“God had a library assembled into a book, a permanent record, so we could navigate a difficult detour back to the main road of life.”
That is how we ended the last discussion. There are some things that need to be addressed about the Bible before we go to other things.
It was written long ago in a land far away. It was a different world. We have learned so much. We have so much in new skills and technologies. It’s a different world now. Some people argue that change reduces the relevance of the Bible to our modern lives.
But let’s rethink that. Our new skills and technologies enable us to do things in new, more powerful, long reaching ways. As we take some time with ancient writings, including the Bible, we still see people are people. Love, fear, hate, greed, altruism, war, treaties, nationalism, money, records, accomplishments, disasters. It’s all there. It’s all here.
The passing of ages hasn’t really done much for the desires of human nature except perhaps strengthen them and provide enhanced powers and opportunities to execute them. Rather than face to face, hand to hand combat on a field, now, if someone pushes a certain button it all goes up in a set of mushroom clouds or incurable illnesses on whatever continents. We don’t often have to get our hands bloody. We can let a system do it for us, at a distance, out of sight. We may be less inclined to reconsider an action. Our money and our identity is now vaporware in some computer and now fleetingly fragile and vulnerable. But while we may need to work around cultural expressions and geographical layouts, the human elements are still relevant. The basic nature of humanity has not changed.
Languages Have Changed, God’s Message Has Not
While some scholars can easily handle Hebrew and Greek of the ancient Bible, the rest of us must rely on a translation from those languages. In the last 150 years there has come an explosion of translations available. As can be expected a lot of weeding is required to find the one on which you will hang your soul. The next couple of paragraphs are brief summaries of long technical discussions.
The Bible was mostly written in Hebrew and Greek. It is appropriate, even complementary, to note that orthodox Jews were and are fanatical about precision and accuracy in duplicating and handling “The Writings.” There is little argument about Hebrew texts as sources for translation work. There was need for the Hebrew texts to be translated into Greek so many Jews among Greek culture could better read The Writings. Seventy Hebrew scholars provided this resource in the second century BC. This became known as the Septuagint (LXX).
Both the Hebrew text and the Septuagint were used by New Testament writers. In fact, having the Old Testament in both forms at this end of history tends to enhance confidence in both. The finesse of Greek can be a help in drawing nuances behind the more cryptic Hebrew.
Greek is an amazingly finely nuanced language capable great precision in conveying ideas. The thoughts and workings of God with and among people in both the Old and New Testaments were committed to the Greek language. It is the best medium for the task.
Discussion about Greek source manuscripts is not so tidy. By way of simplistic summary there are two main lineages of Greek text: “Alexandrian” and “Byzantine.” In the 16th century Erasmus and Stephens did much to collate many fragments of Greek texts into a working document that came to be called the “Textus Receptus” – the “received text.” This belongs to the Byzantine lineage. This text undergirded most of the translation work that fueled the Reformation. That God arranged that this text was used in such renovation of faith and practice is, to me, a strong credential for its value. In the 19th century “textual criticism” arguing what is the best source text to translate from became a hot topic that has great influence in today’s translation work.
How I Chose a Translation
Let me tell you a story. I had been raised on the King James Version of the Bible. That was “The Bible.” In time I became aware there were other translations of the Bible. The old English of the KJV, while beautiful, no longer meshed well with current language forms and tended to tangle the tongue. As I began to give some consideration to more current translations an observation and question came to mind: In Genesis three the tempter was successful in his work by editing God’s word. I wonder if he might do something similar at this end of history?
This was the headwater of my search in the issue of translations. I even wound up taking a couple of Greek translation classes and came to some appreciation of the art of translation. I was careful in seeking a Bible translation upon which I was willing hang my soul. It had to be a worthy study Bible. Single person translations were set aside. Paraphrases were set aside – too likely to be colored by personal perspectives. “Dynamic equivalence” was also shunned as it made a bit too much room for the translators’ theological stance to color the work. I found translations that were popular and appeared to be of scholarly workmanship. But in some entire verses were absent and many other clips were discovered. Some of the edits left distinct holes in the context.
My exposure to Greek made an Interlinear Greek-English New Testament (based on the 1550 Stephens text) a useful tool in working through this. In the end I settled on the New King James Version. It was good formal language. It was translated by a team of scholars of diverse backgrounds for whom this was an awesome project for God’s work with eternal consequences – not just a project translating an ancient document. The checks I was able to make with Greek (I can do next to nothing in Hebrew) and some older trusted translations built confidence.
Some thoughts on the art of translation. Each language has its qualities, quirks and cultural idioms. If you spend a little time with a thesaurus it becomes apparent that a particular word will typically have several synonyms – words of similar meaning. Note: similar meaning. There is a lot that goes into carefully picking the right, the best word or words to convey the source language idea.
Then there are “idiomatic” expressions. “He hit that one out of the park!” What could that possibly mean? That is a cultural idiom borrowed from baseball. Translated: “He did very well indeed!” There are idiomatic expressions in ancient culture that don’t translate easily to our culture. Even the best translation has a few instances where a different expression, with a slightly different color, would also work.
Not only are there different languages, language changes over time, making retranslation valuable. The English of John Wycliff (1380) is different than that of William Tyndale (1530) and of today. New words come into use. Old words fade. Definitions change. Spelling changes. Syntax changes. I have a facsimile of the Wycliff Bible. It is recognizable as English but only marginally understandable. Tyndale is usable. His work had strong influence on the King James Version. But in a translation using current language my mental processing is more free to work with ideas than trying to decode the text.
As you become serious in your study you need to consistently use one translation. As you read and reread certain words, phrases and concepts become familiar. This allows for connections between passages to form. It becomes easier to find and recall passages that become familiar.