1.
Different Translations a There are three reasons translations differ today. i Different Manuscript families (Already discussed)

There have been many texts discovered in the last ii
 century
Older versions may use “inferior” manuscripts.
Different People Doing the translation

The Translation Ancestry is different

Throughout history men have sought to make the Bible as accessible to the common man as possible

Greek and Hebrew were common man languages. (Koine greek was common greek not classical. It was the vernacular of the age)


Some have died for this.












The English Bible has come to us through many routes.

John Wycliffe (1380-1382) 1 st attempt ( it would be unreadable for us b/c used classical English )
William Tyndale (1525)
Miles Coverdale (1535)
The Matthews Bible (1537)
The Great Bible (1539)
The Bishop’s Bible (1568)
The King James (1611)
The Revised Version (1885)
The American Standard Version
(1901)— extremely literal. So literal it is almost unreadable in places.
Very helpful for word studies

The Revised Standard (1952)— feel of KJV while updating the manuscript evidence


The New English (1961)
The Jerusalem Bible (1966)—
Catholic Bible— greek, Hebrew, and
French. Beautiful translation—uses
Yahweh
The Living Bible (1971)--paraphrase
The New American Standard (1971)
The Good News Bible (1976)
The New International (1979)— had to be innerantist, evangelical. This






 works way into translation decisions .
Gen 1:2 (was noted as also might be
“became” even though no Hebrew reason for this)
Gen. 2 “had left garden”
1 sam. 17—all other accounts david kills goliath twice. NIV corrects this
The New King James (1982)
The New Jerusalem (1985)
The New Revised Standard (1989)— more gender inclusive

TNIV— never once tried to make
God gender neutral. They were attempting to neuter passages which the greek or Hebrew did not call for it. “man shall not live by bread alone” obvious that it is referring to mankind Where they got into trouble was messianic prophecies.
Psalm 8:4 what is man that you are mindful of him, or son of man that you visit him. “son of man was
Hebrew idiom for man” Jesus “I’m the son of Man” to unbelievers common guy—to those who see— riding on clouds” makes it more difficult when Hebrews author quotes this. They followed the gender neutral translation

Presuppositions of Translators

Help you identify why decisions were made as they were.

Related in the preface directly and sometimes in the Canon used.

While the theology might be good, the translation may not be.

Sometimes both the theology and the
 translation are not good.
Important that it is translator s , not translator. iii Different Translation Philosophies

Translations are not inerrant

The Wicked Bible (1631)

Thou shalt commit Adultery

The Murderer’s Bible




Thou shalt kill
Let the children first be killed (Mark
7:27)



The Vinegar Bible (1717)

The Parable of the Vinegar (Luke
20)
The Fool’s Bible

The Fool has said in his heart there is a God (Ps. 14:1)
NRSV (Joel 2:28 dream reams NIV (Daniel
11:7) “her” should be “his”
Translation Philosophies

They all struggle with what to do with transliterations, and when to do them.


All struggle with being understood.
Word for Word ( Formal equivalence )

Goal in translation is to keep as close to the exact words and phrasing of the original Greek and Hebrew, yet still make sense in English.




Strength is that it allows the reader to see what the Greek and Hebrew looked like in word choices. Allows text to speak for itself (1 Thess. 4:4
— possess one’s vessel— what does he mean?? It could mean many things but translators should allow the individual to determine )
Problem: Idioms are not interpreted
(1 Samuel 20:30) “son of a perverse and rebellious woman”
Problem: Translation can be vague when original is specific
Dynamic Equivalence

Goal is to translate words, idioms, and constructions into a precise equivalent of English.

Keeps historical distance in factual, but not grammatical matters.

Strength is that it makes the Bible accessible.

Problem: Reader is at the mercy of


Free


 the translator regarding meaning
Goal is to translate the ideas only.
Tries to eliminate historical distance.
Strength is that it makes the Bible easy to understand — may stimulate thinking.

Problem: Work totally dependent on theology of translator

Problem: Always done by single translator


Problem: Nuances lost
Problem: Readers can be misled

Comparison

Word for Word: For while we were in the flesh, the sinful passions, which were aroused by the Law, were at work in the members of our body to bear fruit for death.
(NAS)

Dynamic Equivalence: While we were living by our natural inclinations, the sinful passions aroused by the Law were working in all parts of our bodies to make us live lives which were fruitful only for death.
(NJB)

Free: For as long as we lived that old way of life, doing whatever we felt we could get away with, sin was calling most of the shots as the old law code hemmed us in. And this made us all the more rebellious. In the end, all we had to show for it was miscarriages and stillbirths. (The Message) iv The Amplified Version

Goal is to list primary possibilities of meaning.

Strength is that it is easy.

b

Problem: Can lead to the belief that a word can mean several things within any given sentence.

Best to use several translations side by side.
Ask the Right Questions when Choosing a Translation i ii
What is the Manuscripts ancestry of my version?
What is the translation ancestry of my version? iii What are the presuppositions of the translators of my version? (Make sure it’s translator s ) iv What is the translation philosophy of my version? v USE MORE THAN ONE!!!


At least one word for word and dynamic
Spiritual Adults should avoid Free vi Remember, ALL translations are interpretations