Comments on Selected Versions of the Bible
The source for most of
this information is: Edward P. Blain. The Illustrated Bible Handbook
(Nashville: Abingdon, 1987) 42ff.
Revised Standard Version (and New Revised Standard
Version) – The RSV is a revision of the
American Standard Version, which is a revision of the King James version. The
language of the ASV rendered the Greek and Hebrew of the Bible more accurately
than the KJV, but it sacrificed the poetic quality of the KJV by offering a
very literal, wooden translation. The RSV, which was published with both
Testaments in 1952, was an attempt to offer accurate translation that is based
on the best textual evidence, while preserving as much as possible the dignity
of the KJV. It is a product of an ecumenical committee. The NRSV is an updated
version of the RSV. Both can be very useful for study, worship, and devotional
reading. Both the HarperCollins Study Bible and the Oxford Annotated
Bible are available in the NRSV, and both are excellent tools for serious
study.
The New English Bible
(or the Revised English Bible) - The
complete version with Old and New Testaments first appeared in 1970. It is
based on relatively recent textual evidence, it is the result of a committee of
the finest British scholars, and it is a fresh translation from Hebrew,
Aramaic, and Greek. Unlike the RSV, the NEB is not a revision of the KJV. It
tends toward more evangelical renderings of some phrases.
The New International Version - Among adherents of more
conservative traditions, this is a very popular translation. It was begun in
1965, and the translation was carried out by committees from the Christian
Reformed Church and the National Association of Evangelicals. An international
group of over one hundred conservative scholars produced the translation.
Thirty-four evangelical denominations and groups were represented among the
translators. The publication of both testaments together took place in 1978.
The NIV is a fresh translation of the texts in their original languages. It is
not a revision of an earlier translation. The best available textual evidence
was used in establishing the texts of both Testaments. This translation was a
reaction to so-called “liberal” tendencies in the RSV and in other
translations, as well. The translators were explicitly expected to hold a “high
view of Scripture” which was in accord with certain conservative confessions of
faith.
Good News Bible
(Today’s English Version) – This
translation, which first appeared with both Testaments in 1976, was produced by
the American Bible Society in connection with the British and Foreign Bible
Society. In this translation, we see a good example of “dynamic equivalence.” The translation
involves the attempt to create in modern readers the same reactions that
ancient readers would have had. The language is common English, not the
elevated language of the KJV, or even the RSV. It should be emphasized that
this is a responsible translation, and it can be very useful for liturgical or
devotional reading. However, for serious study it is less helpful, except for
purposes of comparing translations.
The New Jerusalem Bible - This is a revision of the Jerusalem Bible,
a Roman Catholic Bible that is based on a French translation. The scholars who
translated the French text into English consistently consulted the Greek and
Hebrew texts. This is a freer
translation than, for example, the RSV. It uses poetic form more frequently
than many other translations do. There are also quite a few notes accompanying
the text.
New American Bible – The
American counterpart to the French Roman Catholic Jerusalem Bible, this version
first appeared in 1970. It is the work of a forty-six member panel of scholars,
four of whom are Protestant, and the rest are Roman Catholic. The translators
of this work exercised a great deal of individual freedom as compared to the
translators of the RSV. It contains extensive footnotes and introductions to
biblical books. This is a good Bible for both Catholics and Protestants.
The King James Version
- For its time, the KJV was a
remarkable achievement, and it can still be a wonderful version to use in
liturgical settings or for personal devotion. The translators, given what they
had to work with, did a very good job. In its wording, it drew heavily on
Tyndale’s translation. The language of the KJV is very poetic, and it has a
noble ring to it. However, there is no getting around the fact that this is an
older translation, produced in 1611. (The definitive text was not established
until the Oxford Standard Edition of 1769). The translators were not working
with the oldest or best manuscripts. It is not the best text for serious study,
but it still has value in liturgical and devotional settings.
The New King James Version – Some 130 scholars, editors, and religious leaders were involved in this
revision of the KJV. Their intention was to modernize the KJV in certain ways
while preserving the basic text. It appeared with both Testaments in 1982. The
words of Jesus are printed in red. The people who produced the revision highly
venerate the KJV, and, unfortunately, this has led them to argue for the
accuracy of the Beza text (Textus Receptus), text on which the KJV was based.
The Beza text, however, is, on the whole, less reliable than many of the
manuscripts that scholars use in constructing more modern versions of the
Bible. In general, the scholars who produced the New KJV did not use helpful
methods of textual criticism.
The Bible: A New Translation (The Moffatt Translation) – This translation is the work of one man, the
Scottish scholar James Moffatt. The final form of this work (both Testaments)
came out in 1935. His work on the New Testament is widely thought to be better
than his work on the Old. His translation can be quite free, and he even goes
so far as to rearrange chapter and verse order in some instances. However,
Moffatt has been much admired for his innovativeness and his translational
skill, and there is even a commentary series on his text.
The New Testament in Modern English (The Phillips
Translation) – Like the Moffatt translation,
this is also the work of one man, although in this case the translator is J. B.
Phillips. He published his translation of the New Testament in 1958, and he
published a revised New Testament in 1973. The revised edition is significantly
more responsible. He also has a translation of Four Prophets (Amons, Hosea, First Isaiah, and Micah). Phillips
aimed for dynamic equivalence, and he did not wish for his translation to sound
like a translation.
The Living Bible - This is not a translation, but a paraphrase
of the American Standard Version (1901). It is the work of one man, Kenneth N.
Taylor, who had very rigid evangelical theological notions that affected the
outcome of his paraphrase. Taylor did not work with the original languages. The
complete work was published in 1971. Although this version may be useful in
certain contexts, it is not an accurate rendition of the Greek and Hebrew
texts, and it is not a useful tool for Bible study.
The Jesus Seminar has put
out its own translation of the four canonical gospels plus some other
non-canonical texts in a book called The Complete Gospels, which is
edited by Robert J. Miller and published by HarperCollins. They have some other
translations out, as well. These translations can offer a fresh look at the
text, and they can sometimes be very helpful. However, the Jesus Seminar also
has a very pointed agenda – to remove Jesus from the confining grip of the church
– and this tends to affect their translations. In general, is best to use translations
that have been produced by scholars who come from a variety of ideological and religious
perspectives.