not all versions are created equal
TRANSCRIPT
-
7/28/2019 Not All Versions are Created Equal
1/8
Excursus B
NOT ALL VERSIONS
ARE CREATED EQUAL
From the first complete translation of the English Bible in 1382 (normally attributed
to John Wycliffe [c1330-1384]), there are today literally hundreds of English
translations of the Bible. These translations, normally called versions, are usually
directly translated from the original languages of the Bible. Yet not all the translations
are equally reliable.
Older versions, for instance, are less reliable because they had access only to
less reliable source documents. As we have seen in chapter 6, the King James
Version, or Authorized Version, or KJV for short, which was first published in 1611,was based on the Greek Text of Erasmus known as The Textus Receptus. Most
modern versions, however, are based on newly discovered, more ancient, texts as well
as scientific textual studies. So in general, modern versions are more reliable than
older ones.1 Some examples of good modern translations include the New Revised
Standard Version (NRSV), its precursor the Revised Standard Version (RSV), the
New English Bible (NEB) and paraphrased Good News Bible (GNB).
Our interest here is in a particular subset of modern versions: those coming from
evangelical publishers. Some examples of such translations include The Book, The
Living Bible and The New International Version (NIV). Apart from textual evidence
one additional consideration looms large in these versions: their belief in biblical
inerrancy. Given below is the quote taken from the Translators Preface of the NIV:
In working towards these goals, the translators were united in their commitment to
the authority and infallibility of the Bible as Gods word in written form.2
As the ex-fundamentalist preacher and songwriter, Dan Barker, remarked:
This is hardly an objective agenda for a team of translators! Imagine if freethinkers
publish a new bible translation, prefacing it with a statement that we are united in
our commitment to bash and disprove Gods word.3
The NIV is the best selling English Bible today. Since its first introduction in
1973, this evangelical version has sold more than 215 million copies worldwide.4
Since the average evangelical or fundamentalist will very likely be using this version,
it is important to understand how the translators belief in biblical inerrancy affects
their rendition of the Bible.
1 Metzger, Companion to the Bible: p758-7632 NIV, p: xxxix3 Barker,Losing Faith in Faith: p2694 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_International_Version accessed on October 1,
2007
196
-
7/28/2019 Not All Versions are Created Equal
2/8
REMOVING CONTRADICTIONS BY QUOTING
OR USING LESS AUTHORITATIVE TEXTS
Some alterations seem to have been made to remove contradictions from the main
text. One example comes from a contradiction long known to exist between the textsof II Kings and II Chronicles:
II Kings 24:8 NRSV
Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he became King; he reigned three months
in Jerusalem
II Chronicles 36:9 NRSV
Jehoiachin was eightyears old when he began to reign; he reigned three months
and ten days in Jerusalem.
The NRSV did not even have a footnote at II Chronicles 36:9, implying that the main
textual traditions supported this reading, although it is in contradiction to the passage
in II Kings. Let us see how the NIV presents these passages:
II Kings 24:8 NIV
Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he became King and he reigned in
Jerusalem for three months.
II Chronicles 36:9 NIV
Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began to reign and he reigned inJerusalem for three months and ten days.
See how the contradiction has disappeared! Have there been new discoveries in
archaeology or textual criticism since the publication of the NRSV (in 1989) that the
NIV took advantage of? No. The NIV I have is also a 1989 edition and is similarly
based mainly on the Biblia Hebraica, like the NRSV. The truth is found in a very
small footnote at the bottom of the page in which this passage appears. This is what
the footnote says:
One Hebrew manuscript, some Septuagint manuscripts and Syriac, most Hebrewmanuscripts eight. [emphases added PT]
Thus the footnote implicitly admits that the balance of evidence favors eight not
eighteen. So why was the latter chosen to be in the main body of the text? Look at the
excerpt from the preface again. Now one can see the relevance of Dan Barkers
comments. This is not all, this tendency to make contradictions in the original texts
disappear by translating it away can be found in other passages in the NIV. Another
example is from II Kings 8:26 / II Chronicles 2:22. Here II Kings 8:26 gives
Ahaziahs age of ascension to the throne as 22 while II Chronicles 2:22 says he was42 when he became King. All the major modern versions support this. Yet the NIV
has simply translated away this contradiction by changing the age given in II
Chronicles to 22!
