Which Bible Translations Should You Use?

The introduction of the King James (KJV) or Authorized Version (AV) of the Bible states, “But how shall men meditate in that which they cannot understand? How shall they understand that which is kept close in an unknown tongue?…Translation it is that opens the window, to let in the light; that breaks the shell, that we may eat the kernel.”

The Bible as we know it today has been passed down through the centuries. Over the past few years, we have witnessed an explosion of different translations and “specialty” Bibles. Some of these can be helpful. Others are pitifully inaccurate. How can you be sure which one to use? Which is the most accurate?

The word “bible” conjures up mystery in some people’s minds. From the Greek biblos, it simply means “a sheet or scroll of writing; book.”

The languages in which the Bible was originally written are primarily Hebrew, for the Old Testament (with a few exceptions in Daniel and Ezra), and Greek in the New Testament. If a person is not able to read Hebrew and/or Greek, then he must rely on reading a translated version in his own language or vernacular. Of course, no Bible translation is 100% accurate. There will be errors, based on the meaning of certain words, phrases, idioms and each individual’s preconceived ideas. God could have directly sent men who could have translated the Bible into the language of the people. But God has tested the Bible “scholars” of this world to see how careful and diligent they are in keeping His Word accurate.

Dead Sea Scrolls Offer Proof

The Old Testament was preserved by the Jews, who were one of the twelve tribes of Israel. They were entrusted (Rom. 3:1-2) to carry down, from generation to generation—by precisely copying and meticulously preserving—the entire text of the Old Testament. The Jews took this responsibility so seriously that, as they were making copies, they counted the words and letters to make sure nothing was added or omitted. This text is known as the “Masoretic Text.” Without doubt, the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1947 proves the accuracy of the Old Testament scriptures we have today. The climate around the Dead Sea is quite arid and perfect for preserving materials such as the scrolls.

These scrolls include complete books and portions of books written 2,000 years ago. One well-preserved scroll of the Book of Isaiah was written in “square letter” Hebrew, which dates it to the second century B.C. This single document alone put to rest the speculation that Isaiah was written after the time of Christ—thus proving correct the prophecies of Jesus.

Most of the scrolls were written between 100 B.C. and A.D. 68, and most likely hidden just before the Roman armies destroyed Jerusalem in A.D. 70.

When these newly-discovered scrolls were translated and then compared to our modern King James Bible, they harmonized completely. The only significant differences are those of spelling. We cannot be surprised at this, because, even in our lifetime, certain words have undergone changes in spelling. For instance, “subtil” to “subtle” and “centre” to “center.”

Dr. Yigael Yadin, an expert on the Dead Sea Scrolls, once said, “What is astonishing is that despite their antiquity and the fact that the scrolls belong to this pre-standardization period, they are, on the whole, almost identical with the Masoretic Text known to us. This establishes a basic principle for all future research on texts of the Bible. Not even the hundreds of slight variations established in the texts, affecting mainly spelling and occasionally word substitution, can alter that fact.”

Professor Miller Burrows of Yale University states, “The conspicuous difference in spelling and grammatical forms between the [Isaiah Scroll] and the Masoretic Text, makes their substantial agreement in the words of the text all the more remarkable.”

The discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls allows us to travel back 1,000 years earlier than the oldest previously known manuscripts. They provide for us proof that the Old Testament, as we have it, is accurate and reliable.

Catholic Translations

In the first three centuries, the Catholic Church used the oldest available fragments of the New Testament. These are called the “Western Text.” They are full of notable corruptions, contradictions, deletions and counterfeit additions. They vary so much that there is no way of accurately knowing what constitutes the New Testament. Scholars admit that they originated in Rome.

Catholics and Protestants agree that the Bible is the inspired Word of God, but disagree on which books belong in the Bible. The Catholic Old Testament canon includes books such as Tobias, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, and I and II Maccabees, with added sections in Esther and Daniel that are missing in the KJV. These added books are referred to as the “Apocrypha” and are not accepted as scripture by Protestants and others. Among scholars, it is common knowledge that there are obvious historical inaccuracies in the books of Tobias and Judith.

The Codex Vaticanus just happened to be found in the Vatican Library in 1481. The quality of the text is amazingly intact. But it leaves out a substantial amount of text. For instance, Genesis 1:1 through 46:28 is missing, as well as Psalms 106 through 138, Paul’s Pastoral Epistles, Hebrews 9:14 through 13:25, and the entire book of Revelation. In the gospels alone there are 748 whole sentences, 452 clauses and 237 words missing. Codex Vaticanus has all the books of the Catholic Old Testament except for I and II Maccabees.

The Codex Sinaiticus was discovered in A.D. 1844 by Prof. Tishendorf on a trash pile outside the walls of St. Catherine’s Monastery, at the base of what some believe is the mountain where Moses received the Ten Commandments. It had been thrown out as garbage by monks. On nearly every page there are corrections and revisions by as many as ten different people. It contains most of the New Testament plus the “Epistle of Barnabas” and “Shepherd of Hermes.” Codex Sinaiticus lacks II Maccabees, but includes IV Maccabees.

