00-FMDC-NRSVPew-2.qxd 7/10/2005 5:53 PM Page vii

To the Reader

This preface is addressed to you by the Committee Thereafter the Revised Standard Version gained of translators, who wish to explain, as briefly as pos- the distinction of being officially authorized for sible, the origin and character of our work. The use by all major Christian churches: Protestant, An- publication of our revision is yet another step in the glican, Roman Catholic, and Eastern Orthodox. long, continual process of making the avail- The Revised Standard Version Bible Committee able in the form of the English language that is most is a continuing body, comprising about thirty mem- widely current in our day. To summarize in a sin- bers, both men and women. Ecumenical in repre- gle sentence: the New Revised Standard Version of sentation, it includes scholars affiliated with vari- the Bible is an authorized revision of the Revised ous Protestant denominations, as well as several Standard Version, published in 1952, which was a Roman Catholic members, an Eastern Orthodox revision of the American Standard Version, pub- member, and a Jewish member who serves in the lished in 1901, which, in turn, embodied earlier section. For a period of time the revisions of the King James Version, published in Committee included several members from Cana- 1611. da and from England. In the course of time, the King James Version Because no translation of the Bible is perfect or came to be regarded as “the Authorized Version.” is acceptable to all groups of readers, and because With good reason it has been termed “the noblest discoveries of older manuscripts and further in- monument of English prose,” and it has entered, vestigation of linguistic features of the text continue as no other book has, into the making of the per- to become available, renderings of the Bible have sonal character and the public institutions of the proliferated. During the years following the publi- English-speaking peoples. We owe to it an incal- cation of the Revised Standard Version, twenty- culable debt. six other English translations and revisions of the Yet the King James Version has serious defects. Bible were produced by committees and by indi- By the middle of the nineteenth century, the de- vidual scholars—not to mention twenty-five other velopment of biblical studies and the discovery of translations and revisions of the New Testament many biblical manuscripts more ancient than those alone. One of the latter was the second edition of on which the King James Version was based made the RSV New Testament, issued in 197l, twenty- it apparent that these defects were so many as to five years after its initial publication. call for revision. The task was begun, by authority Following the publication of the RSV Old Tes- of the Church of England, in 1870. The (British) Re- tament in 1952, significant advances were made in vised Version of the Bible was published in 1881- the discovery and interpretation of documents in 1885; and the American Standard Version, its vari- Semitic languages related to Hebrew. In addition to ant embodying the preferences of the American the information that had become available in the scholars associated with the work, was published, late 1940s from the Dead Sea texts of and as was mentioned above, in 1901. In 1928 the Habakkuk, subsequent acquisitions from the same copyright of the latter was acquired by the Inter- area brought to light many other early copies of all national Council of Religious Education and thus the books of the Hebrew Scriptures (except Esther), passed into the ownership of the Churches of the though most of these copies are fragmentary. Dur- United States and Canada that were associated in ing the same period early Greek manuscript cop- this Council through their boards of education and ies of books of the New Testament also became publication. available. The Council appointed a committee of scholars In order to take these discoveries into account, to have charge of the text of the American Standard along with recent studies of documents in Semit- Version and to undertake inquiry concerning the ic languages related to Hebrew, in 1974 the Poli- need for further revision. After studying the ques- cies Committee of the Revised Standard Version, tions whether or not revision should be undertak- which is a standing committee of the National en, and if so, what its nature and extent should be, Council of the Churches of Christ in the U.S.A., au- in 1937 the Council authorized a revision. The thorized the preparation of a revision of the entire scholars who served as members of the Commit- RSV Bible. tee worked in two sections, one dealing with the For the Old Testament the Committee has made Old Testament and one with the New Testament. use of the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (1977; ed. In 1946 the Revised Standard Version of the New sec. emendata, 1983). This is an edition of the He- Testament was published. The publication of the brew and Aramaic text as current early in the Revised Standard Version of the Bible, containing Christian era and fixed by Jewish scholars (the the Old and New Testaments, took place on Sep- “Masoretes”) of the sixth to the ninth centuries. tember 30, 1952. A translation of the Apoc- The vowel signs, which were added by the Mas- ryphal/ of the Old Testa- oretes, are accepted in the main, but where a more ment followed in 1957. In 1977 this collection was probable and convincing reading can be obtained issued in an expanded edition, containing three ad- by assuming different vowels, this has been done. ditional texts received by Eastern Orthodox com- No notes are given in such cases, because the vow- munions (3 and 4 Maccabees and Psalm 151). el points are less ancient and reliable than the 00-FMDC-NRSVPew-2.qxd 7/10/2005 5:53 PM Page viii

