Olaf Bacon's Content

Javascript Disabled Detected

You currently have javascript disabled. Several functions may not work. Please re-enable javascript to access full functionality.

Olaf Bacon's Content

There have been 185 items by Olaf Bacon (Search limited from 19-April 23)

By content type

See this member's

Sort by

Order

#46095 Adding links to verses

Posted by Olaf Bacon on 23 March 2024 - 03:38 PM in e-Sword Questions & Answers

I sent the query asked by glory777 to Rick Meyers, the developer of e-Sword for the PC. I used https://www.e-sword.net/feedback.html and tagged it as a Problem. The reply came back within a short time, the same day, from e-Sword Support <support@e-sword.net> as follows:

The T4 Tooltip utility does a pretty good job of that. Based upon the amount of time it takes for T4 to process the text, one can imagine the algorithm required to do such a task.

In His service,

Rick Meyers

rick@e-sword.net

e-Sword for the PC (https://www.e-sword.net/)

e-Sword for Android (https://www.e-sword.net/android/)

e-Sword X for the Mac (https://www.e-sword.net/mac/)

e-Sword HD for the iPad (https://www.e-sword.net/ipad/)

e-Sword LT for the iPhone (https://www.e-sword.net/iphone/)

the Sword of the LORD with an electronic edge

Therefore, the suggestion by APsit190 in his video, Posted 17 January 2022 - 07:30 PM is valid. Here Stephen mentions that you can also select the version of the Bible that you want to be referenced, if you wanted only a particular Bible version to appear in the pop-up, instead of allowing the user to change the pop-up to appear dynamically in the latest selected Bible.

#46090 Updated American Standard Version (USAV+)

Posted by Olaf Bacon on 22 March 2024 - 07:04 AM in e-Sword Modules / Resources

The following information about UPDATED AMERICAN STANDARD VERSION OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES (2022 EDITION) is seen in e-Sword for the PC in the Bible, Information, option for the UASV+ Bible.

Updated American Standard Bible

THE HOLY BIBLE

UPDATED AMERICAN STANDARD VERSION

CONTAINING THE

OLD AND NEW TESTAMENT

TRANSLATED OUT OF THE ORIGINAL TONGUES

NEWLY REVISED BY CHRISTIAN PUBLISHING HOUSE

2022

ISBN-13: 978-1-949586-27-5

ISBN-10: 1-949586-27-8

The Holy Bible, Updated American Standard Version.

UASV Text Edition: 2022

CHIEF TRANSLATOR: Edward D. Andrews

CHIEF EDITOR: Edward D. Andrews

The UASV text may be quoted up to one thousand (1,000) verses without permission of the publisher. Any commentary may use the UASV text entirely without the need of seeking permission.

Citations must appear as follows:

The Holy Bible: Updated American Standard Version (Cambridge, OH: Christian Publishing House, 2022).

Permission beyond the above must be directed to Christian Publishing House, support@christianpublishers.org

The Holy Bible, Updated American Standard Version (UASV) is adapted from the American Standard Version of the Bible (1901).

Published by Christian Publishing House

Cambridge, Ohio 43725, U.S.A.

http://www.christianpublishers.org/

[ EDIT: This URL is faulty. The correct URL is https://www.christianpublishers.org/

PREFACE TO THE UPDATED AMERICAN STANDARD VERSION

A literal translation is undoubtedly more than a word-for-word rendering of the original language of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. According to English grammar and syntax, the corresponding English words need to be brought over into the translation. Still, the translation at the same time must be faithful to the original word or as much as possible, for the author may have used word order to emphasize or convey some meaning. In most cases, the translator is simply rendering the original-language word with the same corresponding English term each time it occurs. The translator has used his good judgment in order to select words in the English translation from the lexicon within the context of the original-language text. The translator remains faithful to this literal translation philosophy unless it has been determined that the rendering will be misunderstood or misinterpreted. The translator is not tasked with making the text easy to read but rather to make it as accurately faithful to the original as possible.

Removing the Outdated

• Passages with the Old English “thee’s” and “thou’s” etc. have been replaced with modern English.

• Many words and phrases that were highly ambiguous or easily misunderstood since the 1901 ASV have been updated according to the best lexicons.

• Verses with complex word order or vocabulary have been translated into correct English grammar and syntax for easier reading. However, if the word order of the original conveyed meaning, it was kept.

More Accurate

• The last 120+ years have seen the discovery of far more manuscripts, especially the papyri, with many manuscripts dating within 100 years of the originals.

• While making more accurate translation choices, we have stayed true to the literal translation philosophy of the ASV, while other literal translations abandon the philosophy far too often.

• The translator seeks to render the Scriptures accurately without losing what the Bible author penned by changing what the author wrote, distorting or embellishing by imposing what the translator believes the author meant into the original text.

• Accuracy in Bible translation is being faithful to what the original author wrote (the words that he used) instead of going beyond into the meaning, trying to determine what the author meant by his words. The latter is the reader’s job.

• The translator uses the most reliable, accurate critical texts (e.g., WH, NA, UBS, BHS, and the original language texts, versions, and other sources that will help him determine the original reading.

Why the Need for Updated Translations?

• New manuscript discoveries

• Changes in the language

• A better understanding of the original languages

• Improved insight into Bible translation

Major Critical Texts and Manuscript Abbreviations of the Old Testament

AC: Aleppo Codex

AT: Aramaic Targum(s), paraphrases

ATJ Jerusalem Targum I (Pseudo-Jonathan) and Jerusalem Targum II (Fragmentary Targum).

ATO Targum of Onkelos (Babylonian Targum), Pentateuch.

ATP Palestinian Targum, Vatican City, Rome, Pentateuch.

B.C.E.: Before Common Era

BHS: Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. Edited by Karl Elliger and Wilhelm Rudolph. Stuttgart, 1984.

BHQ: Biblia Hebraica Quinta with Apparatus. Edited by David Marcus; Jan de Waard; P. B. Dirksen; Natalio Fernández Marcos, Anthony Gelston, Yohanan A.P Goldman, Carmel McCarthy, Rolf Schäfer, Magne Sæbø, Adrian Schenker, Abraham Tal. Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft , 2004–2015

B 19A: Codex Leningrad

CC: Cairo Codex, Heb., 895 C.E., Cairo, Egypt,

c.: Circa, about, approximately

DSS: The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible; The Lexham Dead Sea Scrolls Hebrew-English Interlinear Bible

DSSB: Martin Abegg Jr., Peter Flint, and Eugene Ulrich, The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible: The Oldest Known Bible Translated for the First Time into English (New York: HarperOne, 1999)

GinsInt: Introduction to the Massoretico-Critical Edition of the Hebrew Bible, by C. D. Ginsburg, Ktav Publishing House, New York, 1966 reprint.

IT: Old Latin Versions, Itala, second to the fourth century C.E.

LXX: The Greek Septuagint (Greek Jewish OT Scriptures in general and specifically used during the days of Jesus and the apostles)

LXXAq Aquila: Gr. translation of H.S., second cent. C.E.

LXXSym Symmachus: Greek translation of H.S., by Symmachus, c. 200 C.E.

LXXTh Theodotion: Greek translation of H.S., by Theodotion, second cent. C.E.

LXXא Codex Sinaiticus, Gr., c. 330–360 C.E.,

LXXA Codex Alexandrinus, Gr., c. 400-440 C.E.

LXXB Codex Vaticanus 1209, Gr., c. 300–325 C.E.

LXXBr Septuagint (with an English translation by Sir Lancelot Brenton, 1851)

OG: Original Greek (Oldest recoverable form of the Greek OT (280-150 B.C.E.)

LXXGS Septuagint (Paul de Lagarde, Göttingen, Germany, 1883), 24 volumes.

LXXL The Lexham English Septuagint, Second Edition

LXXN A New English Translation of the Septuagint, NETS

LXXP Fouad Inv. 266 This papyrus fragment was discovered in Egypt, dating to the first-century B.C.E.

SOPHERIM: Copyists of the Hebrew OT text from the time of Era to the time of Jesus.

CT: Consonantal Text is the OT Hebrew manuscripts that became fixed in form between the first and second centuries C.E., even though manuscripts with variant readings continued to circulate for some time. Alterations of the previous period by the Sopherim were no longer made. Very similar to the MT.

MT: The Masoretic Text encompasses the Hebrew OT manuscripts from the second half of the first millennium C.E. (500-1000 C.E.)

MTcorrection by a correction of the Masoretic Text

MTemendation by a small alteration of the Masoretic Text

MTmargin The Masoretic Text marginal notes

SP: Samaritan Pentateuch

SYM: Greek translation of H.S., by Symmachus, c. 200 C.E.

SYRHexapla is the Syrian Aramaic (Syriac) translation of the Greek Septuagint as found in the fifth column of Origen’s Hexapla.

SYR: Syriac Peshitta

TH: Greek translation of Hebrew Scriptures by Theodotion, second cent. C.E.

VG: Latin Vulgate by Jerome, c. 400 C.E.

VGc Latin Vulgate, Clementine recension (S. Bagster & Sons, London, 1977).

VGs Latin Vulgate, Sixtine recension, 1590.

The primary weight of external evidence generally goes to the original language manuscripts, and the Codex Leningrad B 19A and the Aleppo Codex are almost always preferred. In Old Testament Textual Criticism, the Masoretic text is our starting point and should only be abandoned as a last resort. While it is true that the Masoretic Text is not perfect, there needs to be a heavy burden of proof in we are to go with an alternative reading. All of the evidence needs to be examined before concluding that a reading in the Masoretic Text is corrupt. The Septuagint continues to be very much important today and is used by textual scholars to help uncover copyists’ errors that might have crept into the Hebrew manuscripts either intentionally or unintentionally. However, it cannot do it alone without the support of other sources. There are a number of times when you might have the Syriac, Septuagint, Dead Sea Scrolls, Aramaic Targums, and the Vulgate that are at odds with the Masoretic Text; the preferred choice should not be the MT.

Initially, the Septuagint (LXX) was viewed by the Jews as inspired by God, equal to the Hebrew Scriptures. However, in the first century C.E., the Christians adopted the Septuagint in their churches. It was used by the Christians in their evangelism to make disciples and to debate the Jews on Jesus being the long-awaited Messiah. Soon, the Jews began to look at the Septuagint with suspicion. This resulted in the Jews of the second century C.E. abandoning the Septuagint and returning to the Hebrew Scriptures. This has proved to be beneficial for the textual scholar and translator. In the second century C.E., other Greek translations of the Septuagint were produced. We have, for example, LXXAq Aquila, LXXSym Symmachus, and LXXTh Theodotion. The consonantal text of the Hebrew Scriptures became the standard text between the first and second centuries C.E. However, textual variants still continued until the Masoretes and the Masoretic text. However, scribes taking liberties by altering the text was no longer the case, as was true of the previous period of the Sopherim. The scribes who copied the Hebrew Scriptures from the time of Ezra down to the time of Jesus were called Sopherim, i.e., scribes.

From the 6th century C.E. to the 10th century C.E., we have the Masoretes, groups of extraordinary Jewish scribe-scholars. The Masoretes were very much concerned with the accurate transmission of each word, even each letter, of the text they were copying. Accuracy was of supreme importance; therefore, the Masoretes use the side margins of each page to inform others of deliberate or inadvertent changes in the text by past copyists. The Masoretes also use these marginal notes for other reasons as well, such as unusual word forms and combinations. They even marked how frequent they occurred within a book or the whole Hebrew Old Testament. Of course, marginal spaces were very limited, so they used abbreviated code. They also formed a cross-checking tool to mark the middle word and letter of certain books. Their push for accuracy moved them to go so far as to count every letter of the Hebrew Old Testament.

In the Masoretic text, we find notes in the side margins, known as the Small Masora. There are also notes in the top margin, which are referred to as the Large Masora. Any other notes placed elsewhere within the text are called the Final Masora. The Masoretes used the notes in the top and bottom margins to record more extensive notes comments concerning the abbreviated notes in the side margins. This enabled them to be able to cross-check their work. We must remember that there were no numbered verses at this time, and they had no Bible concordances. Well, one might wonder how the Masoretes could refer to different parts of the Hebrew text to have an effective cross-checking system. They would list part of a parallel verse in the top and bottom margins to remind them of where the word(s) indicated were found. Because they were dealing with limited space, they often could only list one word to remind them where each parallel verse could be found. To have an effective cross-reference system by way of these marginal notes, the Masoretes would literally have to have memorized the entire Hebrew Bible.

Major Critical Texts and Manuscript Abbreviations of the New Testament

Byz RP: 2005 Byzantine Greek New Testament, Robinson & Pierpont

TR1550: 1550 Stephanus New Testament

Maj: The Majority Text (thousands of minuscules which display a similar text)

Gries: 1774-1775 Johann Jakob Griesbach Greek New Testament

Treg: 1857-1879 Samuel Prideaux Tregelles Greek New Testament

Tisch: 1872 Tischendorf’s Greek New Testament

WH: 1881 Westcott-Hort Greek New Testament

NA28: 2012 Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament

UBS5: 2014 Greek New Testament

NU: Both Nestle-Aland and the United Bible Society

SBLGNT: 2010 Greek New Testament

THGNT: 2017 The Greek New Testament by Tyndale House

Variant Reading(s): differing versions of a word or phrase found in two or more manuscripts within a variation unit (see below). Variant readings are also called alternate readings.

Variation Unit: any portion of text that exhibits variations in its reading between two or more different manuscripts. It is essential to distinguish variation units from variant readings. Variation units are the places in the text where manuscripts disagree, and each variation unit has at least two variant readings. Setting the limits and range of a variation unit is sometimes difficult or even controversial because some variant readings affect others nearby. Such variations may be considered individually or as elements of a single reading. One should also note that the terms “manuscript” and “witness” may appear to be used interchangeably in this context. Strictly speaking, “witness” (see below) will only refer to the content of a given manuscript or fragment, which it predates to a greater or lesser extent. However, the only way to reference the “witness” is by referring to the manuscript or fragment that contains it. In this book, we have sometimes used the terminology “witness of x or y manuscript” to distinguish the content in this way.

Christian Bible students need to be familiar with Old and New Testament textual studies as the two are essential foundational studies. Why? If we fail to establish what was originally authored with reasonable certainty, how are we to translate or even interpret what we think is God's actual Word? We are fortunate that there are far more existing New Testament manuscripts today than any other book from ancient history. Some ancient Greek and Latin classics are based on one existing manuscript, while with others, there are just a handful and a few exceptions that have a few hundred available. However, the New Testament has over 5,898 Greek New Testament manuscripts that have been cataloged (As of January 2021), 10,000 Latin manuscripts, and an additional 9,300 other manuscripts in such languages as Syriac, Slavic, Gothic, Ethiopic, Coptic, and Armenian. This gives New Testament textual scholars vastly more to work within establishing the original words of the text.

History and Families of the New Testament Text

Alexandrian Text-Type: In textual criticism of the New Testament, the Alexandrian text-type is one of the main text types. It is the text type favored by most modern textual scholars since the days of J. J. Griesbach (1745-1812) and it is the basis for most modern Bible translations. Roger L. Omanson and Bruce Manning Metzger write, “It is usually considered to be the best text and the most faithful in preserving the original. Characteristic of the Alexandrian text is its use of few unnecessary words. That is, it is generally shorter than the text of other forms, and it does not show the degree of grammatical and stylistic polishing that is characteristic of the Byzantine type of text. Until recently the two chief witnesses to the Alexandrian text were Codex Vaticanus (B 03) and Codex Sinaiticus (א 01), parchment manuscripts dating from about the middle of the fourth century. However, with the discovery and publication in the mid-1950s of the Bodmer papyri (P66 72 73 74 75), particularly P66 and P75, both copied about the end of the second or the beginning of the third century, evidence is now available that the Alexandrian type of text goes back to early in the second century. The Sahidic and Bohairic versions in the Coptic language (listed in the critical apparatus by the symbols copsa and copbo) also frequently contain typically Alexandrian readings.”

Western Text-Type: In textual criticism of the New Testament, the Western text-type is one of the main text types. It is the predominant form of the New Testament text witnessed in the Old Latin and Syriac Peshitta translations from the Greek, and also in quotations from certain 2nd and 3rd-century Christian writers, including Cyprian, Tertullian and Irenaeus. The Western text had many characteristic features, which appeared in text of the Gospels, Book of Acts, and in Pauline epistles. The Catholic epistles and the Book of Revelation probably did not have a Western form of text. It was named “Western” by Semmler (1725–1791), having originated in early centers of Christianity in the Western Roman Empire. Metzger writes, “The so-called Western text, which was widely current in Italy and Gaul as well as in North Africa and elsewhere (including Egypt), can also be traced back to the second century. It was used by Marcion, Tatian, Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Cyprian. Its presence in Egypt is shown by the testimony of P38 (about A.D. 300) and P48 (about the end of the third century). The most important Greek manuscripts that present a Western type of text are codex Bezae (D) of the fifth century (containing the Gospels and Acts), codex Claromontanus (D) of the sixth century (containing the Pauline epistles), and, for Mark 1:1 to 5:30, codex Washingtonianus (W) of the fifth century. Likewise the Old Latin versions are noteworthy witnesses to a Western type of text; these fall into three main groups, the African, Italian, and Hispanic forms of Old Latin texts. The chief characteristic of Western readings is fondness for paraphrase. Words, clauses, and even whole sentences are freely changed, omitted, or inserted. Sometimes the motive appears to have been harmonization, while at other times it was the enrichment of the narrative by the inclusion of traditional or apocryphal material. Some readings involve quite trivial alterations for which no special reason can be assigned. One of the puzzling features of the Western text (which generally is longer than the other forms of text) is that at the end of Luke and in a few other places in the New Testament certain Western witnesses omit words and passages that are present in other forms of text, including the Alexandrian. Although at the close of the last century certain scholars were disposed to regard these shorter readings as original (Westcott and Hort called them “Western non-interpolations”), since the acquisition of the Bodmer Papyri many scholars today are inclined to regard them as aberrant readings”

Caesarean Text-Type: In textual criticism of the New Testament, Caesarean text-type is the term proposed by certain scholars to denote a consistent pattern of variant readings that is claimed to be apparent in certain Koine Greek manuscripts of the four Gospels, but which is not found in any of the other commonly recognized New Testament text-types: the Byzantine text-type, the Western text-type, and the Alexandrian text-type. In particular a common text-type has been proposed to be found in the ninth/tenth century Codex Koridethi; in Codex Basilensis A. N. IV. 2 (a Greek manuscript of the Gospels used, sparingly, by Erasmus in his 1516 printed Koine New Testament); and in those Gospel quotations found in the third century works of Origen, which were written after he had settled in Caesarea. The early translations of the Gospels in Armenian and Georgian also appear to witness to many of the proposed characteristic Caesarean readings, as do the small group of minuscule manuscripts classed as Family 1 and Family 13. Metzger writes, “An Eastern form of text, which was formerly called the Caesarean text, is preserved, to a greater or lesser extent, in several Greek manuscripts (including Θ, 565, 700) and in the Armenian and Georgian versions. The text of these witnesses is characterized by a mixture of Western and Alexandrian readings. Although recent research has tended to question the existence of a specifically Caesarean text-type, the individual manuscripts formerly considered to be members of the group remain important witnesses in their own right. Another Eastern type of text, current in and near Antioch, is preserved today chiefly in Old Syriac witnesses, namely the Sinaitic and the Curetonian manuscripts of the Gospels and in the quotations of Scripture contained in the works of Aphraates and Ephraem.

Byzantine Text-Type: In textual criticism of the New Testament, the Byzantine text-type is one of the main text types. It is the form found in the largest number of surviving manuscripts of the Greek New Testament. The New Testament text of the Eastern Orthodox Church, the Patriarchal Text, as well as those utilized in the lectionaries, are based on this text-type. Whilst varying in at least 1,830 places, it also underlies the Textus Receptus Greek text used for most Reformation-era (Protestant) translations of the New Testament into vernacular languages. Modern translations (since 1900) mainly use Eclectic editions that conform more often to the Alexandrian text-type. Metzger writes, “The Byzantine text, otherwise called the Syrian text (so Westcott and Hort), the Koine text (so von Soden), the Ecclesiastical text (so Lake), and the Antiochian text (so Ropes), is, on the whole, the latest of the several distinctive types of text of the New Testament. It is characterized chiefly by lucidity and completeness. The framers of this text sought to smooth away any harshness of language, to combine two or more divergent readings into one expanded reading (called conflation), and to harmonize divergent parallel passages. This conflated text, produced perhaps at Antioch in Syria, was taken to Constantinople, whence it was distributed widely throughout the Byzantine Empire. It is best represented today by codex Alexandrinus (in the Gospels; not in Acts, the Epistles, or Revelation), the later uncial manuscripts, and the great mass of minuscule manuscripts. Thus, except for an occasional manuscript that happened to preserve an earlier form of text, during the period from about the sixth or seventh century down to the invention of printing with moveable type (a.d. 1450–56), the Byzantine form of text was generally regarded as the authoritative form of text and was the one most widely circulated and accepted.”

Nomina Sacra: In Christian scribal practice, nomina sacra is the abbreviation of several frequently occurring divine names or titles, especially in Greek manuscripts of Holy Scripture. A nomen sacrum consists of two or more letters from the original word spanned by an overline. Metzger lists 15 such expressions from Greek papyri: the Greek counterparts of God, Lord, Jesus, Christ, Son, Spirit, David, Cross, Mother, Father, Israel, Savior, Man, Jerusalem, and Heaven. These nomina sacra are all found in Greek manuscripts of the 3rd century and earlier, except Mother, which appears in the 4th.

Some Notable NT Papyrus Manuscripts

P4, P64, P67: Papyrus 4 is an early New Testament papyrus of the Gospel of Luke in Greek. It is dated to about 150-175 C.E. The “Magdalen” papyrus was purchased in Luxor, Egypt in 1901 by Reverend Charles Bousfield Huleatt (1863–1908), who identified the Greek fragments as portions of the Gospel of Matthew and presented them to Magdalen College, Oxford, where they are catalogued as P. This was the work of a profession al scribe, or at least one who had been trained in producing literary texts. Its text is remarkably close to P75, and B. Textual scholars agree that P64 and P67 are from the same manuscript. However papyrologist Colin Roberts was correct when he said P4 belonged to the same codex.

P37: Papyrus 37 designated by P37 is an early copy of the New Testament in Greek. It is a papyrus manuscript of the Gospel of Matthew dating to the 3rd century, sometime around 250-260 C.E., due to its affinities with P53. It shows great affinity with P45.

P45: Papyrus 45 is an early New Testament manuscript which is a part of the Chester Beatty Papyri. Manuscripts among the Chester Beatty Papyri have had several provenances associated with them, the most likely being the Faiyum. It has been paleographically dated to 175-225 C.E. It contains the texts of Matthew 20-21 and 25-26; Mark 4-9 and 11-12; Luke 6-7 and 9-14; John 4-5 and 10-11; and Acts 4-17. The manuscript is currently housed at the Chester Beatty Library, Dublin, Ireland, except for one leaf containing Matt. 25:41-26:39 which is at the Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Vienna (Pap. Vindob. G. 31974).

P46: Papyrus 46, scribal abbreviation P46, is an early Greek New Testament manuscript written on papyrus, with its 'most probable date' between 175 and 225 C.E. Some leaves are part of the Chester Beatty Biblical Papyri, and others are in the University of Michigan Papyrus Collection.

P47: Papyrus 47 (Gregory-Aland), signed by P47, is an early copy of the New Testament in Greek. It is a papyrus manuscript of the Book of Revelation which contains Rev. 9:10-11:3; 11:5-16:15; 16:17-17:2. The manuscript has been assigned paleographically to about 200-250 C.E.

P52: The Rylands Library Papyrus P52, also known as the St John's fragment and with an accession reference of Papyrus Rylands Greek 457, is a fragment from a papyrus codex, measuring only 3.5 by 2.5 inches at its widest, and conserved with the Rylands Papyri at the John Rylands University Library Manchester, UK. The front (recto) contains parts of seven lines from the Gospel of John 18:31–33, in Greek, and the back (verso) contains parts of seven lines from verses 37–38. Since 2007, the papyrus has been on permanent display in the library's Deansgate building. The manuscript has been assigned paleographically to about 110-150 C.E.

P66: Papyrus 66 is a near complete codex of the Gospel of John, and part of the collection known as the Bodmer Papyri. The manuscript has been assigned paleographically to about 110-150 C.E. The manuscript contains John 1:1–6:11, 6:35b–14:26, 29–30; 15:2–26; 16:2–4, 6–7; 16:10–20:20, 22–23; 20:25–21:9, 12, 17. It is one of the oldest well-preserved New Testament manuscripts known to exist. The Greek text of this codex is a representative of the Alexandrian text-type. Aland ascribed it as “Free text” and placed it in I Category.

P72: Papyrus 72 is the designation used by textual critics of the New Testament to describe portions of the so-called Bodmer Miscellaneous codex, namely the letters of Jude, 1 Peter, and 2 Peter. These books seem to have been copied by the same scribe, and the handwriting has been paleographically dated to about 200-250 C.E. Although the letters of Jude (P.Bodmer VII) and 1-2 Peter (P.Bodmer VIII) in this codex do not form a single continuous text, scholars still tend to refer to these three texts as a single early New Testament papyrus. Papyrus 72 is the earliest known manuscript of these epistles, though a few verses of Jude are in a fragment P78 (P. Oxy. 2684). P.Bodmer VII (Jude) and P.Bodmer VIII (1-2 Peter) form part of a single book (the Bodmer Miscellaneous Codex). This book appeared on the antiquities market in Egypt and was bought by the Swiss collector Martin Bodmer. The same scribe who copied P.Bodmer VII and VIII is also thought to have copied P.Bodmer X and XI.

P74: Papyrus 74, designated by P74, is a copy of the New Testament in Greek. It is a papyrus manuscript of the Acts of the Apostles and Catholic epistles with lacunae. The manuscript paleographically had been assigned to the 7th century.

P75: Papyrus 75 is an early Greek New Testament papyrus. It is generally described as “the most significant” papyrus of the New Testament to be discovered so far. This evaluation of the manuscript is a result of the early date 175-225 C.E. that has usually been assigned to it and the fact that its text so closely resembles that of the fourth-century Codex Vaticanus.

P115: Papyrus 115 is a fragmented manuscript of the New Testament written in Greek on papyrus. It consists of 26 fragments of a codex containing parts of the Book of Revelation, and probably nothing more. It dates to the third century, about 200-250 C.E. Grenfell and Hunt discovered the papyrus in Oxyrhynchus, Egypt. P115 was not deciphered and published until the end of the twentieth century. It is currently housed at the Ashmolean Museum. The original codex had 33-36 lines per page of 15.5 cm by 23.5 cm. The surviving text includes Revelation 2:1-3, 13-15, 27-29; 3:10-12; 5:8-9; 6:5-6; 8:3-8, 11-13; 9:1-5, 7-16, 18-21; 10:1-4, 8-11; 11:1-5, 8-15, 18-19; 12:1-5, 8-10, 12-17; 13:1-3, 6-16, 18; 14:1-3, 5-7, 10-11, 14-15, 18-20; 15:1, 4-7.

Some Notable NT Majuscule Manuscripts

א: Codex Sinaiticus (01): The Codex Sinaiticus, or “Sinai Bible,” is one of the four great uncial codices, ancient, handwritten copies of a Christian Bible in Greek. The codex is a historical treasure. It dates to 330-360 C.E.

A: Codex Alexandrinus (02): The Codex Alexandrinus is a fifth-century (400-440 C.E.) Christian manuscript of a Greek Bible, containing the majority of the Greek Old Testament and the Greek New Testament. It is one of the four Great uncial codices. Along with the Codex Sinaiticus and the Vaticanus, it is one of the earliest and most complete manuscripts of the Bible.

B: Codex Vaticanus (03): The Codex Vaticanus is one of the oldest copies of the Bible, one of the four great uncial codices. The Codex is named after its place of conservation in the Vatican Library, where it has been kept since at least the 15th century. It is written on 759 leaves of vellum in uncial letters and has been dated palaeographically to the 4th century.

C: Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (04): Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus is a fifth-century Greek manuscript of the Bible, sometimes referred to as one of the four great uncials. The manuscript is not intact: in its current condition, Codex C contains material from every New Testament book except 2 Thessalonians and 2 John; however, only six books of the New Testament — the four Gospels, Jude, and Revelation — are preserved in their entirety.

Dea: Codex Bezae (05): The Codex Bezae Cantabrigiensis, designated by siglum Dea or 05, δ 5, is a codex of the New Testament dating from the 5th century written in an uncial hand on vellum. It contains, in both Greek and Latin, most of the four Gospels and Acts, with a small fragment of 3 John. Written one column per page, the codex contains 406 extant parchment leaves measuring 26 x 21.5 cm, with the Greek text on the left face and the Latin text on the right. A digital facsimile of the codex is available from Cambridge University Library, which holds the manuscript.

Dp: Codex Claromontanus (06): Codex Claromontanus, symbolized by Dp, D2 or 06 (in the Gregory-Aland numbering), δ 1026 (von Soden), is a Greek-Latin diglot uncial manuscript of the New Testament, written in an uncial hand on vellum. The Greek and Latin texts are on facing pages, thus it is a “diglot.”

Ke: Codex Cyprius (017): Codex Cyprius, designated by Ke or 017, ε 71, is a Greek uncial manuscript of the four Gospels, on parchment. It was variously dated in the past, currently it is dated to the 9th century. It was brought from Cyprus to Paris. Sometimes it was called Codex Colbertinus 5149. The words are written continuously without any separation, with stichometrical points.

Kap: Codex Mosquensis I (018): Codex Mosquensis I designated by Kap or 018, Απρ1 (Soden), is a Greek uncial manuscript of New Testament, palaeographically it has been assigned to the 9th century. The manuscript is lacunose (having or full of lacunae). A lacuna is a gap in a manuscript, inscription, text, painting, or musical work. A manuscript, text, or section suffering from gaps is said to be “lacunose” or “lacunulose.”

Le: Codex Regius (New Testament) (019): Codex Regius designated by siglum Le or 019, ε 56, is a Greek uncial manuscript of the New Testament, dated paleographically to the 8th century. The manuscript is lacunose (having or full of lacunae). It has marginalia.

Lap: Codex Angelicus (020): Codex Angelicus designated by Lap or 020, α 5, is a Greek uncial manuscript of the New Testament. Palaeographically it has been assigned to the 9th century. Formerly it was known as Codex Passionei.

Papr: Codex Porphyrianus (025): Codex Porphyrianus designated by Papr or 025, α 3, is a Greek uncial manuscript of the Acts of Apostles, Pauline epistles, and General epistles, with some lacunae, dated paleographically to the 9th century. It is one of a few uncial manuscripts that include the Book of Revelation.

S: Codex Vaticanus 354 (028): Codex Vaticanus, designated by S or 028, ε 1027, formerly called Codex Guelpherbytanus, is a Greek manuscript of the four Gospels which can be dated to a specific year instead of an estimated range. The colophon of the codex lists the date as 949. This manuscript is one of the four oldest New Testament manuscripts that can be dated to a specific year rather than an estimated range.

V: Codex Mosquensis II (031): Codex Mosquensis II designated by V or 031, ε 75, is a Greek uncial manuscript of the Gospels, dated palaeographically to the 9th-century. The manuscript is lacunose (having or full of lacunae). A lacuna is a gap in a manuscript, inscription, text, painting, or musical work. A manuscript, text, or section suffering from gaps is said to be “lacunose” or “lacunulose.”

W: Codex Washingtonianus (032): The Codex Washingtonianus or Codex Washingtonensis, designated by W or 032, ε 014 (Soden), also called the Washington Manuscript of the Gospels, and The Freer Gospel, contains the four biblical gospels and was written in Greek on vellum in the 4th or 5th century. The manuscript is lacunose (having or full of lacunae). A lacuna is a gap in a manuscript, inscription, text, painting, or musical work. A manuscript, text, or section suffering from gaps is said to be “lacunose” or “lacunulose.”

Z: Codex Dublinensis (035): Codex Dublinensis designated by Z or 035, ε 26, is a Greek uncial manuscript of the Gospels, dated palaeographically to the 6th century. The manuscript is lacunose (having or full of lacunae).

Γ: Codex Tischendorfianus IV (036): Codex Tischendorfianus IV – designated by Γ or 036, ε 70 – is a Greek uncial manuscript of the Gospels, dated palaeographically to the 10th century. The manuscript is lacunose.

Δ: Codex Sangallensis 48 (037): Codex Sangallensis, designated by Δ or 037, ε 76, is a diglot Greek-Latin uncial manuscript of the four Gospels. Usually it is dated palaeographically to the 9th, only according to the opinions of few palaeographers to the 10th century. It was named by Scholz in 1830.

