, a good book written on the subject is by Bruce M. Metzger, "The Bible in Translation". Metzger is himself probably one of the most respected Bible translators around, but I did find that his criticism of works were somewhat one-sided - he was able to find faults in most translations that he had nothing to do with. It would be nice to have a second opinion, removed from such a biased view (nevertheless, he provides fascinating insight into the translation process, as well as the factors translators must consider etc.) A great website on the subject, which I highly recommend is http://www.bible-researcher.com