TO THE READER viii consonants. When an alternative reading given by taking into account the several Oriental versions of the Masoretes is translated in a footnote, this is 2 Esdras, namely, the Syriac, Ethiopic, Arabic (two identified by the words “Another reading is.” forms, referred to as Arabic 1 and Arabic 2), Ar- Departures from the consonantal text of the menian, and Georgian versions. Finally, since the best manuscripts have been made only where it Additions to the Book of Esther are disjointed and seems clear that errors in copying had been made quite unintelligible as they stand in most editions before the text was standardized. Most of the cor- of the Apocrypha, we have provided them with rections adopted are based on the ancient versions their original context by translating the whole of the (translations into Greek, Aramaic, Syriac, and Greek version of Esther from Robert Hanhart’s Latin), which were made prior to the time of the Göttingen edition (1983). work of the Masoretes and which therefore may re- For the New Testament the Committee has flect earlier forms of the Hebrew text. In such in- based its work on the most recent edition of The stances a footnote specifies the version or versions Greek New Testament, prepared by an intercon- from which the correction has been derived and fessional and international committee and pub- also gives a translation of the . lished by the United Bible Societies (1966; 3rd ed. Where it was deemed appropriate to do so, infor- corrected, 1983; information concerning changes mation is supplied in footnotes from subsidiary to be introduced into the critical apparatus of the Jewish traditions concerning other textual readings forthcoming 4th edition was available to the Com- (the Tiqqune Sopherim, “emendations of the mittee). As in that edition, double brackets are scribes”). These are identified in the footnotes as used to enclose a few passages that are generally “Ancient Heb tradition.” regarded to be later additions to the text, but which Occasionally it is evident that the text has suf- we have retained because of their evident antiquity fered in transmission and that none of the ver- and their importance in the textual tradition. Only sions provides a satisfactory restoration. Here we in very rare instances have we replaced the text or can only follow the best judgment of competent the punctuation of the Bible Societies’ edition by scholars as to the most probable reconstruction of an alternative that seemed to us to be superior. the original text. Such reconstructions are indi- Here and there in the footnotes the phrase, “Oth- cated in footnotes by the abbreviation Cn (“Cor- er ancient authorities read,” identifies alternative rection”), and a translation of the Masoretic Text readings preserved by Greek manuscripts and ear- is added. ly versions. In both Testaments, alternative ren- For the Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical Books of derings of the text are indicated by the word “Or.” the Old Testament the Committee has made use of As for the style of English adopted for the pres- a number of texts. For most of these books the ba- ent revision, among the mandates given to the sic Greek text from which the present translation Committee in 1980 by the Division of Education was made is the edition of the prepared and Ministry of the National Council of Churches by Alfred Rahlfs and published by the Württemberg of Christ (which now holds the copyright of the Bible Society (Stuttgart, 1935). For several of the RSV Bible) was the directive to continue in the tra- books the more recently published individual vol- dition of the King James Bible, but to introduce umes of the Göttingen Septuagint project were such changes as are warranted on the basis of ac- utilized. For the book of Tobit it was decided to fol- curacy, clarity, euphony, and current English usage. low the form of the Greek text found in codex Within the constraints set by the original texts Sinaiticus (supported as it is by evidence from and by the mandates of the Division, the Com- Qumran); where this text is defective, it was sup- mittee has followed the maxim, “As literal as pos- plemented and corrected by other Greek manu- sible, as free as necessary.” As a consequence, the scripts. For the three Additions to Daniel (namely, New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) remains , the Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the essentially a literal translation. Paraphrastic ren- Three Jews, and ) the Com- derings have been adopted only sparingly, and mittee continued to use the Greek version attrib- then chiefly to compensate for a deficiency in the uted to Theodotion (the so-called “Theodotion- English language—the lack of a common gender Daniel”). In translating Ecclesiasticus (Sirach), third person singular pronoun. while constant reference was made to the Hebrew During the almost half a century since the pub- fragments of a large portion of this book (those dis- lication of the RSV, many in the churches have covered at Qumran and Masada as well as those re- become sensitive to the danger of linguistic sexism covered from the Cairo Geniza), the Committee arising from the inherent bias of the English lan- generally followed the Greek text (including verse guage towards the masculine gender, a bias that in numbers) published by Joseph Ziegler in the Göt- the case of the Bible has often restricted or ob- tingen Septuagint (1965). But in many places the scured the meaning of the original text. The man- Committee has translated the Hebrew text when dates from the Division specified that, in refer- this provides a reading that is clearly superior to the ences to men and women, masculine-oriented Greek; the Syriac and Latin versions were also language should be eliminated as far as this can be consulted throughout and occasionally adopted. done without altering passages that reflect the his- The basic text adopted in rendering 2 Esdras is the torical situation of ancient patriarchal culture. As Latin version given in Biblia Sacra, edited by Robert can be appreciated, more than once the Commit- Weber (Stuttgart, 1971). This was supplemented by tee found that the several mandates stood in ten- consulting the Latin text as edited by R. L. Bensly sion and even in conflict. The various concerns had (1895) and by Bruno Violet (1910), as well as by to be balanced case by case in order to provide a 00-FMDC-NRSVPew-2.qxd 7/10/2005 5:53 PM Page ix