The Greek Septuagint was translated during the Hellenistic era (331 B.C. to A.D. 100), to benefit Jews of Alexandria, Egypt, who spoke Greek. About 250 B.C., the first five books of the Bible were translated by 72 Hellenist Jews. The name Septuagint comes from the Greek phrase “of the seventy.” A few decades later, the books of the Prophets were translated as well. This is where the Codex Vaticanus, Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Alexandrinus originated.

Codex Alexandrinus has all of the books of the Catholic Old Testament, plus III and IV Maccabees.

The Greek Septuagint translation of the Old Testament has many corruptions and should not be used.

The text of the Revised Standard Version (RSV) has been the work of so-called higher critics over the past 150 years. They base their work on both the Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus. But they originated in Egypt in the fourth century A.D., through the work of schools and critics in the early centuries after Christ. Together, these texts are also known as the “Alexandrian Text.” Some think they should rely on the oldest text available. This text has about 5% of the known Greek manuscripts and has been altered over the years. The fact that it is the oldest manuscript does not make it accurate. As a copy of the text wore out, a new copy was made—written by hand. This explains why there are few old copies. Each was disposed of and destroyed as a newer one replaced it. Critics seem to forget that accurate copies of the original are far superior to corrupt copies, no matter how old they are.

The King James Version

When King James commissioned a group of 57 scholars to translate the Bible in 1607, he looked for the best men at that time to produce a new translation using only the original Hebrew (Masoretic Text) and Greek (Byzantine/Received/AntiochianText) manuscripts.

These men were divided into six groups: Three for the Old Testament, two for the New Testament, and one for the Apocrypha (later dropped). When each group finished its work, they submitted it to another group of twelve men for review. This next group found it necessary to add certain words not found in the original in order for the text to flow in the English language. These added words are in italics so that anyone reading will be able to tell which words were added. The initial job was finished in two years, but an additional nine months was taken for yet another group to evaluate the work of the first groups. Since it was first published in 1611, only minor modifications (mostly spelling) have been made.

The King James Version uses the “Byzantine Text” (also known as the “Syrian” “Antiochian” and “Received” texts) for its main manuscript of the New Testament. This text circulated throughout the Byzantine Empire. It also circulated in Syria and in its capital, Antioch. Scholars often call it Koine (Greek: “common”) to designate its 95% accuracy.

There are some small differences among the almost 5,000 Greek manuscripts that we use to compare. But most of these differences do not change the intent or meaning of the verses.

The Bible is inspired by God in such a way that we cannot base doctrine on any one verse. Doctrine or teaching is not found nicely wrapped up in one place. “For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little” (Isa. 28:10).

The actual differences in manuscripts involve words or phrases that do not change the intent of the verse. By putting all the verses together on any particular subject, you can come to a sound decision on what the verses’ intent is.

Questions of Authority

There are only two places in the New Testament that come into question about authenticity: Mark 16:9-20 and John 7:53-8:11.

The last part of Mark’s gospel is not found in some of the oldest manuscripts, but it is found in some copies. The language used is somewhat different than that of the rest of the book, leading some to believe that someone other than Mark actually finished this section. But if these last verses are left out, the chapter does not come to a logical ending. Because God does things decently and in order (I Cor. 14:40), these verses do belong; they were inspired by God to be there.

Referring to John 7:53-8:11, the margin notes in the New King James Version (NKJV) state, “NU brackets 7:53 through 8:11 as not in the original text. They are present in over 900 manuscripts of John.” Again, this section does not take away nor add anything that would change the intent of the book. In fact, a theologian once said, “the account has all the earmarks of historical veracity.”

One deliberate hoax that was perpetrated after the New Testament was completed is found in I John 5:7-8: “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree as one.” Transcribers who believed in the pagan Trinity concept added the italicized words to support their beliefs.

Those who use this verse to support the Trinity doctrine are either ignorant of the verse being altered, or are blatantly trying to deceive. Nowhere does the Bible teach the pagan doctrine of the Trinity. Although this verse is found in the KJV and the NKJV, there is a marginal note in the NKJV stating, “NU, M omit the rest of v. 7 and through on earth of v. 8, a passage found in Greek in only four or five very late mss.”

The Critical and Experimental Commentary says of this section that the verse was not found in the Latin Vulgate until the eighth century. Adam Clarke’s Commentary states, “But it is likely that this verse is not genuine. It is wanting in every MS. Of this epistle written before the invention of printing, one excepted, the Codex Montifortii, in Trinity College, Dublin: the others which omit this verse amount to one hundred and twelve.

“It is wanting in both the Syriac, all the Arabic, Ethiopic, the Coptic, Sahidic, Armenian, Slavonian, etc., in a word, in all the ancient versions but the Vulgate; and even of this version many of the most ancient and correct MSS. have it not. It is wanting also in all the ancient Greek fathers; and in most even of the Latin.”

