![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.bartehrman.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/Joshua-Schachterle-Bart-Ehrman-Author-1-1.png\" "\\"Joshua")
<\/span><\/p>\nWritten by <\/a>Joshua Schachterle, Ph.D<\/a><\/p>\n Author | Professor | Scholar<\/p>\n Author | Professor | BE Contributor<\/p>\n Verified! See our editorial guidelines<\/a><\/p>\n Verified! See our guidelines<\/a><\/p>\n Edited by Laura Robinson, Ph.D.<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n\nDate written: February 20th, 2024\n \nDate written: February 20th, 2024<\/p>\n Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily match my own. – Dr. Bart D. Ehrman<\/p>\n There have been so many translations of the Bible that it\u2019s difficult to keep track of them all. In fact, since the 16th century, there have been around 900 translations into English alone<\/strong>! How were these translations made and by whom? How do we know which versions are most accurate?<\/p>\n It\u2019s often said that translation is interpretation. Indeed, it\u2019s all but impossible to make a perfect one-to-one translation of any document without affecting the meaning. In this article, I\u2019ll look at the history of English Bible translations, the sources they used, and some basic information about the most widely-used English Bible translations today.<\/p>\n “My favorite English Bible translation is the NRSV-Updated Edition<\/em> (this is the latest updated version of the New Revised Standard Version) because it was made by scholars from different Christian traditions and is endorsed by well-known biblical scholars like Bart Ehrman. The latest version of it is called the <\/em>*SBL Study Bible<\/span><\/em><\/a> (SBL is the Society of Biblical Literature) and I highly recommend it. “<\/em><\/p>\n *Affiliate Disclaimer: We may earn commissions on products you purchase through this page at no additional cost to you. Thank you for supporting our site!<\/em><\/p>\n Consider the rather archaic English euphemism \u201cHe kicked the bucket\u201d.<\/strong> <\/p>\n Native English speakers of a certain age will know that this phrase means \u201cHe died\u201d. A non-native speaker of English, however, might understand the literal meaning \u2013 someone kicked a container called a bucket \u2013 but wouldn\u2019t get the figurative meaning.<\/p>\n So what should translators do with such a phrase? Should they merely translate the words exactly as they are? That wouldn\u2019t convey the intended meaning that someone died. Should they focus instead on the basic meaning and just say \u201cHe died\u201d? That wouldn\u2019t convey the folksy nature of the phrase. It\u2019s complicated.<\/p>\n Timothy Beal<\/a> gives some great examples of translation problems like this from the Hebrew Bible. In Exodus 32:10, when God becomes angry at the Israelites for worshiping a golden calf, most English translations have him say something like this to Moses:<\/p>\n Now let me alone so that my wrath<\/strong> may burn hot against them and I may consume them, and of you I will make a great nation.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n However, if we were to translate the Hebrew literally, God says this:<\/p>\n Now let me alone so that my nose <\/strong>may burn hot against them and I may consume them, and of you I will make a great nation.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n The English word \u201cwrath\u201d does convey the general meaning accurately: God is furious. However, it isn\u2019t literally what the original Hebrew says. It says that his nose burns hot, a common ancient Hebrew euphemism for anger. Should translators go with the intended meaning or just translate the actual words?<\/strong><\/p>\n In another example, the future king David encounters an ill-tempered man named Nabal who refuses to give him and his men supplies. Fortunately, Nabal\u2019s wife Abigail sneaks some food to David and his men. 1 Samuel 25:34 quotes David as saying that if she had not done this:<\/p>\n truly by morning there would not have been left to Nabal so much as one male.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n In other words, David would have killed all the males in Nabal\u2019s family. However, a literal translation from the Hebrew would say this:<\/p>\n truly by morning there would not have been left to Nabal so much as one who pisses against a wall.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n The general meaning is certainly conveyed by using the word \u201cmales\u201d. But technically, that\u2019s not what it says. Translators of any document have to make this kind of decision all the time.<\/p>\n The other translation issue involves sources.<\/p>\n We know that the Hebrew Bible\/Old Testament was written in Hebrew<\/a> (with a bit in Aramaic) and that the New Testament was written in Greek. So where do translators get these original writings from which they make their translations? It\u2019s complicated. Really complicated.