The Bible: Its Transmission & Value

Series at Kutztown, PA, Bible FellowshipChurch, April 10, 1983

Dr. Robert C. Newman

Biblical Theological Seminary

SESSION 1:

MODERNTRANSLATIONS: WHY DO THEY DIFFER

AND WHATDIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?

Translation Technique:

Isthe translation literal, idiomatic or paraphrastic?

(1) Luke 2:1:

Andit came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from CaesarAugustus, that all the world should be taxed (KJV, rather literal).

Nowit came about in those days that a decree went out from Caesar Augustus, that acensus be taken of all the inhabited earth (NASB, rather literal).

Inthose days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of theentire Roman world (NIV, more idiomatic).

Inthose days a decree was issued by the Emperor Augustus for a registration to bemade throughout the Roman world (NEB, idiomatic‑paraphrastic).

Aboutthis time Caesar Augustus, the Roman emperor, decreed that a census should betaken throughout the nation (LB, paraphrastic).

(2) Prov 10:11:

Themouth of the righteous is a fountain of life, but the mouth of the wickedconceals violence (NASB).

Themouth of the righteous is a fountain of life, but violence overwhelms the mouthof the wicked (NIV).

Thereis living truth in what a good man says, but the mouth of the evil man isfilled with curses (LB).

Theological Outlook:

Isthe translation liberal or evangelical, Catholic or sectarian?

(1) Gen 1:6:

AndGod said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters (KJV).

ThenGod said, "Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters" (NASB,evangelical).

Godsaid, "Let there be a vault between the waters" (NEB, liberal).

(2) John 1:1:

Inthe beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God(NASB).

Whenall things began, the Word already was. The Word dwelt with God, and what God was, the Word was (NEB).

In[the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god(NWT, Jehovah's Witnesses).

(3) Matt 16:18:

...youare Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church... (NASB, evangelical).

...youare Peter, the Rock, and on this rock I will build my church... (NEB,ecumenical).

...youare "Rock," and on this rock I will build my church... (NAB,Catholic).

(4) Isa 9:6:

AndHis name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Princeof Peace (NASB, evangelical).

...andhe shall be called in purpose wonderful, in battle, God‑like, Father forall time, Prince of Peace (NEB, liberal).

Andhis name is called Pele‑joez‑el‑gibbor‑Abi‑ad‑sar‑shalom(JPS, Jewish, w/ footnote: "That is, Wonderful in counsel is God themighty, the everlasting Father, the Ruler of Peace").

(5) Gen 11:1:

Onceupon a time... (NEB, liberal).

Textual Basis:

Isthe underlying Greek or Hebrew text based on the traditional text, a criticaltext or conjecture?

TraditionalText: the text of OT and NT as it existed in the majority of manuscripts knownat the time the Bible first began to be printed (c AD 1500).

CriticalText: the text of the OT and NT as reconstructed from all presently‑knownmanuscripts, giving greater weight to those manuscripts which are earlierand/or appear to be more reliable. e.g., (see the marginal notes in NASB):differences range from single words (Matt 6:1, Jn 1:18, Acts 20:28) to phrases(Jn 6:69, 1 Thess 3:2) up to several verses (Mk 16:9‑20, Jn 7:53‑8:11).

Conjecture:reconstructing some part of the text where the editor feels that none of themanuscripts existing today preserves the original reading.  Extremely rare in NT; in OT, rarelydone by conservatives, more common with liberals. e.g.,

(1)1 Sam 13:1: cp KJV & NASB

(2)Ps 2:12:

Dohomage to the son (NASB, conservative).

Kissthe king (NEB, liberal).

Bowdown to him (GNB, liberal).

Kisshis feet (RSV, liberal).

A SIMPLIFIEDCHART OF ENGLISH BIBLE TRANSLATIONS

THEOLOGICALOUTLOOK

Conservative Liberal

Very

Literal           NASB ASV

ERV

TRANSLATION                        KJV RSV

TECHNIQUE

       GNB(NT)

Idiomatic          NIV   GNB(OT)

               NAB

JB

Paraphrastic       LB NEB

SOME TESTS FORA THEOLOGICALLY‑SOUND TRANSLATION

1. Do the translators believe theapostles properly understood OT Scripture?

Peter:cp Acts 2:27 w/ Ps 16:10 (Does the person in the Ps die?  Is decay mentioned?)

Matthew:cp Mt 1:23 w/ Isa 7:14 (Isa mention virgin?)

Authorof Hebrews: cp Heb 1:8 w/ Ps 45:6 (Is God addressed?)

2. Do the translators believe theapostles thought Jesus was God?

John:Jn 1:1; 8:58

 Paul: Rom 9:5

Authorof Hebrews: Heb 1:8

3. Do the translators play down Messianicprophecy?

Ps2:12 (kiss the Son?)

Ps22:16 (pierced hands?)

Isa9:6 (names suggest deity?)

sa53:10,12 (dies and lives again?)

Dan9:24‑25 (Messiah or just an annointed one?)

Micah5:2 (eternally existing or oringinated long ago?)

Zech12:10 (look on "me" whom they have pierced?)

4. Do the translators play downresurrection in the OT?

1Sam 2:6; Job 19:25‑27; Ps 17:15; Ps 49:14‑15

5. Do thetranslators "correct" the text without manuscript support? Check introduction and footnotes.

SESSION 2:

THE HAND‑COPYINGOF THE BIBLE:

CAN WE HAVECONFIDENCE IN IT?

Causes of Error:

Contrast machine printing and hand copying:

              independenceof copies

              valueof proofreading

Accidental Changes:

              errorsof sight or writing: confusion ofletters, skipping, interchange, wrong word division

              errorsof hearing: similar sounds

              errorsof memory: synonyms, influence of parallels

              errorsof judgment: abbreviations,marginal notes

IntentionalChanges:

attemptedcorrections: grammatical, harmonization, combination

              doctrinalcorrections: in surviving manuscripts, generally toward "orthodoxy"

Correction of Error:

Collation of manuscripts: collect variants, study characteristicsof individual manuscripts

Internal Tests: context, style, harder reading,shorter reading, best explains others

External Tests: best manuscript, bestcombinations, best family

Estimation of Error:

Testing growth of error during period we havemanuscripts:

              compareKJV with NASB

              cpTraditional Text with Codex Vaticanus

              cpmedieval Heb mss w/ Dead Sea Scrolls

Results:no doctrines of Scripture differ; variations at most only involve question ofwhether a given doctrine taught in a particular place or not

SESSION 3:

THE EARLIESTMANUSCRIPTS;

WHAT DO WEHAVE TODAY?

Introduction:

Becauseof the increasing damage which occurs to written materials as time passes, forvirtually any ancient work we have fragments that have survived from earliertimes rather than have complete copies of the work.

New Testament Manuscripts:

    The originals were probablywritten over the period AD 50‑100. The earliest fragment which is undisputedis a scrap from the Gospel of John, written about AD 125, less than ageneration after the work itself. The earliest nearly complete copy of a whole book (also John) comes fromabout AD 200. The oldest remainingcomplete copy of the whole NT dates back to about AD 350.

Old Testament Manuscripts:

    The originals were probablywritten over the period 1400‑400 BC. The earliest fragments discovered to date are among the DeadSea Scrolls: parts of Exodus and Samuel from about 250 BC.  The earliest complete book (Isaiah)comes from the same find, dating to about 150 BC. These manuscripts are actually older than the Jewish sectwhich was using them. The earliestcomplete copy of the whole OT, surprisingly, is a Greek translation, datingfrom AD 350. The earliest completeHebrew manuscript only goes back to about AD 950.

Comparison with Other Works:

ORIGINALLY      EARLIEST

WORK            WRITTEN       COMPLETEMS DIFFERENCE

New Testament c75                   c350   c275

Josephus            c90                    c1000             c900

Plutarch               c100                 c950 c850

Tacitus                c100                 c850 c750

ORIGINALLY      EARLIEST

WORK WRITTEN       COMPLETEMS DIFFERENCE

Old Testament 1400‑400BC         c350AD 750‑1750

Enuma Elish c1750BC c650BC c1100

Rigveda 1500‑1000BC         c1350AD 2350‑2850

Iliad                  700+BC c1050AD c1750+

SESSION 4:

THEAUTOGRAPHS:

WHAT ARETHEY WORTH?

The Bible's Own Claims for Itself:

Theultimate author is God, creator of the universe and controller of history:  2 Tim 3:16; Ps 119:1,89; Gen 1:1; Prov 16:1,9,33

TheBible's contents give us what we need to know to solve our deepest problems andto transform us into happy, fulfilled, useful people: 2 Tim 3:15‑17; Ps 119: 1,97‑100,105; Ps 1:1‑6

The Bible's Evidence for Itself:

    Cosmology:  The Bible pictures a universe with anorigin rather than an eternal one, and this universe was planned by the eternalGod (e.g., Gen 1). This fits thedata of cosmology as known today better than alternatives.  See Jastrow, God & theAstronomers; Newman andEckelmann, Genesis One & the Origin of the Earth.

    Biology:  This is an area of hot controversytoday. The Bible pictures life andconsciousness as having a non‑natural origin, though the exact nature ofGod's intervention may be disputed. Scientists seeking to explain the origin of life and consciousnessnaturalistically face the apparently insuperable problem that randomness cannotproduce the levels of order actually observed in living things.  See Hoyle and Wickramasinghe, Evolutionfrom Space.

    Prophecy:  The essence of a good theory issuccessful prediction. As theBible claims to be authored by the One who controls history, so it has manypredictions of detailed events far in advance of their fulfillment.  For instance, the world‑wideimpact of the Messiah's ministry (Isa 49:6); the religio‑political futureof Israel (Hos 3:4‑5); the details of destruction of numerous cities (Jer51:42‑43; Ezk 26:4,12; Ezk 30:13). These have been strikingly fulfilled. See Urquhart, Wonders of prophecy; Stoner and Newman, Sciencespeaks; McDowell, Evidence that Demands a Verdict.

    History:  There is also historical evidence of supernaturalintervention into history. Themost striking cases involve the time of Moses and the Exodus and the ministryof Christ. But occult phenomenatoday also point to the activity of the supernatural from the "otherside." Secular humanists and otherswho deny supernatural intervention have had to construct some pretty strainedtheories in seeking to avoid these phenomena.

    Experience:  The history of Christianity is filledwith examples of the transformation of individuals and societies by theinfluence of the Gospel. No otherreligions have produced a comparable effect, certainly not secular humanism.