Translation Problems

When one language is translated into another, certain problems arise. Even under the best conditions, translations produce inaccuracies, because there is no exact correspondence between languages in syntax and vocabulary.

Even though there are a few phrases that are disputed in the Greek, we can still understand its vocabulary, idiom and grammar much better than we did 150 years ago.

This is not always the case with Hebrew. Because it is a much older language and the Israelites lost much of the knowledge of certain aspects, two different translations by two different people will wind up with two different renderings of a particular passage. Vowels did not originally exist in the ancient Hebrew, but were invented in approximately A.D. 700 to help unify Hebrew pronunciation. Thus, the pronunciation of the tetragrammaton “YHWH” (“Lord” in the Old Testament) is constantly disputed. People will not even attempt to say the word, out of fear of mispronouncing God’s name.

Realize that the meanings of certain passages in the Hebrew are still subject to interpretation. Additional research and new discoveries will assist in solving some of the difficulties of the ancient Hebrew language. But until then, we cannot criticize a translator when he has done his best with the knowledge he has.

Due to peculiarities of Hebrew grammar, some verbs are often uncertain. Translators faced difficult obstacles. Hebrew verbs in perfect tense can be translated as present, simple past or present perfect. The word ahabti can be translated “I love,” “I loved,” or “I have loved.” Yadati can be translated “I know,” “I knew,” or “I have known.”

Hebrew words in imperfect tense can be translated as imperfect, present or future. Yiktob can be translated as “he is writing,” “he writes,” “or he will write.”

The RSV translates Isaiah 42:6 as, “I have taken you by the hand and kept you,” whereas the KJV translates it “…and will hold thine hand, and keep thee.”

Also, certain idioms in one language are not understood in another. To “kick the bucket” in the United States usually means “to die.” But to say “kick the bucket” in a foreign tongue may mean to literally “kick a bucket”!

Types of Translations

There are two basic types of translations: (1) literal, in which translators use the original manuscripts to interpret word for word; (2) free interpretation, in which translators render meaning by meaning.

The KJV and the NKJV (Revised Authorized Version) are both literal translations. They follow the Greek and Hebrew text word for word wherever possible. But where the English idiom does not correspond with the original text, the words often come out sounding cumbersome and not understandable.

The KJV often sounds odd because it uses 17th-century language. People then generally knew whether a speaker was talking to one person or many. This is preserved in Classical English. If a speaker were addressing one individual, he would use “thee” or “thou.” If he were addressing a group of people, he would say, “you” or “your.” The NKJV has replaced “thee” and “thou” with the more modern “you” and “your.”

Some other literal translations are the American Standard Version, the Revised Version, the King James II Bible by Jay P. Green; The Holy Bible in Modern English by Ferrar Fenton; Young’s Literal Translation of the Holy Bible by Robert Young and the Jewish Publication Society translation of 1917.

Most of the newest Bible versions use the second method of translating, describing the meaning of each passage. First, a translator tries to understand what the verse is saying. Then he attempts to convey this message to the reader using his own way of explaining what the verse means. If the translator has little or no knowledge, or a wrong understanding, of a particular verse, he does a great disservice to the reader. This is one way in which an individual’s own ideas are promoted. For example, go back to the I John 5:7-8 issue, where those who believed in the Trinity tried to palm off their own ideas.

A translator may also need to add words or phrases in order to convey his message or translate other words into a more modern usage (for example, “feet” instead of “cubits”).

Some examples of free translations are Today’s English Version, The New English Bible, The Bible, A New Translation (Moffatt) and New International Version (NIV). The English Standard Version and the Holman Christian Standard Bible (New Testament; full Bible due in 2004) both appeared in 2001.

As a matter of fact, the NIV has been revised yet again. It is called Today’s New International Version. This newest of the new translations is gender neutral. “Sons of God” will be replaced with “children of God,” in Matthew 5:9, and “a man is justified by faith” will be changed to “a person is justified by faith” in Romans 3:28.

Working to preserve gender specific language, the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood said, “This is incredibly serious to evangelicals, how the Bible is translated…We believe the Bible is the word of God, so changing these things deliberately is dangerous.”

By comparing both types of translations, most people can learn more about the Bible and its teachings. The literal translation will take you back to the thought process of the original, while the free translation will help you feel closer to the times by saying things in a more modern way. For instance, shekels, minas and talents will become pennies, nickels and dollars.

As a general rule, a translation produced by just one man will tend to be slanted toward that man’s ideas.

A translation by a committee or team of scholars will be more moderate or conservative. Sometimes though, a compromise will take place in order to please all. If this happens, then the original thought may be lost altogether.

Everyone should have at least one good study Bible. Despite some inaccuracies of the King James Bible, we recommend it as your primary study Bible, not only because it is one of the most accurate, but because many study tools, such as Strong’s Concordance, Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon and others, are based on the KJV. The numbering system that these study aids use makes it easier to cross-reference and study the meaning of certain words.

No Bible translation is 100% accurate. But when God opens a person’s mind to His understanding, that person will always strive to divide truth from error.