ix TO THE READER faithful and acceptable rendering without using name for the one and only God, as though there contrived English. Only very occasionally has the were other gods from whom the true God had to pronoun “he” or “him” been retained in passages be distinguished, began to be discontinued in Ju- where the reference may have been to a woman as daism before the Christian era and is inappropri- well as to a man; for example, in several legal ate for the universal faith of the Christian Church. texts in Leviticus and Deuteronomy. In such in- It will be seen that in the Psalms and in other stances of formal, legal language, the options of ei- prayers addressed to God the archaic second per- ther putting the passage in the plural or of intro- son singular pronouns (thee, thou, thine) and verb ducing additional nouns to avoid masculine forms (art, hast, hadst) are no longer used. Al- pronouns in English seemed to the Committee to though some readers may regret this change, it obscure the historic structure and literary charac- should be pointed out that in the original lan- ter of the original. In the vast majority of cases, guages neither the Old Testament nor the New however, inclusiveness has been attained by sim- makes any linguistic distinction between address- ple rephrasing or by introducing plural forms when ing a human being and addressing the Deity. Fur- this does not distort the meaning of the passage. Of thermore, in the tradition of the King James Ver- course, in narrative and in parable no attempt was sion one will not expect to find the use of capital made to generalize the sex of individual persons. letters for pronouns that refer to the Deity—such Another aspect of style will be detected by read- capitalization is an unnecessary innovation that ers who compare the more stately English ren- has only recently been introduced into a few En- dering of the Old Testament with the less formal glish translations of the Bible. Finally, we have left rendering adopted for the New Testament. For ex- to the discretion of the licensed publishers such ample, the traditional distinction between shall matters as section headings, cross-references, and and will in English has been retained in the Old Tes- clues to the pronunciation of proper names. tament as appropriate in rendering a document This new version seeks to preserve all that is that embodies what may be termed the classic best in the English Bible as it has been known form of Hebrew, while in the New Testament the and used through the years. It is intended for use abandonment of such distinctions in the usage of in public reading and congregational worship, as the future tense in English reflects the more col- well as in private study, instruction, and meditation. loquial nature of the koine Greek used by most We have resisted the temptation to introduce terms New Testament authors except when they are and phrases that merely reflect current moods, quoting the Old Testament. and have tried to put the message of the Scriptures Careful readers will notice that here and there in simple, enduring words and expressions that are in the Old Testament the word LORD (or in certain worthy to stand in the great tradition of the King cases GOD) is printed in capital letters. This rep- James Bible and its predecessors. resents the traditional manner in English versions In traditional Judaism and Christianity, the Bible of rendering the Divine Name, the “Tetragram- has been more than a historical document to be pre- maton” (see the notes on Exodus 3.14, 15), fol- served or a classic of literature to be cherished lowing the precedent of the ancient Greek and and admired; it is recognized as the unique record Latin translators and the long established practice of God’s dealings with people over the ages. The in the reading of the Hebrew Scriptures in the Old Testament sets forth the call of a special peo- synagogue. While it is almost if not quite certain ple to enter into covenant relation with the God of that the Name was originally pronounced “Yah- justice and steadfast love and to bring God’s law to weh,” this pronunciation was not indicated when the nations. The New Testament records the life the Masoretes added vowel sounds to the conso- and work of Jesus Christ, the one in whom “the nantal Hebrew text. To the four consonants YHWH Word became flesh,” as well as describes the rise of the Name, which had come to be regarded as too and spread of the early Christian Church. The sacred to be pronounced, they attached vowel Bible carries its full message, not to those who re- signs indicating that in its place should be read the gard it simply as a noble literary heritage of the past Hebrew word Adonai meaning “Lord” (or Elohim or who wish to use it to enhance political pur- meaning “God”). Ancient Greek translators em- poses and advance otherwise desirable goals, but ployed the word Kyrios (“Lord”) for the Name. to all persons and communities who read it so that The likewise used the Latin word Dominus they may discern and understand what God is say- (“Lord”). The form “” is of late medieval ing to them. That message must not be disguised origin; it is a combination of the consonants of in phrases that are no longer clear, or hidden un- the Divine Name and the vowels attached to it by der words that have changed or lost their meaning; the Masoretes but belonging to an entirely differ- it must be presented in language that is direct and ent word. Although the American Standard Version plain and meaningful to people today. It is the (1901) had used “Jehovah” to render the Tetra- hope and prayer of the translators that this version grammaton (the sound of Y being represented by of the Bible may continue to hold a large place in J and the sound of W by V, as in Latin), for two rea- congregational life and to speak to all readers, sons the Committees that produced the RSV and young and old alike, helping them to understand the NRSV returned to the more familiar usage of the and believe and respond to its message. King James Version. (1) The word “Jehovah” does not accurately represent any form of the Name For the Committee, ever used in Hebrew. (2) The use of any proper BRUCE M. METZGER