197
-
7/28/2019 Not All Versions are Created Equal
3/8
REMOVING DIFFICULTIES BY TRANSLATING IN SOFT
FOCUS
Sometimes we find that words are paraphrased to remove obvious difficulties that
exist in the original Hebrew text. Take one instance of the warning of God to Adam inGenesis 2:17. I give three different versions below:
Genesis 2:17 KJV
But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat it: for in the
day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
Genesis 2:17 Good News Bible
[E]xcept the tree that gives knowledge of what is good and what is bad. You must
not eat the fruit of that tree; for if you do, you will die the same day.
Genesis 2:17 NRSV[B]ut of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in that day
that you eat of it you shall die.
The various translations above give us an idea of what the original Hebrew is saying:
that if Adam were to eat the fruit hell die on that very day. The problem is that Adam
didpartake of the fruit (Genesis 3:6). However he did notdie, in fact he lived to a ripe
old age of 930 (Genesis 5:5)!
The way NIV skirted this difficulty is interesting, watch:
Genesis 2:17 NIV
[B]ut you must not eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, for when you
eat of it you will surely die.
Can you see the theological rabbit being pulled out of the hat? Yes, by translating the
passage in the soft focus mode the specific curse to die on the very same day is no
longer there. Thus a difficulty is removed!
REMOVING REPREHENSIBLE PASSAGES BY
MISTRANSLATION
Some passages in the Bible sound reprehensible. Given below is the passage taken
from II Kings where the prophet Elisha used his powers to curse and kill 42 children.
Just to give the sense of the Hebrew we will give three different translations:
II Kings 2:23-24 KJV
And he went up from thence unto Bethlehem and he was going up by the way,
there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him,
Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head. And he turned back, and looked on
them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord. And there came forth two she bears
out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.
198
-
7/28/2019 Not All Versions are Created Equal
4/8
II Kings 2:23-24 GNB
Elisha left Jericho to go to Bethel, and on the way some boys came out of a town
and made fun of him. Get out of here, baldy! they shouted. Elisha turned round,
glared at them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord. Then two she-bears came
out of the woods and tore forty-two of the boys to pieces.
II Kings 2:23-24 NRSV
He went up from there to Bethel; and while he was going up on the way, some
small boys came out of the city and jeered at him, saying, Go away, baldhead! Go
away, baldhead! When he turned around and saw them, he cursed them in the
name of the Lord. The two she-bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two
of the boys.
The passage doesnt put Elisha (or God) in good light for both seemed to be
responsible for the murder of 42 children. That little boys or small children are
meant can be seen from the original Hebrew. According to Strongs ExhaustiveConcordance of the Bible the original Hebrew word for little used here is qatan,
which means small in number or young in age, and the word for children here is
naar, which means a boy (or a girl) from infancy to adolescence. In other words, the
passage was talking about little children. We can see that the above three versions
have been quite faithful to the original Hebrew despite the theological difficulties.
The NIV however translated the same passage thus:
II Kings 2:23-24 NIV
From there Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some
youths came out of the town and jeered at him. Go on up, you baldhead they said.
Go on up, you baldhead! He turned round, looked at them and called down a
curse on them in the name of the Lord. Then two bears came out from the woods
and mauled forty-two of theyouths.
The italics are mine, but its just to emphasize the major change in meaning that has
happened by using youths instead of little children or small boys. Youths
today can mean young men in their early twenties. Suddenly Elishas act does not
lookthatbad. It looks like some gangsters taunted him and he defended himself. Yet
as we see above, youth was not meant in the original Hebrew; as the other versionsattested. Thus by twisting two words completely out of its original meaning the NIV
has managed to skip over another theological difficulty.
LEAVING ERRORS IN TRANSLATION UNCHANGED
Sometimes the editors of the NIV keep dubious translations from older versions. Let
us look at one famous example. This concerns the messianic prophecy of the virgin
birth. Matthew proclaimed that Jesus birth was in fulfillment of an Old Testament
prophecy:
199
-
7/28/2019 Not All Versions are Created Equal
5/8
Matthew 1:22-23
And this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: The
virgin is with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel-
which means God is with us.
The prophecy referred to by the Matthean passage above is in found Isaiah 7:14. Thisis how the passage looks in the King James Version:
Isaiah 7:14 KJV
Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold a virgin shall conceive, a
bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
At first glance, this looks like an amazing fulfillment of prophecy. Unfortunately, the
KJVs use ofvirgin here is a well-known error in translation.
The Hebrew word in Isaiah 7:14 of the masoretic text, wrongly translated as
virgin above, is almah. Now almah does not carry any explicit notion of virginity,
meaning simply a young woman of marriageable age. Had Isaiah actually wanted to
convey the prophecy of the virgin birth he would have used the word bethulah, which
does carry the explicit meaning of virgin.
As we will show in chapter 11, Matthew used the Greek translation of the Old
Testament, the Septuagint, which erroneously translated almah as parthenos. Now
parthenos does mean virgin. The correct Greek word that should have been used by
the translators of the Septuagint was neanis. Thus Matthews proclamation was based
on a mistranslation of the Hebrew word almah.
In fact in modern, more reliable versions, the correct translation for Isaiah 7:14is used. Two examples:
Isaiah 7:14 GNB
Well then, the Lord himself shall give you a sign: a young woman who is pregnant
will have a son and will name him Immanuel.
Isaiah 7:14 NRSV
Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign. Look, the young woman is with
child and shall bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel.
The Good News Bible even provides a footnote explaining this:
YOUNG WOMAN: The Hebrew word here translated young woman is not the
specific term for virgin, but refers to any young woman of marriageable age. The
use of virgin in Mat. 1.23 reflects a Greek translation of the Old Testament, made
some 500 years after Isaiah.5
Obviously, the implication of the above translation is enormous. It implied that
Matthew erroneously attributed a non-existent prophecy to Jesus by utilizing a less
than perfect translation of the Hebrew Bible.6Let us look at how the NIV presents the
same passage:
5 Good News Bible (ABS 1976): p673 footnote6 See chapter 7 for a more detailed analysis of this virgin birth prophecy.
200
-
7/28/2019 Not All Versions are Created Equal
6/8
Isaiah 7:14 NIV
Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and
will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.
Amazingly, there isnt even a footnote explaining why virgin was used! Again the
implication is obvious. The adherence of the editors/translators of the NIV to biblicalinerrancy made them perpetuate an obvious translation error in Septuagint in order to
keep the prophecy!
ALTERING THE TRANSLATION
UNTIL IT COMES OUT RIGHT
Sometimes the errors in the extant Hebrew text are so obvious that one cannot get it
right with simply changing a word here and there: a major overhaul is required. One
such example is this passage in II Chronicles:
I Chronicles 3:22-24 (NRSV/RSV/KJV)
22 And the sons of Shemaiah: Hattush, Igal, Bariah, Neariah, and Shaphat,six.
23 The sons of Neariah: Elioenai, Hizkiah, and Azrikam, three.
24 The sons of Elioenai: Hodaviah, Eliashib, Pelaiah, Akkub, Johanan, Delaiah,
and Anani, seven.
The relevant line is verse 22. It gives five names for the sons of Shemiah but gives the
total as six! This type of mistake, of course, is one which an inerrant Bible issupposed to be free of.
So this is how the NIV translated the verses above:
I Chronicles 3:22-24 (NIV)
22 Shemaiah and his sons: Huttush, Igal, Bariah, Neriah, and Shaphat - six in all.
23 The sons of Neriah: Elioenai, Hizkiah and Azrikam three in all.
24 The sons of Elioenai: Hodaviah, Eliashib, Pelaiah, Akkub, Johanan, Delaiah, and
Anani seven in all.
With this translation, the error noted in verse 22 above magically disappears!
However to accomplish this sleight of hand, the original verse has been completely
mutilated. In the original Hebrew text, the format of verse 22 is exactly the same as
verses 23 and 24; they all start with And the sons of as the NRSV, RSV and
KJV correctly translate. It is obvious that, in all three verses, the Chronicler is
counting only the sons without including the fathers. However, by twisting the words
around in verse 22, from And the sons of Shemaiah to Shemiah and his sons, it
looks as though the Chroniclers count of six now includes the father! Yet this
translation is illegitimate and is made purely to rid the Bible of the difficultiesfundamentalists fear so much.
201
-
7/28/2019 Not All Versions are Created Equal
7/8
ADDING WORDS INTO THE BIBLE TEXT
On the last page of the Christian Bible we find this warning:
Revelation 22:18
I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book, if anyone
adds to them, may God add to him the plagues which are written in this book.
Yet this admonition does not to carry any weight with the editors of NIV; words not
found in the biblical manuscripts are quite freely added when biblical inerrancy seems
to be threatened. In his recent book The Bible in Translation (2001), the respected
textual scholar of Princeton Theological Seminary and chairman of the NRSV
translation committee, Dr. Bruce M. Metzger, had this to say about this aspect of the
NIV:
It is surprising that translators [of the NIV] who profess to have a high view of
scripture should take liberties with the text in omitting words, or, more often, by
adding words that are not in the manuscripts...in Jeremiah 7:22 the translators have
inserted the word just for which there is no Hebrew authority. In the New
Testament at Matthew 13:32 concerning the mustard seed, they inserted the word
your (the smallest of all your seeds) and the word now in I Peter 4:6 (the
gospel was preached even to those who are now dead.) - neither of which is in the
Greek text. In I Corinthians 4:9, we find in the NIV a quite considerable
elaboration of what Paul actually wrote: God put us apostles on display at the end
of the procession, like men condemned to die in the arena (the two additions have
been italicized here).7
Professor Metzger did not elaborate on why these textually indefensible additions
were made. However the theological implications are clear. Let us look at a couple of
the passages Metzger cited:
First, let us look at Jeremiah 7:22, in which the Lord Almighty speaks:
Jeremiah 7:22 NRSVFor in the day that I brought your ancestors out to the land of Egypt, I did not speak
to them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices.
Jeremiah 7:22 NIV
For when I brought your forefathers out of Egypt and spoke to them, I did not just
give them commands about burnt offerings and sacrifices.
Remember that Metzger mentioned that there is no Hebrew manuscript that supports
this reading in NIV (i.e. the addition of just). Note that this addition changes the
whole meaning of the passage, from negative to positive. The reason the NIVtranslators did so, is easy to see. For God did command the Israelites during the
exodus from Egypt about burnt sacrifices. One example:
7 Metzger, The Bible in Translation: p140-141
202
-
7/28/2019 Not All Versions are Created Equal
8/8
Exodus 20:22-24 NRSV
The Lord said to Moses: Thus you shall say to the Israelites:...You need make for
me only an altar of earth andsacrifice on it yourburnt offerings...
It is obvious then, that in the original Hebrew manuscripts, a blatant contradiction
exists. Here was a passage (Jeremiah 7:22) that explicitly mentioned that God did notgive any command on burnt offerings during the exodus that clearly contradicts
Exodus 20:22-24 which equally explicitly provides a commandment from God about
burnt offerings and sacrifices. Thus to save their doctrine of biblical inerrancy, the
translators added the word just to avoid this very contradiction!
The change made to the passage from Matthew 13:32 is even more blatant. Let us
compare the NRSV and the NIV again here:
Matthew 13:31-32 NRSV
He [Jesus] put before them another parable: The kingdom of heaven is like amustard seed that someone took and sowed in the field; it is the smallest of all
seeds...
Matthew 13:31-32 NIV
He told them another parable: The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed
which a man took and planted in his field. Though it is the smallest of all your
seeds...[italics added-PT]
The extant Greek manuscripts have Jesus here saying that the mustard is the smallest
of all seeds, as the NRSV faithfully translates. However this statement, that themustard seed is the smallest of all seeds, is agross botanical error. For while it is true
that mustard seeds are small, they are not the smallest. The orchid seed, for instance,
is even smaller.8 Of course the fundamentalist translators of NIV cannot have the
divine Jesus being shown to make such a mistake, so they add the word yourtoseeds,
implying that Jesus was merely talking about the seeds available to this audience!
Again it is important to note that the translators had added a word not found in the
extant Greek manuscripts.
* * * * *
These examples should be enough to caution anyone about thinking that all Bible
versions are the same. Some have theological preconceptions built-into the
translation.9
8 According to my copy of the Guinness Book of World Records, the smallest seeds are
those of the epiphytic orchids. Each seed weighs in at approximately 0.0000008 grams!9 Other fundamentalist versions such as The Book(and theLiving Bible, on which The
Book is based) have similar methods of skirting through theological difficulties. Those
who are interested to explore this further can consult the bookFundamentalism: Hazards
and Heartbreaks by Rod Evans and Irwin Berent published by Open Court publishing.
203