Translation Theory and the Evaluation of Translations

Which Version Should I Choose?

Challenges that Confront Translators

Restoration of the Biblical Text Establishing the Meaning of the

Biblical Text Expressing the Meaning of the

Biblical Text

RESTORATION OF THE TEXT First step in Bible translation is to establish the

text of the OT and NT Nearly 5,500 manuscripts of the NT or portions

of it exist today No two manuscripts are identical The only complete manuscript of the Masoretic

text dates to A.D. 1008 The temporal distance between this Hebrew

text and the original document and the differences between this text and earlier versions requires textual criticism

Process of textual criticism TC is the science which seeks to

reconstruct the original biblical text TC is not an exact science—it often

deals with probabilities not certainties Step One: Examine external evidence

Date of witnesses Geographical distribution of witnesses Reliability of the textual group

Process of textual criticism Consider transcriptional probabilities

More difficult reading is preferred Shorter reading is preferred More distinct reading (in comparison to

parallels) is preferred Less polished reading is preferred

Examine the possibility of unintentional change Errors of sight (1 Tim. 3:16 qs os) Errors of hearing (Rev. 1:5 luvsanti lousanti)

Process of textual criticism Internal Evidence-What was original

author most likely to have written? Author's style and vocabulary Immediate context

The reading that offers the best explanation for the origin of other readings is likely the original reading

Reconstructing the Text or Tampering with the Text

1 John 5:7-8 John 7:53-8:11 2 Thessalonians 2:13

Reassurances While doctrine may be affected by a variant

in a given passage, no doctrine is entirely dependent on a single variant

Although a few questions remain, the text of the OT and NT has been reconstruction with a high degree of accuracy (ex. Romans) A-41 B-21 C-22 D-1 In 75% of case, text is certain or almost certain Doubtful text is Romans 14:19

Establishing Meaning of the Text Lack of punctuation, divisions between words,

sentences or paragraphs Rom 9:5 placement of periods and commas

Christ who is God over all, blessed forevermore. Christ. May the God who is over all be blessed forevermore. Christ, who is over all. God be blessed forevermore.

John 3:16 and Matt 1:22-23 Quotation marks Syntactical ambiguities

Greek genitive is capable of 30 different nuances Some of these are the opposite of the other

Puzzling Vocabulary stoicheia rudimentary elements or demonic spirits

Every translation is, by necessity, an interpretation!

Since translation involves interpretation . . . . To insure that your translation does not

express idiosyncratic interpretations, depend on translations produced by committees of scholars rather than individual scholars

To insure that your translation does not reflect theological biases, depend on translations produced by interdenominational and international groups

Expressing the Meaning of the Biblical Text The original and receptor languages do

not have identical grammar Hebrew verb has two aspects English verb system is more specific Greek verb has more extensive tense system English verb system is less specific

The original and receptor languages do not have identical vocabulary cavri" qriambeuvw

Brief History of the Translation of the Bible into English VI century:Gospel brought to England

by missionaries from Rome VII and VIII century: Translation of

portions of the Latin Vulgate into English by Caedmon, Aldhelm, and Bede

XIV century: John Wycliffe supervised translation of entire text of Vulgate into English extremely literal word-for-word translation later revision by John Purvey focused on

meaning of sentences as a whole rather than individual words

John Wycliffe (1329-1384)

Purvey: “A translator hath great need to study well the sense both before and after, and then also he hath need to live a clean life and be full devout in prayers, and have not hit wit occupied about worldly things, that the Holy Spirit, author of all wisdom and knowledge and truth, dress him for his work and suffer him not to err. By this manner, with good living and great travail, men can come to true and clear translating, and true understanding of holy writ, seem it never so hard at the beginning. God grant to us all grace to know well and to keep well, holy writ, and to suffer joyfully some pain for it at the last.”

AD 1408: Constitutions of OxfordOne of the 13 provisions forbade anyone to translate or read the Bible in the vernacular

AD 1516: Erasmus published his edition of the Greek NT with a preface encouraging the translation of the NT into the vernacular

Desiderius Erasmus (1467-1536)

Desiderius Erasmus from the Preface to the GNT 1516

I totally disagree with those who are unwilling that the Holy Scriptures, translated into the common tongue, should be read by the unlearned. Christ desires His mysteries to be published abroad as widely as possible. I could wish that even all women should read the Gospel and St. Paul's Epistles, and I would that they were translated into all the languages of all Christian people, that they might be read and known not merely by the Scots and the Irish but even by the Turks and the Saracens. I wish that the farm worker might sing parts of them at the plough, that the weaver might hum them at the shuttle, and that the traveler might beguile the weariness of the way by reciting them.

