Step 5: More from The Preface

The NIV was produced by committees of competent translators from various backgrounds so that the final product would not seem to favor the doctrinal formulations of any particular Christian denomination.

Also, the translation work was checked again and again by different committees. The Preface states, "The translation of each book was assigned to a team of scholars. Next, one of the Intermediate Editorial Committees revised the initial translation, with constant reference to the Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek. Their work then went on to one of the General Editorial committees, which checked it in detail and made another thorough version. This revision in turn was carefully reviewed by the Committee on Bible Translation, which made further changes and then released the final version for publication. In this way the entire Bible underwent three revisions, during each of which the translation was examined for its faithfulness to the original languages and for its English style." There were multiple reviews of each part of the text for both faithfulness to the original texts and for good English usage.

Although there have sometimes been gifted people who worked virtually alone to produce good Bible translations, in general I would advise shoppers to look for a Bible translation based on the best available original language texts and done by a group of people who cross check one another in order to protect the final product from each other's unconscious biases. Further, the text should be in good contemporary English so its expression flows in a clear and natural way.

I mentioned the NIV as an example in discussing the benefits of reading The Preface. That does not mean I am suggesting the NIV meets everyone's needs or is the best modern English translation. There are things I personally like about the NIV, but there are also things I do not like about it. Winston Churchill humorously said a preposition is a terrible word to end a sentence with. The NIV frequently ends sentences with prepositions. I was always taught that is poor English usage and I try to avoid it when I speak or write. I expect placing prepositions at the ends of sentences is a concession the editors made to what has been happening throughout contemporary society during recent decades, despite rules of proper grammar. Also on my "do not like list," sometimes the editors of the NIV made the decision to paraphrase technical words to make the meaning clear. That helps the modern reader understand concepts better, but leaves the reader without clues that two passages are related because both use the same word with a rather precise technical meaning.* Still, I have a copy of the NIV and do make use of it.

There is still more in The Preface. For example, it will tell you why you sometimes see LORD and sometimes Lord. The distinction is very important, especially at Psalm 110:1.

*In 1 John 2:1-2 the NIV translates the Greek word hilastarion as "the sin offering for the whole world." The English Standard Version uses the word 'propitiation' to translate the word. The word 'propitiation' is almost never used in contemporary English speech or writing. It refers to the forgiving character of God through an atoning sacrifice. Its contextual usage in the rest of the Bible refers to the sacrifice the high priest offered for the sins of the people on the Old Testament Day of Atonement. Certainly, "the sin offering for the whole world" is easier to grasp for the contemporary reader. The same Greek word appears in Romans 3:25 where the NIV translates it as "sacrifice of atonement." Both of these renderings present an accurate meaning, but the reader would not have sufficient clues that the same Greek word is translated in both passages.

I am in Mexico. Spanish is our language. However, all your comments, apply the same for the same problem in Spanish. Thank you very much.<br>
<p>Thank you for your comment. Somehow I missed it earlier.</p>
<p>Well - I read your comments with interest! I loved the King James and found it a difficult journey towards the 'new' bibles, but I surprisingly now I don't want to go back. Instead I research the text that has 'changed' for me (often comparing with the KJV). I am disappointed that I haven't the confidence to claim any one 'new' version as MY Bible! Like you, I find that I tend to 'jump' from one version to another.</p><p>Thank you for this instructable. It was both enlightening and instructive.</p>
Thank you for your very kind comment. During the last five years I have been working at gaining more facility with the Hebrew I was required to study fifty years ago, but never really learned well enough to use. I have been doing that by means of a free app. named Blue Letter Bible on an iPad. The display is two-column, and I can choose any of several English versions to parallel the Hebrew text. Sometimes I use the King James Version. I am constantly amazed at how accurately it follows the text, even if the style of expression is sometimes very dated for modern readers. In 2011 National Geographic Magazine had a very interesting article on the world-wide influence of The King James Version over the last 400 years. I bought a print copy of the magazine in an airport. If you have not seen it, a library near you may well have it. Since retiring from regular service in a local congregation, I tend to use a German edition for most of my Bible reading because I would like to be more able with that language, too. One nice new English version is the Holman Christian Standard Bible. It comes as a free component of The Blue Letter Bible app.
<p>Yeah well the niv took words out of john 3:16 </p>
<p>There are Bible translations that sometimes leave out or alter a passage that does not fit the doctrinal stance of the translators. These are usually done by one denominational group for the purpose of supporting their unusual doctrinal positions. But, sincere and well-meaning people will also sometimes tell you words have been changed or left out by a particular translation when they have not. In step 8 I discussed fears people have about renderings of John 3:16. I encourage you to read that carefully. Also, you do not need simply to take someone's word for something. In Acts 17 the people in Berea went home and checked their Bibles to see if what Paul had preached was really in the Bible. (The Bible for those people was most likely the Greek Old Testament.) You can be like that if you use good resources available to all. I recommend you compare the version you see examining with an interlinear original language text. You can do that at bible hub (dot) com. There you will find a variety of versions, original language texts, interlinear word-for-word translations, and links to lexical resources to help you get a more complete sense of the meaning of a word as it is used in original biblical languages apart from how we might use it twenty centuries later. </p>
<p>The KJV is the real bible</p>
I think I mentioned I did not want to start a King James only debate. I personally read the New Testament in the original Greek from which the King James was translated.
<p>What do you think of a Bible which has restored all occurences of God&acute;s name? For me it makes it more accurate than any other translation. That&acute;s the one I use for my personal Bible study.</p>
I assume you mean it uses &quot;Yahweh&quot; rather than LORD. I have used the WEB (World English Bible) based on the American Standard Version of 1901 by means of a free program named e-Sword. I always found it very accurate and good to use.
<p>Curious as to your thoughts on comparing the Geneva Bible to the KJV</p>
Thank you for the inquiry. I am really not familiar with the Geneva Bible firsthand. I have read only bits and pieces about it and can not give an informed opinion.
I like this instructable. I was kinda hesitant on reading it because I have seen many people stick to one version or another. You did a pretty good job. The message I got was to study multiple versions. While it is true the Bible has been translates multiple times and there could be more errors in it than we realize, I believe God will show us, through the spirit, what is truth. No matter how it is worded. Which is why I think it is important to pray while reading the Bible, no matter what versions. <br>I haven't read any other versions than KJV, but when I was a missionary teaching others, they usually used a different version. There are differences when it came to doctrine between different churches. But I wouldn't cry about it because if you are open to it, God will still lead you. <br> <br>I admire that you have read the greek translation. I would love to read the Bible in greek and hebrew, only I don't know those languages.
Thank you for looking at this Instructable and for commenting. One of our teachers encouraged typing three or four different versions below each other line by line when working with a difficult passage. That was before computers. Today that would be much easier, or at least it would be easy to line up verses in parallel columns. Translations are commentaries in the sense that an expression in Hebrew may be very difficult to understand. The translator must make some choices based on what he believes the text intends. He could do that based on the context and what he believes would follow next. He could rely on the flow of a similar discussion in another part of the Old Testament. He could also do that based on how the Greek Septuagint rendered the passage. But, such translation difficulties pertain to very minor things, not to any important doctrines. (As an example, our Sunday morning Bible class just covered Judges 3:22. Does the text say Ehud's sword came out between Eglon's legs, or does it say the contents of Eglon's intestines came out around the hilt of the sword? The grammar of the Hebrew text makes it very difficult to know.) There have been people who have worked independently to learn some Greek or Hebrew. We also have good tools for people who have not studied those languages, like Strong's Numbers. I did another Instructable you might like. Click on this <a href="http://www.instructables.com/id/Learn-New-Testament-Greek/" rel="nofollow">link</a>. It will give you some good access to a very helpful tool for those without training in Greek and Hebrew.&nbsp;<br> <br> I have been grateful for the training I received in Greek and Hebrew. Both have been very helpful. I do wish I had worked harder at both, especially Hebrew, which I badly neglected over the years. But, Greek has always been more useful than Hebrew, at least to me.<br> <br> God does guide our studies of His Word, and I believe blesses sincere attempts to sit under His tutelage through His Word. Often that comes in the form of expressions or mental pictures that enable communicating in clear ways that help our hearers better assimilate what we are trying to teach them.<br> <br> <br>
Thanks Phil, didn't read it all, but just wanted to commend you for a fine instructable (that which I did read at least :)<br>I have been very impressed by all your published content so far, keep up the good work, and God bless.
Thank you, and God bless.
have you ever read any of the street bible
I have not. I had not heard of it, but found it at Amazon. There I saw a bit of Genesis 1. It reminds me of something I saw a number of years ago in a bookstore called &quot;The Cottonpatch Bible.&quot; I suppose it would be categorized as a paraphrase, somewhat like Eugene Peterson's &quot;The Message&quot; or &quot;The Living Bible.&quot;
probably, it'd aimed at teenagers
Do you like it and find it helpful?
erm, hard to comment really. I think it is quite good, but then i do not particularly struggle to understand a standard bible, however, I know many my age or younger wouldn't understand the language used.
Look at the Revolution Bible for Guys in the New Living Translation, it's perfectly aimed at teens and is my favorite Bible to use.
the New Living Translation, isn't a translation at all.. it's a version... Highly inaccurate and very much a biased paraphrase. While it may be easy to read and understand, if what it says is incorrect, what good is it?
Please now, let's not get technical over this matter. Your comment is much like saying that people should not watch Veggie Tales. Veggie Tales is not accurate, but Veggie Tales is much better to connect with children then reading the rather graphic, but astounding book of Exodus. So in response. What good is Veggie Tales? Lots.
Satan likes it when you talk that way... &quot;Let's not get technical... The Devil's in the details&quot;... I disagree. Truth is truth. if you water it down, it's no longer truth. <br><br>While Veggie Tales, may be good stories, I refuse to watch them.. (Mostly because I can't stand singing vegetables but that's my problem) :-)<br><br>What if one of the Veggie tales characters told your kids that they don't have to listen to their parents? That they can learn everything they need from watching them (the Veggies) but they did it in a way that was very vague. Would it still be alright?<br><br>The English language has been steadily ruined over the past 100 years. Good means Bad and Bad means Good. (Gee isn't that a Bible Prophecy?) It's more important than ever to study an accurate Translation of the Bible and learn what's it REALLY Teaches.
The English language has deteriorated to the point where bad mean good, and good means bad, really? That has to be a matter of opinion. Matter of opinion is why there are multiple Bible Translation, and there may be up to 30K Christian denominations, each believing they know the truth.<br>
My opinion? maybe but....<br><br>I would ask you to compare Dictionaries from say 50 years ago and today. Compare the words, Honor, Praise and Glory. Today they all mean the same thing. Worship. However, 50 years ago you'd understand the differences in these words. 50 years ago to get worship you'd have to combine all three terms. That is what I mean by saying the English language has deteriorated. Today's dictionaries have taken all the nuances out of the language.<br><br>To quote Pilate... &quot;What is Truth?&quot;<br><br>What's more important? Changing the Bible to reflect your beliefs or changing your beliefs to what the Bible actually says and teaches? Sadly, there is so much bias in many of today's popular translations. To support this comment, I recommend you read the book &quot;Truth in Translation&quot; by Jason BeDuhn. In his book, he compares many different translations along with how it reads in Greek and explains how Bias and inaccuracy has crept into some translations. Having a translation that is as accurate as possible is the key to finding Truth.<br><br>Disclaimer. It's not my intention to anger anyone here. only to inspire one to thought that there maybe another option to the way you see things. How do you know you have truth, if you never look at things from the other side?
I am on my 13th time through the Greek New Testament, reading it cover-to-cover. Although I am far less capable in Hebrew, I have always been impressed with how good and how accurate the modern popular versions are in general. After nearly forty years as a pastor preparing sermons and Bible classes I need to dig into any variations that could affect meaning and translation. I just do not find any support for the position that modern translations are distortions. What I have presented aims to demystify issues related to translation. As I tried to stress in the beginning, my aim is not to get into what various groups try to do with their particular use of selected passages. Such things are related to hermeneutical (interpretive) principles, some of which are sound and some are not so sound.
