Our Bible [Explained](3)

Welcome Prayer

Challenge us and Change us! Amen

We are in week 3 of our 4 week study of the history of our Bibles.

We have discussed the transmission of our Bibles and the translations.

We discussed how all scripture is theopneustos.

God Breathed.

2 Timothy 3:16 The Message

Every part of Scripture is God-breathed and useful one way or another—showing us truth, exposing our rebellion, correcting our mistakes, training us to live God’s way.

We discussed how all scripture is well preserved.

Matthew 24:35 NASB95

“Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away.

Matthew 24:35 The Message

Sky and earth will wear out; my words won’t wear out.

and we discussed how all scripture is without error.

2 Peter 1:20–21 NIV

Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

The Old Testament was written in Ancient Hebrew and then translated in Greek

Greek Septuagint.

The New Testament was written in Koine Greek.

They were first translated together by Jerome in Latin.

The Latin Vulgate. 1000 years.

John Wycliffe, England, takes the MT, LXX and LV and translates the full bible into English in 1382.

In the 1500’s with the Great Reformation, there are many English translations written.

Geneva Bible, Tyndale Bible, Coverdale Bible, Bishop’s Bible, Matthew’s Bible, and the Great Bible

Many different English translations

Tyndale wanted everyone to have and understand the Bible.

I will cause a boy who drives a plough to know more of the scriptures than the Pope.

But no official version.

King James, and the Church of England commissions committees to translate the Official or Authorized version.

The 1611 KJV

Using the MT, LXX, Vulgate and an early version of the Textus Receptus as their textual basis. (6 Greek manuscripts)

The Fact is - We are second-language translation Christians.

Many languages have far less..

We are blessed with so many English translations.

A Breakdown of common translations

My points of breaking down the differences between the translations are...

Textual basis: Using the younger manuscripts, Majority text translation (KJV) or using the more recent 5,800 manuscripts. Older minority. Most of the ones we are discussing are using the Older more recent manuscripts..They are really not that different.. from the most extreme to the other extreme, 2%. THERE IS NO CONSPIRACY to remove the Deity of Christ from modern versions. Some will point to this verse or that and say that it doesn’t reflect Jesus as God, but overall, the modern translations show Him as God more than the older ones. The more you study and learn, the more you will find this to be true. Some newer translations have a liberal influence.

Translation methodology: Word for Word or Thought for Thought? Formal Equivalence(literal) word for word or Dynamic Equivalence (phrases, idioms)? Literal disadvantage is using word for word may not make sense without some thought paraphrasing needed. Thought for thought would be willing to change the exact wording to keep the meaning. Matthew 1:18 tells us Mary was pregnant. “Mary had it in the belly” The Jewish people would understand that, We don't, it needs some help..

Use of idioms… idiomatic expressions

figurative speech adds flavor.. regional, different in all languages that don’t translate.

Going to Bed Hit the sack..

It takes 2 to tango

See eye to eye

She needs a taste of her own medicine

That will be easy, a piece of cake..

Raining cats and dogs

I will believe that when pigs fly

Mary was found to be pregnant, with child. “Mary had it in the belly”

The advantage to dynamic equivalence, thought for thought is it is easy to understand.

The disadvantage is its easy to miss things, details.

The Nature of translating is there is always a weakness to point out.

Well you got the main point across, but you lost the nuance.

You got the words right, but it doesn’t flow… Hard to understand.

So there is a sliding scale more over here, more over to this side..

This verse is way over here where the next is way over here..

KJV 1611

ancestor of many modern translations.

Textual basis: 6 Greek texts for NT, they used and were influenced by Bishops, Tyndale and Geneva Bible.

So they used earlier English translationsUses Erasmus TR. We know because Book of Life is included..

We know this is wrong. Erasmus incorrectly translated the Latin Tree to Book in the Vulgate he was using.Majority text is used.

