Choosing a
Faithful Translation of the Bible
Which Bible should I
use? This is a question every beginning new Christian faces. The Christian
bookshops are lined with many different versions. There are older versions,
contemporary versions, English editions, American editions, revised versions
and study editions. So which Bible should I purchase?
Selecting a good Bible
for reading is not like buying a novel from Kinokuniya.
The Bible is not a best-selling novel, nor is it a human written book. The first
fact a new believer must bear in mind in choosing a Bible is that he is buying
a copy of God’s Word. The Bible says in 2Tim 3v16 that, “All Scripture is given by
inspiration of God”. As such, he should
base his choice on how reliable and accurate the translation is.
When
one buys a Bible, he is buying a copy of God’s Word. The original Bible is
written in Hebrew and Greek. The original Bible (autograph) written by the
inspired writers is no longer with us. What we do have in Church and in the
bookshops are copies of the original autograph.
But we need not have to worry that God’s Word is
lost just because we do not have the original.
God by His providential care has ensured that the
Word of God is not lost when people make copies and translation of His holy
Word. One illustration that is useful in order to help you understand this is
to think about the photocopying process. When you make a photocopy of an
original document, the copy that comes out of the machine is an exact copy of
the original. Although it is different from the original, the language, the
fonts, the design, the pictures, the format, and the contents are exactly the
same.
However,
in ancient times, no one could make copies of the originals with photocopying
machines. They are all hand written. What this means is that human errors are
bound to creep in. As such, in choosing a Bible, we want to be sure that we are
buying one that is faithful and accurate in its text and translation.
In
choosing a faithful translation of the Bible, there are two factors to
consider. One is the reliability of the text manuscripts, and the other is the
accuracy of translation.
The reliability of the text
The
Bible translations which we have today are mainly from two text manuscript
sources. One is called the Byzantine text. The other is the
What
is interesting is that most of the English Bible before the 19th
century was based on the later Byzantine text. The Alexandrian manuscripts were
not used in English translations till 1881. Most modern Bible translations
today follow the Alexandrian text. There are only two Bible translations that
use the Byzantine text types. They are the King James Version, also known as
the Authorized Version, and the New King James Version.
For
centuries, the Byzantine text was the dominant text used. The church fathers
used it, the Protestant reformers used it, and the text became the basis for
the well-know King James Version. Although many have queried the lack of the
Alexandrian text (many times unfairly and with overly Pharisaical zeal), no one
has ever challenged the faithfulness of the Byzantine text.
The accuracy of translation
There
are basically two methods of translation used in putting the original text in
Hebrew and Greek into English. One method is the `word for word’ method, also
known as formal equivalence. The other is a `thought for thought’ method, also
known as dynamic equivalence.
The dynamic equivalence method
Many
modern translations use the dynamic equivalence method. The method of dynamic
equivalence is not without its problems, especially in translating the inspired
Scriptures. A believer reading the Bible desires to know precisely what God
says in the text. But the method of dynamic equivalence does not always do
this. When we translate only the thought of God without keeping to the words of
God, we can potentially alter the meaning of the Word of God.
We must bear in mind that when God gave us His
inspired Word, every word of God is carefully chosen by the Holy Spirit. The
extent of divine inspiration covers both the thought as well as the words.
Versions
using the method of dynamic equivalence are obviously easy to read since it is
written in the receptor’s language. But we should not base our choice of the
Bible on just the factor of readability, The factor of
accuracy, I assert, is far more important in determining our choice.
One
obvious danger of using this `thought for thought’ method is that the
translation is bound to carry bias. Even a well-respected version like the NIV
has, in many instance, the translators’ own interpretations put into the text.
When this happens, the translators’ words are included into the Word of God and
are read as the Word of God.
The formal equivalence method
The
formal equivalence method is a much preferred method in translation. In giving
a `word for word’ rendering, this method enables the reader to know the
equivalent words in the Holy Scriptures. Best of all, it also preserves the
text of Scripture.
Using
this formal equivalence method, a translator finds a precise word in the
receptor’s language to match the meaning of the original word.
Although
this is the best method for Bible translation, it nevertheless has limitations.
For it is not always possible to find a precise word to match
the word and meaning of another language and culture, especially if the
original text is an ancient document. Language is imbedded in culture,
and cultures vary from people to people.
Even
in Bible versions that use formal equivalence, additional words must be used to
provide a clearer meaning. And there are times also when a certain degree of
`thought for thought’ method must be used.
One
reason why the KJV and the NKJV are so popular among conservative Christians
and serious students of the Bible is that they keep closely to the original
words of the Bible.
The King James Version Controversy
In
talking to some over-zealous believers, sometimes you will find them asserting
that the KJV is the only true Bible. This of course is not true. The
translators themselves never made such a claim. In the original preface of the
KJV, the translators openly acknowledged that other poorer translations are
also the Word of God.
The
KJV, nevertheless, is a good, accurate and faithful translation. The Bible was
translated in 1611. Its textual basis was the Byzantine text. Once completed,
it was authorized by King James to be the Bible for the English people. But it
never got to a good start. Most of the Protestant believers preferred the
Geneva Bible which was translated by the famous Scottish reformer John Knox and
his colleagues at
Perhaps
one reason why the KJV was not well-received initially was because a few of the
translators were staunch anti-Calvinists. Calvinism was the main theology in
those days. And the Geneva Bible with its footnotes was decisively Calvinistic.
The Geneva Bible, more than the King James Version, was the Bible of the
Reformation.
Although
the translators of the KJV came from different backgrounds, all of them were
undoubtedly the best language scholars of their times. Their works produced
more than just a faithful and accurate translation of the Bible. They put
together a Bible that is still unsurpassed in terms of style and expressions.
The
KJV, of course, is written in old English. To say that we have no problem
reading the KJV is not true. But to discard the KJV because of its archaic
English is definitely not wise.
Thankfully,
a modernized version of the KJV is made available. The NKJV is also based on
the same Byzantine text of the KJV. Like the KJV, the NKJV also uses the `word
for word’ approach in translation. By using the Byzantine text and the formal
equivalence translation technique, the NKJV is certainly a good and faithful
translation of the Bible. People whose native language is not English will find
in the NKJV a Bible that is easier to read and study.
By
Pastor Cheah Fook Meng