This is a heading

Which Bible version shall I use


Bible Versions

Why so many different Bible versions and so many differences between the versions? Can we rely on the Bible today as the Word of God?

Manuscript evidence

Let us briefly look at the manuscript evidence for the Bible that we have today. [This is a huge subject and I am no expert and you may wish to conduct your own research as well]

The Hebrew Scriptures

  • Hand copied by scribes. This was meticulous work subject to continuous checking and double checking
  • Task taken on by the Masoretes from sixth century AD
  • Then the families of Ben Asher and Ben Chayyim
  • Translated into Greek (the Septuagint) 300-200 BC
  • Dead Sea Scrolls. All the Hebrew scriptures are represented, except Esther, including a complete scroll of Isaiah dated to before 100 BC. This scroll is essentially the same as that used for our English translations today.

The Greek Scriptures

  • There is more manuscript evidence for the New Testament than for any other body of ancient literature
  • There are over 5000 Greek manuscripts and over 8000 Latin manuscripts with many more in other languages
  • In total there are over 24000 partial and complete manuscripts of the New Testament
  • These were hand copied in the tradition of the Hebrew Scriptures until the invention of the printing press in the 1500’s
  • Virtually the entire New Testament can be reconstructed from the writings and letters of the early church fathers (I understand that only a handful of verses would not be included)

In the many thousands of manuscript copies scholars have discovered that there are some 150,000 "variants." These numbers are not so damning as it may initially appear. Indeed, a look at the hard evidence shows that the New Testament manuscripts are amazingly accurate and trustworthy. Of these 150,000 variants, 99 percent hold virtually no significance whatsoever. Many of these variants simply involve a missing letter in a word; some involve reversing the order of two words (such as "Christ Jesus" instead of "Jesus Christ"); some may involve the absence of one or more insignificant words.

Really, when all the facts are put on the table, only about 50 of the variants have any real significance - and even then, no doctrine of the Christian faith or any moral commandment is affected by them.

For more than ninety-nine percent of the cases the original text can be reconstructed to a practical certainty. Thus, in the Bible as we have it (and as it is conveyed to us through faithful translations) we do have for practical purposes the very Word of God, inasmuch as the manuscripts do convey to us the complete vital truth of the originals.

Biblical Interpretation

Before answering our question we need to quickly look at how literature is normally interpreted – this is known as hermeneutics. Generally when we look at almost any literature we tend to use a literal interpretation i.e. we take the words and sentences at face value with the expectation that the author meant what he said and hence we can understand what he meant. This is called the grammatical-historical approach. When it comes to the Bible however some Christian theologians have tried to put meanings into the words of the Bible rather than take the words at face value, and this can result in meanings that were never intended.

Bible versions

So, to start answering our question:-

Bibles available today, in the English language, can be put into three broad groups:-

A) Those translations based on “complete equivalence”

B) Those translations based on “dynamic equivalence”

C) Paraphrases which are not translations at all

In the past translation has been based on a word for word rendering in order to produce as literal a translation as possible. This is the “complete equivalence” translation. The most well know and still widely used is the King James Bible 1611. Also in this group are the American Standard Version, the New American Standard Version and the New King James Version.

More recent translations have been made using the “dynamic equivalence” method and this seeks a thought for thought translation rather than word for word. This leads to a freer form of translation as the translators use far more interpretation as they try to convey what, they believe, the authors meant. An example of this type of translation would be the New International Version, completed in 1978. Other examples are the Contemporary English Version, The Good News Bible and the New Living Translation.

Paraphrases are not translations at all and amount to the author giving a running commentary on the scriptures. Understood in this way they may have their place but treating them as translations can lead to problems. Examples are The Message and the Living Bible.

No translation has ever been infallible, only the original autographs are (the original manuscripts) and all translations will have some measure of interpretation in them as not all foreign words can be easily translated into English. However the more a translation moves away from literalness the more it moves to being an interpretation. (To see the difference compare Romans 8:9 and the translation of the word “sarx” and 1 Samuel 15:33 to see a softening (perhaps unnecessary) of the text.)

So to sum up, the wealth of manuscript evidence testifies to the accuracy of the Bible and it can therefore be trusted in the original language. The number of translations available all have their place once the philosophy of the translation is understood. For instance the Good News Bible may be better for children or young Christians and the (New) Kings James or the (New) American Standard better for careful study of the word of God. With this understanding the choice is yours.

 There are excellent websites that cover this topic in much more detail such as Creation.com