Dan Wallace’s recommendations for Bible translations

Read his paper “why so many versions” also "The Majority Text and the Original Text: Are They Identical?" (posted on the Biblical Studies Foundation web site).

  • Today we are talking about English translations of the Bible
  • The good, the bad and the ugly
  • Can you trust them?
  • Are they intended to undermine your faith?
  • We already spoke a lot about manuscripts and transmission of the text
  • But most of us are reading a translation, not Greek and Hebrew… so
  • What’s a good translation for you?

WHY new translations?

  • $$$ - publishing companies want their own translation so they don’t have to pay royalties to other publishers
  • And Bibles sell big
  • Consistently ignored on best seller lists
  • English changes –
  • Examples when KJV is discussed
  • New Greek manuscripts
  • We talked about some of those specifics last time
  • sometimes confirming readings and causing a switch between the footnote and the text
  • 1611 KJV essentially based on 6 manuscripts 10-13th century
  • 1881 RV based on 2,000 manuscripts, the earliest in the 4th century
  • Today, over 5,800 manuscripts – earliest in late 1st or early 2nd century
  • New insights into old languages – examples?
  • In 1895 we came to find, through discovery of 2,000 year old Greek manuscripts, that the NT Greek was common, not high society
  • Before this scholars often thought the NT Greek was a special Greek invented by the Holy Spirit
  • They even called it “Holy Ghost Greek”
  • There were over 500 words unknown outside the Bible
  • Now, about 50
  • Example:
  • “it is finished” was seen on business receipts meaning “paid in full”
  • “only begotten” was shown to mean “one and only” or “unique”
  • John 3:16
  • So, it was thought that translations of it should reflect that
  • If it was written into common language it should be translated that way
  • But this old translation just “sounds like the Bible”
  • No, it sounds like your memories of hearing the Bible
  • Let’s not spiritualize what we “like” or are “used to”
  • To the early church, the Bible sounded like normal language.
  • You do realize you have a translation, right?
  • If you spoke French, Spanish or Swahili you would also need to ask “which translations are good in my language”
  • There are literally hundreds of English translations… There’s no way I’m looking at each one
  • So, we will focus on a few popular ones which most of us are likely to run into.
  • We will look at 3 issues relating to each translation
  • 1- Textual Basis – what manuscripts were used
  • Fewer or more. All or some. Older minority or younger majority
  • They aren’t that different – perhaps 2% difference in the NT
  • This should be obvious from the last message I gave in this series
  • Is there a conspiracy?
  • Deity of Christ
  • 1 Tim 3:16 – less
  • 1 John 5:7 – less, for good reason
  • John 1:18 - more
  • Phil 2:6 - more
  • Titus 2:13 - more
  • 2 Peter 1:1 - more
  • No, the more I study and learn the more I’m not conspiratorial
  • Though some translations show liberal or conservative influence
  • 2- Translation methodology
  • formal equivalence
  • Word-for-word (more literal)
  • Advantage – nuance
  • Disadvantage - nonsense
  • Dynamic equivalence
  • Thought-for-thought (phrase-for-phrase)
  • Matt 1:18 “having it in the belly” “pregnant”
  • Advantage – easier to get
  • Disadvantage – easy to miss things
  • The nature of translating is that there will always be weaknesses to point out, given that a choice was made between these two
  • 3- Peculiarities – interesting things about a particular translation
  • Textual Basis
  • On OT
  • With DSS or without
  • Two major groupings
  • Majority –
  • Erasmus’ Greek text
  • End of Revelation translated from Latin into Greek
  • Created a whole new variant “book of life” instead of “tree of life”
  • Most ancient –
  • Earlier texts recovered later
  • To simplify this for our purposes
  • The younger majority or the older minority

Details about specific translations – hopefully, without nitpicking

  • KJV - 1611
  • Text basis – Erasmus (6 Greek texts)
  • A revision, not a new translation
  • Based on the Bishop’s Bible
  • Includes “book of life” in Rev 22:19
  • “majority text” – but not always
  • 1 Jn 5:7 – not in the most ancient OR the majority
  • End of revelation has unique readings
  • “textusreceptus” – from KJV
  • Translation method
  • Word for word, BUT
  • Not entirely “God’s nostrils enlarged” is rendered “God became angry”
  • More literary than literal
  • Peculiarities
  • A highly respected work
  • Good translation
  • Literarily attractive
  • 1769 version of Dr. Blayney from Oxford is the one most widely used today
  • Over 300 words in the KJV no longer mean what they did in 1611
  • Chapiter, quaternion, ambassage, amerce, habergeon,
  • Have been lost to most people
  • Others have NEW meanings
  • Compel, closet, conversation (way of life), doctors (teachers), bewitchment (lead astray), carriages (luggage), instant (urgent/insistent), leasing (lying), meet (proper/fitting)
  • The translators knew Latin better than Greek
  • If you have been KJO influenced, this info should help
  • Most aren’t KJO, they are merely influenced and suspicious of other translations
  • Largely because of KJO propaganda and distortions
  • Please hear the whole story
  • RV – 1881 – most recently in 1901
  • TB
  • newish
  • TM
  • More literal than the KJV
  • NKJV - 1982
  • TB – same as KJV
  • “textusreceptus” received text
  • Which comes FROM the KJ
  • Other MSS were available but ignored.
  • TM – only update KJV
  • It’s a success at this
  • Word-for-word (exact equivalence)
  • A very good translation
  • Peculiarities
  • Not archaic – and not as literary
  • Has good translations of many unlikely readings
  • John 7:53-8:11
  • Even kept KJ addition of 1 John 5:7 – though it should not have
  • Has footnotes indicating where MSS disagree
  • Italicizes words that are added for clarity – a habit not all modern translations have.
  • Good if you don’t ignore the footnotes, but they are hard…
  • I prefer if the most likely reading is in the text and the less in the footnotes.
  • Good for textusreceptus folks
  • RSV – 1952
  • Used the KJV as a starting point
  • TB – NA 17th
  • So it leaves out several verses (we discussed last time)
  • TM – meant to be a middle ground between word-for-word and phrase-for-phrase
  • Literal equivalent and dynamic equivalent
  • Leans more literal
  • Seems to be good, though it was criticized
  • For TB and TM
  • Peculiarities
  • Still archaic in many ways, probably because of it’s fidelity to the KJV
  • This may have helped it
  • Thee, Thou, hast, hath (whenever in reference to God)
  • This isn’t a Greek or Hebrew thing, it’s a literary liberty
  • Criticized because of leaving out John 7:53-8:11, then it added it back in.
  • No longer in print
  • NRSV – a 1989 update to the RSV
  • TB – NU with Qumran influence in the OT (1 Sam 1-2)
  • Older MSS
  • TM
  • More dynamic than the RSV (thought-for-thought)
  • Peculiarities –
  • Nitpicky – OT prophecies tend to be translated less messianic (though within the realm of reason)
  • Ps 2, Ps 22:13, Dan 9:25, Zech 13:6
  • Gender inclusive (mixed bag)
  • The first to do so, and do so a lot
  • But not relating to God
  • Matt 18:15
  • 1 Tim 3:2 – revisionism – female bishops
  • Seems poorly translated
  • Accused of being liberally influenced
  • This doesn’t mean it’s a perversion
  • John 1:18 (NRSV) 18No one has ever seen God. It is God the only Son, who is close to the Father’s heart, who has made him known.
  • It’s generally a good dynamic translation
  • Which comes with its own weaknesses (unavoidably)
  • REB – a revision of the NEB
  • Done by British scholars
  • Gender inclusive without the compromises of the NRSV
  • Dan Wallace considers it and the NEB “probably the best English renderings of the Bible in terms of style done in the twentieth century.”
  • Includes apocrypha (like the REB)
  • Very dynamic, and smooth
  • NASB (1995)
  • TB –
  • OT
  • Rudolf Kittel’s BiblicaHebraica (with “the most recent light from lexicography, cognate languages, and the Dead Sea Scrolls”)
  • NT
  • Used the ASV (1901) as a starting point (as many do)
  • NA 26th typically
  • TM
  • Word-for-word wherever possible
  • Peculiarities
  • Used in more seminaries and scholastic circles than any other
  • When idioms are used, footnotes include the more word for word translation
  • Alternate translations are also included in some places
  • Instead of an obvious paragraph break in the text, new paragraphs are shown with a bold verse number 6 vs 6
  • * a bit wooden
  • But later was revised to help this without losing it’s rep as a good word-for-word
  • Any clumsiness is out of fidelity to the text
  • Dan Wallace “the NASB is probably the best word-for-word translation available today.” (Why So Many Versions - 2004)
  • ESV – 2001
  • TB –
  • Uses the 1971 RSV as a base text
  • Departs from it to improve or make it more current
  • OT
  • Masoretic – BibliaHebraicaStuttgartensia (5th ed., 1997)
  • Generally speaking, they stick to this source and rarely use the DSS or other sources.
  • NT
  • UBS 5th Corrected Edition
  • NA 28th
  • TM – a
  • Essentially Literal
  • From the intro - The ESV is an “essentially literal” translation that seeks as far as possible to reproduce the precise wording of the original text and the personal style of each Bible writer. As such, its emphasis is on “word-for-word” correspondence, at the same time taking full account of differences in grammar, syntax, and idiom between current literary English and the original languages. Thus it seeks to be transparent to the original text, letting the reader see as directly as possible the structure and exact force of the original.[1]… …As an essentially literal translation, taking into account grammar and syntax, the ESV thus seeks to carry over every possible nuance of meaning in the original words of Scripture into our own language. [2]
  • Peculiarities
  • Christos is translated as Christ
  • YHWH is Lord unless it is coupled with Adonai (which is translated “lord”), then it is God
  • Slave – (translated contextually) slave, bondservant or servant (I like this)
  • Gender “accurate”
  • Hasn’t drawn much criticism on this
  • Which I take to be a pretty good sign, perhaps it is done well
  • Endorsements from many great guys – Calvinists
  • Other stuff for me –
  • Dan 9:25 separates the 7 from the 62 and shows two different anointed ones (instead of one Messiah) – though there may be textual warrant for this.
  • Gen 49:10 doesn’t have “Shiloh” though still implies the Messiah reigning through Judah in context of the rest of scripture
  • HCSB – Holman Christian Standard Bible 2004
  • Brand new translation, not based on others. Though there will obviously be many similar readings.
  • TB – NU27th UBS4th, BibliaHebraicaStuttgartensia, 5th edition
  • TM – middle road “optimal equivalence”
  • As opposed to formal or dynamic
  • The idea seems good to me
  • More literal than the NIV but not as much as the NKJV, NASB, or even the ESV
  • Peculiarities
  • 100 scholars from 17 denominations
  • A lot of footnotes – specifically when thought-for-thought was used
  • This is something I think the NIV11 lacks
  • Some say it’s too literal, some that it’s too free – perhaps this means they did a good job
  • Yahweh(654 times, not all 6,828 times)
  • I like this
  • But some are concerned
  • LXX “Lord”
  • My opinion – The Holy Spirit inspired God’s name to be written
  • Who are we to take it out?
  • Don’t use it “in vain” not “don’t us it”
  • The pronunciation is aneducated guess
  • It’s certainly not “Jehovah”
  • Initial printing had it 75 times
  • Slave instead of servant (doulos)
  • Messiah instead of Christ (a minority of the time)
  • Generally, ignores modern gender issues and translates literally
  • Theological vocabulary words (Justification, sanctification, redemption, etc)
  • Contains a glossary (words like Abba, sanctification, centurion)
  • OT messianic passages tend to be more clearly messianic (in line with the LXX and their NT interpretation)
  • NIV - 1984
  • Most popular English translation in the world at the moment
  • Most attacked as well
  • TB – newer
  • TM – phrase-for-phrase,
  • Dan Wallace “I personally consider it the best phrase-for-phrase translation available today”
  • A careful bible study should not be done primarily based on a phrase-for-phrase translation
  • It’s gone through some revisions
  • TNIV (2005) – abandoned
  • NIV 2011
  • This is the only NIV on sale today
  • Peculiarities
  • Good scholars
  • Wide variety within evangelicalism (whatever that is)
  • Is it “gay” – 1 Cor 6:9 “men who have sex with men” with a footnote to keep this strong. It translates 2 words referring to active and passive homosexual sexual participants
  • Is it anti-Christ?
  • John 1:18 NIV11 “No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and[b] is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known”
  • Matt 1:16 correctly gives the clear identity of Mary as the “of whom”
  • NIV84 Matthew 1:16 and Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.
  • NIV11 Matt 1:16 “And Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, and Mary was the mother of Jesus who is called the Messiah
  • Phil 4:13 is harder to rip out of context
  • Phil 4:13 NIV11 “I can do all this through him who gives me strength”
  • “all this” instead of “all things”
  • “alien” is now “foreigners”
  • “saint” is “God’s people” or “the Lord’s people”
  • Gender issues
  • In many places it does a good job
  • Ps 1 “the one” “that person” “whose”
  • In a few places it may be misleading
  • Matt 18 “brother or sister”
  • 2 Cor 5:17 “therefore, if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come: The old has gone, the new is here!”
  • “the new creation has come” instead of “he is a new creation”
  • I would have been fine with “they are a new creation”
  • 1 Tim 2:12 from “have authority” to “assume authority”
  • Romans 16:7 “Junia” “among the apostles”
  • Romans 16:1 “servant” is “deacon”
  • A couple messianic passages are less messianic – without footnote (whereas they had it before) Micah 5:2, Psalm 2:2,
  • I’m not saying “conspiracy!” I’m saying “unhelpful”
  • Would I teach from it? No
  • We have many other options, though MOSTLY it is very good
  • TLB 1971
  • TM – a paraphrase of the ASV
  • Not a translation
  • Work of one man
  • Billy Graham helped popularize it
  • NLT – 1996 + 2004
  • One of the most popular at the moment
  • TB – NU (1993)
  • Meant to be revision of TLB but they started fresh instead
  • TM - Thought-for-thought
  • Looser than NIV by far
  • Peculiarities
  • Avoids theological terms “sanctification, justification, regeneration” etc.
  • “made right with God” “made holy” “born anew”
  • Footnotes are often included when they have more free readings
  • No question, this isn’t for studying carefully, but casually
  • It’s extra, it’s good, IF you read it with that in mind
  • Most of the time I am quite happy with the interpretive choices
  • Good for kids or those who are poor readers
  • Gender choices, good
  • As far as these free/paraphrases go, it’s very good
  • Very refreshing
  • Message
  • TB
  • TM – paraphrase? extremely idiomatic to the point of losing much of the meaning of the original
  • Matthew 5:13 (ESV) 13“You are the salt of the earth, but if salt has lost its taste, how shall its saltiness be restored? It is no longer good for anything except to be thrown out and trampled under people’s feet.
  • Matthew 5:13 (The Message) 13“Let me tell you why you are here. You’re here to be salt-seasoning that brings out the God-flavors of this earth. If you lose your saltiness, how will people taste godliness? You’ve lost your usefulness and will end up in the garbage.
  • Proverbs 1:17 ESV “For in vain is a net spread in the sight of any bird”
  • Proverbs 1:17 “nobody robs a bank when everyone is watching”
  • Psalm 1:1 (ESV)Blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel of the wicked, nor stands in the way of sinners, nor sits in the seat of scoffers;
  • Psalm 1:1 (The Message) 1How well God must like you— you don’t hang out at Sin Saloon, you don’t slink along Dead-End Road, you don’t go to Smart-Mouth College.
  • Zechariah 13:6 (ESV) 6And if one asks him, ‘What are these wounds on your back?’ he will say, ‘The wounds I received in the house of my friends.’
  • Zechariah 13:6 (The Message) 6And if someone says, ‘And so where did you get that black eye?’ they’ll say, ‘I ran into a door at a friend’s house.’
  • You can’t even call it thought for thought
  • Peculiarities
  • One man – Eugene Peterson
  • In a multitude of counselors there is safety
  • Or, as he put it “to win you need a lot of good counsel”
  • Peterson says it is meant for new believers as a first Bible and they should quickly be weaned from it. He doesn’t think it should even be read in church as a Bible.
  • I think it’s not even good for new believers…
  • It’s the most idiomatic translation I have ever seen
  • It makes things into idioms or colloquialisms where they weren’t before
  • “hinder” becomes “run aground”
  • “worked with labor and toil” becomes “worked our fingers to the bone”
  • “transgress” becomes “run roughshod”
  • “strengthened with all power” becomes “stick it out over the long haul”
  • It’s bad for English as a second language
  • I have found several places where the theology is lost or even wrong
  • John 3:5 (ESV) 5Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.
  • John 3:5 (The Message) 5Jesus said, “You’re not listening. Let me say it again. Unless a person submits to this original creation—the ‘wind-hovering-over-the-water’ creation, the invisible moving the visible, a baptism into a new life—it’s not possible to enter God’s kingdom.
