Acts 17:11 Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica; they received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so.(ESV)
Yesterday we talked about the different ways Bible translations carry Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek into English. Some stay relatively close to the original wording and structure. Some concentrate more heavily on communicating the meaning in natural English. Some deliberately use much freer language so that familiar passages can be heard differently.
None of that requires us to be afraid of different translations. It gives us a reason to read more than one.
I regularly switch between translations when studying Scripture. I may start in the ESV, look at the KJV and NKJV, compare the BSB, and then see how something more interpretive handles the passage.
Sometimes they’re remarkably similar. Sometimes one of them suddenly says something very different.
That difference isn’t necessarily a problem. It’s an invitation. Stop and look. Why is this one different?
The Bereans Didn’t Stop at Hearing
Acts 17 gives us one of my favorite pictures of biblical discernment.
Paul and Silas arrived in Berea and went into the synagogue. The people listened. Luke tells us that they received the message eagerly.
But they did something else.
They examined the Scriptures daily to determine whether what they were hearing was true.
Think about who they were checking.
Paul.
We know him as the Apostle Paul. We have his letters bound inside our Bibles.
The Bereans didn’t have Romans, Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, and the rest neatly sitting between leather covers. They had a man standing in front of them making claims about Jesus.
So they listened to Paul and checked what he said against the Scriptures they already possessed.
Luke praises them for doing it. They weren’t rebuked for lacking faith. They were called noble.
That gives us a useful model. Receive eagerly. Examine carefully.
Those two things can live together.
We don’t have to become suspicious of everything to practice discernment. We also don’t have to turn off discernment to receive something eagerly.
Put Another Translation Beside It
One of the easiest ways to begin examining a passage is simply to open another translation. Suppose you’re reading something in the ESV and a sentence is difficult to understand.
Open the NIV. Open the BSB. Open the NLT. Look at the NKJV. Maybe read The Message. Maybe read TPT.
You aren’t looking for a vote. Five translations agreeing against one doesn’t automatically settle every textual or linguistic question.
You’re looking for differences.
Sometimes another translation simply rearranges the sentence into clearer English. Sometimes it chooses another legitimate meaning of the same Hebrew or Greek word. Sometimes an idiom is translated instead of preserved. Sometimes a translator has made an interpretation more explicit. Sometimes different underlying manuscripts may even be involved.
The difference tells you where to investigate.
This is one reason I like the Berean Standard Bible project. The people behind the BSB openly describe their work as a transparent translation, and they make translation tables available so readers can trace the English wording back toward the Hebrew and Greek behind it.[1]
That doesn’t mean the BSB is magically incapable of error. It means its translators are inviting examination. I appreciate that.
Don’t Go Shopping for the Answer You Wanted
There’s also a danger in reading many translations. You can keep opening Bibles until one of them says what you wanted the verse to say. That isn’t study. That’s shopping.
Imagine reading five translations that communicate essentially the same idea. Then the sixth uses a dramatically different phrase that happens to support something you already believe.
It’s tempting to say: “See! That’s what the Bible says.”
Maybe. But first ask why that translation is different.
The unusual translation might have uncovered a legitimate shade of meaning that the others didn’t communicate well. It might be translating from a different textual reading. It might simply be using more expressive English. Or the translator may have interpreted the passage and placed that interpretation directly into the wording.
Until we investigate, we don’t know.
The translation we like the most isn’t automatically the translation that’s right.
Every Translation Contains Interpretation
This is something translation committees themselves acknowledge. The ESV describes its philosophy as “essentially literal,” but even its translators acknowledge that translation involves tradeoffs between literal precision, readability, grammar, syntax, and idiom.[2] The NIV deliberately attempts to balance the form of the original text with clarity of meaning in contemporary English. Biblica explains that translating Scripture can’t simply be a matter of replacing Hebrew and Greek words with English words because languages don’t work that way.[3] The Passion Translation goes farther. Its own translation philosophy says that the essential meaning should take priority over the literal form when necessary. It describes itself as a meaning-for-meaning translation and says that it sometimes goes farther than literal translations in an attempt to communicate what it understands as the essence of the passage.[4]
That gives us useful information before we ever open it. The farther a translation moves toward communicating the thought, the more somebody has to determine what that thought is.
The translator becomes increasingly visible. That doesn’t automatically make the translation wrong. It does mean that we should become increasingly careful about treating every English phrase as though it were sitting directly in the Greek or Hebrew manuscript.
The Words in English Aren’t the Original Words
This can be surprisingly difficult to remember. We become attached to the wording we know. For generations of English-speaking Christians, that wording was often the King James Version. For others it may be the NIV. For me, the ESV is usually where I begin. But the ESV isn’t the original Bible.
Neither is the KJV. Neither is the NKJV. Neither is the NIV, BSB, NLT, MSG, or TPT.
They’re English translations of ancient texts. That distinction protects us from an easy mistake. We can say: “The Bible says…” when what we really know is: “This English translation says…”
Usually there’s no meaningful difference between those statements. Sometimes there is. Those are the places worth studying.
Use Freer Translations for What They Do Well
Yesterday I mentioned The Message. NavPress describes it very plainly as a reading Bible rather than a study Bible. Eugene Peterson deliberately wrote in contemporary, conversational language to help readers hear Scripture freshly.[5] That makes it useful.