Has 1 John 5:7 and different wordings in Revelation that don’t really reflect the Greek at all.

There is only one group out there who typically says “This is the only true Bible”

Everyone else is looking for accurate translations.

Everyone in here has heard their views.

Word for Word, but they used a literary style more than what the original language was. Sounds beautiful. Poetry. Prose, High Church.

Very Good translation. Not original text. When we looked at the 1611 version, it didn’t match my version..

Book Pass 1 - Scoffield

We use the 1769 version. Dr Blaney’s oxford version. Updated language and spelling.

Changed from the Gothic font to the Roman font, easier to read.

But even this updated version does not use modern English.

Some words that are used, that we do not use today.

Book Pass 2 - 1938 Authorized King James with Apocrypha

Chapeter, ambassage, quaterian, amerse

Words have changed..

Compel: And they compel one Simon--to bear his cross. Mark 15.

Genesis 1:28: God tells Adam and Even to "replenish" the earth. The word replenish used to mean "to supply fully." It was not a re-filling or a filling again, as we might think of the word today; instead the re- prefix added a sense of urgency. So to "replenish" would be "to fill with urgency and enthusiasm."

Matthew 6:6: Jesus tells people to go into their "closet" to pray. The original Greek, as well as the French word from which the English derives, indicated a place well within your house, a private or a secret room. We could today say bedroom. Jesus means to get away from others and any distractions to pray.

It is a private place, not necessarily a literal closet.

Conversation meant way of life, not dialogue

carriages - luggage

leasing - lying

meet - proper

There is no conspiracy against KJV, change is good.

Making the translation better.

Book Pass 3 - NKJV

NKJV - 1982

Based on the TR and KJV.

I would recommend the NKJV it is easier to understand.

WORD for WORD.

Updated, lost the archaic terms, maybe lost some beauty..

It does have footnotes for when documents disagree.

Revised Standard Version

KJV starting point.. Greek sources are as of 1952

Middle ground

Which at the time was very Bold!

It was criticized for its dynamic aspects.

Criticized in its original printing of leaving out John 7:53-8:11 Pericope Adulterae

So, the revised it and put it back in, and sales went up.

No Longer in Print.

BOOK PASS 4 - NRSV

New Revised Standard Version 1989

Textual Basis: Used all Greek manuscripts as of 1989.

The more liberal NRSV differs from the RSV in four primary ways:

updating the language of the RSV, by replacing archaic forms of speech but keeps the words when addressing GOD (Thee, Thou, wast, dost, etc.)

and by replacing words whose meaning has changed significantly since the RSV translation

making it clear where the original texts intend to include all humans, male and female, and where they intend to refer only to the male or female gender.

And with the 1900’s we now have issues of.... Gender Exclusiveness....

Gender-exclusive language – or the use of pronouns that refer to one gender while neglecting the other,

even when talking about both men and women – is commonplace in everyday language.

For example, the use of himself instead of oneself is specifically gendered.

Gender-inclusive language - use of pronouns that refer to everyone, not one specific. does not discriminate against one or the other.

All of mankind.

Genesis 1:27 NASB95

God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

The reason why this is such a big deal as we continue through the more modern versions is in the KJV, the word anthropos is used, talking about “man”, it will use it for men and women, or just in reference to men… Very Important to know, in Greek, you would say ‘brothers’ which meant brothers and sisters, or sometimes it just means brothers.. CONTEXT..

we don’t say brothers when we mean everyone

We no longer say man or mankind when we mean everyone

He becomes anyone, He who… whoever

and what that does it makes the newer translations less masculine.

Not that there is anything wrong with women, half the people I know are women....

One passage is 1 Timothy 3, where they make it possible for women to be bishops.

Lastly, NOT saying it is a perversion, nor am I saying it is not the WORD OF GOD..

It just skews a few passages a different way than possibly the original intention.