<\/p>\n First, the bad news: there are no extant autographs \u2013 or original writings \u2013 of any biblical text.<\/strong> What we have are copies of copies of copies of copies, ad infinitum.<\/p>\n In addition, the oldest biblical manuscripts are not complete Bibles as we know them today, but only parts of the Bible. Sometimes this means an entire book, while in other cases, all we have are fragments of a book.<\/p>\n This brings up an important question for a book considered divinely inspired by so many: If we don\u2019t have the original(s), how do we know for certain what the original said? <\/p>\n Short answer: we don\u2019t!<\/em><\/p>\n Scholars and translators gather as much manuscript evidence as they can for each book. While there are many, many variations between manuscripts, scholars do their best to approximate what was likely the original text based on a broad survey of all the manuscripts available.<\/p>\n The general standard for decent Bible translations today is to use what is known as the Masoretic Text<\/strong> for the Hebrew Bible and the Nestle\u2013Aland<\/strong> edition (also called the Novum Testamentum Graece) for the New Testament. Both the Masoretic Text and the Nestle-Aland are compilations from different manuscripts. The best translations use other manuscript evidence as well, such as fragments of the Hebrew Bible from the Dead Sea Scrolls<\/a>.<\/p>\n Having outlined in a very basic way some translation issues, let\u2019s look briefly at the history of English Bible translations.<\/p>\n NOW AVAILABLE FREE!<\/p>\n Did Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John Actually Write Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John?<\/strong><\/p>\n The New Testament Gospels are anonymous. So why did early Christians say they were written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John? And what’s the evidence that they actually did?<\/p>\n __CONFIG_colors_palette__{“active_palette”:0,”config”:{“colors”:{“62516”:{“name”:”Main Accent”,”parent”:-1}},”gradients”:[]},”palettes”:[{“name”:”Default Palette”,”value”:{“colors”:{“62516”:{“val”:”rgb(255, 133, 34)”,”hsl”:{“h”:26,”s”:0.99,”l”:0.5667}}},”gradients”:[]}}]}__CONFIG_colors_palette__ <\/span> GET THE FREE WEBINAR<\/strong><\/span><\/span> <\/a> While there were no complete English Bible translations from the Old English period (450-1150 CE), parts of the Bible were translated separately. This includes the Lindisfarne Gospels, made in the 10th century by a monastic scribe named Aldred, and a translation of much of the Hebrew Bible<\/a> in the 11th century by an abbot named \u00c6lfric. <\/p>\n The first complete English translation of the Bible was made in 1382 during the Middle English period (1066-1500 CE).<\/strong> It was credited to John Wycliffe, a Catholic priest and theologian, although most scholars believe he had significant uncredited help.<\/p>\n There were two different versions of Wycliffe\u2019s translation, both made from the Latin version of the Bible known as the Vulgate. The first version sticks pretty rigidly to Latin word order. The second used the more common English word order of the time to make it more comprehensible to lay readers.<\/p>\n In the 1526, William Tyndale, a biblical scholar and linguist, made a modern English translation of the New Testament. He was the first English Bible translator to make use of the newly-invented printing press to copy his translation. The first complete modern English translation of the entire Bible was made by Miles Coverdale in 1535.<\/p>\n In 1604, King James I of England commissioned a new English translation of the Bible, which was completed by a team of translators in 1611. This became the standard English Bible until the last years of the 19th century, when new English translations began to proliferate.<\/p>\n Take a look at the chart below. It will give you basic information about seven widely-known English Bible versions which I\u2019ll expand upon below. Most versions are tied to certain Christian denominations.<\/p>\n By the way, Bible Gateway<\/a> is a free online source for a lot of different versions of the Bible.<\/p>\n![\"Bible](\"https:\/\/www.bartehrman.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/Bible-Translations-Comparison-Exploring-the-Versions-of-the-Bible.png\" "\\"Bible")
<\/span><\/p>\nWhat Are Some Issues with Translating the Bible?<\/h2>\n
What Sources Do Translators of the Bible Use?<\/h2>\n
![\"Did](\"https:\/\/www.bartehrman.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/Did-Matthew-Mark-Luke-and-John-Write-the-Gospels.png\" "\\"Did")
<\/a><\/span> <\/p>\nEarliest Translations of the Bible into English<\/h2>\n
Comparison of English Bible Versions<\/h2>\n
![\"newest](\"https:\/\/www.bartehrman.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/newest-bible-translation-oldest-bible-translation.png\" "\\"newest")
<\/span><\/p>\n