Θ: Codex Koridethi (038): The Codex Koridethi, also named Codex Coridethianus, designated by Θ, 038, or Theta, ε 050 (Soden), is a 9th-century manuscript of the four Gospels. It is written in Greek with uncial script in two columns per page, in 25 lines per page. There are gaps in the text: Matthew 1:1–9, 1:21.

Ξ: Codex Zacynthius (040): Codex Zacynthius (designated by siglum Ξ or 040 in the Gregory-Aland numbering; A1 in von Soden) is a Greek New Testament codex, dated paleographically to the 6th century. First thought to have been written in the 8th century, it is a palimpsest—the original (lower) text was washed off its vellum pages and overwritten in the 12th or 13th century. The upper text of the palimpsest contains weekday Gospel lessons; the lower text contains portions of the Gospel of Luke, deciphered by biblical scholar and palaeographer Tregelles in 1861. The lower text is of most interest to scholars.

Π: Codex Petropolitanus (New Testament) (041): Codex Petropolitanus, designated by Π or 041, ε 73, is a Greek uncial manuscript of the Gospels, dated palaeographically to the 9th-century. The manuscript is lacunose.

Φ: Codex Beratinus (043): Codex Purpureus Beratinus designated by Φ or 043, ε 17, is an uncial illuminated manuscript Gospel book written in Greek. Dated palaeographically to the 6th-century, the manuscript is written in an uncial hand on purple vellum with silver ink. The codex is preserved at the Albanian National Archives (Nr. 1) in Tirana, Albania.

Ψ: Codex Athous Lavrensis (044): The Codex Athous Laurae—designated by Ψ or 044 in the Gregory-Aland numbering, and δ 6 in von Soden numbering—is a manuscript of the New Testament written in Greek uncial on parchment. The manuscript is written in a mix of text styles, with many lacunae, or gaps, in the text, as well as containing handwritten notes, or marginalia.

Ω: Codex Athous Dionysiou (045): Codex Athous Dionysiou, designated by Ω or 045, ε 61, is a Greek uncial manuscript of the New Testament. The codex is dated palaeographically to the 9th century. It has marginalia.

ff1: Codex Corbeiensis I: The Codex Corbeiensis I, designated by ff1 or 9, is an 8th, 9th, or 10th-century Latin New Testament manuscript. The text, written on vellum, is a version of the old Latin. The manuscript contains 39 parchment folios with the text of the four Gospels, Acts of the Apostles, and General epistles.

ff2: Codex Corbeiensis II: The Codex Corbeiensis II, designated by ff2 or 8, is a 5th-century Latin Gospel Book. The text, written on vellum, is a version of the old Latin. The manuscript contains 190 parchment folio with the text of the four Gospels with lacunae. Written in a beautiful round uncial hand.

g1: Codex Sangermanensis I: The Codex Sangermanensis I, designated by g1 or 7, is a Latin manuscript, dated AD 822 of portions of the Old Testament and the New Testament. The text, written on vellum, is a version of the Latin. The manuscript contains the Vulgate Bible, on 191 leaves of which, in the New Testament, the Gospel of Matthew contain Old Latin readings. It contains Shepherd of Hermas.

k: Codex Bobiensis: Codex Bobiensis or Bobbiensis is one of the oldest Old Latin manuscripts of the New Testament. The fragmentary text contains parts of the Gospel of Mark and Gospel of Matthew.

The Practice of Textual Criticism

Determine the Original Reading

Note: The following are critical texts: the TR stands for Textus Receptus text (1550), WH stands for Westcott and Hort text (1881), and NU stands for the Nestle-Aland text (28th ed. 2012) and the United Bible Societies Greek New Testament (5th ed. 2014). WHNU is applicable to all three texts.

Collecting the manuscript evidence is a laborious process, but it is a little more straightforward than the evaluation process. In the collection process, the goal is to gather as much evidence as possible concerning various readings of a specific text. The evaluation process aims to determine which reading has the best evidence for being the original reading. The evaluation process is complicated because not all scholars agree on which evaluation principles are to be used or the relative importance of each of them.

Evaluation Principles

• There can only be one reading, which is the original reading.

• Manuscripts are to be weighed, not counted. Certain families of manuscripts are more trustworthy (e.g., Alexandrian over Byzantine, Western, or Caesarean). In addition, certain manuscripts within a family are more faithful than others (e.g., P66 P75 01 03)

• Generally, the weighty reading from both internal and external evidence is preferred.

• The external evidence of the manuscript witnesses are to be evaluated first; thereafter, will the internal evidence be considered.

• The primary weight of external evidence goes to the original language manuscripts. If the weight is so evenly distributed, it is difficult to make a decision; the versions and Church Fathers may serve to tip the scales.

• Probability is determined based on paleographical details and the habits of scribes.

The Internal Textual Criticism Process

• The reading that the other reading(s) most likely came from is likely the original, and this is the fundamental principle of textual criticism.

• The more difficult or awkward reading is often preferable. The reading at first will seem to be more difficult or awkward to understand, but after further investigation, it will be discovered that a scribe deliberately or mistakenly changed the text to an easier reading.

• The shorter reading is generally preferred if the change is intended. This is a reflection of scribal tendency, as a scribe is far more likely, in his efforts at clarification, willfully to make an addition to a text. Very rarely will a scribe intentionally add to his text by mistake.

• The longer reading is generally preferred if the change is unintended. This again is a reflection of scribal activity, in that a scribe is far more likely to omit a word or phrase mistakenly than to add it intentionally.

• The longer reading is preferred if there is clear reason(s) internally as to why the scribe omitted a word or phrase, like difficulties (perceived contradictions) or awkwardness. For example, a scribe may willfully remove or alter a verse that repeats one of the previous verses.

• Within the synoptic gospels especially, a less identical reading is preferred, as scribes had a tendency to harmonize readings.

• An author-style reading is preferred. If a reading matches the author’s style, it is preferred, and the variants that are foreign to that style are questionable.

• An author-vocabulary reading is preferred. If a reading matches the author’s vocabulary, it is preferred, and the variants that are foreign to that vocabulary are questionable.

• An author-doctrine reading is preferred. Suppose a reading matches the doctrine of the author. In that case, it is preferred, and the variants that are foreign to that doctrine are questionable, especially if they are of a later period in Christian history, anachronistic.

• The reading that is deemed immediately at odds with the context is preferred if deemed intentional because a scribe is more likely to have smoothed the reading out.

The External Textual Criticism Process

• The Alexandrian text-type is generally preferred (especially P66 P75 01 03), unless it appears to be a “learned” correction.

• A represented reading from more than one geographical area may be preferred to even an Alexandrian text-type reading. The reason is that the odds are increased greatly against a reading being changed from the original in such a wide geographical and family spectrum.

• An overwhelming Alexandrian representation (P66 P75 01 03), numerous Alexandrian manuscripts of great quality and trustworthiness can overrule a widely represented reading from all geographical areas and families.

• The Byzantine reading is always questionable until proven otherwise.

• The most faithful to a text-type is preferred if they are divided in support.

Documentary Approach (F. J. A Hort, E. C. Colwell, P. Comfort, Edward D. Andrews, Don Wilkins)

Under this method, greater weight is given to the documentary evidence. This method is the position of this writer. Those who support the Reasoned

Eclecticism method (B. M. Metzger, K. Aland) have claimed that they attempt to depend on both internal and external evidence equally in their determination as to what is the original reading. However, this has proven not to be the case. A textual scholar must make these determinations on a variant-by-variant basis. The NU has tended to favor the internal evidence at times, resulting in a critical text that is out of balance in their documentary evidence.

The approach here is to select a manuscript(s) that is deemed the best for each book of the New Testament. It must be remembered that for hundreds of years in the early manuscript copying, books and sections (e.g., Gospels and Paul’s letters) were produced, not the whole New Testament. For example, for the Gospel of Luke, we would use P4, P45, and P75, and B. P4 and P75 are preferred and make up the B text. Thus, the original text of the Gospel of Luke is retained in P4, P75, and B while we get further support from P45.

Now that we have established the best manuscripts for establishing the original for the Gospel of Luke, they need to be scrutinized, removing any clear errors or variants. When we have established a semi-critical text for the Gospel of Luke from this process, it would then be used as our standard text from which we establish the original wording, making certain by standing it up against other witnesses. If there were any places where the other witnesses seem to compete with this standard text, internal evidence would then be considered.

The Main Resources Used in Making the UASV New Testament Text

• B. F. Westcott and F. J. A. Hort, Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek: Appendix (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1882)

• Biblical Studies Press, The NET Bible First Edition Notes (Biblical Studies Press, 2006)

• B. F. Westcott and F. J. A. Hort, Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1882)

• B. F. Westcott and F. J. A. Hort, Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek: Appendix (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1882)

• Brooke Foss Westcott and Fenton John Anthony Hort, The New Testament in the Original Greek (Logos Bible Software, 2009)

• Bruce Manning Metzger, United Bible Societies, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, Second Edition a Companion Volume to the United Bible Societies’ Greek New Testament (4th Rev. Ed.) (London; New York: United Bible Societies, 1994)

• Constantin von Tischendorf, Tischendorf’s Greek New Testament, electronic ed. of the 8th ed., vol. 3 vol. (Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, 1997)

• Chad Brand et al., eds., Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary (Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers, 2003)

• D. J. A. Clines, Geoffrey W. Bromiley, The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Revised (Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1979–1988)

• Dirk Jongkind, ed., The Greek New Testament: Apparatus (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2017).

• Dirk Jongkind, ed., The Greek New Testament (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2017)

• Eberhard Nestle et al., The Greek New Testament, 27th ed. (Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft: Stuttgart, 1993)

• Eberhard Nestle and Erwin Nestle, Nestle-Aland: Novum Testamentum Graece, ed. Barbara Aland et al., 28. revidierte Auflage. (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2012)

• Gerhard Kittel, Gerhard Friedrich, and Geoffrey William Bromiley, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans, 1985)

• Gleason L. Archer, New International Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties, Zondervan’s Understand the Bible Reference Series (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1982)

• Gottlob Schrenk, ed. Gerhard Kittel, Geoffrey W. Bromiley, and Gerhard Friedrich, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1964–)

• Henry George Liddell et al., A Greek-English Lexicon (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996)

• Horst Robert Balz and Gerhard Schneider, Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1990–)

• Inc Merriam-Webster, Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary. (Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster, Inc., 2003)

• James Strong, A Concise Dictionary of the Words in the Greek Testament and The Hebrew Bible (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2009)

• James Strong, Enhanced Strong’s Lexicon (Woodside Bible Fellowship, 1995)

• James Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Greek (New Testament) (Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997)

• Johannes P. Louw and Eugene Albert Nida, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains (New York: United Bible Societies, 1996)

• Kurt Aland et al., The Greek New Testament, Fourth Revised Edition (Interlinear with Morphology) (Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1993)

• Merrill Frederick Unger et al., The New Unger’s Bible Dictionary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1988)

• Philip Wesley Comfort, A COMMENTARY ON THE MANUSCRIPTS AND TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Academic, 2015).

• Philip W. Comfort, New Testament Text and Translation Commentary: Commentary on the Variant Readings of the Ancient New Testament Manuscripts and How They Relate to the Major English Translations (Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., 2008).

• Philip Wesley Comfort and David P. Barrett, The Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts: Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts, 2 Volume Set The (English and Greek Edition) (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Academic, 2019)

• Rick Brannan and Israel Loken, The Lexham Textual Notes on the Bible, Lexham Bible Reference Series (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2014)

• Robert L. Thomas, New American Standard Hebrew-Aramaic, and Greek Dictionaries: Updated Edition (Anaheim: Foundation Publications, Inc., 1998).

• Roger L. Omanson and Bruce Manning Metzger, A Textual Guide to the Greek New Testament: An Adaptation of Bruce M. Metzger’s Textual Commentary for the Needs of Translators (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2006).

• Spiros Zodhiates, The Complete Word Study Dictionary: New Testament (Chattanooga, TN: AMG Publishers, 2000)

• Stephen’s 1550 Textus Receptus: With Morphology (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2002)

• The Lexham Greek-English Interlinear New Testament (Bellingham, WA, 2008)

• The New Testament in the Original Greek: Byzantine Textform 2005, with Morphology. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2006)

• Thomas Newberry and George Ricker Berry, The Interlinear Literal Translation of the Greek New Testament (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2004)

• Walter A. Elwell and Barry J. Beitzel, Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1988)

• W. E. Vine, Merrill F. Unger, and William White Jr., Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words (Nashville, TN: T. Nelson, 1996)

• William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000)

• Wallace B., Daniel (n.d.). Retrieved from The Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts: http://csntm.org/

• Wilker, Wieland (n.d.). Retrieved from An Online Textual Commentary on the Greek Gospels: http://www.willker.d.../TCG/index.html

• Zane Clark Hodges, Arthur L. Farstad, and William C. Dunkin, The Greek New Testament according to the Majority Text, 2nd ed. (Nashville: T. Nelson Publishers, 1985)

The Main Resources Used in Making the UASV Old Testament Text

Albert Pietersma and Benjamin G. Wright, eds., “Routh,” in A New English Translation of the Septuagint (Primary and Alternate Texts), trans. Frederick W. Knobloch (New York; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007)

Benyamim Tsedaka, ed., The Israelite Samaritan Version of the Torah: First English Translation Compared with the Masoretic Version, trans. Benyamim Tsedaka (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2013)

Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia: With Westminster Hebrew Morphology., electronic ed. (Stuttgart; Glenside PA: German Bible Society; Westminster Seminary, 1996)

Biblia Hebraica Quinta with Apparatus. (Stuttgart; Germany: German Bible Society; Westminster Seminary, 2004–2015)

Biblia Sacra Juxta Vulgatam Clementinam., Ed. electronica. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2005)

Biblical Studies Press, The NET Bible First Edition Notes (Biblical Studies Press, 2006)

Chad Brand et al., eds., Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary (Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers, 2003)

D. J. A. Clines, Geoffrey W. Bromiley, The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Revised (Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1979–1988)

John Joseph Owens, Analytical Key to the Old Testament, vol. 1-4 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1989)

Francis Brown, Samuel Rolles Driver, and Charles Augustus Briggs, Enhanced Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1977)

Gérard E. Weil, Massorah Gedolah: Manuscrit B. 19a de Léningrad (Rome, Italy: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 2001)

Gleason L. Archer, New International Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties, Zondervan’s Understand the Bible Reference Series (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1982)

Gleason Archer Jr., A Survey of Old Testament Introduction, 3rd. ed. (Chicago: Moody Press, 1994)

Henry Barclay Swete, The Old Testament in Greek: According to the Septuagint (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1909)

Inc Merriam-Webster, Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary. (Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster, Inc., 2003)

James Strong, A Concise Dictionary of the Words in the Greek Testament and The Hebrew Bible (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2009)

James Strong, Enhanced Strong’s Lexicon (Woodside Bible Fellowship, 1995)

James Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Hebrew (Old Testament) (Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997).

Ken M. Penner, The Lexham Dead Sea Scrolls Hebrew-English Interlinear Bible (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2016)

Lancelot Charles Lee Brenton, The Septuagint Version of the Old Testament: English Translation (London: Samuel Bagster and Sons, 1870)

Ludwig Koehler et al., The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1994–2000)

Martin Abegg Jr., Peter Flint, and Eugene Ulrich, The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible: The Oldest Known Bible Translated for the First Time into English (New York: HarperOne, 1999)

Merrill Frederick Unger et al., The New Unger’s Bible Dictionary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1988)

R. Laird Harris, “1023 כָפַר,” ed. R. Laird Harris, Gleason L. Archer Jr., and Bruce K. Waltke, Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (Chicago: Moody Press, 1999)

Randall K. Tan, David A. deSilva, and Isaiah Hoogendyk, The Lexham Greek-English Interlinear Septuagint: H.B. Swete Edition (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2012)

Rick Brannan and Israel Loken, The Lexham Textual Notes on the Bible, Lexham Bible Reference Series (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2014)

Rick Brannan et al., eds., The Lexham English Septuagint (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2012)

Robert L. Thomas, New American Standard Hebrew-Aramaic, and Greek Dictionaries: Updated Edition (Anaheim: Foundation Publications, Inc., 1998).

Walter A. Elwell and Barry J. Beitzel, Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1988)

W. E. Vine, Merrill F. Unger, and William White Jr., Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words (Nashville, TN: T. Nelson, 1996)

Wilhelm Gesenius and Samuel Prideaux Tregelles, Gesenius’ Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament Scriptures (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2003)

William Lee Holladay and Ludwig Köhler, A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (Leiden: Brill, 2000)

Abbreviations and Symbols Used in Footnotes

App. Appendix(es)

fn. Footnote

cf. Compare

Lit Literally

vid. See

IBID. in the same place

Or alternative reading

vs. verse

vss. Verses

MS Manuscript

MSS Manuscripts

cm centimeter(s)

dry qt dry quart(s) U.S.

ft foot/feet

gal liquid gallon(s)

g gram(s)

in. inch(es)

kg kilogram(s)

km kilometer(s)

lb. pound(s) avoirdupois

L liter(s)

mi mile(s)

m meter(s)

oz ounce(s)

oz t ounce(s) troy

pt pint(s) U.S.

Vid This is short for Latin videtur, which means “it seems so.” An example would be P45vid or P75vid, which would suggest that the reading under consideration appears to be in the manuscript. But there is a lacuna (an unfilled space or interval; a gap) or other damage to the manuscript, which means that it is evidence but not as certain as it could be.

B.C.E. Before the Common Era

C.E. Common Era

[ ] Single brackets [ ], are used to indicates that the translator(s) had difficulty in deciding which variant to place in the text.

[[ ]] Double brackets [[ ]], are used to indicate a spurious passage that has been added to the text or in a footnote. However, because of its early history, it has been included but within double brackets.

Currency and Weight Old Testament

• A Bekah equaled 5.7 gm (0.1835 oz)

• A Daric equaled 8.4 gm (0.27 oz) Persian Gold

• A Gerah equaled 0.57 gm (0.01835 oz)

• A Mina equaled 570 gm (18.35 oz)

• A Pim equaled 7.8 gm (0.2508 oz)

• A shekel equaled 11.4 gm (0.367 oz)

• A Talent equaled 34.2 kg (1,101 oz)

Currency and Weight New Testament

• A Assarion Roman and provincial, copper or bronze

• A Denarius equaled 3.85 gm (0.124 oz) Roman, silver

• A Didrachma 6.8 gm (0.218 oz) Greek, silver

• A Drachma 3.4 gm (0.109 oz) Greek, silver

• A Lepton (1⁄2 Quadrans) Jewish, copper, or bronze

• A Mina 340 gm (10.9 oz)

• A Pound 327 gm (11.5 oz) Roman

• A Quadrans (2 lepta) Roman, copper or bronze

• A Talent 20.4 kg (654 oz)

• A Tetradrachma (silver stater) 13.6 gm (0.436 oz) Greek, silver

Explanations of Features Used in This Edition

Beginning of Each Bible Book

At the beginning of each Bible book, there are bullet points of Who Wrote, Where Written, and When Written: e.g., c. 45-50 C.E. At times, c. is written in front of a date or number to indicate that it is approximate. c. is an abbreviation for “circa.”

Section Headings

Though out every Bible book, there are section headings. The headings are no part of the original that the authors published. They have been provided to give the reader a snapshot of the theme within that section of Scripture.

Footnotes in this Edition

The footnotes in the Updated American Standard Version (UASV) are used to supply the reader with deeper insight into the Scriptures. There are hundreds of footnotes on important textual information, and many of them have detailed easy-to-understand explanations. Moreover, two appendices explain Old and New Testament textual criticism. The primary text for the Old Testament is the Hebrew Masoretic Text, and the New Testament, the Koine Greek New Testament. Some footnotes let the reader know the reason why the translation has had to abandon the primary text for versions.

Hundreds of other footnotes give the reader an extensive, more profound understanding of important Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek words. Some footnotes let the reader know the reason why the translation has had to abandon the literal rendering. Every Hebrew and Greek word has two or more different meanings, and it is the context that helps determine which one the author meant. Even though the translation itself has retained a literal rendering more often than any other, many footnotes contain alternative literal renderings. Some notes give English equivalents for weights, measures, and monetary values. Some notes give the meaning of names of Bible books, persons, places, and geographical data.

Appendix Chapters BIBLE STUDY TOOL

Ten Appendix chapters are arranged in subjects to help the reader in multiple ways. First, it will help the reader get at what the author meant by the words that he used. Second, it will help them better understand features and footnotes in this edition. Third, it will help them know how the Bible came down to us and why it is trustworthy. Fourth, it will help the Christian defend God’s inspired Word as fully inerrant, authoritative, authentic, and reliable.

The appendices are found for free on the UASV’s official website (https://uasvbible.org/uasv-appendices/)

and in a separate publication. (https://www.amazon.com/dp/194958660X)

APPENDIX 1 Principles of Bible Translation for the Updated American Standard Version

APPENDIX 2 Bible Texts and Versions – Why We Need to Know

APPENDIX 3 Textual Studies of the Old Testament – Why We Need to Know

APPENDIX 4 Textual Studies of the New Testament – Why We Need to Know

APPENDIX 5 How to Interpret the Bible

APPENDIX 6 Bible Backgrounds of the Old and New Testaments

APPENDIX 7 Christian Apologetics

APPENDIX 8 Christian Evangelism

APPENDIX 9 Bible Difficulties Explained

APPENDIX 10 The Divine Name in the Hebrew Scriptures

Why We Do Not Capitalize Personal Pronouns Referring to God

Choosing to capitalize personal pronouns in Scripture creates unnecessary difficulties at times. Note what the Pharisees say when speaking to Jesus (in the NASB), “We wish to see a sign from You.” Thus, the meaning here would be that the Pharisees regarded Jesus as deity when that is not the case. Some feel that it is honoring God to capitalize the personal pronouns. However, God has honor and authority purely because he is God. The Scriptures are filled with ways we are actually called to honor and worship God; we do not need to create others to show our reverence for God. We are not dishonoring God if personal pronouns referring to him are not capitalized. For those that choose to capitalize all personal pronouns referring to God, it is simply a matter of preference or style, not because the Scriptures obligate them to do so. Suppose we want to show respect, reverence, honor, and praise to God. In that case, it isn’t through capitalizing personal pronouns that refer to him, but rather by personal Bible study, obedience to the Word of God, our service, church attendance, and carrying out the great commission to make disciples. (Matt. 24:14; 28:19-20; Acts 1:8) When we look at the ancient manuscripts, there is no effort made to differentiate the personal pronouns that refer to God. Sir Frederic Kenyon, in his book Textual Criticism of the New Testament, says, “Capital letters, which are occasionally used in business documents to mark the beginning of a clause, do not occur in literary papyri . . .” Some might not even be aware that the translators of the highly valued King James Version always capitalized personal pronouns referring to God. It is a bit ironic that those translations that capitalize the personal pronouns referring to God out of reverence and respect remove the Father’s personal name some 7,000 times in the Old Testament.