1522: William Tyndale announced his intentions to translate the Scriptures into English

Soon after, Master Tyndale happened to be in the company of a learned man, and in communing and disputing with him drove him to that issue, that the learned man said: "We were better be without God's law than the Pope's." Master Tyndall, hearing that, answered him: "I defy the Pope and all his laws"; and said,"If God spare my life, ere many years I will cause a boy that driveth the plough shall know more of the Scripture than thou dost." Foxe’s Book of Martyrs

William Tyndale (1494-1536)

1525: Tyndale completed translation of the NT into English in one year’s time

First complete translation of Greek NT into English

Tyndale was also responsible for a good portion of the OT translation that appeared in Matthew’s Bible

Burned at the stake in 1536 praying, “Lord open the King of England’s eyes”

Other Bible Translations from Tyndale to KJV Coverdale’s Bible (1535)

first to use chapter summaries rather than headings

first to separate Apocrypha from OT Approved for circulation by Henry VIII

Matthew’s Bible (1537) Great Bible (1539) Geneva Bible (1560) first OT translation

completely based on the Hebrew text Bishop’s Bible (1568)

King James Version (Authorized Version) prompted by a resolution from John Rogers

at the Hampton Court Conference in 1603 Guidelines for the translators

Based on Bishop’s Bible Anglicized names of people and places retain old ecclesiastical words marginal notes to clarify translation and point

out parallel passages indicate words supplied by translators write new chapter headings

Translated by six panels consisting of 47 men from Oxford, Cambridge and Westminster

Reviewed by committee of 12 (2 reps from each panel)

Translators were the leading biblical scholars in England at the time

1611 Authorized Version

Translators to the ReadersZeale to promote the common good,

whether it be by deuising any thing ourselues, or reuising that which hath bene laboured by others, deserueth much respect and esteeme, but yet findeth but cold intertainment in the world. It is welecommed with suspicion in stead of loue, and with emulation instead of thanks . . . .

Importance of clear translation in the people’s language

“But how shall men meditate in that, which they cannot vnderstand? How shall they vnderstand that which is kept close in an vnknowen tongue? . . . Translation it is that openeth the window, to let in the light; that breaketh the shell, that we may eat the kernel; that putteth aside the curtaine, that we may looke into the most Holy place; that remooueth the couer of the well, that wee may come by the water, euen as Iacob rolled away the stone from the mouth of the well, by which meanes the flockes of Laban were watered. Indeede without translation into the vulgar tongue, the vnlearned are but like children at Iacobs well (which was deepe) without a bucket or some thing to draw with; or as that person mentioned by Esay, to whom when a sealed booke was deliuered, with this motion, Reade this, I pray thee, hee was faine to make this answere, I cannot, for it is sealed.”

Multiple Translations are a token of the Bible’s value

How many bookes of profane learning haue bene gone ouer againe and againe, by the same translators, by others? Now if this cost may bee bestowed vpon the goord, which affordeth vs a little shade, and which to day flourisheth, but to morrow is cut downe; what may we bestowe, nay what ought we not to bestow vpon the Vine, the fruit whereof maketh glad the conscience of man, and the stemme whereof abideth for euer? And this is the word of God, which we translate

Translations subject to correction and improvement

Let vs rather blesse God from the ground of our heart, for working this religious care in him, to haue the translations of the Bible maturely considered of and examined. For by this meanes it commeth to passe, that whatsoeuer is sound alreadie (and all is sound for substance, in one or other of our editions, and the worst of ours farre better then their autentike vulgar) the same will shine as gold more brightly, being rubbed and polished; also, if any thing be halting or superfluous, or not so agreeable to the original, the same may bee corrected, and the trueth set in place

Translations helpful despite imperfections

That we doe not deny, nay wee affirme and auow, that they very meanest translation of the Bible in English, set foorth by men of our profession (for wee haue seene none of theirs of the whole Bibe as yet) containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God

