1. Bible Manuscripts and Translations John Oakes 11/13/2010

2. Our Outline  First Considerations: Inspiration and Inerrancy  English Translations: Which is the “best” translation?  What about the KJV?

3. First Considerations  What do we mean when we say the Bible is inspired?  Exactly what is inspired?  Original autographs  Manuscript copies  Translations  Is the Bible inerrant? If so, in what sense?

4. The Biblical Meaning of Inspiration  2 Peter 1:20-21  1 Thess 2:13  I believe that the entire scripture is inspired by God because:  The Bible says so  The evidence supports this conclusion  By faith in God

5. What, Exactly, Is Inspired by God?  The Original Autographs For sure!  (But we do not have those)  The Copyists? No  Why would God trust his inspired word to fallible copyists?  The Translators? No  Why would God trust his inspired word to fallible translators?

6. Inspired Translations?  Q: God is sovereign: Wouldn’t he see to the inspiration of the translators?  Q: Does this mean we do not have direct access to the inspired Word of God?  The question of exaggerated and unreasonable faith.  Does God change lights from red to green for us?  Does God move the had of the copyist or the mind of the translator?  Does God reveal his one chosen mate to us?

7. Conclusion (with regard to Biblical inspiration)  Although it is true that we do not have a perfect Greek or Hebrew text, and although we do not have inspired, inerrant translations, with the help of modern scholarship of the languages, knowledge of OT and NT cultures, careful textual criticism and so forth, we have at least as good access to understanding the original inspired Word of God as Christians living in the first or second century.

8. Is The Bible Inerrant?  The Simple Answer: Yes, definitely.  The Nuanced Answer: What do you mean by inerrant?  Are Jesus’ speeches transcripts?  What about speeches by Abraham or Noah?  How would a Near Eastern Jew 700 BC understand inerrancy?  Does the chronology have to be strictly correct for the text to be inerrant?  The question is not what can God do, but what did he do.

9. Inerrancy: A Conclusion  The Bible is theologically and doctrinally inerrant.  Theological inerrancy holds up to careful scrutiny.  Evidence for doctrinal inerrancy is also very strong.  The Scripture is verbally inspired  Paul agrees with this! Galatians 3:16  Careful analysis of the scripture supports this conclusion

10. English Translations  Word for Word  Phrase for Phrase  Thought for Thought (ie paraphrased)

11. NASBNew American Standard Bible (1971; update 1995) AMPAmplified Bible (1965) ESVEnglish Standard Version (2001) RSVRevised Standard Version (1952) KJVKing James Version (1611; significantly revised 1769) NKJVNew King James Version (1982) HCSBHolman Christian Standard Version (2004) NRSVNew Revised Standard Version (1989) NABNew American Bible (Catholic, 1970, 1986 (NT), 1991 (Psalms) NJBNew Jerusalem Bible (Catholic, 1986; revision of 1966 Jerusalem Bible) NIVNew International Version (1984) TNIVToday’s New International Version (NT 2001, OT 2005) NCVNew Century Version NLT 1 New Living Translation (1 st ed. 1996; 2 nd ed. 2004) NIrVNew International reader’s Version GNTGood News Translation (also Good News Bible) CEVContemporary English Version LivingLiving Bible (1950). Paraphrase by Ken Taylor. Liberal treatment of ‘blood.’ MessageThe Message by Eugene Peterson (1991-2000s)

12.  Version Type # Translators  NASB word for word 54  AMP word for word 13  ESV word for word 100+  KJV word for word 54  NKJV word for word 119  HCSB word for word/phrase for phrase 90  NRSV word for word/phrase for phrase 30  NAB word for word 55  NJB phrase for phrase 36  NIV phrase for phrase 115  TNIV phrase for phrase 115  NLT phrase for phrase 90  CEV paraphrase 100+  NIrV paraphrase 11  GNT paraphrase 7  Message paraphrase 1

13. Which is the Best Translation?  It Depends... Probably more than one. What is the goal?  To do a deep and detailed study in order to do Bible teaching or to deepen our own personal knowledge of the scripture.  Reading the scripture to allow an entire section have an impact.  Reading scripture in public (what public?)  Studying out, defending and explaining a doctrine.  Reading for inspiration and to give personal faith.  Doing a word study, Doing a topical study, etc….

14. We are not limited to English translations  Greek Interlinear  Greek Lexicon  Comprehensive Concordance  Commentaries

15. Should We Stick to the NIV?

16. What About the KJV “Authorized” Version? Critics of the NIV (and other translations) say:  In every case, when the KJV is compared with the NIV, the KJV is better.  The KJV contains the whole Bible and has no deletions. Revelation 22:18  The KJV is more hard hitting and does not compromise with the world.  The KJV uses better Greek and Hebrew manuscripts: The Textus Receptus.  The translators of the NIV were homosexuals and/or deists who reject the deity of Jesus Christ.

17. Authorized Version KJV Is Always More Accurate  Examples:  Holy Ghost  James 3:13  Proverbs 18:24  Romans 3:25  This is a biased analysis which no serious scholar would support.  KJV uses archaic words, poorer manuscripts, word meanings have changed…..

18. KJV (Unlike The Others) Has No Deletions  Revelation 22:18 Matthew 5:18  Acts 8:37, 1 John 5:7-8, Luke 17:36, etc.  Which is worse, additions or deletions?

19. AV Uses Superior Greek Manuscripts  Textus Receptus (Erasmus, 16 th century)  Byzantine Text Family  Alexandrine Text Family  Western Text Family  Telephone…  Hebrew Text and Scholarship Problems

20. Conclusion  The entire Old and New Testaments are inspired by God. We know this both by evidence and by faith.  The Scripture is verbally inspired and inerrant. We also know this by evidence and faith. However, we ought to be cautious about over-committing ourselves with regard to the meaning of the word inerrant.  We English speakers do not read the original inspired text, but with sufficient help from scholars we have at least as good an access to understanding the original as the majority who lived in the first and second centuries.  The debate over the “right” English translation is not a useful one. A student of the scriptures who does not have a deep knowledge of the original languages will use more than one translation, as well as other resources to arrive at a good understanding of the meaning of the text.  Arguments that the King James Version is the only acceptable, inspired translation and that others are demonic are biased, full of logical fallacies and simply not valid.