Please Help Us Keep These Thousands of Blog Posts Growing and Free for All
$5.00
DR. DON WILkINS: B.A. UC Irvine, M.Div. Talbot Seminary, Th.M. Talbot Seminary, M.A. UCLA, Ph.D. UCLA. He has worked with The Lockman Foundation (TLF) as a senior translator since 1992 on the NASB.
I have been the senior translator for the NASB (and Scholar in Residence) at the Lockman Foundation for about two decades, and Edward Andrews and I are good friends who share a passion for literal Bible translation. He has invited me to write about Bible translation as a professional in the field, and I am happy to do that. We have come to a point in time when, strangely, literal translations (I’ll use “LT” for short) are being challenged for accuracy and relevance. I want to do what I can to address and clarify the issues. I will be speaking for myself, not as a representative of the NASB or the Lockman Foundation. In the process, I will try to be objective and critical about the NASB where criticism is due.
I believe that bona fide credentials are important for a translator or for any Bible expert, so at the risk of boring you, I will provide mine. Let me begin with what I lack, however: I know less about New Testament (NT) Greek than the least-educated person living during the first century who knew the common Greek of that time. The same is true, mutatis mutandis for my Hebrew and Aramaic, the original languages of the Old Testament (OT). And let me quickly add: don’t let any modern expert in the languages claim otherwise for his or her own skills and credentials. In all our academic efforts we are trying unsuccessfully to teleport ourselves back to the ancient times when these languages were spoken. It might be just as helpful if we could locate and resurrect a few people from those times, but that so far has been proved an equally hopeless project. So the best we can really do is read and study what has been written in these languages.
So the best we can really do is read and study what has been written in these languages. Fortunately, a lot of ancient Greek has survived, and a good deal of my graduate work (M.A. and Ph.D.) was spent in working through long lists of Greek works, the NT among them, that I had to be prepared to sight-read for exams. Through the course of my studies, I read Greek from every historical period except modern, i.e. from Homer to Byzantine Greek. This also included ancient Greek in different dialects. And just for fun, I was also required to translate English into ancient Greek, imitating the styles of famous authors. What this forced me to do is to think of how an ancient Greek might say something, which proves to be a valuable tool in NT Greek research.
I can only claim graduate work in Hebrew and Aramaic from the seminary, where I earned the M.Div. and Th.M. degrees. What I have learned since has been through experience, and thankfully computer-aided research has been very helpful. Also, the Greek translation of the OT (the LXX) is extremely important for research in the Hebrew/Aramaic OT, and I am fully qualified to work with it. In addition, my Ph.D. includes Latin, and the Vulgate is sometimes helpful. Knowing Latin is also quite an advantage in reading some of the better commentaries.
Having introduced myself, I was going to talk about a sideswipe Mark Strauss took at the NASB while discussing translation philosophy. I’ve already said a lot here, however, so let me just give you a preview of Strauss’s comment. You can find his talk on the NIV site, where he raises the question of what “¿Cómo se llama?” means. He uses this example to deal with the issue of literal translation. If you are familiar with this common Spanish question, how would you translate it? We’ll look at this and LT next time.
Please Help Us Keep These Thousands of Blog Posts Growing and Free for All
Hi Don, I enjoy your work. The vidoes that I have seen of you are very good. I have a question about translations. I am a NASB person, but I am wondering if I am tying myself too tightly to the NASB, and eliminating value from the NIV, NET, NLT, and ESV. I really enjoyed your part in the Ankerberg video of translators; I thought that you had a good common sense approach, that was missing from some of the others in the video. I would love to view more of your video disussions, but I am not sure of where to search. Thanks for all that you do for the cause of Christ.
Isaiah – Malachi: I sent your message to Don, he should reply back within 24-48 hours. I am Edward D. Andrews, the Chief Translator of the Updated American Standard Version, found here on our blog. My suggestion is have the one serious Bible for personal study and research but always compare and use others. When you encounter differences, sometimes take a deeper dive and see why. For one thing it might reinforce your appreciation of your preferred Bible, or it might move you to rethink your preferred Bible.
Thank you. I know that you will find good results from the Udated American Standard Version. I found the American Standard Version in a second-hand store. That surprised me; I enjoyed reading it.
Loading...
Thanks for the kind words! Color me biased for the NASB of course, but that’s because I know firsthand that we have used the best lexical sources to work on it, even checking those sources against original Greek texts (both biblical and extra-biblical) as necessary for accuracy. We put in the same effort for Hebrew using the best sources available. We place a high priority on avoiding interpretation, and my personal goal is an English text that could plausibly be back-translated into the original by a highly competent translator. That’s why we use italic for implied text not actually in the original and use “Lit” notes. I think more interpretive translations like the NIV and NLT can possibly be used like commentaries, but commentaries always disagree so you need to see different points of view. It’s harder to answer your question for the NET and ESV; I’ve often compared both and sometimes have seen wording that I thought was good, but then a closer look usually has revealed flaws, or at least led me to conclude that the way the NASB translators handled the wording was equally good or better. As to videos, I don’t get around much, but I did do one with Sam Nesan (Explain Apologetics). It’s on his Youtube channel at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dV0VLyWfzg8, titled “How is the Bible Translated?”
Thanks for all of the information that you have provided. I have a great trust in the things that you teach on God’s Word. May or Lord richly bless you, your family, and your ministry.
Don Wilins is an amazing theologian. I am thankful for all that he has done bring much needed clarity to the Scriptures.
Hi Don, I enjoy your work. The vidoes that I have seen of you are very good. I have a question about translations. I am a NASB person, but I am wondering if I am tying myself too tightly to the NASB, and eliminating value from the NIV, NET, NLT, and ESV. I really enjoyed your part in the Ankerberg video of translators; I thought that you had a good common sense approach, that was missing from some of the others in the video. I would love to view more of your video disussions, but I am not sure of where to search. Thanks for all that you do for the cause of Christ.
Isaiah – Malachi: I sent your message to Don, he should reply back within 24-48 hours. I am Edward D. Andrews, the Chief Translator of the Updated American Standard Version, found here on our blog. My suggestion is have the one serious Bible for personal study and research but always compare and use others. When you encounter differences, sometimes take a deeper dive and see why. For one thing it might reinforce your appreciation of your preferred Bible, or it might move you to rethink your preferred Bible.
Thank you. I know that you will find good results from the Udated American Standard Version. I found the American Standard Version in a second-hand store. That surprised me; I enjoyed reading it.
Thanks for the kind words! Color me biased for the NASB of course, but that’s because I know firsthand that we have used the best lexical sources to work on it, even checking those sources against original Greek texts (both biblical and extra-biblical) as necessary for accuracy. We put in the same effort for Hebrew using the best sources available. We place a high priority on avoiding interpretation, and my personal goal is an English text that could plausibly be back-translated into the original by a highly competent translator. That’s why we use italic for implied text not actually in the original and use “Lit” notes. I think more interpretive translations like the NIV and NLT can possibly be used like commentaries, but commentaries always disagree so you need to see different points of view. It’s harder to answer your question for the NET and ESV; I’ve often compared both and sometimes have seen wording that I thought was good, but then a closer look usually has revealed flaws, or at least led me to conclude that the way the NASB translators handled the wording was equally good or better. As to videos, I don’t get around much, but I did do one with Sam Nesan (Explain Apologetics). It’s on his Youtube channel at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dV0VLyWfzg8, titled “How is the Bible Translated?”
Thanks for all of the information that you have provided. I have a great trust in the things that you teach on God’s Word. May or Lord richly bless you, your family, and your ministry.