Subject: How do we get our Bible? |
Bible Note: Greetings Forum Friends! There has been a lot of discussion lately about the merits and/or flaws of various translations. I thought it would be useful to post a brief description of how the text of the Bible is arrived at. This will necessarily be just a short overview of a very complex issue. As most of us are aware, there is no Bible which was handed down, already printed and bound in leather. What we have are thousands of handwritten copies of the original books and letters of the Bible. As far as we know, we do not actually possess even one original. So, when a group begins work on a translation, they must first decide what text they will actually translate. Every translation is based upon a text. Some have used the Textus Receptus. Some have used the Westcott and Hort text. Some have used the Majority text. Some have used an eccletic text (i.e. - making their own textual decisions as they go). But, all of them are based upon someone's decision about what the original text said. Unfortunately, the manuscripts we have do not all agree with one another. (Allow me to state up front that the differences tend to be very minor. No major doctrine is affected by the differences in the manuscripts.) These differences are the result of several different kinds of errors. Some copies were made by one person reading the text, while a group of others copied what they heard. Sometimes, someone would hear incorrectly. Some copies were made by an individual simply copying an original. Occasionally, that individual would make mistakes. He might accidently leave out a word or phrase. He might intentionally leave out a word or phrase or even add a word or phrase. Every copy made of these copies would contain the same errors and maybe even more. The text of the Bible is arrived at by looking at the thousands of manuscripts which we have, and using certain principles to determine what the original must have said. How old is the manuscript? Generally speaking, a manuscript copied in the 2nd century will be more reliable than one copied in the 14th century. Where and by whom was the manuscript copied? Some copies were made by professionals who were very careful and dilligent. Others were made by individuals who were not very careful. The rules are complex, but make sense. The result is that we are almost 100 percent certain that what we have in the text of our Bible is what the originals said. Even in those places where some doubt exists, no doctrine is affected. The differences in the manuscripts mostly included changes in word order, spelling differences, and additions or subtractions which make a verse harmonize with another verse. The reason I post this is simple. The average Christian does not have the tools or the knowledge to deal with these issues. The average Christian will simply open up a translation and go with it. This is fine. All of the legitimate translations are reliable. Each one may prefer one over another. Some may like the poetic and beautiful language of the KJV. Some may like the literalness of the NASB. Some may like the readability of the NIV. Whichever translation (as long as it is a legitimate translation) you prefer, use it and grow in Christ. However, don't let anyone convice you that one particular translation is the one that Paul used! ;-) Paul didn't use a translation (except for the Old Testament). He read both Hebrew and Greek. He had access to and wrote many of the originals for the New Testament. He did not use the KJV, the NIV, the NASB, the RSV, ect.... Occasionally, one will come across a verse which reads diffently in several translations. When this occurs, do your homework. Find out why one reads this way, and another reads that way. Then, make your decision about which one you believe is the most accurate. Don't demonize those who make a different choice than you. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |