900 Bible Versions: Which One Can You Trust?

Transcript imported from the captions supplied for this teaching.

Kind: captions
Language: en
Why are there so many different Bible translations,
and which ones should we use?
It's time to UNLEARN the lies.
UNLEARN
Hey, welcome to UNLEARN.
My name is Lex, and I'd like to invite you
to join us each week as we UNLEARN the lies
and dig deeper into the truth of God's Word.
Now, let's get started.
There are approximately 900 English translations
and paraphrases of the Bible.
Never at any time in history have we had such
an overabundance of Bible versions to choose
from.
This presents us with the unique problem of
which translation to use.
It’s obvious that not all translations are
created equal, because they range from very
literal such as the Young's Literal Translation
to very loose such as The Message.
So, I want to look at why we have so many
different translations.
During the first 1400 years of Christian history
all Bibles were handwritten copies that were
written and copied by hand, and most of the
time these copies were not made by scribes.
This is important to keep in mind when we
start looking at the manuscripts that are
available to us today.
There are three primary New Testament manuscript
text-types, the Alexandrian text-type represented
by codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, the Byzantine
text-type represented by the Majority Text,
and the Western text-type represented in the
Old Latin.
The Majority Text is used as the base for
all Bible translations and refers to the largest
number of surviving manuscripts, and has the
fewest instances of textual variations, which
is why it’s relied upon heavily in both
the Textus Receptus and the Critical Text.
The Textus Receptus was compiled by Erasmus
in the 16th century, and is the basis for
Tyndale’s English New Testament as well
as the King James, New King James, and most
Reformation-era translations and is very similar
to the Majority Text.
The Alexandrian text-type consists of a relatively
small number of manuscripts and is sometimes
referred to as the minority-text.
These manuscripts tend to have a larger number
of abrupt readings, omitted verses, more variations
between parallel passages, and more difficult
readings.
Most textual critics favor the Alexandrian
text-type because they tend to be older documents.
However, it’s been argued that Egypt has
an optimal climate for preserving texts, while
the environment in the middle-east is not
favorable for preserving documents, which
explains why we don’t have older documents
in the Byzantine text-type.
Most modern Bible versions are based on the
Critical Text, which was first compiled in
the 1800’s and relies heavily on the Sinaiticus
and Vaticanus codices.
Codex Sinaiticus is an Alexandrian text-type
manuscript written in uncial letters in the
4h century.
According to many scholars, Codex Sinaiticus
was one of the fifty copies of the Bible commissioned
by the Roman Emperor Constantine.
It’s important to note that Sinaiticus has
been modified by more than seven different
people between the 4th and 12th centuries,
making it one of the most corrected manuscripts
in existence.
It’s also missing large portions of the
Old Testament, as well as small portions of
the New Testament, yet it’s considered by
Scholars to be one of the most reliable texts
because of it’s age.
Let me tell you that this really bothers me,
because they know it’s missing verses, yet
they consider it to be reliable.
How can we trust a manuscript that we know
has been modified and is missing information?
Codex Vaticanus is named such because it came
from the Vatican Library.
Interestingly, this manuscript contains unusual
small horizontally aligned double dots called
"distigmai” indicating textual uncertainty,
and mark places where there were known textual
variants.
The Critical text relies heavily on the Sinaiticus
and Vaticanus codices, yet there are many
differences between those two texts.
In fact, there are more than 3,000 textual
variants between these texts in the Gospels
alone.
Because of this, one scholar commented,
"It is in fact easier to find two consecutive
verses in which these two manuscripts differ
the one from the other, than two consecutive
verses in which they entirely agree."
- Dean John W. Burgon, Revision Revised (1883),
p. 12
Yet, with all of these discrepancies, these
are the two texts that form the basis for
nearly all modern translations.
It’s important to point out that the Alexandrian
text-type has far fewer manuscripts, which
indicates that it was not as widely circulated
as the Majority text.
Which means the Majority text represents the
text that has been in use and circulated over
the centuries.
I want to emphasize that all of these texts
are approximately 85% identical, which leaves
15% variation between them.
However, 99% of the variants make no difference
at all in the translation of the text.
Almost 75% of these variants are spelling
mistakes and 25% are word order and grammar
variants.
This leaves only about 1% of the variations
to be of any concern at all to the translation.
This is very encouraging, and means we have
good reason to believe that what we have today
is very close to what was originally written.
In regard to the number of texts we have available,
the date of these documents, and their reliability,
Bible scholar Dr. Gary Habermas has this to
say:
“What is usually meant is that the New Testament
has far more manuscript evidence from a far
earlier period than other classical works.
There are just under 6000 NT manuscripts,
with copies of most of the NT dating from
just 100 years or so after its writing.
Classical sources almost always have fewer
than 20 copies each and usually date from
700-1400 years after the composition of the
work.
In this regard, the classics are not as well
attested.
While this doesn't guarantee truthfulness,
it means that it is much easier to reconstruct
the New Testament text.”
- "The Reliability and Inspiration of the
Bible".
Dr. Habermas Answers Important Questions
We have over 5,800 Greek texts, 10,000 Latin
manuscripts, and over 9,000 manuscripts in
various other languages including Syriac,
Slavic, Gothic, Ethiopic, Coptic and Armenian,
yet the fact that we have less than 1% of
meaningful variation is phenomenal.
There is no other document in history that
can compare to the manuscript evidence and
congruency that we have for the Bible.
Most of the variations are attributed to scribal
errors, and can be easily reconciled when
comparing the texts.
The fact is there are a very small number
of variants that actually affect the message
of the text, and none of the variants affect
core doctrine.
This shows us that God has preserved His Word
over all these years in spite of human error.
That being said, there are two major multiverse
variants, which are are the woman caught in
adultery in John 7:53-8:11, and the long ending
of Mark 16:9-20.
These two passages are the subject of much
debate among scholars.
Aside from these variants, there are a number
of verses that appear in the Majority Text
and or Textus Receptus but not in the Critical
Text.
For example, Matthew 17:21 is missing from
the critical text.
“However, this kind does not go out except
by prayer and fasting.”
- Matthew 17:21 (Majority Text/Textus Receptus)
So, when we come across these type of variants,
we need to look at the context and see if
that verse is important to the text or not.
In this particular text, this information
could be important if there are unclean spirits
that can’t be removed without prayer and
fasting.
Other textual variants of significance are
verses that are shortened or missing information.
For example, Mark 10:24 is missing some critical
information that appears in the Majority Text
and Textus Receptus.
“And the disciples were astonished at His
words.
But Jesus answered again and said to them,
“Children, how hard it is FOR THOSE WHO
TRUST IN RICHES to enter the kingdom of God!”
- Mark 10:24 (Majority Text/Textus Receptus)
But the Critical text says:
“And the disciples were astonished at His
words.
But Jesus answered again and said to them,
“Children, how hard it is to enter the kingdom
of God!”
- Mark 10:24 (Critical Text)
This missing information makes a big difference
in the understanding of what Yeshua was saying.
Is it hard for everyone to enter the kingdom,
or is it hard for those who trust in riches
to enter the kingdom?
The context of this verse is in relation to
money, so it seems to make more sense that
He would be talking about the love of riches
making it hard to enter the kingdom.
Likewise, when we compare this verse with
parallel passages in the other gospels, we
see that He does include the statement about
trusting in riches.
Another type of variant is when a passage
uses different pronouns, or uses a pronoun
instead of a proper name.
For example, in 1 Timothy 3:16 we see that
the Majority text says, “God” while the
Critical text says, “He”.
“And without controversy great is the mystery
of godliness: GOD was manifested in the flesh,
justified in the Spirit, seen by angels, preached
among the Gentiles, believed on in the world,
received up in glory.”
- 1 Tim 3:16 (Majority Text/Textus Receptus)
But the Critical text says:
“By common confession, great is the mystery
of godliness: HE who was revealed in the flesh,
was vindicated in the Spirit, seen by angels,
proclaimed among the nations, believed on
in the world, taken up in glory.”
- 1 Tim 3:16 (Critical Text)
In this verse, the Majority text makes it
clear that God was manifest in the flesh,
but the Critical text, using the pronoun “He”
leaves it unclear if this was God or someone
else.
Another type of variant is when a verse contains
different information than the same verse
in other manuscripts.
This type of variant is less common, but there
are a few instances of it.
For example, Revelation 22:14 is quite different
in the Critical text than it is in the Majority
text.
“Blessed are those who DO HIS COMMANDMENTS,
that they may have the right to the tree of
life, and may enter through the gates into
the city.”
- Revelation 22:14 (Majority Text/Textus Receptus)
While the Critical text says:
“Blessed are those who WASH THEIR ROBES,
that they may have the right to the tree of
life, and may enter through the gates into
the city.”
- Revelation 22:14 (Critical Text)
This particular variant makes a significant
difference in our understanding of what we
should do.
Also, the phrase “wash their robes” seems
a bit vague and leaves room for various interpretations,
while the phrase “do His commandments”
is very clear and specific.
Now, I can’t talk about textual variants
without mentioning the “Comma Johanneum”
found in 1 John 5:7-8.
This is one of the rare textual variants that
found its way into the Textus Receptus, but
doesn’t have the support of the Majority
Text.
“For there are three that bear witness in
heaven: THE FATHER, THE WORD, AND THE HOLY
SPIRIT; AND THESE THREE ARE ONE.
AND THERE ARE THREE THAT BEAR WITNESS ON EARTH:
the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and
these three agree as one.”
- 1 John 5:7-8 (Textus Receptus)
But the Majority text says:
“For there are three that bear witness:
the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and
these three agree as one.”
- 1 John 5:7-8 (Majority Text/Critical Text)
As far as I know, the “Comma Johanneum”
exists only in the Textus Receptus, and it
was added reluctantly by Erasmus because he
couldn’t find it in any of the Greek manuscripts,
so he backward translated it from the Latin
text.
This is a very rare occurrence, and it is
well documented.
So, textual variants account for some of the
differences we see in translations, but they
are actually not the most significant factor.
Copyright laws affect the reading of the text
more than the textual variants.
In order to have a copyright, new Bible versions
must show significant difference from all
existing Bible versions, this means that words
must be changed whether they need it or not.
In most cases words are replaced with synonyms
that convey the same idea.
This is what copyright.gov says about this
type of copyright.
“A derivative work is a work based on or
derived from one or more already existing
works.
Common derivative works include translations…
Another common type of derivative work is
a “new edition” of a preexisting work
in which the editorial revisions, annotations,
elaborations, or other modifications represent,
as a whole, an original work.
To be copyrightable, a derivative work must
incorporate some or all of a preexisting “work”
and add new original copyrightable authorship
to that work.”
- www.copyright.gov/circs/circ14.pdf
We also have to realize that translator bias
affects translations as well.
If someone has a particular belief about a
verse, that might shape their translation
of that particular verse.
Mark 7:19 is a good example of a verse that
has been affected by translator bias.
This is how the verse reads in the New King
James Version:
“because it does not enter his heart but
his stomach, and is eliminated, thus purifying
all foods"
- Mark 7:19 (NKJV)
Now compare that with what the New International
Version says:
“For it doesn’t go into their heart but
into their stomach, and then out of the body.”
(In saying this, Jesus declared all foods
clean.)”
- Mark 7:19 (NIV)
Notice that they changed “thus purifying
all foods” into a declaration that all food
is clean.
The New Living Translation takes it even further,
saying:
“Food doesn’t go into your heart, but
only passes through the stomach and then goes
into the sewer.”
(By saying this, he declared that every kind
of food is acceptable in God’s eyes.)”
- Mark 7:19 (NLT)
This is not a verse that is affected by source
texts, because all of the manuscripts agree
about this verse in the Greek.
The Greek text says:
“katharizōn panta ta bromata” (καθαρίζων
πάντα τὰ βρώματα)
Which literally translates as, “purifying
all the foods”, the exact same way the New
King James translates it.
So, why do these other translations add to
the text?
It’s because they have a bias about this
verse that’s affected their translation
of it.
Finally, when looking at Bible translations,
we need to understand the two basic types
of translations.
The first is called "formal equivalence,"
and attempts to translate the text word-for-word,
as literally as possible.
The second is called ”dynamic equivalence,”
and attempts to translate thought-for-thought,
and results in a less than literal translation.
However, there is another type of translation
known as a paraphrase, which is basically
a retelling of the Scripture in the author’s
own words.
This type of translation ends up being very
different from the original text, and these
versions should be avoided.
One example of a paraphrase is “The Message”.
In my opinion, these paraphrase versions are
so far from the original text that they shouldn’t
even be considered a Bible translation.
So, what does all of this mean for us?
It means we must be Bereans who study the
Scriptures daily so that we can rightly understand
the Word of God.
Not all translations are created equal, so
we need to use wisdom in selecting a good
translation.
I personally recommend a word-for-word translation
so that you can have the most accurate understanding
of the text.
I also recommend a translation that is based
on the Majority text and or Textus Receptus.
My personal favorite is the New King James
Version, but I like several others as well.
I hope this video has helped to clear up some
of the confusion about Bible translations.
SHARE THE TRUTH
UNLEARN THE LIES
Thanks for watching.
If you found this video helpful then share
it with your friends and family so they can
UNLEARN the lies with us.
If you want to see more videos like this one,
subscribe to my channel.
I want to say a special thank you to those
who support this ministry.
We truly appreciate your prayers and generosity.
Thank you so much.
And remember, the truth will set you free.
See you next time.