No translation perfectA man may be counted a vertuous man, though hee

haue made many slips in his life, (els, there were none vertuous, for in many things we offend all) also a comely man and louely, though hee haue some warts vpon his hand, yea, not onely freakles vpon his face, but also skarres. No cause therefore why the word translated should bee denied to be the word, or forbidden to be currant, notwithstanding that some imperfections and blemishes may be noted in the setting forth of it. For what euer was perfect vnder the Sunne, where Apostles or Apostolike man, that is, men indued with an extraordinary measure of Gods spirit, and priuiledged with the priuiledge of infallibilitie, had not their hand?

Improvement of older translation is not disparagement

Truly (good Christian Reader) wee neuer thought from the beginning, that we should neede to make a new Translation, not yet to make of a bad one a good one . . . but to make a good one better, or out of many good ones, one principall good one, not iustly to be excepted against; that hath bene our indeauour, that our marke.

Freedom to paraphrase for the sake of clarity and beauty

An other thing we thinke good to admonish thee of (gentle Reader) that wee haue not tyed our selues to an vniformitie of phrasing, or to an identitie of words, as some peraduenture would wish that we had done, because they obscrue, that some learned men some where, haue beene as exact as they could that way. . . . For is the kingdome of God become words or syllables? why should wee be in bondage to them if we may be free vse one precisely when wee may vse another no lesse fit, as commodiously?

Translation to be neither scrupulous or obscure

Adde hereunto, that nicenesse in wordes was alwayes counted the next step to trifling, and so was to bee curious about names too: also that we cannot follow a better patterne for elocution then God himselfe; therefore hee vsing diuers words, in his holy writ, and indifferently for one thing in nature: we, if wee will not be superstitious, may vse the same liertie in our English versions out of Hebrew & Greeke, for that copie or store that he hath giuen vs. Lastly, wee haue on the one side auoided the scrupulositie of the Puritanes, who leaue the olde Ecclesiastical words, and betake them to other, as when they put washing for Baptisme, and Congregation in stead of Church; as also on the other side we haue shunned the obscuritie of the Papists, in their Azimes, Tunike, Rational, Holocausts, Praepuce, Pasche, and a number of such like, whereof their late Translation is full, and that of purpose to darken the sence, that since they must needs translate the Bible, yet by the language thereof, it may bee kept from being vnderstood. But we desire that the Scripture may speake like it selfe, as in the language of Canaan, that it may bee vnderstood euen of the very vulgar.

Early Criticisms Hugh Broughton preferred the Geneva

Bible and labored for 30 years to produce a revision of it. He said of the KJV:The late Bible . . . was sent to me to censure: which bred in me a sadness that will grieve me while I breathe, it is so ill done. Tell His Majesty that I had rather be rent in pieces with wild horses, than any such translation by my consent should be urged upon poor churches. . . The new edition crosseth me. I require it to be burnt.

Gell claimed the translation grew weaker as it proceeded

Gell and Broughton argued that the better readings were relegated to the margin. Catholics objected to the inclusion of variants.

Objections to inclusion of Apocrypha

Printing Problems Original 1611 ed.

Matt. 23:24 “strain at a gnat” Matt. 26:36 substituted name Judas for Jesus

2nd ed. printed Exodus 14:10 twice 1631, Cambridge printers fined L300 for

omitting “not” from the Seventh Commandment (Wicked Bible)

1735 substituted k for f in Mark 7:27: Let the children first be filled (Murderer’s Bible)

Psalm 119:161: “Printers have persecuted me without a cause.” Should read “Princes.”

Problems in the Use of the KJV Today Unintelligible vocabulary

wimple, almug, algum, chode, charshim, chapt, gat, habergeon, hosen, kab, knob, lgure, leasing, maranatha, nard, neesed, pate, pilled, rabboni, raca, stacte, strake, sycamyne, trode, ouches, tatches, brigadine, wot, trow

Words that have changed meaningprevent (1 Thess 4:15), charger (Mark 6:25), mean (Prov. 22:39; Isa. 2:9), peculiar (1 Peter 2:9), gay (James 2:3)

Text NT: Stephanus (1551) and Beza (1589) OT: Complutensian Polyglot (1517) and

Antwerp Polyglot (1572)

KJV: A Literal Translation? “Let the King Live” translated “God Save the

King” “May it never be” translated “God forbid” “Light a lamp” modernized to “light a candle” Refers to “bottles” rather than wineskins and

“shoes” rather than sandals “Sit at table” rather than “recline at table” Poor punctuation at Col. 2:21 give impression

that “Touch not, taste not” is a Pauline affirmation

New American Standard Bible Background

Full translation appear in 1970 Sponsored by Lockman Foundation

Goals true to Greek and Hebrew grammatically correct understandable to common man “giving the Lord Jesus his proper place, the

place which the Word gives him” stands on its own merits rather than

reputation of translators

NASB Textual Basis

Advantage over ASV due to discovery of Cairo Geniza fragments, Dead Sea Scrolls and Aleppo Codex

ASV compared only 1,500 GNT manuscripts. NASB had access to nearly 5,000

Formal mattersQuotations, reverted to verse indention, paragraphs mark w. bold verse number, use of capitalization to refer to Deity (Gen. 1:26)

Weaknesses of the NASB Possible “overtranslation” At times slavishly literal Puzzling renderings

Mark 7:4 “baptize” is translated “cleanse” with a marginal rendering “sprinkle” while noun form is translated “washing” with “baptizing” in margin.

Strengths of NASB Highlights Deity of Christ Assumes harmony of Scripture

E.g. Paul’s conversion in Acts 9:7 and 22:9

Avoids paraphrase, making translation a good guide for exegesis

New International Version 1965 Committee on Bible Translation

was formed 1968 NY Bible Society (now IBS)

undertook sponsorship of translation Original plan to call version “A

Contemporary Translation” Name changed to NIV to reflect

international background of translators (US, Canada, UK, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand)

Approach to Translation 20 teams, each consisting of

translator, co-translator, 2 consultants, and an English stylist

Work of team evaluated and revision by two editorial committees

Final evaluation and approval by CBT

Helpful features of NIV Paragraph format Use of quotation marks and parentheses Brackets rather than italics for inserted

material use of critical texts attempted to steer middle course

between excessive literalness (ASV, NASB) and paraphrase (NEB, LB, Philips, and the Message)

Highlights doctrine of Christ’s Deity

Deity of ChristKJV NIV

only begotten Son

being in the form of God

Romans 9:5, an exclamation of praise to Father

Titus 2:13 distinguishes God and Jesus

God the One and Only

being in very nature God

Romans 9:5 affirms deity of Christ

Titus 2:13 identifies Jesus as God

Criticisms of NIV Foy Wallace: “tinctured through with

the erroneous doctrines of original sin, hereditary depravity, restoration of national Israel, premillenialism, and predestination”

detracts from Christ’s Deity Homosexual involvement in translation

team Current edition is gender-inclusive

English Standard Version Accuracy

attempts to render the text of the autographs using BHS and NA and informs readers of important variants

attempts to inform reader of all legitimate interpretations either through renderings that preserve the ambiguity of the original text or by stating alternative renderings in the margin

attempts a "word for word" rather than "thought for thought" translation making it reliable for biblical research

Orthodoxy translation committee composed of inerrantist evangelicals conservative revision of the RSV that seeks to correct

theological problems of the older version conforms to the Colorado Springs Guideliens on the Issue

of Gender in Bible Translation

Literary Excellence retains the poetic and stately ring of

the KJV and RSV preserves familiar readings when

these are accurate seeks to be contemporary (no "thee

or thou") without being colloquial (e.g. the abbreviations of the HCSB "Come and you'll see" John 1:39)

Comparisons John 1:18 (superior to HCSB and KJV) Romans 1:17 (superior to NIV) 2 Thess. 1:9 (superior to most versions) 1 John 5:7 (completely omits added

text) Possibly the most accurate Bible

translation available today

Recommendations Use ESV or NASB as basis for sermon

preparation and as pulpit Bible. The mark of a good translation is that it preserves the ambiguity and precision of the original. The ESV seems to attain this goal better than any other translation.

Compare this with other serious translations Avoid use of extreme paraphrases such as The

Message altogether Recognize that other paraphrases such as the

New Living Translation may be appropriate in some contexts like a devotional reading but that they often obscure the sense of the original and "overinterpret the text."