DOCSLIB.ORG

Bible Translations (And Which Translation I Will Preach from and Why) Biblical Principles

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Bible Translations (And Which Translation I Will Preach from and Why) Biblical Principles BIBLE TRANSLATIONS (AND WHICH TRANSLATION I WILL PREACH FROM AND WHY) BIBLICAL PRINCIPLES ‣ Bible translations straddle two “worlds”: ‣ Ancient world ‣ Modern world BIBLICAL PRINCIPLES ‣ A good Bible translation is: ‣ (1) Faithful to the biblical text in its original languages (ancient world) ‣ (2) Accessible to 21st- century English speakers and readers (modern world) (1) FAITHFUL TO THE BIBLICAL TEXT ‣ Accurately translates what the author(s) originally meant ‣ Theologically conservative translators (1) FAITHFUL TO THE BIBLICAL TEXT ‣ Word-for-word (“literal”) is not always better. Why? ‣ Ancient world had different way of communicating than modern world. ‣ Some idioms simply don’t translate. ‣ Word-for-word leans too heavily toward the ancient world. Assuming that what was commonplace for them is commonplace for us today. ‣ Can make it more difficult for modern readers to understand. LITERAL = BETTER? ‣ Thusly for loved the God the world so that the son only one he gave so that every one the believing into him no perish but have life eternal. ‣ John 3:16! ‣ If a person from another culture were to ask me what I meant when I ordered “apple pie à la mode” at a restaurant, I could respond: “apple pie by the fashion.” ‣ Moo, Douglas, “The New International Version,” Which Bible Translation Should I Use? (Nashville: B&H, 2012). (2) ACCESSIBLE TO 21ST-CENTURY ENGLISH SPEAKERS ‣ Biblical languages written in the common languages of the day ‣ Hebrew in the OT times ‣ Greek in the NT times (2) ACCESSIBLE TO 21ST-CENTURY ENGLISH SPEAKERS ‣ Greek: ‣ Not classical (formal) Greek ‣ “Koine” Greek ‣ Common language of the Greeks ‣ A shared language (2) ACCESSIBLE TO 21ST-CENTURY ENGLISH SPEAKERS ‣ Thought-for-thought (or paraphrasing) is not always better. ‣ Why? ‣ The more the translators communicate via thought-for-thought, the more interpreting they do ‣ Deemphasizes the biblical concepts ‣ Leans too heavily in the modern world Bible Translations Chart Word-for-word (“formal”) (of those translated by Greek/Hebrew Interlinear New American Standard Bible conservative scholars) King James/New King James Keep Greek/ Hebrew word English Standard Version order Holman Christian Standard Bible New International Version New Living Translation New Century Version The Message Rearrange Greek/Hebrew word order as necessary Thought-for-thought (“dynamic”) PRACTICAL ‣ Question: So which translation philosophy should I use (as this church’s pastor)? Word-for-word or thought-for-thought? ‣ Answer: A translation that is somewhere in the middle—balancing the ancient and the modern world. BIBLE TRANSLATION OPTIONS ‣ Three options that fit the criteria: ‣ Holman Christian Standard Bible ‣ English Standard Version ‣ New International Version BIBLE TRANSLATION OPTIONS ‣ Why not the King James, or New King James, or New American Standard Bible? ‣ KJV: While still faithful to the biblical text, its last update was almost 250 years ago, so it no longer communicates to today’s English speaker. ‣ NKJV: Uses textual criticism based on outdated manuscript evidence. Tries too hard to be an updated KJV, instead of trying to be faithful to the biblical text. ‣ NASB: Very wooden. Doesn’t flow well in English. HOLMAN CHRISTIAN STANDARD BIBLE ‣ Pros: ‣ Capitalizes pronouns of deity (e.g., “Him,” “He,” etc.) ‣ Cons: ‣ Not commonly used ‣ Awkward phrasing at points ENGLISH STANDARD VERSION ‣ Pros: ‣ Poetic; “sounds” like the Bible ‣ The most popular among Reformed theologians/authors and pastors ‣ Fantastic marketing; wonderful hard copy editions available ‣ Cons: ‣ Often defers to tradition over clarity ‣ Slow to accept that something has become outdated in English usage ENGLISH STANDARD VERSION ‣ Translation philosophy: ‣ “The ESV is an ‘essentially literal’ translation that seeks as far as possible to capture 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 into account differences of 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 meaning of the original.” OBJECTIONS ‣ Objections? ‣ Q1: Shouldn’t the Bible sound like the Bible? (older and formal?) ‣ Q2: Are you sure Bible translations should be “modern” or “accessible”? Why can’t they just stay the same? SHOULDN’T THE BIBLE *SOUND* LIKE THE BIBLE? ‣ Q1: Shouldn’t the Bible sound like the Bible? (older and formal?) ‣ “Despite a common perception, the KJV is not written in ‘Old English,’ but is instead ‘Modern’— though that does not mean it is not archaic… by contemporary standards.” ‣ Older forms (e.g., “thee,” “thou,” “-est,” “eth”) were used simply because translators were instructed to change the Bishop’s Bible as little as possible. ‣ Linguistic conservative despite contemporary usage. ‣ Decker, “400 Years of the KJV, “ November 28, 2011. WHY “ACCESSIBLE”? ‣ Q2: Are you sure Bible translations should be “modern” or “accessible”? ‣ Genesis 1:1-2: ‣ The Word on the Street: “First off, nothing. No light, no time, no substance, no matter. Second off, God starts it all up and WHAP! Stuff everywhere! The cosmos is in chaos: no shape, no form, no function—just darkness… total. And floating above it all, God’s Holy Spirit, ready to play.” WHY “ACCESSIBLE”? ‣ Q2: Why “modern” and “accessible”? ‣ Answer the question with a question: Which Bible version has this in its preface? ‣ “Without translation into the common tongue, the uneducated are like children trying to draw water out of a deep well without a bucket or something to draw with….” ‣ Answer: KJV 1611! ‣ “Without translation into the vulgar (common) tongue, the unlearned are but like children at Jacob’s well (which is deep) without a bucket or something to draw with….” WHY “ACCESSIBLE”? ‣ Q: Why “accessible”? ‣ A: (1) English changes; therefore Bible translations should not be static and unchanged. WHY “ACCESSIBLE”? ‣ Translations change because language changes: ‣ NIV: 1978 —> 1984 —> 2005 (TNIV) —> 2011* ‣ ESV: 2001 —> 2007 —> 2011 ‣ KJV (1611) —> RV (1885) —> ASV (1901) —> RSV (1952 & 1971) —> ESV (2001) ‣ NLT: 1996 —> 2004 ‣ HCSB: 1999 —> 2000 —> 2002 —> 2003 ‣ KJV: Tyndale (1535) —> Geneva (1560) —> Bishop’s Bible (1568) —> 1611 —> … —> … — > 1769 (Blaney) WHY “ACCESSIBLE”? ‣ Q: Why “accessible”? ‣ A: (2) Americans aren’t the only people who use English as their language. ‣ Canada, UK, India, etc. all speak English as well. WHY “ACCESSIBLE”? ‣ Q: Why “accessible”? ‣ A: (3) Not everyone has grown up with a “traditional” Bible version… ‣ …Nor does everyone understand the same level of difficulty of English. WHY “ACCESSIBLE”? ‣ Q: Why “accessible”? ‣ A1. Because language changes ‣ A2. Americans aren’t the only people who use English as their language. ‣ A3. Not everyone has grown up with a “traditional” Bible version, nor does everyone understand the same level of difficulty of English. NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION—HISTORY ‣ History: ‣ Howard Long - Christian businessman. ‣ 1965 - scholars started meeting to start a new translation after a decade of discussion. ‣ The Committee on Bible Translation —> New International Version of the Bible. NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION—TRANSLATION PHILOSOPHY ‣ Translation philosophy: ‣ “Getting the words right means being true to the original Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic of the Bible. But it also means being true to the reader — capturing the Bible’s original meaning in natural, everyday English. ‣ “That’s what sets the NIV Bible apart. It doesn’t sacrifice precision for clarity or the other way around. It delivers both, all in a Bible translation you’ll love to read.” NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION—COMMITTEE ‣ Committee members: ‣ 15 members. ‣ Are all devoted to the Lord. ‣ All agree on the authority of Scripture. ‣ All evangelical but diverse. ‣ 12 different denominations. ‣ All English-speakers, but not all American: USA, Canada, UK, and India. NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION—CONS ‣ Cons: ‣ Some say it leans too much toward the “thought-for-thought” side of the scale ‣ Doesn’t “sound” like the Bible ‣ Declining in popularity in some circles due to widespread ESV’s acceptance among Reformed authors/pastors NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION—PROS ‣ Pro—Widely accepted ‣ NIV is still the best-selling modern English version of all time. 450 million copies sold. ‣ Any Christian bookstore you visit will certainly carry the NIV. ‣ Utilized not just in the USA but in other English-speaking countries as well. NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION—PROS ‣ Pro—Well-respected ‣ Reformed theologians like D. A. Carson, Doug Moo, Bruce Waltke, and Tim Keller use the NIV in writing and preaching. ‣ Lots of Christian authors use the NIV for their Bible references. NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION—PROS ‣ Pros—Readable ‣ Not only is the NIV faithful to the text, but also to be understandable and accessible to a general English audience ‣ Easy for new believers to understand ‣ Easy to read aloud (“…devote yourself to the public reading of Scripture”—1 Timothy 4.13) ‣ NIV reads most like a modern-day book (new paragraph when speaker changes, etc.) NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION—PROS ‣ Pros—Tradition ‣ The King’s Chapel is used to hearing preaching from the NIV. ‣ No one here regularly uses ESV (so far as I am aware). NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION—LUKE 22.31–32 ‣ ESV: ‣ “Simon, Simon, behold, Satan demanded to have you, that he might sift you like wheat, but I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail.” ‣ NIV: ‣ “Simon, Simon, Satan has asked to sift all of you as wheat. But I have prayed for you, Simon, that your faith may not fail.” HOW IS NIV ACCESSIBLE? ‣ Q: How has the NIV determined what is “accessible”? ‣ A: Careful research about the state of the English language. HOW IS NIV ACCESSIBLE? ‣ Careful research: ‣ “Collins Report” from Collins Dictionaries— largest databank of English in the world. 4.4 billion words. ‣ Conclusions: Came up with a set of guidelines from this report (not from personal experience or ideological agenda). ‣ Every word examined in light of “Collins Report” and the context of the passage at hand.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Old Greek of Isaiah Septuagint and Cognate Studies
    The Old Greek Of IsaIah Septuagint and Cognate Studies Editor Wolfgang Kraus Editorial Board Robert Hiebert Karen H. Jobes Siegfried Kreuzer Arie van der Kooij Volume 61 The Old Greek Of IsaIah The Old Greek Of IsaIah an analysIs Of ITs Pluses and MInuses MIrjaM van der vOrM-CrOuGhs SBL Press Atlanta Copyright © 2014 by SBL Press All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, or by means of any information storage or retrieval system, except as may be expressly permitted by the 1976 Copyright Act or in writing from the publisher. Requests for permission should be addressed in writing to the Rights and Permissions Office, SBL Press, 825 Houston Mill Road, Atlanta, GA 30329, USA. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Van der Vorm-Croughs, Mirjam. The old Greek of Isaiah : an analysis of its pluses and minuses / Mirjam van der Vorm-Croughs. pages cm. — (Society of Biblical Literature Septuagint and cognate stud- ies ; no. 61) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-58983-978-6 (paper binding : alk. paper) — ISBN 978-1-58983- 980-9 (electronic format) — ISBN 978-1-58983-979-3 (hardcover binding : alk. paper) 1. Bible. Isaiah. Greek—Versions—Septuagint. 2. Bible. Isaiah—Language, style. 3. Greek language, Biblical. 4. Hebrew language. I. Title. BS1514.G7S486 2014 224’.10486—dc23 2014010033 Printed on acid-free, recycled paper conforming to ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992 (R1997) and ISO 9706:1994 CONTENTS Preface ix Abbreviations xi CHAPTER 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Most Accurate Bible Version for Old Testament
    Most Accurate Bible Version For Old Testament Cosmoramic and dark Tymon impregnating her Wednesday betroths slumberously or set pantomimically, is Giorgi nihilist? Etiolate and Galwegian Madison scribblings her amie outstruck first-rate or cantons evanescently, is Vick choky? Unfilled and inelaborate Christy prostrates so quaveringly that Hendrik municipalises his Democritus. Although few monks in any of our greatest enemy to convey ideas and accurate version for any other It is white known to historians that gap was a common practice because that destiny for anonymously written books to be ascribed to famous people cannot give birth more authority. And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors. King james version for most accurate and old