Purpose

The purpose of this article is to review and assess the signficance of our traditions of Bible translations.

Introduction

This article is important because the foundations matter and unity/division matters. Also, there are critics, and we want to explain things to the critics. Another idea we care about is the freeness of the translation.

Main Point

The main point is that we care about the unity of the Christian church. And we care about the open/freeness of Bible translations. Currently, in this article, we focus on these two main topics, the best translations, and the openness of translations.

To get an introduction to the unity/division aspect, here is a YouTube video showing James White vs Thomas Ross discussing LSB vs KJV. We are on the James White side in general, but as the debate progresses, the opposing side grows stronger mainly by advocating for Majority over blindly following the Critical text. Our use of ESV does not follow our favorite textual base. Even though we have issues with the KJV, we appreciate the KJV having grow up with it in the 1970s. We use the Critical text incidentally, because we don't have a choice with ESV. We don't use the NJKV for many reasons besides the textual base.

youtube - James W. vs Thomas R.

On the topic of free and open translations, we believe Bible translations should be public domain. We are completely amazed at the willingness of so many Bible translations to submit to the idea of copyrights on their translations. So our approach has been to find the best open translations and if there is any flaw that we find in them, to begin an effort of fixing the flaws. The idea of fixing flaws is not based on whim, but based on theological and meaningful purposes. Also, any modifications we propose would ideally be reviewed with friends to be more group based and not one man based. In this history, we first found the WEB, then NHEB (used as a base), and now recently, the BSB.

Before even fixing our website to use the BSB we have already found a flaw in the BSB. And we have found a notable scholar, David Garland, who is in our view one of the top five on 1 Corinthians, and defends the correct translation of the flaw found in BSB. This flaw shows the BSB is following ESV, which is our primary copyright preference. But even though we really like the ESV and BSB, a flaw is a flaw. We intend to fix the flaw. The verse is 1 Cor 10:23. Our fix is simply to remove the quotation marks added by ESV and BSB which breaks the tradition of many Bible translations and adopts a novel modern interpretation (which we are confident is invalid).

You might not agree with us in our interest if free/open translations or our approach to fixing flaws, but that is ok. This is one of our fundamental interests that goes back to personal reading of the KJV in the 1970s. The history of our experience with Bible translations since those days have impacted and infuenced our thinking. We think the shift from KJV dominance to our modern world of so many translations is amazing. Some things have been good and some not so good.

In the Christian world, almost everyone picks their favorite Bible translation, and some are very tolerant with other Christians. I am in the camp of pursing the best, but being rather tolerant. The unity/division principle is very important to us. The KJV only groups are troublemakers, in our mind, but even they have points that should be considered. There is a tendency to follow the Wescott and Hort tradition without enough criticism. But the goal should be Christians having the same mind! So, we sometimes like to listen to warring opinions in the Christian world, and try to advocate for a peaceful position.

So coming back to this video, we like to allow Christians to debate, but we can see troublemakers. The Apostle Paul instructs us to be wary of those who cause division. Titus 3:10-11 warns us. And the Apostle Paul dealt with troublemakers in many other situations that help us think about divisions. You don't even need to listen to the whole video, the point is very clear by 1:02 (hour:min). The importance of Philipians 1:27, 2:2 on having one mind is hugely important.

youtube - James W. vs Thomas R.

On the other hand, Thomas Ross is arguing for the Majority Text at minute 1:20 (hour:min)- 1:30, and on this point we strongly agree. We need to listen to our "disagreeable brothers" sometimes since our strong tendency in modern translations is to follow the non Christian Wescott and Hort critical text, sometimes going too strongly in overvaluing the so called "oldest" greek texts. These so called "oldest" greek texts have more internal conflicts which in our mind is a sign that they are not good texts. Our belief is that we give far too much value to the Nestle greek text, and not enough value on the majority text. In this reguard, the TR is better as it follows the Majority Text. This debate should really be Majority Text vs modern Critical Text, and the KJV/TR is more of a distraction of the main point.

Some people care about these things and others are content with just picking a Bible and going with it. For us, we care about this topic because it is a real foundational issue and it can and does cause division. We think God allows things in life sometimes to test us. We should be careful about everything we say and think, and this debate presses on some Christians in how the work with or fight each other. Both sides have strengths and weaknesses. We are coming to this debate, not as an expert, but because we have lived through major translation change since the 1970s, and we find some interesting details that are not resolved. These Christians arguing, should be more aligned. We want to see Christians more of the same mind, and we think there is work to do. The main fronts of work to be done seem to be: Majority/Critical and Open/Copyright. Just to be clear, we are not strict like either of these debaters. We use the ESV because it is good and better than others for reasons other than this article. But at the same time, we would consider the Nelson NJKV with its notes showing the Majority and Critical more of an accurate textual base. Our hope would be that the Critical people soften and the Majority people not be too hard/stubborn. God is watching us, and we need to push for our ideas with sensitivity and care.

Summary

We are so privileged today to have so many good translations! We were doing ok in the 1970s, even with all the flaws of the KJV. But it was becoming a time when there was a pressing need to work on new translations. I lived through those years and experienced the struggle, learning English and using the KJV as the only translation. A little RSV New Testament in those years was an amazing discovery after being limited to the KJV. This experience helped me appreciate all the great efforts in translation in following years.

But at the same time, when the new translations came out, there was a tendency for each new translation to use copyrights. Most people did not care. Initially we did not care much. But over time, especially when the internet grew in the 1980s and 1990s, we grew in our concern over the tendency and the restrictiveness of the copyrights.

So the summary is this, translations should be free and good. We should give Christians a lot of freedom on their preferred translation but we can also pursue good translations. We can like the ESV, but we can also be criticial of it. We can accept Christians who love or hate the ESV, allowing the heart and relationship with our Christian brothers to be very important.

Appendix

Nelson's NKJV

This is an interesting discussion by Matthew Everhard on the NKJV. We appreciate the various perspectives and how the various translations are being used in various camps.

youtube NKJV translation

The Majority Text - AI Overview:

Dr. Wilbur N. Pickering is a modern New Testament textual critic and linguist known for defending the Byzantine Majority Text—specifically a cohesive subset known as Family 35—rather than the specific King James Version (KJV) text itself, though his work is frequently discussed alongside the KJV and the Textus Receptus.

Key Aspects of Pickering's Work The Identity of the New Testament Text: His foundational 1977 book defends the position that the traditional Byzantine text-type represents the closest form to the lost original autographs.

Family 35 (f35): Pickering argues that a specific cluster of manuscripts within the Byzantine tradition exhibits an exceptionally high and pure level of copying accuracy, serving as his primary basis for reconstructing the Greek New Testament.

Translation Work: He published his own English translation of the New Testament titled The Sovereign Creator Has Spoken, derived directly from his Family 35 Greek text rather than the standard printed text used by the 1611 KJV translators (Textus Receptus).

If you are looking for specific details, let me know if you want to explore: The differences between Family 35 and the Textus Receptus (KJV basis) Dr. Pickering's arguments against Alexandrian manuscripts (like Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus) How to access his free online Greek text and translations