  • Doctrinal issues you would be led astray on if you thought this was accurate
  • Spirit and soul (Peterson chooses not to translate them accurately)
  • Prophecy – specificity in words is of supreme importance in prophecy
  • Homosexuality – 1 Cor 6:9-10 and 1 Tim 1:9-10 have been gutted of reference to homosexual acts
  • Roles in marriage
  • Craig Blomberg, of Denver Seminary, has put it, "it is freer even than a paraphrase. I think of it more as devotional literature than as a version of the Bible and wouldn't recommend it for any other role."
  • NWT – sectarian JW translation (1950, revised 1970 and 1984)
  • The worst English translation you will probably ever come across
  • Who did it?
  • The NWT committee whose members the Watchtower hides
  • Fredrick Franz seems to have been the principle guy
  • Why?
  • To “eliminate the misleading influence of religious traditions which have their roots in paganism”
  • It’s what you call “sectarian”
  • TB – older newer texts (Wescott and Hort)
  • TM -
  • Word for word to the point of bad English – most literal translation out there
  • Except in passages where the Bible teaches things the JW translators didn’t believe
  • Then, it’s interpreted, word-for-word is abandoned and good translation methodology goes out the door
  • “every other” Col
  • It combines the WORST qualities of word-for-word and phrase-for-phrase into a terrible twisting of the word of God
  • Granville Sharp’s rule 2 Peter 1:1, Titus 2:13
  • Peculiarities
  • “Jehovah” is given as a translation of “kurios” whenever it is said of the Father but NOT the Son or anyone else.
  • 237 times!
  • “torture steak” is put instead of “cross”
  • “Holy Spirit” is often translation “God’s active force”
  • Which is not even possibly what those words mean”
  • John 1:1 NWT “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god”
  • Col. 1:15-17 NWT"He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; because by means of him all [other] things were created in the heavens and upon the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, no matter whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All [other] things have been created through him and for him. Also, he is before all [other] things and by means of him all [other] things were made to exist."
  • The first edition had no brackets
  • Heb 1:8 NWTBut about the Son, he says: “God is your throne+ forever and ever, and the scepter of your Kingdom is the scepter of uprightness”
  • Instead of "your throne, O God, is forever," because this statement refers to Christ
  • It is truly a perversion that flows from the fact that the Bible disagrees with their theology
  • NIrV – another free translation/paraphrase
  • NAB (NABRE) – 1970-1986 Catholic official translation, also the most popular
  • TB – NU
  • TM –
  • Varied –
  • Portions were word for word
  • Then retranslated to thought for thought
  • It also is meant for liturgical use
  • This has caused multiple revisions of massive portions
  • You get the impression that it’s being pulled in too many directions
  • Peculiarities
  • Gender neutral overboard (1 Tim 3)
  • It alone is used in parishes – NABRE (New American Bible Revised Edition)
  • The notes of the NABRE, like the NAB, reflect the critical scholarship position which assumes the following:
    a) Yahwist (J), Elohist (E), Priestly (P) sources for the Pentateuch
    b) Multiple authorship of Isaiah (Isaiah & Deutero-Isaiah)
    c) Late date for the authorship of Daniel (around 200 BC)
    d) The preterist approach for the interpretation of the book of Revelation
  • For example
  • A footnote on Matt 16:21-23 says that the passage where Jesus predicts His crucifixion is something Jesus never said.
  • NJB – Catholic translation - popular outside the US
  • Also dynamic
  • Also liberal notes
  • Very bad
  • NET –
  • New English Translation (2005, and again in 2010)
  • Free online, very loose copyright laws
  • Tons of notes “look over the translators shoulder”
  • Extensive footnotes – text critical notes, study notes (interpretation), translators notes
  • TB – NA27
  • They depart from it over 100 times, with notes explaining why
  • TM-
  • On the pendulum of word-for-word to phrase-for-phrase they lean to phrase
  • But more literal than the NIV, less literal than the NASB
  • Dan Wallace was the senior NT editor, he says
  • He says he thinks that in many places in the OT it misses something in the link to Messianic prophecies
  • ISV – a new translation worth looking at but it’s not yet in print
  • Conclusions
  • If you were communicating REALLY important things and had to use a translator, which kind would you want?
  • I would want a primarily formal equivalence unless it was more clear to use dynamic.
  • I frequently construct my sentences with great care
  • For me – NASB – NIV – NLT– ESV – HCSB
  • A word for word, a couple phrase-for-phrase

From Dan Wallace