Literal Translation Philosophy

The Updated American Standard Version (UASV) comes from the standard literal translation philosophy of English Bible translations over almost 600-years. The source of this history starts with William Tyndale’s New Testament of 1526, followed by several other 16th-century English translations into the renowned King James Version of 1611 (KJV). It would be another 274 years before we arrive at the first modern English translation that could fully take advantage of manuscript discoveries, the English Revised Version of 1885 (RV), followed by the American Standard Version of 1901 (ASV). During the last two decades of the 19th century and into the mid-20th century, there was a discovery of 500,000 Greek papyri manuscripts found in the dry sands of Egypt, which vastly improved our understanding of Koine Greek. We also discovered many New Testament papyri manuscripts that aid us in our textual decisions. This led to the Revised Standard Version of 1952 and 1971 (RSV). Sadly, we now enter a new era of Bible translation philosophy.

Eugene A. Nida was an American linguist who developed the dynamic-equivalence Bible-translation theory (i.e., interpretive translation philosophy) and one of the founders of the modern discipline of translation studies. This new translation interpretive philosophy was not to give the Bible readers what God said by way of his human authors but rather to give them what a translator thinks God meant in its place. The interpretive translation’s goal was not to be accurate and faithful to the original text. They were more concerned with the meaning and making easy-to-read Bibles. For decades now, we have had dozens of these interpretive translations that are not the translation but more like mini commentaries.

Some English translations attempted to compete with this onslaught of interpretive translations. However, they were semi-literal at best, calling themselves Essentially Literal or Optimal Equivalence. They are excellent translations, but they are inconsistent and not fully dedicated to the literal translation philosophy. One translation stood alone for decades as the only literal translation philosophy, the New American Standard Bible (NASB): 1960, 1971, 1977, 1995, 2020 by The Lockman Foundation. The only problem was that they retained the corrupt readings from the KJV in the main text of their New Testament, even though the translators understood they were not original. Worse still, the 2020 New American Standard Bible took the first step in abandoning its literal translation philosophy. The Updated American Standard Version (UASV) is a complete return to the faithfulness of the text. The UASV’s primary purpose is to give the Bible readers what God said by way of his human authors, not what a translator thinks God meant in its place. The UASV’s primary goal is to be accurate and faithful to the original text. The meaning of a word is the responsibility of the interpreter (i.e., reader), not the translator.

The Updated American Standard Version (UASV) is a true literal translation, where the English language permits a literal rendering that does not distort what the Bible authors meant. We are meeting the needs of God’s people who desire a word-for-word rendering of the original. Many readers who do not use a literal translation may not understand what may appear as insignificant as choosing a comma or omitting it. A definite or indefinite article may alter what the author meant to convey.

Can the Original Language Text be Translated Perfectly into Any Modern-Day language?

There will probably never be a perfect translation into any modern-day language, and a few things can get in the way of a perfect translation if that were even possible.

No modern language precisely reflects the original language vocabulary and grammar of Biblical Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Therefore, at times, a literal translation of the Bible can be ambiguous or not fully convey the original author’s intended meaning. When we render an original language word into a modern language, it needs to be understood that we lose some sense of the meaning that would have been conveyed to the original audience in their language.

The same Hebrew or Greek word can have widely different meanings in different contexts. For example, the Hebrew word zaqen and the Greek word presbuteros can be translated “older man,” or “elder,” and both are sometimes used to refer to persons that are advanced in age (Gen. 18:11; Deut. 28:50; 1 Sam. 2:22; 1 Tim 5:1-2) or to the older of two persons (older son, Lu 15:25). However, it can also apply to those holding a position of authority and responsibility in the Christian congregation (elders, 1 Tim. 5:17), in the community, or a nation. It is also used in reference to the ancestors of Israel (men of old, Heb. 11:2), as well as members of the Jewish Sanhedrin (elders, Matt. 16:21), and of the twenty-four elders (heavenly beings) seated on the twenty-four thrones around the throne of God. (Rev. 4:4) Clearly, the context will determine what the author meant in his usage of these terms. The translator should always seek to reflect the literal rendering of the original language in every passage, but there will be some rare exceptions to this rule. Here are a few of those exceptions.

Jesus’ half-brother, James, writes,

James 3:6 Updated American Standard Version (UASV)

6 And the tongue is a fire, the world of unrighteousness; the tongue is set among our members, staining the whole body, setting on fire the course of life, and is set on fire by Gehenna.

We have several excellent examples of translation decisions within this one verse.

In rendering “the world of unrighteousness,” older translations and the 1995 NASB use the outdated term iniquity, which means “grossly immoral behavior.” However, the 2020 NASB renders it “the very world of unrighteousness.” From the verb from which the participle James uses, “staining the whole body” we literally have spotting the whole body, somewhat ambiguous, so we should adopt the lexical rendering “stained,” “defiled,” or “corrupted.” Then we have “the course of life,” which is literally the wheel of birth (existence, origin). Finally, translators of the Bible should avoid rendering the Hebrew Sheol and the Greek Hades and Gehenna by the word hell (RSV, ESV, LEB, CSB, NASB2020). Simply transliterating these words will force the reader to dig deeper for the author’s intended meaning. Hundreds of times throughout the Bible, the reader is told to pause, ponder, consider, to meditate on the Word of God. The literal translation is not only the Word of God in English, but it also forces the reader to slow down, pause, ponder, consider, to meditate. The interpretive translations give their readers a mini commentary on 6th – 8th-grade levels (GNB, CEV, NCV, NIrV, NLT, TNIV). It is not the Word of God in English, it is what the translators think the Word of God means in English, and there is no need to slow down, pause, ponder, consider, to meditate.

When dated terms are used (e.g., iniquity), they should be replaced with the original biblical text’s corresponding English word (unrighteousness). The Bible translators can use such literal wording as (stain, defile, corrupt) in place of such ambiguous expressions as “spotting the whole body,” which helps the modern reader avoid confusion. When the literal rendering comes across as making no sense (the wheel of birth), it is best to provide the original word(s) sense. A translation of the Greek geenna is best transliterated as Gehenna. An explanation of what the translator is doing in the text should be placed in a footnote. This gives the reader access to all the information. Again, these are rare exceptions to the rule that the translator should always seek to reflect the literal rendering of the original language in every passage.

The Hebrew Old Testament (שָׁכַב shakab) and the Greek New Testament (κοιμωμένων koimaōmenōn) original language terms should be rendered as “sleep” and “fall asleep,” which refer to a sleeping body and a dead body. The translation committee should not take liberties with the word of God in an attempt at being more concise or replacing the literal rendering that is understandable and conveys what the author meant with an easier to read interpretation. 1 Kings 2:10 says, “Then David slept with his forefathers and was buried in the city of David.” The interpretive translations render it as “David died and was buried in David’s City” (GNB), “Then David died and was buried with his ancestors in Jerusalem” (NCV), and “Then David rested with his ancestors and was buried in the City of David” (TNIV). Some have argued that the dynamic equivalent thought-for-thought translations (Then David died and was buried, NLT) are conveying the idea in a more transparent and immediate way, but is this really the most beneficial? Retaining the literal rendering, the metaphorical use of the word sleep is best because of the similarities that exist between physical sleep and the sleep of death. Without the literal rendering, this would be lost on the reader. Retaining the literal rendering, “slept,” and adding the phrase “in death” in a footnote completes the sense in the English text. Sense: to be asleep in death; the figurative extension of the physical sleep in the sense of being at rest and at peace; the person in the sleep of death exists in God’s memory as they sleep in death; it is only temporary for those who are physically asleep, so it will be true of those who are asleep in death. The idea that death is like a deep sleep that one awakens from at some future point is made by multiple authors and Jesus Christ when talking about Lazarus.

Nevertheless, there are times when the literal translation can be misunderstood or misinterpreted. James 5:1 is translated, “But above all, my brothers, do not swear, either by heaven or by earth or by any other oath, but let your “yes” be yes and your “no” be no, so that, you may not fall under judgment.” The Greek is literally, “But above all, my brothers, do not swear, either by heaven or by earth or by any other oath, but let yours is to be yes, yes, and no, no, so that you may not fall under judgment.” This would make little sense. Romans 12:1 is translated, “Do not be slothful in zeal, be fervent in spirit, serving the Lord.” The Greek is literally, “Do not be slothful in zeal, be in the spirit boiling, serving the Lord.” This would undoubtedly confuse.

A literal translation is unquestionably more than a word-for-word rendering of the original language of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. The corresponding English words need to be brought over according to English grammar and syntax. Still, the translation at the same time must be faithful to the original word or as much as possible, for the author may have used word order to emphasize or convey some meaning. In most cases, the translator renders the original-language word with the same corresponding English term each time it occurs. The translator has used his good judgment to select English terms or phrases from the lexicon within the context of the original-language text. The translator remains faithful to this literal translation philosophy unless it has been determined that the rendering will be misunderstood or misinterpreted. The translator is not tasked with making the text easy to read but rather to make it as accurately faithful to the original as possible. The translator’s primary purpose is to give the Bible readers what God said by way of his human authors, not what a translator thinks God meant in its place. The translator’s primary goal is to be accurate and faithful to the original text. The meaning of a word is the responsibility of the interpreter (i.e., reader), not the translator. Nevertheless, extremes in the literal translation of the text just for the sake of being literal must be avoided.

Many modern-day English translations have taken the unjustifiable liberty in their choice of omitting the Father’s personal name, Jehovah, from modern translations of the Old Testament even though that name is found in ancient Bible manuscripts. Many translations replace the personal name with a title, such as “LORD.” The Father’s personal name is found thousands of times in the 1901 American Standard Version and will be retained here in the Updated American Standard Version.