There are passages I have read so many times that my mind knows where the sentence is going before my eyes finish reading it. Different wording can break that familiarity. Suddenly I am paying attention again. Wonderful.
But if The Message uses a striking metaphor that doesn’t appear in a more literal translation, I need to remember what I’m holding.
I shouldn’t build an entire doctrine around Eugene Peterson’s English metaphor without checking what stands behind it.
The same principle applies to TPT. TPT openly describes itself as expansive and meaning-for-meaning.[4] So if TPT says something dramatically different from the ESV, NASB, NIV, NKJV, and BSB, I shouldn’t immediately conclude: “TPT found the deeper meaning everyone else missed.”
Neither should I immediately conclude: “TPT is wrong.”
I should ask: Where did those words come from?
That question can lead into the Greek. It can lead into Hebrew. It can lead into Aramaic or Syriac. It can lead into textual notes. It can lead into the cultural setting. It might reveal an ancient idiom. It might reveal an interpretive decision. It might even reveal a translation choice that can’t be adequately supported by the source text. But now I know.
Be Especially Careful When Building Doctrine
Reading devotionally and establishing doctrine aren’t exactly the same task. Suppose an unusual phrase in The Message causes me to think differently about forgiveness. Wonderful. I can explore that thought.
Suppose an expanded phrase in TPT causes me to think about God’s love from an angle I’d never considered. Explore it.
But the more theological weight I place on a particular word or phrase, the more carefully I need to establish that the idea actually comes from Scripture.
If I’m going to say: “God’s Word teaches this.” then I need something stronger than: “This is how my favorite translation phrases it.”
Read the surrounding passage. Compare translations. Check cross-references. Look at translation notes. Study the original-language word if the question depends upon it. Read people who disagree with your interpretation. Let Scripture challenge you instead of searching Scripture for ammunition to defend what you already decided.
There’s Another Extreme
We can also make Bible study so complicated that ordinary reading almost becomes impossible. You don’t need a Greek lexicon open every time you read a Psalm. You don’t need eight translations lined across your desk before you can understand that Jesus said to love your enemies. You don’t need to question every sentence until Scripture becomes some puzzle that only scholars can solve.
The purpose of comparison isn’t to destroy confidence in the Bible. It’s to make us more careful with our interpretation of the Bible.
Those are very different things. Sometimes Scripture is difficult. Sometimes it is remarkably plain.
When Jesus says: “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,” I probably don’t need three lexicons and a manuscript database to figure out whether he meant it.
Sometimes the problem isn’t translation. Sometimes I understand exactly what Scripture says and simply don’t like the answer.
No translation comparison can rescue me from obedience.
Read Wide, Anchor Deep
So where does this leave us? Read the ESV. Read the KJV. Read the NKJV. Read the BSB. Read the NIV. Read the NLT. Read The Message. Read TPT.
Read whichever translation gets you opening Scripture instead of leaving it on the shelf.
But learn what you’re reading.
Know whether the translation is trying to preserve the wording, communicate the thought, reproduce the effect, or expand what the translator believes is implied.
Then use it accordingly.
If a freer translation makes a verse come alive, enjoy it. Then compare it.
If a literal translation leaves you confused, read something clearer. Then come back.
If two translations disagree significantly, investigate instead of choosing whichever one you prefer. And never be afraid to ask: “Where did those words come from?”
That question doesn’t weaken Scripture. It separates Scripture from our assumptions about Scripture.
Paul told the Thessalonians: “Do not despise prophecies, but test everything; hold fast what is good.” — 1 Thessalonians 5:20–21(ESV)
I think there is wisdom there that reaches far beyond prophecy.
Don’t reject everything. Don’t accept everything. Test it.
Keep what survives examination. The Bereans received Paul’s message eagerly while examining the Scriptures to see whether what he said was true.
We can do the same. Read eagerly. Study carefully. Ask questions. Compare. Investigate.
And remember the simple principle we started with yesterday: When translations agree, keep reading. When translations disagree, slow down.
Not because disagreement means something is wrong.
Because it may be pointing directly toward the place where there’s something worth learning.
References
1. Berean Standard Bible — Translation Process and Resources. The Berean Bible project describes the BSB as a transparent translation in which words are connected back to the Greek and Hebrew texts. It also makes its translation tables freely available for examination and public comment.
2. English Standard Version — Translation Philosophy, Crossway. The ESV describes itself as “essentially literal,” emphasizing word-for-word correspondence while recognizing necessary differences in grammar, syntax, idiom, readability, and expression between languages.
3. New International Version — Translation Philosophy, Biblica. The NIV describes its method as balancing transparency to the original form with clarity of meaning and notes that translation can’t simply substitute English words for Hebrew and Greek words because languages organize meaning differently.
4. The Passion Translation — Translation Philosophy and FAQ. TPT describes itself as an “essential equivalence” and meaning-for-meaning translation. Its philosophy says that essential meaning can take priority over literal form and describes TPT as an expansive translation that sometimes goes farther than literal translations in communicating what its translators understand as the essence of a passage. Its FAQ identifies the Nestle-Aland Greek text as its New Testament base while also incorporating Syriac Peshitta material.
5. The Message — NavPress. NavPress describes The Message as a translation by Eugene Peterson and states explicitly that it is “not a study Bible, but rather a reading Bible,” intended to express Scripture in contemporary language.
Leave a comment