Comparing Bible Translations: Analysis

Issue #1: Historical Background

When was the translation produced?

A glance at the copyright dates answers this question. The dates for the translations used in this study are at the bottom of
this page. While portions of the Bible in English go back as far as around 650, we usually identify the first English Bible
with John Wycliffe in 1382. Translations from the original Hebrew and Greek began with the work of William Tyndale and
Miles Coverdale in the 1500s. From their work came the Bishop's Bible in 1568, shortly after the Geneva Bible was
completed outside England in 1560.
The King James Version, which went through at least thirteen revisions between 1611 and 1660, had virtually no
competition until the late 1800s. Translations exploded in the early twentieth century, but most of the versions popular today
were produced since the 1970s. Among the most recently introduced versions are the Holman Christian Standard (HCSB,
2004), The Clear Word (CW, 2003), Today's New International Version (TNIV, NT 2002), and English Standard Version
(ESV, 2001). The complete Message Bible (MSG) was released in July 2002.

Who produced the translation?

Most of the commonly accepted translations have been produced by committees and teams of translators. Many Puritans,
led by the great Reformer John Knox, worked together to produce the Geneva Bible. The KJV involved a team of 54
scholars drawn from both Puritan and traditional Anglican circles. The National Council of Churches of Christ
commissioned the RSV and NRSV, while the NEB and REB are the results of a multidenominational effort in the British
Isles. Many major versions are associated with Bible publishing companies: the NIV with Zondervan, NLT with Tyndale,
NKJV and NCV with Thomas Nelson, NASB and the Amplified Bible with the Lockman Foundation, GNT and CEV with
the American Bible Society, and HCSB with Broadman & Holman. The NET Bible was produced by an anonymous group
that prides itself in its independence from any church, denomination, or publisher.
Among individuals' efforts, most notable are the paraphrases: The Living Bible by Kenneth N. Taylor (Baptist), The
Message by Eugene H. Peterson (Presbyterian), and The New Testament in Modern English by John B. Phillips (Anglican).
Textus Receptus advocate Jay P. Green has produced several versions of his own, including three revisions of the KJV.
Translations by women include those by Julia Evelina Smith Parker (1876) and Helen Barrett Montgomery (1924). Names
such as Moffatt, Weymouth, Lattimore, Darby, and Norlie also designate versions produced by individuals. Norlie's Bible is
distinctive by its association with the Jesus People of the 1960s.
The benefit of a committee approach is that it lessens the tendency for an individual's idiosyncrasies to find their way into
the Bible. Some of the more questionable renderings in Weymouth, the PME, and the LB might have been overridden with a
larger editorial circle. Of course, as we shall see later, committees themselves are not immune from theological biases. The
benefit of the individual approach is consistency from one area of the Bible to another, though most translation teams work
to maintain consistency through multiple stages of review. This is one of the more perplexing dilemmas to confront readers
dependent on a translation: whether to trust one person's opinion or trust a committee that may put important issues to a
simple majority vote.

Is the translation translated directly from the original languages?

Nearly all English Bible versions today are taken directly from the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek in which the Bible was
originally written, with other languages consulted only when the original text is unclear. Two notable exceptions are the
Living Bible (which is a paraphrase of the ASV) and Lamsa's Bible (from the Syriac Peshitta). Also, Catholic Bibles prior to
the Jerusalem Bible were translated from the Latin Vulgate, and the JB shows influence from its French counterpart.
Translation from languages other than the originals may contain startling variations. For example, the Lamsa version of
Matthew 27:46, following the Syriac manuscripts, has Jesus saying not, My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?, but
My God, My God, for this I was spared.

Does the version derive from previous translations?

Most major translations are revisions of previously existing ones. The largest "family" is known as the Tyndale tradition.
Tyndale's work (supplemented by Matthew Coverdale) was finally authorized in 1537 as the Great Bible, which became the
Bishop's Bible in 1568 and the King James Version in 1611. The KJV was updated in England as the RV in 1884 and in the

http://web.archive.org/web/20071012184943/http://faith.propadeutic.com/analysis1.html 5/7/2014
 US as the ASV in 1901. The RSV, NRSV, ESV, NASB, Updated NASB, Living Bible, and NLT all derive from the ASV.
More recent revisions of the KJV include the King James II, the Modern King James, and the Children's King James–all by
Jay P. Green–as well as the New King James and the KJ21. The Geneva Bible–which rivaled the King James and was
preferred by many Puritans, separatists, and early Baptists–also shows much influence from Tyndale's work.
Other families are developing, as the JB is now the NJB, the BV was updated some time ago to the MLB, the NEB has
been revised as the REB, the TEV has been updated as the CEV and GNT, and the NIV has been revised as the NIVI, NIrV,
and TNIV.

Has the translation itself been revised?

Early translations such as the Geneva Bible and KJV were subject to numerous printing errors and thus were often revised
with each printing. Since the KJV's copyright does not apply outside the British Isles, some of the spelling and grammar
updates vary slightly from one American edition to another. Modern translations focusing on contemporary speech often
need revision when their language becomes dated. Again, copyright dates are the best clue here. Any dates after the first
release of a version's Old Testament usually indicate revisions. Minor revisions are often made to correct mistranslations or
to respond to particular criticisms when a version is first released. One example is a rewriting of the NLT's introduction after
its first printing received criticism. The TEV was revised in 1992 to render its language more gender-neutral (and was later
renamed GNT), while the NIrV was revised in 1998 to be more gender-specific. Also, the makers of the NASB have been
asked to release a revision that presents the text in paragraphs rather than verse-by-verse. Primarily on-line versions such as
the NET Bible may be under continuous revision since small changes do not mean expensive printing costs. It should be
noted, of course, that a revision is not necessarily an improvement.
It is helpful to know if there has been, or will soon be, a more major revision, on the order of new version. This usually
will make the older one hard to find. Since the New Living Translation was introduced, the supply of Living Bibles has been
slowly dwindling, and the LB may soon be out of print. With the release of the ESV along with the well-established NRSV,
the older RSV may die out soon as well. Nearly all NASB Bibles for sale now are the 1995 Updated Edition, though the
previous edition (1977) may still be found. But don't expect widely popular translations such as the KJV and the NIV to be
going anywhere soon, regardless of what revisions may be around the corner.

Has the translation gained wide acceptance among Christians?

The best-received translations among Protestants, in terms of sales, are the NIV, KJV, NLT, NKJV, and NASB, with the
NIrV, NRSV, and MSG not too far behind. The NAB and NJB are the most popular Roman Catholic Bibles. The NWT is
used exclusively by Jehovah's Witnesses, and the CW is intended for Seventh Day Adventists.
For a number of reasons, translations by individuals have rarely gained popularity. This is easily demonstrated by listing
some of the attempts of the last twenty years: William Paul's Understandable Version, the New Life Version, the
Unvarnished New Testament, McCord's New Testament Translation of the Everlasting Gospel, The Word Made Fresh, and
Schonfield's Original New Testament. Ever seen one of these? Own one? If so, you're one of a small few. Nevertheless, one
or two such versions are included in this analysis for comparison.

Has the translation gained widespread criticism or been the subject of controversy?

At one time the very act of translating the Scriptures was considered criminal. And where one translation is well
established, any new version may be shunned because of the novelty and competition it provides. This was particularly the
case with the RV, the first revision of the KJV to make widespread, substantial changes. But in most places today,
theological bias, whether real or perceived, is the most provocative concern. Many readers do not want a Bible they do not
feel they can trust.
The RSV and NRSV are the Bibles most often criticized for liberal biases, and a conservative team recently revised the
RSV as the ESV to remove its non-evangelical tendencies. The issue of gender-neutral translation prevented the NIVI from
being published in the US (if such was ever intended, which is a matter of debate), and has flared up again with the
publication of the TNIV. The overall issue of literal vs. free translations is a perennial one, with advocates on either side.
Paraphrases also receive criticism, though more for their misuse than for anything else. Paraphrases are intended for those
who wish to read the Bible devotionally, or in larger portions, or for those who would have difficulty reading a more literal
translation. They are generally meant to be used in conjunction with other translations. But nevertheless some people use the
LB, PME, and MSG for close study or preaching, focusing on each word as if it were the biblical writer's own. But the
paraphrasers generally make it quite clear in their introductions how they desire their version to be used.

• Questions for Comparing Translations

• Issue #1: Historical Background
• Issue #2: Textual Basis
• Issue #3: Translation Philosophy
• Issue #4: Theological Orientation
• Issue #5: English Style
• Practice with Romans 8:26-39
• Conclusions

http://web.archive.org/web/20071012184943/http://faith.propadeutic.com/analysis1.html 5/7/2014
 Translations Compared

•AAT - An American Translation; 1935, NT by Edgar J. Goodspeed, OT ed. by J. M. Powas Smith