Lastly, every effort has been made in rendering a Hebrew or Greek word the same every time if that is what the context allows. This exposes what the authors meant by the words that they used. Accurate knowledge: (ἐπίγνωσις epignōsis) This is a strengthened or intensified form of gnosis (epi, meaning “additional”), meaning “true,” “real,” “full,” “complete” or “accurate,” depending upon the context. It is a personal recognition where one understands something clearly and distinctly or as true and valid. Paul and Peter alone use epignosis. Paul uses the term fifteen times, while Peter uses it four times. Paul wrote about some who were “always learning and yet never able to come to accurate knowledge of truth.” (2Ti 3:6-7) He also prayed for those in the Colossian church, who clearly had some knowledge of the will and purposes of the Father, for they had become Christians, “that [they] may be filled with the accurate knowledge of his will in all spiritual wisdom and understanding.” (Col 1:9) All Christians should desire to obtain or achieve accurate knowledge of God’s Word. (Eph 1:15-17; Php 1:9; 1Ti 2:3-4), It is crucial in one’s effort at putting on the new person that Paul spoke of, and in gaining peace. – Rom. 1:28; Eph. 1:17; Phil. 1:9; Col. 1:9-10; 3:10; 1 Tim 2:4; 2Pe 1:2.

The Updated American Standard Version (UASV) understands there are times when rendering the best sense of the original language words according to the context is more important than a literal translation. For example, the Greek noun (κόσμος kosmos) is rendered “world” 185 times and “adornment” one time. The one exception here is found in 1 Peter 3:3. “Do not let your adornment be external, the braiding of hair and the wearing of gold ornaments or fine clothing.” The Greek “kosmos (κόσμος, 2889), “a harmonious arrangement or order,” then, “adornment, decoration,” came to denote “the world, or the universe, as that which is divinely arranged.” The related Greek verb (κοσμέω kosmeō) is translated “adorn” at *** 2:10, “… not stealing, but showing all good faith so that they will adorn the doctrine of God our Savior in every respect.” The Updated American Standard Version (UASV) is the most consistent in its literal rendering of the original language words into English.

The Holy Bible: Updated American Standard Version (Cambridge, OH: Christian Publishing House, 2022).

Glossary of Technical Terms

Introduction

What is Bible translation? In short, it is the rendering of something written or spoken in one language in words of a different language. However, there are two basic philosophies or methods on how this is to be accomplished. There is the literal translation, i.e., lexical or linguistic translation, whose translator or translation committee determines what English word or phrase in the Hebrew-English or Greek-English lexicon (the technical term for dictionary) corresponds best to the original language word. For example, the Greek word (φρόνημα phronēma) can be translated differently as the corresponding English terms are “mind” or “mindset.” Therefore, the American Standard Version (ASV), English Standard Version (ESV), New American Standard Bible (NASB), and the Updated American Standard Version render phronema in Romans 8:27 as “he who searches hearts knows what is the mind of the Spirit.” However, the Lexham English Bible (LEB) and the Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB) render phronema as “the one who searches our hearts knows what the mindset of the Spirit is” and “He who searches the hearts knows the Spirit’s mind-set” respectively. Both of these renderings are literal.

The literal translation committee is focused on the original language term to determine which English word(s) in the lexicon correspond best. For example, did Jesus go out into the wilderness or the desert for forty days? The other translation method is known as the dynamic or functional equivalent method (Defined below). Their committee is interested in the reader, and the end goal is to take the corresponding English term and find the sense of what is meant, which replaces the literal rendering. Therefore, the Common English Bible (CEB) and the New Life Version (NLV) render phronema in Romans 8:27 as “knows how the Spirit thinks,” while the Easy to Read Version (ERV) and the New Living Translation (NLT) renders it, “understands what the Spirit is saying.”

Time is in one direction and cannot be repeated. B.C.E. means “before the Common Era,” which is more accurate than B.C. (“before Christ”). C.E. denotes “Common Era,” often called A.D., for anno Domini, meaning “in the year of our Lord.” It should be noted that the Romans did not have a zero, so time goes from 1 B.C.E. to 1 C.E.

4026 1000 760 406 ◄B.C.E. | C.E.► 29 33 36 100

Original Language (OL) is the Hebrew and Aramaic for the Old Testament and Greek for the New Testament.

Source Language (SL) is the language in which a translation is being produced into another language. Therefore, if one is translating from Hebrew into English, then Hebrew is the SL.

Receptor Language (RL) is just the opposite; it is the language of which the translation is being produced. Therefore, if one is translating from Greek into English, then English is the RL.

As you can see from the above, the terms Source and Receptor Language have the acronym SL and RL, respectively. In addition, keep in mind that the text that the translator is rendering into another language is the source text. Please do not confuse the Source Language with the Original Language. True, the Source Language can be the Original Language of Hebrew or Greek. However, if there is a case of a translator making a Chinese translation of the New Testament, but has chosen to make it from English, the Source Language would be English. The Original Language of the Old Testament is Hebrew, and the New Testament is Greek.

Dynamic Equivalent (DE) takes the meaning of the original language text in the receptor language of, say, English and focuses on the sense of the word. For example, Exodus 35:21, the Updated American Standard Version (USV) literally reads, “And they came, every man whose heart lifted him,” while the Common English Bible (CEB) committee deemed the figurative use of the “heart” as too complicated, so they rendered it, “Everyone who was excited and eager.” The objective of the dynamic equivalent is to translate meaning, not words.

Dynamic Equivalence is a method of translation, which is also known as a sense-for-sense or thought-for-thought translation, whose objective is to translate the meaning of phrases or whole sentences. The objective is to take technical terms, idiomatic expressions, figurative language, and so on and render them in easy-to-understand terms that they feel reflect the sense of the OL terms.

Functional Equivalence (FE) is a method of translation that goes beyond the corresponding English word or phrase of the original language with what is known as a functional equivalent. Again, when the literal rendering is determined to be too difficult for the modern-day reader, the committee will like for a word or phrase that they feel captures the sense of what was meant. For example, the literal UASV at Proverbs 5:15 reads, “Drink water from your own cistern,” while the functional equivalents ERV reads, “Now, about sex and marriage,” and the NCV reads, “Be faithful to your own wife.” The Functional Equivalent is attempting to explain the imagery that is found in the literal Translation. This translation philosophy goes beyond true translation philosophy, and the translation committee usurps the reader's responsibility by interpreting what God said and then calling it a Bible translation. It is not a Bible translation; it is a mini commentary.

Formal Equivalence (FE) is a word-for-word translation where the committee gives the reader the corresponding English word, attempting to follow the same word order as the OL. The emphasis is on the OL and the lexical or linguistic interpretation, and the grammatical construction. This translation philosophy gives the Bible readers what God said through his human authors, not what a translator thinks God meant in its place. They seek to be accurate and faithful to the original text. The meaning of a word is the responsibility of the interpreter (i.e., reader), not the translator.

Literal Translation (LT) gives you what God said, so there is no concealing this by going beyond what God said into the realms of what a translator interprets the sense of these words to be.

The Target Audience (TA) is the publisher's chosen audience, which is who they are focusing on reaching with their translation. Once that target audience has been selected; then, the committee will have this translation philosophy mindset. For example, the Common English Bible's target audience is a seventh grade reading level.

The Dynamic Equivalent Interpretive Translator’s Perception of Today’s Readers

The main strengths of the literal translation are that they are trying to preserve the original text, the ancient expressions, how the words are joined together, and rendering the words consistently. All of this allows the reader to determine the meaning and not have to depend on the translator to do his work for him. This also ties the Bible together as a whole, and the reader is better able to see the Old Testament in the New Testament. The main strengths of the thought-for-thought translation are simply that they get the meaning immediately, as would have the original readers. As the original readers would not have had to struggle with grammar and syntax, or idiomatic expressions, so it is too, the modern reader of a thought-for-thought translation has all of these points of concern modernized for them in an easy to read translation. At first glance, this may appear like an ideal approach.

Those who favor the thought-for-thought form of translation abuse the statement that “all translation is interpretation.” Dr. Leland Ryken has said, “There is only one sense in which all translation is interpretation, and it is not what dynamic equivalent translators usually mean by their cliché. All translation is lexical or linguistic interpretation. That is, translators must decide what English word or phrase most closely corresponds to a given word of the original text. I myself do not believe that ‘interpretation is the best word by which to name this process, but inasmuch as it requires a ‘judgment call’ on the part of translators, there is something akin to interpretation when translators decide whether, for example, the Israelites were led through the wilderness or the desert.”

The translator should not go beyond the “lexical or linguistic interpretation” that Ryland speaks of unless there are very good reasons for doing so, such as a verse that would be unintelligible. When the translator goes beyond what God said into the realms of interpretation, i.e., explaining the literal meaning, “wear fine clothes, with a splash of cologne, in place of “Let your garments be always white. Let not oil be lacking on your head.” (Eccl. 9:8) Readers are not being told that when a translator or committee makes these interpretive changes, he is removing the reader from the equation. In other words, there is no need for the reader to concern himself with understanding how to interpret the Word of God correctly, as it has already been done for him.

The reader of God’s Word, be they young children, teenagers, the elderly, or ones with learning disabilities, needs to see the original’s structure and meaning by corresponding English words and phrases and sentence patterns. The original word of God needs to be transparent to the reader. The reader needs to be brought up to the translation, not have the translation dumbed down. The focus of the literal translation is the Word of God in the original, so we know that what we have is the Word of God, not the word of man. The focus of the dynamic equivalent is on the reader. Below are some examples of how the dynamic equivalent perceives today’s readers.

• “After ascertaining as accurately as possible the meaning of the original, the translator’s next task was to express that meaning in a manner and form easily understood by the readers” – GNB.

• “Metaphorical language is often difficult for contemporary readers to understand, so at times we have chosen to translate or illuminate the metaphor” – NLT.

• “Because for most readers today the phrase ‘the Lord of hosts’ and ‘God of hosts’ have little meaning, this version renders them ‘the Lord Almighty’ and God Almighty’” – NIV.

• “Ancient customs are often unfamiliar to modern readers” – NCV.

• “We have used the vocabulary and language structures . . . of a junior high student” – NLT.

• “The Contemporary English Version has been described as a ‘user-friendly’ and ‘mission-driven’ translation that can be read aloud without stumbling, heard without misunderstanding, and listened to with enjoyment and appreciation because the language is contemporary and the style is lucid and lyrical.”

Eugene Nida, the father of thought-for-thought translation, had this to say about literal translators in Christianity Today: “This ‘word worship’ helps people to have confidence, but they don’t understand the text. And as long as they worship words, instead of worshiping God as revealed in Jesus Christ, they feel safe.” (Nida 2002:46) The actual facts are that Nida and his Dynamic Equivalent camp worship the modern reader instead of respecting the Author of the Bible and his Word choices. Bible scholar John MacArthur states: thought-for-thought translations “diminish the glory of divine revelation by being more concerned with the human reader than the divine author.”

The thought-for-thought proponents have gone beyond translation by modifying words that they feel to be too difficult for the modern reader to comprehend. They also assume ignorance on the part of the modern-day reader by taking statements that they believe would be misunderstood and expressing them to be easily understood. In addition, they have removed gender language they feel is offensive.

#46088 NEWS e-Sword updated the MODULE CONVERTER

Posted by Olaf Bacon on 22 March 2024 - 03:29 AM in e-Sword Questions & Answers

I sent the following query to Rick Meyers, the coder of e-Sword for the PC.