13 times is to be commended! I've only been through it once so far. I agree that for the most part just about all popular versions are 99% accurate. Bias doesn't get inserted on purpose. It enters into any translation via the translators held beliefs and background. It's difficult to not let this happen and with 99% accuracy all are to be commended. Please don't misunderstand me. For example. the NIV released a new revision earlier this year. One of the verses they updated was Habbakukk 1:12 My question above was how many will not use this revision because of that change in scripture? If you agree like I do, that there can be no contradiction in the Bible because it is &quot;inspired of God&quot; then this should definately change some beliefs. But will it? It depends on the condition of each person's heart as to if they will accept the change.
I understand that, but my point to make is the fact that telling a teenager that the only way he should study the Bible is to make sure his edition is true to life translations; It's not modern it wouldn't connect. Simpler language will not destroy the Bible if we use it simply for the effect of affecting the youth.<br><br> I also do not like you insulting both me or my knowledge. I was helping someone out, telling them that this version is modern, easy to read, easy to understand, a teen connecting his spiritual journey to another teen, and here comes you...<br><br>Holy good molly... I see your comments list, your spamming the nonsense out of this Instructable! Why? Oh great... a witness. Oh golly. Sir. I respect your religion. Keep talking and I will no longer. Good day.
What is the point of being a pastor if you &quot;do not seek to convince anyone about what the Christian faith is or whether it is true, whether the Bible is God's word, nor who Jesus Christ is?&quot;
You must understand proselytizing is not appropriate in this setting. I once did an Instructable on <a href="http://www.instructables.com/id/Learn-New-Testament-Greek/">Learning New Testament Greek</a>. One person commented that the title made him fear it would be an attempt to convert readers, but he was pleasantly surprised to see that it was a nice instructive guide. I did another that was a <a href="http://www.instructables.com/id/A-Basic-Introduction-to-Christian-Symbols/">basic introduction to Christian symbols</a>. It is an attempt to explain things we all often see in artwork and imagery, but may not recognize. I had several people accusing me in their comments of trying to promote my brand of religion, even though I tried to keep it very even handed and absent of proselytizing. If I had used this Instructable or the others I linked to promote a case for the Christian faith, I would have been widely flamed by numbers of readers, and rightly so. Chances are those Instructables would also have been removed as spam.&nbsp;
Thank you. As an agnostic, it's so much easier to listen to the pastors who teach ABOUT their religion, and let people come to the faith if it moves them, without shoving it down their throats. You seem like the type that would be able to have long, rational discussions about faith and religion without making someone uncomfortable about it, which I believe is really practicing the love you preach.
Thank you. I have long tried to take a long, slow, rational approach. Many times over the years there have been things in all sorts of areas I needed to think about before I was ready to assent, and I did eventually change my thinking. You probably know the saying, &quot;A man convinced against his will remains unconvinced still.&quot; I never appreciate someone trying to arm wrestle me into something I am not ready to endorse. BTW, if ever you would like to discuss some question with me, please feel free to send a private message. Thank you for looking and for commenting.
For there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby WE MUST BE SAVED (Acts 4:10-12). Salvation can only be found in the name of Jesus Christ. You CANNOT find salvation in the name of Allah. You CANNOT find salvation in the name of the Pope. You CANNOT find salvation in the name of Buddha. You CANNOT find salvation in the name of a religion or a denomination. You CANNOT find salvation in the name of an evangelist. You can only find salvation in the person of Jesus Christ. This is God&rsquo;s plan. (now they can banned me)
When I was very young I tried to read the Bible. The wording was very hard for me to understand, so I gave up. Old Testament books are still hard for me! I went for a time as an atheist, grew to an agnostic, then matured to a Christian. I eventually became a Mormon, which has required a greater commitment of me than I have sometimes wished. When I first began reading and studying, I found it difficult. What I found very helpful was to purchase multiple translations and read and study with all of them open. Although many of the versions aren't generally used in my church setting, or aren't &quot;official&quot;, I find that modern language or red letters sometimes help me to better understand the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
Comparing versions as you do is a very good tactic and highly recommended for the person who has not had the opportunity to learn to read any of the biblical languages.
Re &quot;Such changes are hardly large or significant,&quot; it would seem if there is an &quot;insignificant&quot; change in one place, it is likely there are others. It is such changes that sprout religions (e.g., Baptist, Catholic, Adventist, Jehovah's Witnesses, etc.).<br><br>An example of the importance of even minor changes might be seen in the matter of celebrations, like Easter and Christmas (back to that game of telephone again), or trinity, security of the believer and other doctrine concepts. <br><br>These are not small matters. I know of a spouse who, while holding herself out as a pious Christian, was willing to divorce her husband because he would not celebrate Christmas for its pagan origins. Later, when he refused to believe Jesus prayed to himself, sat at his own right hand, handed the keys of the Kingdom back to himself and so forth, she did divorce him on her vague stances.
The changes, themselves, are not significant, but that does not keep individuals from excesses like you describe.
In the end it really doesn't matter by what means you choose the Bible you will use. There will come a time when you will run into Christians that will tell you used went about it in the wrong way, and you chose to use the wrong Bible. Has always baffled, frustrated me that a book described as divinely inspire, and with out error has produced so many editions of itself, and so many Christian denominations, that sect seems a better term than denomination.<br><br>You took on a tough challenge Phil. I will not even attempt to judge how well you did in in fulfilling that challenge. Because it deals with faith, and respectfully no one alive knows the truth. Not like I'm shy about commenting. On some of your more down to Earth instructables I do know enough to comment on errors,and add additional information,and have.<br><br>
Thank you for a well written and carefully researched Instructable. I found it interesting reading.<br><br>I noticed that although your page is headed by an image of the Tetragrammaton that you did not include some discussion on the frequency of the Tetragammation in the original bible texts, (more than 7000 times) and the translation options that have been presented to modern translators.<br><br>While not wanting to detract from any notes that you may wish to add, here is some information that some readers may find interesting.<br><br>The Tetragrmmaton is widely viewed as the personal name of God. It directly translates out to the letters YHVH (or YHWH) without vowel sounds, which were inserted by the reader. This required that the reader would know which vowel sounds to insert. However, over the years this knowledge has been lost, largely due to a growing more recent belief that the personal name of God is too sacred to pronounce. It is now common practice to use the substitution &lsquo;Adonai&rsquo; (the Hebrew for 'Lord') or &lsquo;LORD&rsquo; in many translations. Interestingly, this is possibly the only example of where the older Bible translations may be more accurate than the newer translations, since many of them, including the King James version make use of a popular rendition of the name of God. (Ps 83:18) Some modern versions of the Bible that do not use Gods name in the text explain why they chose not to in the Foreword or in the Translators notes.<br><br>While an admittedly contentious issue with many, the Bible itself in many places presents an explicit and clear Divine Mandate for stressing and publishing proper knowledge of God&rsquo;s name. Here are two such instances:<br>Jeremiah 33:2 &quot;YHVH Who made the earth, Who formed it and set it firm - YHVH is His Name - says this: 'Call to Me and I will answer you ...'&quot;<br>Isaiah 12:4 &quot;Give thanks to YHVH - call His Name aloud. Proclaim His deeds to the nations,declare His Name sublime. Sing of YHVH, for He has done marvelous things - let it be known to the whole world!&quot;.<br><br>Many hold that God&rsquo;s personal name should be used more often in modern translations so as to conform with what may really be the more correctly interpreted instruction of Exod. 20:7 concerning the use of His Name: viz. &quot;Do not make His Name worthless&quot; &quot;Lo tisah et Shem YHVH Eloheicha l'shav.&quot; By withholding the proclamation of His Name, we may well be guilty of &quot;making His Name worthless.&quot; <br><br>Thanks again for your instructable.<br>
And don't forget:<br><br>1) God's son said he would make his father's name known; <br><br>2) Some well known Bibles use &quot;God&quot; (upper case g) where the Teragrammaton was removed. Elsewhere, it is &quot;god&quot; (lower case).
Thank you for your comment. I did use the Tetragrammaton (&quot;the four letters&quot;) as an image. In my mind, it was not exactly what I was looking for in that step, but as close as I could get. When I was discussing additional things in The Preface of the NIV that are worth reading and knowing, I mentioned 'Lord' and 'LORD,' which is, of course, the distinction most English (and other, including German) versions make between 'Adonai' (Lord) and YHWH in the text (LORD). My favorite translation of the Divine Name is by Franz Rosenzweig and Martin Buber in &quot;Die Schrift&quot; (a German paraphrase of the Old Testament from a Jewish perspective). They note that the same verbal form used in Exodus 3:14 for the Divine Name also occurs in Exodus 3:12 as the verb of the sentence, where God promised to be with Moses. Rosenzweig and Buber rendered it (in German) as, &quot;Ich bin der 'ich bin da.'&quot; It has a repetitive lilt in the syllables that rolls off of the tongue, and (more importantly) it means, &quot;I am the One Who is there with you.&quot;

About This Instructable




Bio: I miss the days when magazines like Popular Mechanics had all sorts of DIY projects for making and repairing just about everything. I am enjoying ... More »
More by Phil B:Make a Conduit Bender Fix a Frozen Concoction Machine Mount a Fireplace Mantel 
Add instructable to: