How We Got Our Bible, Part 4 – Translation

 

How We Got Our Bible

Part 4 – Translation 

I.      GREEK MANUSCRIPTS

A.    Three Main Branches of Manuscript Traditions

1.     As the church became more established, certain definable New Testament manuscript traditions tended to become the standards within more or less defined areas.

2.     These became known as "text-types" and there are three of them: The Byzantine text, the Alexandrian text, and the Western text.

3.     The Byzantine (or Majority) text: Preserved by the Byzantine Empire, there are far more manuscripts of this tradition than the others, but most of them are from later dates.

4.     The Western text: Sprang from fairly undisciplined scribal activity in Western Roman Empire, and therefore, considered the most unreliable of the "text-types”

5.     The Alexandrian text: Prepared most likely in the region around Egypt, the oldest known manuscripts are from this family.

6.     Because of this, all of today’s translations are based on either the Byzantine text-type or the Alexandrian text-type.

7.     The “standard” Byzantine text is the Textus Receptus (Received Text)

8.     The “standard” Alexandrian text is the Westcott & Hort (aka the Critical Text)

B.    Two Major Texts of Controversy (TR vs. W&H)

1.     Textus Receptus (Basis for the KJV)

a)     In 1516, Erasmus, a Roman Catholic Priest and humanist, was pressured into to finishing a Greek text in order to be the first Greek text published.

b)     Erasmus had studied hundreds of Greek manuscripts, but based his text on a small handful of Byzantine manuscripts he felt were representative of them.

c)     After its first publishing, Erasmus and others would end up revising the text several times.

d)     In 1611, The King James Version (known in Great Britain as the Authorised Version) was translated from Theodore Beza’s 1604 edition of the TR.

e)     In 1633, another revision was published, which contained the words, “Textum ergo habes, nunc ab omnibus receptum: in quo nihil immuta tum aut corruptum damus.” (“The reader has the text which is now received by all, in which we give nothing changed or corrupted.”)

f)      Thus, the text was named "Textus Receptus."

g)     Note that it was not “received” in the sense that God was putting his stamp of approval upon this Greek revision alone.

h)     It was received in that it was considered the standard text of that time.

i)      In his original edition, Erasmus had no Greek manuscripts for the last six verses of Revelation, so he back-translated from Latin to Greek.  Later revisions fixed that issue.

2.     Westcott & Hort (Basis for many modern translations)

a)     In 1881, after about thirty years of labor, B.F. Westcott and F.J.A. Hort published a Greek New Testament.

b)     Westcott and Hort, liberal scholars, argued that the later manuscripts (Byzantine) were inferior to the older manuscripts (Alexandrian).

c)     In their work, the scholars used manuscripts that dated back to the fourth century, some 500 years earlier than anything used directly by Erasmus. Most of their work was based on two manuscripts — the Vaticanus and the Sinaiticus.

d)     Most modern scholars have followed Westcott & Hort’s work, and the principle that “older is better.”

e)     Although there are many differences between the Textus Receptus, Westcott and Hort, and the 28th edition of the Nestles-Aland Greek texts, the vast majority of variations are so minor that they are not even translatable, (the most common is the moveable “nu”, which is akin to the difference between ‘a’ and ‘an’).

3.     The Controversy

a)     There are, however, places where we find a substantial difference, such as verses or phrases being omitted (John 5:3-4; 7:53-8:11; Mark 16:9-20; 1 John 5:7,8, etc.)

b)     One theory (Critical text view) is that the oldest manuscripts are the most accurate. The theory is that the oldest manuscripts are most significant although they are few.

c)     The other theory (Majority text view) is that the type of manuscripts that survived in greatest numbers are the most accurate (even if they are less ancient). 

4.     There are legitimate questions as to which Greek text is the most reliable.

5.     However, the question must be answered by legitimate and careful scholarship in view of all the evidence

6.     Honest disagreements still remain concerning which Greek NT is superior.

7.     However, among those who love God’s Word there is no conspiracy or attempt to corrupt the Word of God.

II.             Modern Translations

A.    Historical View of Bible Translation

1.      Up until the twentieth century, there has been only one identifiable philosophy of Bible translation, namely a literal translation of the original Hebrew and Greek texts.

2.     Around the middle of the twentieth century, a new philosophy emerged.

a)     This philosophy attempted to reproduce not the words of the original text but the thoughts and ideas.

b)     The leading proponents behind this philosophy were Kenneth Pike and Eugene Nida.

B.    Philosophies of Bible Translation

1.     The name of the historical philosophy of translation is called, “Formal Equivalence” which seeks to carefully translate word-for-word. It is also known, as “Literal Translation.”

2.     The name of the more modern philosophy is called, “Dynamic Equivalence.” This philosophy seeks to capture the thoughts, meanings, and ideas of the original texts.

3.      “Dynamic Equivalence” was the impetus for translation on the mission fields and was carried over to the retranslation of the English Bible.

4.     Another philosophy of translation is called, “Paraphrase” which is simply a restatement of a text in another form or other words, often to clarify meaning.

C.     Pros and Cons of Formal Equivalence (FE)

1.     Pros

a)     FE assures the reader that the translation is as close to the original as is allowable in translating from one language into another.

b)     FE allows the reader to interpret the meaning of the original text and not the translators for him.

c)     FE assures theological precision in preserving theological concepts through theological vocabulary.

d)     FE eliminates the need for translation correction in teaching and preaching.

e)     FE assures the original author’s scholarship and literary style (i.e. play on words)

2.     Cons

a)     Sometimes translating word-for-word can make idioms and colloquialisms difficult to understand.

b)     If the translation is too difficult because it is literally translated, then there may be less interest in reading it.

c)     Unless an individual is serious about Bible study, he may have difficulty interpreting Scripture accurately.

D.     Pros and Cons of Dynamic Equivalence (DE)

1.     Pros

a)     DE simplifies difficult metaphors into direct statements for the reader’s understandability.

b)     DE turns long, complex sentences into shorter comprehensible sentences.

c)     DE reduces the level of vocabulary to a level suitable to the ability of today’s readers

2.     Cons

a)     If original writers would have wanted their text simplified, they could have written it differently.

b)     If God would have wanted the original writers to write differently, then He would have moved them to write differently.

c)     Not all scholars agree on the meanings of words so there can be multiple translations and interpretations.

d)     If translators do not understand the original text particularly well, a free translation of it will likely convey less of the original meaning, and introduce a more spurious meaning, than will a literal one. 

E.    Problem Examples

1.     I Thess. 4:4

a)     (NKJV) That each of you should know how to possess his own vessel in sanctification and honor.

b)     (NIrV) He wants all of you to learn to control your own bodies. You must live in a way that is holy. You must live with honor.

c)     (RSV) That each one of you know how to take a wife for himself in holiness and honor.

d)     The Greek word here is σκεῦος, (skeuos, vessel).  Dynamic equivalence imposes an interpretation on the passage that may not be correct.

2.     Ephesians 2:8

a)     (KJV) For by grace are ye saved through faith …

b)     (CEV) You were saved by faith in God’s kindness …

c)     The term “grace” means free unmerited favor and blessing” and it carries a lot of rich theological meaning when it is studied in the various contexts. To change this doctrinal word to “kindness” is to dilute the Word of God and change its meaning.

F.     Conclusion

1.     Based on the Scriptures own teaching, it would support word-for word translations

a)     If “every word of God” is tested and tried, then translations should reflect the equivalent of every word (Prov. 30:15).

b)     If Jesus declared that every jot and tittle would be fulfilled, then translations must make sure that every word is translated word-for-word (Mat. 5:18).

c)     Man lives by every word of God (Mat. 4:4).

d)     The Bible’s words are spirit words and words of life (John 6:63; Deut. 32:46-47).

e)     Man is not to add to the Scriptures (Deut. 4:2; 12:32; Prov. 30:6; Rev. 22:18-19)

2.     Expositional teaching and preaching would support word-for word translations.

3.     We must also realize that no translation is a 100% word-for-word translation. It simply would be unreadable.

4.     There are times when all versions must adjust to idioms.

5.     It may be helpful at times for the Bible student to read various translations to know about different views on a particular passage.

6.     Furthermore, we must be careful that we do not blow the Bible version debate way out of proportion and neglect the great duty to read the Scriptures daily.

III.           Addendum: Identification of Text-Type and Philosophies of Translation in CurrentEnglish Versions

A.    Strictly Formal Equivalence

1.     Majority Text-type

a)     KJV – Authorised (King James) Version

b)     NKJV – New King James Version

2.     Alexandrian Text-type

a)     NASB – New American Standard Bible

B.    Mostly Formal Equivalence

1.     Majority Text-type

a)     MEV – Modern English Version

2.     Alexandrian Text-type

a)     HCSB – Holman Christian Standard Bible

b)     ESV – English Standard Version

c)     RSV – Revised Standard Version

d)     NRSV – New Revised Standard Version

C.    Dynamic Equivalence

1.     Majority Text-type

a)     none

2.     Alexandrian Text-type

a)     NIV – New International Version

b)     TNIV – Today’s New International Version

c)     NLT – New Living Translation

d)     CEV – Contemporary English Version

e)     GNB – Good News Bible

D.    Paraphrase

1.     Majority Text-type

a)     none

2.     Alexandrian Text-type

a)     NTME—The NT in Modern English (Phillips)

b)     TLB—The Living Bible

c)     TM—The Message

d)     TSB—The Street Bible

How We Got Our Bible, Part 3 -- Preservation and Transmission

 

How We Got Our Bible Part 3 -- Preservation and Transmission 

Grateful acknowledgement to Dr. Richard Keltner and Pastor Daryl Hilbert for some of the material upon which this study is based. 

INTRODUCTION

•         From the original autograph to the modern Bible extends an important link in the overall chain from “God to us” known as transmission. (Geisler & Nix, General Introduction to the Bible)

•         It provides a credible answer to the question: Do Bible scholars today possess an accurate copy of the autographs?

•         In support of the integrity of the transmission, an overwhelming number of ancient documents must be presented.

•         There are not only countless manuscripts to support the integrity of the Bible (including the Old Testament since the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls), but a study of the procedures of preparation and preservation of the biblical manuscript copies reveals the fidelity of the transmission process itself.

•         For the New Testament, beginning with the second century ancient versions and manuscript fragments and continuing with abundant quotations of the Fathers and thousands of manuscript copies from that time to the modern versions of the Bible, there is virtually an unbroken line of testimony.

•         In fact, it may be concluded that no major document from antiquity comes into the modern world with such evidence of its integrity as does the Bible.

 ORIGINAL AUTOGRAPHS

•         “Original autographs” are the very originals that were penned by the prophets and apostles or their amanuenses (i.e. scribal secretary) – (Barach) Jer. 36:27-32; (Tertius) Rom. 16:22; (Paul) Gal.6:11. These are the writings that were under the divine process of inspiration. When the inspired autographs went from the originals to copies, the process is referred to as “transmission.”

•         It is almost universal among evangelical orthodox individuals and churches to make a distinction between inspiration and transmission in their position and doctrinal statements.

–      We do not assert that the common text, but only that the original autographic text, was inspired. (Archibald A. Hodge and Benjamin B. Warfield, Inspiration, pg. 42)

–      The original autographs of the Scriptures were infallibly correct. (John R. Rice, Our God-Breathed Book -- The Bible, pg. 88)

–      The supernatural power involved in the process of inspiration, and in the result of inspiration, was exerted only in the original production of the sixty-six Canonical books of the Bible (2 Pet. 1:20-21; 2 Pet. 3:15-16).  Statement of Faith, Trinitarian Bible Society

–      Thus, the orthodox doctrine that the Bible is the infallible, inerrant Word of God in its original manuscripts has maintained itself from the first century to the present. (Geisler, N. L., & Nix, W. E. A General Introduction to the Bible, pg. 156).

•         The copies that we possess cannot be technically said to be inspired. However, in conformity to God's purpose, promise, and command, faithful and accurate copies were made (Deut. 17:18; Prov. 25:1) and, through God's special providential care, His Word has been preserved in all generations (Psalm 119:152; Matt. 5:18; 24:35; Luke 16:17; 1 Pet. 1:25). Thus, our copies can be considered “virtually” inspired.

PRESERVATION OF TRANSMISSION

•         The Masoretic Text

–      Masoretes were Jewish textual scribes of the fifth through ninth centuries A.D. who standardized the Hebrew text of the Old Testament.

–      The Masoretes understood the significance of God’s revelation to man in the form of the Scriptures. Because of such understanding, they were meticulous in copying the Scriptures. In fact, they had incorporated rules to guarantee that there were no errors in the transmission process.

•         The Masoretes were so convinced that when they finished transcribing a MS they had an exact duplicate that they would give the new copy equal authority.

•         Sir Frederic Kenyon says: “The Masoretes undertook a number of calculation which do not enter into the ordinary sphere of textual criticism. They numbered the verses, words, and letters of every book. They calculated the middle word and the middle letter of each. …These trivialities, as we may rightly consider them, had yet the effect of securing minute attention to the precise transmission of the text: and they are but an excessive manifestation of a respect for the Sacred Scriptures which in itself deserves nothing but praise. The Masoretes were indeed anxious that not one jot nor tittle, not one smallest letter nor one tiny part of a letter, of the Law should pass away or be lost."

•         The Lord Jesus Christ and His Apostles received the preserved and standard Hebrew text of the Old Testament as Scripture (Luke 4:16-19,21; 2 Tim. 3:16). This serves as our pattern for accepting the historically received text of the New Testament also as Scripture. (2 Pet. 3:15)

•         Comparison to Classical Greek Manuscripts:

–      In contrast to the total number of the more than 5,300 partial and complete New Testament manuscripts known today, the Iliad of Homer has only 643, The Peloponnesian War of Thucydides only eight, while Tacitus’s works rely on but two manuscripts. (Geisler & Nix, A General Introduction to the Bible)

–      The abundance of biblical evidence would lead one to conclude with Sir Frederic Kenyon that “the Christian can take the whole Bible in his hand and say without fear or hesitation that he holds in it the true word of God, handed down without essential loss from generation to generation throughout the centuries.”

–      Or, as he goes on to say, The number of manuscripts of the New Testament, of early translations from it, and of quotations from it in the oldest writers of the Church, is so large that it is practically certain that the true reading of every doubtful passage is preserved in some one or other of these ancient authorities. This can be said of no other ancient book in the world.

–      In addition there are more than 19,000 ancient New Testament manuscripts in Latin, Syriac, Armenian, and other language versions, many of which predate the known Greek manuscripts.

NEW TESTAMENT MANUSCRIPTS

•         Papyri

–      A New Testament papyrus is a copy of a portion of the scripture made on papyrus. Papyrus is a brittle kind of paper made out of the papyrus plant, which grows in Egypt. 

–      To date, over 130 such papyri are known. In general, they are considered the earliest witnesses to the original text of the New Testament, typically dating from the 2^nd and 3^rd centuries. Because of the fragile nature of papyrus, most of them are simply fragments.  Most of those surviving early texts only have a few verses on them.

•         Uncials

–      Uncial is a majuscule (written entirely in capital letters) manuscript commonly used from the 4th to 8th centuries AD by Latin and Greek scribes. These were generally written on parchment (sheep skin) or vellum (calf skin), and thus have been preserved much better than papyrus.

–       Parchment had some obvious drawbacks: to transcribe the entire NT onto parchment would require the killing of a good sized flock of sheep or goats! Therefore, parchment manuscripts could only be commissioned by those who were very wealthy.

–      Not only were these manuscripts written in all capital letters, but there were no spaces between the words and no punctuation to speak of.

–      Three of the most famous uncial New Testament manuscripts are the fourth century manuscripts Sinaiticus and Vaticanus and the fifth century Codex Alexandrius.

–      There are about 275 known uncial manuscripts.

•         Minuscules

–      A New Testament minuscule is a manuscript written in a cursive Greek script. The text is mostly lowercase, with some uppercase. There are spaces between words and some degree of punctuation.

–      This style was common from the 9^th century on.

–      Many of these were written on parchment, but after the 12^th century, the process for making high-quality paper had become sufficiently advanced that it was commonly used instead.

–      There are about 3,000 cursive New Testament manuscripts known today. 

 

Conclusion

•         One of the most amazing testimonies to Scripture’s truth is its preservation over thousands of years despite sometimes intense efforts to destroy it.

•         Jesus Christ made an amazing prophesy about this preservation of His Word: “Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away” (Mark 13:31; also Matthew 24:35).