So, the NRSV moves the scale, widens the spectrum for translations,

KJV - RSV ---->> NRSV closer to NIV

Bruce Metzger - Editor

John 1:18 NRSV

No one has ever seen God. It is God the only Son, who is close to the Father’s heart, who has made him known.

GOD, the only Son.... fully showing the Deity of Christ.. maybe better than more familiar versions.

John 1:18 KJV 1900

No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

New American Standard Version - NASB 1995

Book Pass 5 - NASB Preacher’s Bible

Textual Basis: Most recent manuscripts as of 1995.

Methodology: Word for Word, whenever possible.

Some neat facts, it is used in Seminary more than any other Bible.

In-depth Bible study...

Pastor Jeff uses the NASB. Today’s sermon...

When idioms are used and they have to make a dynamic translation, they provide a footnote and give a more word for word translation.

Footnotes for alternate translations as well..

When there is a paragraph break, they use a bold type on the number of the verse to show it’s a new paragraph.

One criticism, that is always used is it is called wooden.. it is more stilted.. robotic..

Why?? because translating word for word doesn’t have the flow of dynamic..

In 2004, Dan Wallace said it is the best word for word translation.. High Praise..

English Standard Version - 2001

Book Pass 6 - ESV Readers, ESV Study Bible

Textual Basis: Most recent manuscripts as of 2001.

Uses the RSV, as their base text.

Methodology: Literal, Word for Word, not as much as the NASB.

High Praise from Calvinists. A lot of major Calvinists use ESV..

Not saying that is forces Calvinism on you.. But if Calvinism is true, then it is forced on you...

Very word for word, like the NASB, but more readable. Once it came out alot of people who praised the NASB, switched over.

They are both very good bibles for conservative, Bible-believing folks, that we would find ourselves aligned with.

One neat note is how the ESV translates slave.

Different every time, there are different kinds of slavery in the Bible.

servanthood, bond-servant, slave.. more modern translation.

Not Gender neutral, but Gender accurate.

For me, there is no agenda to feminize the Bible. They simply use men and women here because that is what they feel better represents the original context.

Holman Christian Standard Bible - 2004

Book Pass 7 - HCSB Study Bible, Chronological Bible

--Hard Core Southern Baptist—

My Good friend Robert Hayes who is currently working his way through Revelation, uses a HCSB. Jeff’s videos are all online.

It was a brand-new translation! No base, so original passages

Textual Basis: Most recent manuscripts as of 2004.

Methodology: Optimal Equivalence. Aint’ Skeered..

Look at each passage and they aren’t afraid of one or the other.. Whichever communicates it the best.

Used over 100 scholars over 17 denominations to translate it, some people think it was a Baptist translation..

It is well respected for having a lot of footnotes.

Same dynamic (word for word) as NASB.

They translate the Tetragrammaton, the name of GOD, they translate it Yahweh. 654 times.

The name of GOD, tetragrammaton is in the text over 6000 times.

Yahweh is the most likely pronunciation of the name GOD gave to Moses.. tell them Yahweh..

NOT JEHOVAH..

They translate in the NT the greek word Doulas - slave.

Romans 1:1 would reads  Paul, a slave of Christ Jesus, called as an apostle and singled out for God’s good news— not a servant of

They often translate Christ as Messiah.

They don’t worry about gender specificity.. They just give us what the text says.. and you can figure it out...

HCSB comes with a glossary. Abba, Centurion, sanctification...

OT Messianic references are given more influence.. They read more Christian.

New International Version - 1984

Book Pass 8 - NIV Bible

The most popular English translation in the world.

The most attacked… I think for it’s popularity...

I have heard pastors, who I love and respect refer to the NIV as the Not Inspired Version..

My view… My view is

“You are not attacking the NIV when you say that.. You are attacking the Bible.”

The NIV accurately translates the Bible the vast majority of the time.

If all someone had read is the NIV for 40 years and you say that, you are undermining their faith in GOD.

Evidence to prove it, is just as easily pulled up and can be used against any translation.

One quick note.... I realize that only one group speaks badly of other translations..

Did you know.... The Majority of KJV churches give to mission groups and gideons...

Who Neither use the KJV and haven’t for years.

Textual Basis: Most recent manuscripts as of 1984.

Methodology: Phrase for Phrase

Dan Wallace considers it the best phrase for phrase translation.

In my opinion, phrase for phrase is really good at getting the clarity of the passage across. But, if you are doing in-depth what does this word mean, what does that mean, then the phrase for phrase is not for you.

It is required of a translator who is using phrase for phrase to interpret along the way.. You are trying to get the point across..

2005 TNIV came out, it was very gender inclusive, it had a lot of criticism against it. Abandoned.

2011 NIV changed. New version replaced the old on the shelves… It’s the only one on sale today.

Wide range of scholars within the evangelical community.

GAY translation??

1 Corinthians 6:9 NIV

Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men

GOD condemns Men who have sex with Men.

It is also called Anti-Christ ??

John 1:18 NIV

No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.

alien - foreigner

saint - God’s people

Gender issues.. inclusive..

Philippians 4:13 NIV

I can do all this through him who gives me strength.

all this?? this is being content in every situation, whether well fed or hungry, whether living in plenty or in want..

It is very faithful to the original. Maybe not my style

but I will use it as a side-by-side parallel a lot.

The Living Bible - 1971 TLB

Paraphrase of the American Standard Version. Not a translation..

Word for Word---Phrase for Phrase ---->> TLB

I do not think this is a good Bible to study..

I actually don’t think these should be printed out and sold as Bibles...

This is a paraphrase… This isn’t what Jeremiah wrote… this is what we think Jeremiah meant..

Used in a parallel maybe...

Billy Graham Crusades passed them out…

It says in the opening pages... Every Christian should read it.

Written by one man, Kenneth Taylor. He didn’t read the Greek or Hebrew..

He read the American Standard and then paraphrased it.

It is a guys interpretation of the Bible. He had 10 kids....

40 million copies.. Tyndale House Publishing

New Living Translation - 1996 NLT

avoids theological terms.. sanctification, justification, renewal

uses get right with GOD, born anew

footnotes about alternate renderings

Not for studying carefully but casually.

I personally always like the interpretation that I see, when I compare with others.

Great for kids or poor readers. Lower comprehension levels..

I feel like each of us read at different levels.. I think for studying we should go as word for word as we can and still understand it. I bought all 3 of my older boys and Miya ESVs for their birthdays.

GOD intends for us to understand the Bible, He wants us to love reading HIS word.

Reading a chapter in the NASB and then in NLT

The Message Bible… - 2002

I am not a fan of the Message.

And if you are… then you shouldn’t be...

Eugene Peterson wrote it himself in 2002

Comparison of ESV vs. The Message

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

17 For in vain is a net spread in the sight of any bird,

Proverbs 1:17 The Message

17 Nobody robs a bank with everyone watching,

Psalm 1:1 ESV

1 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

1 How 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

6 And 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

6 And 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.’

Eugene Peterson once said He translated the Beatitudes in 10 minutes. I said to that.. Obviously..

Eugene Peterson said I heard my translation being read in church and I cringed.

He said it is for new believers as a first Bible, and they should quickly be weened from it.

The New World Translation - NWT

Jehovah Witness translation of the Bible.

It is the worst English translation you will ever come across.

The names of the translators have never been released.

Made to teach the particulars of the Jehovah Witness faith.

Word for Word to the point of being bad English…EXCEPT in the passages where the Bible doesn’t agree with their teaching. Deceitful.

New International Reader’s Version NIRV

from the NIV family, the Reader’s version, its a paraphrase version of the NIV.

International Standard Version - ISV

Still has not been printed, I have heard good things about it. It is online only as of now..

The New English Translation Bible NET Bible - 2017

80,000 Notes

Daniel Wallace

Free online

The net Bible is another recent independent translation, known for its extensive translators’ notes. Rather than establishing any printed edition of the Greek New Testament as the basis for net, textual consultants determined which readings to follow on a case-by-case basis. net differs from NA27/UBS4 in several hundred places. Its textual decisions are very transparent, since many of the translators’ notes interact with the manuscript evidence.

King James Version (1611)—KJV

For the New Testament, the King James translators essentially used the Textus Receptus (see the discussion under “Textus Receptus” above). The King James translators did well with the resources that were available to them, but those resources were flawed, especially with respect to the New Testament text. Since the King James Version was published, earlier and better manuscripts have been discovered, thereby enabling better critical editions of the Greek New Testament and better English translations.

New King James Version (1982)—NKJV

nkjv is a revision of kjv which modernizes its language but does not depart from kjv’s textual decisions. The New Testament of nkjv is thus based on the Textus Receptus, with several marginal notes on readings in the Majority Text (noted in nkjv as M-Text; see discussion under “Textus Receptus” above). nkjv also lists many textual differences between TR and the text of NA26/UBS3 (noted as NU-Text or U-Text). The reader can thus note how many significant differences there are between the two texts.

American Standard Version (1901)—ASV

The asv (essentially the same as the English Revised Version, 1881, with minor changes made for American readers) is the best English translation reflecting the Greek text produced by the end of nineteenth century through the labors of men like Tregelles, Tischendorf, Westcott, and Hort. These men were greatly influenced by Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, but not by the papyri, since only a few had been discovered and published by then. Thus, asv reflects the influence of these two great uncial manuscripts and serves as a point of comparison with the subsequent twentieth-century versions. In this commentary, it is cited sparingly.

Revised Standard Version (1952)—RSV

The rsv is a revision of asv. It was felt that asv suffered from being too rigid; it needed reworking to make it more idiomatic. The demand for revision was strengthened by the discovery of several important biblical manuscripts in the 1930s and 1940s—namely, the Dead Sea Scrolls for the Old Testament and the Chester Beatty Papyri for the New Testament. The rsv New Testament was based on the seventeenth edition of the Nestle text (1941).

New Revised Standard Version (1990)—NRSV

The nrsv is an authorized revision of rsv. Of all the translations, it is the one that most closely follows the text of NA27/UBS4. No doubt, this is due to the fact that Bruce Metzger served on both the editorial committees—a leading member of the NA27/UBS4 committee and the chairperson for the nrsv committee.

English Standard Version (2001)—ESV

A separate revision of rsv was undertaken by evangelical scholars in the late 1990s, resulting in the esv. Like nrsv, its translators started with NA27/UBS4 as the textual base for the New Testament. In the end, its text lies somewhere between rsv and nrsv; the translators were less likely than the nrsv committee to change rsv readings in the direction of NA27/UBS4.

New American Standard Bible (1964, 1995)—NASB

The nasb is generally respected as a good study Bible that closely reflects the wording of the original languages, yet is not a fluid translation for Bible reading. Furthermore, this translation is clearly lacking in terms of textual fidelity: though it was originally supposed to follow the twenty-third edition of the Nestle text, it tends to follow the Textus Receptus. This commentary cites the 1964 edition, as this is the version that most readers have in hand. An updated version appeared in 1995, but this update has only a few textual changes in the translation, with a few more changes in the marginal notes.

New International Version (1978, 1983)—NIV

The niv is an excellent translation in fairly contemporary English. The New Testament essentially follows the United Bible Societies’ first edition of the Greek New Testament (1966). It diverges from NA27/UBS4 in about 350 significant places—many in agreement with TR. This book cites the 1983 edition, which introduced numerous revisions to the original niv and is the edition most people own.