•AMP - Amplified Bible; NT 1958, OT 1965 by Frances E. Siewert, assisted by the Lockman Foundation
•ASV - American Standard Version, 1901; revision of KJV
•BV - Berkeley Version of the New Testament, 1945 by Gerrit Verkuyl
•CEV - Contemporary English Version, 1991 by American Bible Society; revision of TEV
•CPV - Cotton Patch Version of Luke and Acts, 1969 by Clarence Jordan
•CW - The Clear Word; 2003 by Jack J. Blanco
•Darby - A New Translation; NT 1871, OT 1890 by John Nelson Darby
•ESV - English Standard Version; 2001 by Crossway Bibles; revision of RSV
•GEN - Geneva Bible; 1560
•GNC - God's New Covenant: A New Translation; 1989 by Heinrich Walter Cassirer
•GNT - Good News Translation (formerly Good News Bible: Today's English Version); NT 1966, OT 1976 by
American Bible Society; 1992 edition
• GW - God's Word; 1995 by God's Word to the Nations Bible Society
• HCSB - Holman Christian Standard Bible; NT 2000, OT 2004 by Holman Bible Publishers
• INC - Inclusive New Testament; 1994 by Priests for Equality
• ISV - International Standard Version; NT 1998 by the Learn Foundation
• JB - Jerusalem Bible; 1966 by Dominican Biblical School of Jerusalem
• KJV - King James Version; orig. 1611; 1769 Cambridge Edition by Benjamin Blayney; revision of the Bishop's Bible
• KJ21 - 21st Century King James Version; 1994 by Deuel Publishers; revision of KJV
• Lamsa - The Holy Bible from Ancient Eastern Manuscripts; 1957 by George M. Lamsa
• LB - Living Bible, 1962-1971 by Kenneth N. Taylor; paraphrase of ASV
• LITV - Literal Translation of the Holy Scriptures; 1995 by Jay P. Green; revision of The Interlinear Bible
• MLB - Modern Language Bible: The New Berkeley Version in Modern English; 1969, committee led by Gerrit
Verkuyl; revision of BV
• Moffatt - New Translation of the New Testament; 1913 by James Moffatt
• Montgomery - Centenary Translation of the New Testament; 1924 by Helen Barrett Montgomery; revision of ASV
• MSG - The Message; 1993-2002 by Eugene H. Peterson
• NAB - New American Bible; trans. 1970 by Catholic Biblical Association of America; 1986 edition; revision of
Douai-Rheims NT
• NASB - New American Standard Bible; NT 1963, OT 1971 by the Lockman Foundation; 1995 Updated Edition;
revision of ASV
• NCV - New Century Version; 1986 by Word Publishing Company; 1991 edition
• NEB - New English Bible; NT 1961, OT 1970 by Joint Committee on the New Translation of the Bible; 1972 edition
• NET - New English Translation; 1998 by the NET Bible Project, version 2.0
• NIrV - New International Reader's Version; 1995 by International Bible Society; 1998 edition; revision of NIV
• NIV - New International Version; NT 1973, OT 1978 by Committee on Bible Translation; 1984 edition
• NJB - New Jerusalem Bible; 1985
• NKJV - New King James Version; NT 1979, OT 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc.
• NLT - New Living Translation; 1996 by Tyndale House; second printing; revision of LB
• Norlie - New Testament in Modern English; 1961 by Olaf M. Norlie
• NRSV - New Revised Standard Version; 1989 by National Council of Churches of Christ; revision of RSV
• NWT - New World Translation; 1950-1960 by Watchtower Bible and Tract Society; 1961 edition
• PME - New Testament in Modern English; 1947-1957 by John B. Phillips
• REB - Revised English Bible; 1989 by Joint Committee on the New Translation of the Bible; revision of REB
• RSV - Revised Standard Version; NT 1946, OT 1952 by National Council of Churches of Christ; 1970 edition;
revision of ASV
• RV - Revised Version; NT 1881, OT 1884; revision of KJV
• TBV - The Better Version of the New Testament; 1973 by Chester Estes
• TNIV - Today's New International Version; NT 2002 by International Bible Society; revision of NIV
• Tyndale - Tyndale's New Testament, 1534; Yale edition has spelling updated, 1989 by David Daniell
• Weymouth - New Testament in Modern Speech; 1903 by Richard Weymouth
• William - William's New Testament (date unknown, included with the UltraBible software library).
• Young - Young's Literal Translation; NT 1862, OT 1898 by Robert Young
BACK TO TOP

For a concise statement of my beliefs about the Bible, see my Declaration of Faith.

Return to Realms of Faith.

Return to the MAIN PAGE.

http://web.archive.org/web/20071012184943/http://faith.propadeutic.com/analysis1.html 5/7/2014