testament into modern scholars! To assess their fidelity and accuracy of the Bible today compared to look original texts one must refuse the issues of translation theory and the though of the English Bible. The New Testament to ball if the verses match the meaning of rural King James. Stanley Horton being the head Theologian. How much on a very awkward literalistic translation by academic world for warren as old bible version for most accurate and to conform your comment. Whenever anyone in the New Testament was addressed from heaven, it was always in the Hebrew tongue. At times one might have wished that they had kept more of the King James text than they did, but the text is more easily understandable than the unrevised King James text would have otherwise been. The matter World Translation employs nearly 16000 English expressions to translate about 5500 biblical Greek terms and over 27000 English expressions to translate about 500 Hebrew terms.
    [Show full text]
  • Three Early Biblical Translations
    * * * * * * * Three Early Biblical Translations We do not have any of the original manuscripts of the books that have been included in the Bible. All we have is copies of copies. Most of the original manuscripts of the Old Testament were written in Hebrew, although a few chapters of Ezra and Daniel were recorded in Aramaic, the language of Jesus. The books of the New Testament were first written in Greek. The first translations of the Bible were of the Hebrew Bible. The Septuagint (SEP-too-a-jint) was a Greek translation written about three centuries before the birth of Christ. Two other early translations, composed after the birth of Christ, were the Peshitta in Syriac and the Vulgate in Latin. These three translations, the Septuagint, Peshitta, and Vulgate became the official translations of the Old Testament for the Greek-, Syriac-, and Latin-speaking churches respectively. Each also became the basis for other translations of the Bible. The Septuagint The Septuagint (from the Latin word septuaginta meaning seventy) was a Greek version of the Bible created during the reign of Ptolemy II Philadelphus (ca. 285-246 BCE) in Alexandria, Egypt for Diaspora Jews. Most of Jews living outside of Palestine were Greek-speaking as a result of Alexander the Great's (357-323 BCE) campaign to Hellenize his empire. First verses of Genesis (click for larger picture) At first, the Septuagint (LXX) consisted only of the Pentateuch (Torah, first five books of the Bible). Different books were translated from the Hebrew over a span of two centuries, including the books of the Apocrypha, and were added to the LXX.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Brock, Sebastian, the Bible in the Syriac Tradition. Second Revised
    1 Brock, Sebastian, The Bible in the Syriac Tradition. Second Revised Edition. Gorgias Handbooks, no. 7. Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2006. Pp. x + 178. ISBN: 1-59333-300-5. $29.00 USD. 1. Written by the world’s leading Syriac scholar, this unique resource is a comprehensive survey of matters pertaining to the Bible in Syriac. Dealing with both testaments equally, with all translations, with manuscripts, with the history of interpretation, and with general topics relating to the Bible, it has something that will be of interest to a wide variety of readers. Its non- technical style makes it ideal as an introductory textbook, but it also has enough detail to be of interest to every specialist. This is a fairly fast read, made quicker still by the fact that just over a sixth of the 178-page body of the work is taken up with blank pages or title pages of chapters. 2. The book is divided into two parts and is concluded by an extensive bibliography (pp. 155–78) categorizing publications under seven heads: editions, tools, translations, studies, lectionaries, exegesis, and aspects of reception history. The first part, which is free of footnotes, is a thorough expansion of the 1988 booklet with the same title as the current work. The second part is based on material from the third volume of The Hidden Pearl: The Syrian Orthodox Church and its Ancient Aramaic Heritage (Rome, 2001) and uses footnotes sparingly. Because of their origin there is some overlap between the two parts, though the reviewer did not find this to be problematic.
    [Show full text]
  • Bible Translations – Quick Reference Sheet Translation Manuscripts Variation in Original Manuscripts Translation Variants
    DRV GENEVA KJV YLT NKJV LITV CW WEB Abbreviation ABP AB EMTV MKJV DARBY ASV NRSV NASB CEV GW ESV MSG HCSB NET NLT LEB Young’s Literal Translation Douay-Rheims Bible NIV New King James Version ISV Green’s Literal Translation King James Version VOICE AHB Geneva Bible Notes on Reading this Chart: English Majority Text Version Apostolic Bible Polyglot Modern King James Version World English Bible The Clear Word New Revised Standard Version The Apostles’ Bible Name American StandardJohn Version Darby’s Translation New American Standard Bible Contemporary English Version Holman Christian Standard Bible English StandardGod’s Version Word Translation New English Translation International Standard Version New Living Translation New International Version I’ve created this chart for my own personal reference, and as a teaching tool. All variantions are described in reference to the King James Version. This is not to imply that the reading of the KJV is superior to the others, but only to make comparison easier. Please understand that there are many, many variations amongLexham the English translations. Bible For this chart, I’ve chosen only a few verses Thefor Message Comparison, to show the preferences of the translators and the variation between the different manuscripts of the Old and New Testaments. The translations I chose to compare are by no means an exhaustive list. I chose a sampling of old English translations that are freely available, as well as some of the most popular recent translations that people are reading today. For brevity, have omitted many mid-20th century which have been replaced by newer versions, such as the RSV and many older variants of the NIV.
    [Show full text]
  • Versions and Translations the Following Outlines Some of the Key
    Versions and Translations The following outlines some of the key characteristics of several Bibles currently in use. A number of the Bible translations most popular in the Western world today can be found in searchable form online (see: http://www.ntgateway.com/bible-translations/). The King James Version (KJV) The translation was planned from 1604 and published in 1611 under the auspices of King James VI of England. This Bible has become one of the most influential English books in modern Western civilization. It served as a unifier of English politics and religious disagreements. The King James Bible uses an economy of words and voices beautiful cadences that have led many to call it elegant. It remains a favorite in many Protestant circles. The Douay-Rheims Bible The first English translation for Roman Catholics was produced in Douay and Rheims in France from 1582-1610. It is based not upon the Hebrew and Greek text but rather the Vulgate, the Latin translation that was the authoritative Bible for the Catholic Church for much of its history. Its close adherence to the Latin makes many passages difficult for contemporary readers to understand, and it has largely fallen into disuse in many Catholic quarters. It is sometimes called the Rheims-Douay Bible. The American Standard Version (ASV) The growing sense that the KJV was based on less-than-ideal manuscripts and philological knowledge led to the British Revised Version in 1885. An American edition, the ASV, came out in 1901 and represented several hundred further emendations to suit its American audience. The ASV is sometimes thought of as by students of biblical languages as a particularly “wooden” translation, and it does in some respects seek to replicate the feel of the original, for example in using “Jehovah” rather than “Lord,” or “Sheol” rather than “grave/Hell.” However, the ASV is also quite euphemistic in places.
    [Show full text]
  • Translation Technique in the Peshitta to Jeremiah
    University College Thesis submitted for the Ph.D. degree, 1999 Translation Technique in the Peshitta to Jeremiah Gillian Greenbere, in B. Sc., M. B., B. S., M. A. LILL LONDON 2 Abstract of thesis Translation technique in the Peshitta to Jeremiah This discussion is based on a word by word comparison of the source document and the translation throughout the 1364 versesof the book. The conclusions drawn are: 1. the translator's main aim was to present the senseof his Hebrew Vorlage without change,tn and to do so in a readily accessiblepresentational style. The evidence on which this conclusion is basedis the presenceof two co-existing fon-ns of translation throughout: (i) almost always literal, in presentation of the sense. The few points at which the senseis modified almost all pertain to the theme of the movement from the Temple- and sacrifice-basedpre-exilic religion to a prayer-basedreligion compatible with exile; (ii) often non-literal, stylistically, in pursuit of the precise and intelligible presentational style. When the translator wished to add lexical items, breaking the constraints of quantitative literalism so as to increase the precision of expression, he did so. 2. Comparison of earlier with later mss. shows that these characteristics are to be found not only in the work of the translator, but also in the work of later editors: those Peshitta. the to evidently editingt:' mss. valued presentational style sufficiently impose it on the text even though they knew that by so doing they were likely to lessenthe correspondencebetween that text and the Hebrew Vorlage. 3.
    [Show full text]
  • The Septuagint As a Holy Text – the First 'Bible' of the Early Church
    HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies ISSN: (Online) 2072-8050, (Print) 0259-9422 Page 1 of 9 Original Research The Septuagint as a holy text – The first ‘bible’ of the early church Author: This article acknowledges the fact that historically there are two phases in the emergence of the 1 Johann Cook Septuagint – a Jewish phase and a Christian one. The article deals first with methodological Affiliation: issues. It then offers a historical orientation. In the past some scholars have failed to distinguish 1Department of Ancient between key historical phases: the pre-exilic/exilic (Israelite – 10 tribes), the exilic (the Studies, Faculty of Arts and Babylonian exile ‒ 2 tribes) and the post-exilic (Judaean/Jewish). Many scholars are unaware Social Sciences, University of of the full significance of the Hellenistic era, including the Seleucid and Ptolemaic eras and Stellenbosch, Stellenbosch, South Africa their impact on ‘biblical’ textual material. Others again overestimate the significance of this era; the Greek scholar Evangelia Dafni is an example. Many are uninformed about the Persian Corresponding author: era, which includes the Achaemenid, Parthian and Sassanian eras, each one of which had an Johann Cook, impact on Judaism. An example is the impact of Persian dualism. Another problem is the [email protected] application of the concept of ‘the Bible’. The notion of ‘Bible’ applies only after the 16th century Dates: Common Era, specifically after the advent of the printing press. Earlier, depending on the Received: 18 May 2020 context, we had clay tablets (Mesopotamia), vella (Levant-Judah) and papyri (Egypt) to write Accepted: 06 July 2020 on.
    [Show full text]
  • Bible Translations: the Link Between Exegesis and Expository Preaching1
    BIBLE TRANSLATIONS: THE LINK BETWEEN EXEGESIS AND EXPOSITORY PREACHING1 Robert L. Thomas Professor of New Testament Language and Literature The Master's Seminary Expository preaching presupposes the goal of teaching an audience the meaning of the passage on which the sermon is based. Two types of Bible translations are available as "textbooks" the preacher may use in accomplishing this task. One type follows the original languages of Scripture inform and vocabulary insofar as possible without doing violence to English usage. The other type is not so much governed by phraseology in the original languages, but accommodates itself to contemporary usage of the language into which the translation is made. It is possible with a fair degree of objectivity to measure how far each translation deviates from the original languages. The greater degree of deviation inevitably reflects a higher proportion of interpretation on the translator's part. Regardless of the accuracy of the interpretation, the preacher will at times disagree with it and have to devote valuable sermon time to correcting the text. The best choice of translations on which to base expository preaching is, therefore, one which more literally follows the original languages and excludes as much human interpretation as possible. * * * * * English versions of the Bible can be classified in different ways. They can be classified in regard to historical origin, in regard to textual basis, in regard to theological bias, and in regard to usage of the English language. These areas of consideration are not without rele­ vance to exegesis and expository preaching, but for purposes of the current study, a fifth classification will be examined, that of the ^is essay was originally presented at the Thirty-fifth Annual Meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society in Dallas, TX, in December 1983 and has been updated for incorporation in this issue of The Master's Seminary Journal.
    [Show full text]
  • Question 73 - What Are the 16 Major Bible Translations from 280 B.C
    Liberty University Scholars Crossing 101 Most Asked Questions 101 Most Asked Questions About the Bible 1-2019 Question 73 - What are the 16 major Bible translations from 280 B.C. to 1611 A.D.? Harold Willmington Liberty University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/questions_101 Part of the Biblical Studies Commons, Christianity Commons, and the Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons Recommended Citation Willmington, Harold, "Question 73 - What are the 16 major Bible translations from 280 B.C. to 1611 A.D.?" (2019). 101 Most Asked Questions. 98. https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/questions_101/98 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the 101 Most Asked Questions About the Bible at Scholars Crossing. It has been accepted for inclusion in 101 Most Asked Questions by an authorized administrator of Scholars Crossing. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 101 MOST ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT THE BIBLE 73. What are the 16 major Bible translations from 280 B.C. to 1611 A.D.? A. The Greek Septuagint 1. Date: 280 B.C. 2. Translators: 70 Jewish scholars? 3. Important facts: a. It served as the Bible in Jesus’ day. b. It continued to be used for some six centuries. c. It (probably) was history’s first attempt to translate a book from one language into another. B. The Dead Sea Scrolls 1. Date: 200 B.C. 2. Translators: some Jewish Essenes 3. Important facts: a. These were found in 1947. b. The Scrolls represent the earliest copies of the Old Testament books.
    [Show full text]
  • The Following Short Description of the Aramaic Targums Is Excerpted from Bruce M
    The following short description of the Aramaic Targums is excerpted from Bruce M. Metzger's article, "Important Early Translations of the Bible," Bibliotheca Sacra 150 (Jan 93), pp. 35ff. The Jewish Targums Bruce M. Metzger The Targums are interpretive renderings of the books of the Hebrew Scriptures (with the exception of Ezra, Nehemiah, and Daniel) into Aramaic. Such versions were needed when Hebrew ceased to be the normal medium of communication among the Jews. In synagogue services the reading of the Scriptures was followed by a translation into the Aramaic vernacular of the populace. For a reading from the Pentateuch the Aramaic translation followed each verse of the Hebrew; for a reading from the Prophets three verses were followed by the Aramaic translation. At first the oral Targum was a simple paraphrase in Aramaic, but eventually it became more elaborate and incorporated explanatory details inserted here and there into the translation of the Hebrew text. To make the rendering more authoritative as an interpretation, it was finally reduced to writing. Two officially sanctioned Targums, produced first in Palestine and later revised in Babylonia, are the Targum of Onkelos (1) on the Pentateuch and the Targum of Jonathan on the Prophets, both of which were in use in the third century of the Christian era. During the same period the Targum tradition continued to flourish in Palestine. In addition to fragments and citations that have been collected, the Palestinian Targum to the Pentateuch is found, primarily, in three forms. The two that have been the most studied are the Pseudo-Jonathan Targum and the Fragmentary Targum, which contains renderings of only approximately 850 biblical verses, phrases, or words.
    [Show full text]
  • How to Read the Bible
    05_0789734192_Ch03.qxd 9/19/05 5:19 PM Page 25 In this chapter • Three ways to approach the Bible 3 • An overview of seven popular Bible translations How to Read the Bible There are as many different ways to read the Bible as there are people to read it. Whether you and the Bible have barely met or are trying to rebuild an old relationship, a fresh perspective can work wonders. Without pretending to exhaust all the possibilities involved in Bible read- ing, this chapter skims some of the options every reader has when approaching or reapproaching this massive, diverse, and frequently misunderstood book. 05_0789734192_Ch03.qxd 9/19/05 5:19 PM Page 26 26 ABSOLUTE BEGINNER’S GUIDE TO THE BIBLE Three Ways of Looking at the Bible Most people read the Bible in at least one of three ways: ■ As holy scripture ■ As history ■ As literature As Holy Scripture In the previous chapter, we discussed various beliefs regarding where Scripture comes from and classified them into three basic categories: ■ Fundamentalism—Holds that God is the author of the Bible. Biblical funda- mentalists believe that the Bible is a holy and divine product and means what it says at face value (except in cases where the metaphorical intent is clear, such as when Jesus tells his parables). ■ Modernism—Holds that the Bible was written by human beings inspired by their relationships with God. Biblical modernists also tend to see the Bible as holy, but believe that context, metaphor, and the limitations of its human authors should be taken into account.
    [Show full text]