New English Bible (1961)—NEB

The neb is worthwhile to analyze because it reflects a very eclectic Greek text. After the translation appeared, the Greek text followed by the translation committee was produced by R. V. G. Tasker. The committee’s verse-by-verse decision making produced a text that is very uneven and yet very interesting. The translators adopted readings never before adopted by English translators.

Revised English Bible (1989)—REB

The reb is a revision of The New English Bible (neb). The revisers of the New Testament used NA26. This choice resulted in several textual changes from neb, which had followed a very eclectic text. The translators of neb had adopted readings never before put into print by English translators, but the scholars working on reb adjusted many of these readings back toward the norm. At the same time, they also made some significant textual changes, the most outstanding of which was their treatment of the story of the woman caught in adultery (John 7:53–8:11). Reflecting the overwhelming evidence of the Greek manuscripts, this story is not included in the main body of John’s Gospel. Rather, it is printed as an appendix after the Gospel of John.

New Jerusalem Bible (1986)—NJB

The New Jerusalem Bible is a revision of the Jerusalem Bible, a translation widely accepted among Roman Catholics for liturgical purposes, for study, and for private reading. The new edition incorporated progress in scholarship over the two decades since the preparation of the first edition. njb generally has been well received (in Catholic circles and beyond) as an excellent study text. njb is worthy of analysis because it displays an eclectic text—especially in the book of Acts, where many “Western” readings were adopted.

The New American Bible (1970; 1984 revised NT)—NAB

The New American Bible is the first American Catholic Bible to be translated from the original languages (the Jerusalem Bible was originally a French translation). Although this translation was published in 1970, work had begun on this version several decades before. Only after Pope Pius’s encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu (1967), however, would a Catholic Bible based on Greek and Hebrew be accepted. Prior to Pius’s encyclical, an American translation based on the Latin Vulgate, called the Confraternity Bible, was published. nab’s New Testament was revised (in 1984) based on NA26. The translation is fairly literal and has very few marginal notes. It does not follow the “Western” readings, unlike njb.

New Living Translation (1996, 2004)—NLT

The nlt is a complete revision of The Living Bible. The Living Bible was a paraphrase of the American Standard Version, whose New Testament was based upon the Greek text of Westcott and Hort. When it came time to revise The Living Bible, it was deemed appropriate for a translation committee to base its work on the most recent critical editions of the Greek New Testament, the Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece (twenty-seventh edition) and the United Bible Societies’ Greek New Testament (fourth corrected edition). The New Testament translators also made judicious evaluation of the manuscript evidence itself. As a result, their textual decisions often depart from the Nestle-Aland text. These departures sometimes affirmed the Westcott and Hort text and at other times affirmed a different manuscript tradition altogether. (Of all the translations, this is the one whose textual decisions I am most familiar with, since I was New Testament coordinator for the project.)

Holman Christian Standard Bible (2004)—HCSB

The Holman Christian Standard Bible was originally intended to be a fresh translation of the Majority Text; however, the textual basis was changed early on to the modern critical editions of the Hebrew Bible and Greek New Testament. In the New Testament, hcsb essentially follows NA27/UBS4, although it frequently provides TR readings in the footnotes.

The NET Bible (New English Translation) (1996)—NET

The net Bible is another recent independent translation, known for its extensive translators’ notes. Rather than establishing any printed edition of the Greek New Testament as the basis for net, textual consultants determined which readings to follow on a case-by-case basis. net differs from NA27/UBS4 in several hundred places. Its textual decisions are very transparent, since many of the translators’ notes interact with the manuscript evidence.

On occasion, a few other versions are noted, usually because they display readings not found or noted in any of the other versions. These include the English Revised Version (erv, 1881), The New Testament: A New Translation (Moffatt, 1922), The Complete Bible: An American Translation (Goodspeed, 1935), The New Testament in the Language of the People (Williams, 1956), The New Testament in Modern English (Phillips, 1958), and Today’s English Version (tev, 1966).