Dear Rick,

The MODULE CONVERTER has been updated to version 4.2.0 on 2022-04-08. The file name changed to e-Sword PC Module Conversion Utility v4.2.0

This is experiencing a problem.

I expect that Microsoft has been messing with security again, or a bug has crept in somewhere.

During the processing of convert.exe which is supposed to be a self-installing wizard, the option to allow the user to change the folder into which the converter is to be installed has been removed. Please investigate this. The Current Settings are exclusively hard set to Destination Folder: C:\Program Files (x86)\e-Sword.

For all files that arrive, I have to change the permissions and remove the “Security block” inside the file.

After running the wizard, where is Convert installed, and what is the installed filename that is to be called up?

I am not running e-Sword from there.

I have provided Everyone with full permissions in C:\Program Files (x86)\e-Sword\

And where I am running from C:\Program Files (x86)\e-Sword-recent where Everyone also has full access. And still, the situation is that the convert file just disappears.

Rick Meyers replied with the following information.

The converter needs to live with the e-Sword executable as they share files. The installer is supposed to get the path from the Registry. Maybe adjust the Registry as needed.

In His service,

Rick Meyers

rick@e-sword.net

#46021 What's Still Broken As Of e-Sword 11.06?

Posted by Olaf Bacon on 29 February 2024 - 03:21 AM in e-Sword Questions & Answers

http://www.biblesupp...rd-tab-renamer/

When I downloaded this 2024-02-29 and tried to work on a module, and selected a *.cmti module, it reported "Not a valid e-Sword database. (Doesn't work with e-Sword 8)."

Surely this ought to be the tab renamer, not the e-sword 8 to 9 conversion utility? Perhaps it wants a file type with the last character to be a "x"?

#45917 Afrikaans 2020 translation

Posted by Olaf Bacon on 15 February 2024 - 11:54 AM in Module Requests

Will the new (2020) translation of the Afrikaans Bible be made available soon?

Please contact the Bible society of South Africa, because the text is under their copyright. Bible Support website only provides copyright information with specific permission of the copyright holder. Suggest this option to them. e-Sword provides the text of verses in verse order, in chapter and book order using SQLite database format. Explain that Rick Meyers would be able to provide their copyright version for individual users to use, under their copyright with permission, which would be read using the e-Sword Bible Study application, for Microsoft PC, for Apple Mac, for Apple iPad, for Apple iphone and e-sword for Android devices - so that the user can compare the results with many other translations. Inform them how to view Rick Meyers's options at https://e-sword.net

Suggest to them that they provide the option including the Deuterokanonieke Boeke, in addition to Ou Testament, Nuwe Testament, and also Voorwoord, Verantwoording, Woordelys, and Kaarte, and all Inleidings to each book, and .they can forward this in electronic format, together with permission to provide this freely for use with the e-Sword application, to Rick Meyers (Rick@e-sword.net)
Bible Society of South Africa
134 Edward Street, Bellville
Tel: 021 910 8777
Fax: 021 910 8799
E-mail: biblesa@biblesociety.co.za

#45881 Arabic bibles and viewing the text right to left

Posted by Olaf Bacon on 08 February 2024 - 09:33 AM in e-Sword Questions & Answers

Hi oatmealman,
Did you know that in e-Sword Downloads, under Bibles, Arabic, Rick Meyers has provided for Free,
the Arabic Biblica Open New Version [Arabic ONV}, Copyright 1988, 1997,2012 by Biblica, Inc. All rights reserved. Used with permission. as at 2022-11-29.
Also Arabic Smith and Van Dyke Bible [Arabic SVD], Published in 1865, public domain.

#45880 Android Bible Memory - How to Remove a verse?

Posted by Olaf Bacon on 08 February 2024 - 09:12 AM in e-Sword Questions & Answers

I sent a copy of your query to the Designer of e-Sword, from https://www.e-sword.net/android/contact.htm

#45878 bblx files

Posted by Olaf Bacon on 08 February 2024 - 06:57 AM in e-Sword Modules / Resources

MAC Users have a different issue. It doesn't use the BBLX files and if I drop it into the e-Sword folder, the program locks up. So, it needs converted to run on the MAC but I have found no conversion tool to work. Anyone found a solution?

The files that you find on the Bible Support website are mainly designed to run from the e-Sword Personal Bible Study application. This is a Bible Study application, which runs in a SQLite database structure, in which the separate verses of the Bible (Old Testament) and (New Testament) and (Apocrypha) in their chapters, and their associated books of the Bible, in the selected version of the Bible and for the selected language are arranged and listed in numerical order inside a database module. The result is to be used and read inside the e-Sword application. You will need to load the e-Sword application to be able to see the contents of these files. e-Sword is copyrighted, worldwide, and is exclusively designed and provided by Rick Meyers. There are separate varieties of e-Sword for [1] e-Sword: Free Bible Study for the PC running Microsoft Windows.

e-Sword is also available for purchase, as follows: [2] e-Sword X for the Apple Mac from iTunes, [3] e-Sword HD for the iPad from iTunes, [4] e-Sword LT for the iPhone from iTunes, and [5] e-Sword for Android from Google Play. The information you want can be found at https://www.e-sword.net/links.html on the available links provided there.

Because of the database format, the verses of the selected Bible can also be quickly compared with links to these same verses in e-Sword Bible Commentaries, e-Sword Bible Dictionaries, e-Sword Bible Lexicons, and other e-Sword Reference Library modules, in different Bible versions, and in different Languages. You can even search on Strong numbers, as used in the Exhaustive Concordance to sort words in the English Authorised version of the King James Version (1769) into Hebrew and Greek roots of the words, as they were grouped by James Strong in the Hebrew and Greek languages. Strong's Hebrew and Greek Dictionaries were published in 1890 and are in the public domain.

On the Bible Support website many out-of-copyrght books about the Bible have been compiled by volunteers, and the content has been reformatted into a format suitable to use with e-Sword, to assist users with their personal Bible Study.

CONVERSION OF bblx MODULES FOR USE BY e-SWORD ON THE MAC
If you find modules on the Bible Support website that were designed for the e-Sword for the PC and wish to have these converted to HTML formatting so that they can be read with e-Sword on Apple or Android devices, there is a conversion module, designed to run on the Windows PC, available for use from Rick Meyers. This is available from https://www.e-Sword.net on the option EXTRAS under the heading MODULE CONVERTER. Rick Meyers notes: "If you have been one of those adventuresome users who have created your own custom e-Sword modules, and you want to use them in e-Sword on your Apple or Android device then this utility should convert them." This is designed to run on a PC with e-Sword 13 installed on it.

The e-Sword modules were initially designed for the Windows PC when RTF formatting was applied to letter characters. These modules have filenames with a file type that all have the fourth and final letter of the file type with the letter "x". The e-Sword modules with a file type with the fourth and final letter of the file type with the letter "i", were designed for devices in which programming is in HTML format. For example Bibles (*.bblx and *.bbli), Commentaries (*.cmtx and *.cmti), Dictionaries (*.dctx and *.dcti), Lexicons (*.lexx and *.lexi), and Library Reference Files (*.refx and *.topx and *.refi). The file types with the last letter of the file type "i" can also be read in e-Sword for the PC running e-Sword versions 11, 12, and 13.

Please note that files created with the e-Sword built-in Editors for Journal Notes, Study Notes, and Topic Notes are installed in a user's folder on the PC and are not readily interchanged with users on the same PC, nor with users on other types of devices. Each user of the PC logs in with their user name. This was because RTF coding was in use, which is not compatible with the programming methods used on Apple and Android devices, which use other proprietary coding structures, based on HTML coding of characters. Each user of the PC will have their e-Sword Profile, when they install e-Sword on their user name and profile. This is to keep personal files "personal", and not available for other users to access from the same device or from another device.

There is no application available, at present, from Rick Meyers, which is designed to convert topics files created on Apple and Android devices to be readable in the personal folders on the PC.

For Answers to Frequently Asked Questions about e-Sword X on the Mac, please view answers from Rick Meyers at: https://www.e-sword.net/mac/faq.htm

#45877 Arabic bibles and viewing the text right to left

Posted by Olaf Bacon on 08 February 2024 - 02:58 AM in e-Sword Questions & Answers

Hello Apsit190,
Thanks for Take 2 of explaining how to make an e-Sword file read from right to left.
You forgot to remind the user to remember to Save the file, after the change had been entered, before exiting. I found both of your lifes were still listed on your website.

https: //www.youtube.com/watch?v=djTM4YvUcsA

That was take 1 Arabic bibles and viewing text Right to Left.

https: //www.youtube.com/watch?v=yp6QjKBLaDY

This is "Making e-Sword Read Right to Left Take 2"

You have blocked the option of me being able to converse with you by use of the Bible Support > Messenger > Composing message option. Thus I ask my question in public. I was looking at what you did on the screen in Take 1, and so I describe in words what I could seee you do, with the pointer moving on screen, to explain audibly what you did in that video lesson.
------------------------------------------------------------

QUESTION: In the option, Take 2, you did not select the Bible module that you are going to work on. You immedialtey went to "Browse Data".
SUGGESTION: When you open the SQLite database file, Show how you select the existing e-Sword XXXXX.bblx module. Thank you for noticing you needed to open a file, before being able to Browse Data inside the file. Is this just applicable to the first row, for the first verse of the first chapter of the first book inside the Bible? .
Please talk your way though every step that you take. Somehow you moved your pointer somewhere, and did something, which you forgot to describe aloud in English words. The webpage did not show which module you had accessed.

File = select the Arabic.bblx or the Arabic.bbli file
There are three options, Database Structure, Browse Data, and Execute SQL.

Select the option to “Browse Data”.
Then in the “Table:” option you will see that there are various Tables, such as “Bible”, “Details”, and “sqlite_license”.
You explain that user must select “Table” and in the drop-down combo-box, then Select “Details” option.

IN TAKE ONE you showed that you selected a e-Sword module, and that this opened up table 1 in the file that you had opened.
Hebrew New Testament (Dalman-Delitzsch)

Example: Schema CREATE TABLE Details (Title NVARCHAR(100), Abbreviation NVARCHAR(50), Information TEXT, Version INT, OldTestament BOOL, NewTestament BOOL, Apocrypha BOOL, Strongs BOOL, RightToLeft BOOL)

QUESTION - When you go to Browse Data, is this a global change for every version of the almost 8000 entries? or must this change be entered on each and every row?

Select the option "Browse Data"

You will see Table = Bible
with Book, Chapter, Verse, Scripture.
These are listed in numerical order.

Go to Table, and notice there are various options: such as Bible, Details, and sqlite_license. Select the "Details" option.

This will now show the file that you have selected, in your example it is the Hebrew New Testament (Dalman-Delitzsch)

Notice that there are headings for the columns:
Title, Abbreviation, Information, Version, OldTestament, NewTestament, Apocrypha, Strongs, RightToLeft

To edit the database, you will need to select the content of the RightToLeft column, and enter the numeric "1" in the RightToLeft Filter option, which will then apply to the content of this column.

A Pop-up will be displayed to allow you to edit the Database cell. This is in Text Mode. Type of data currently in cell, is of "Text/Numeric", and the length of characters is "1 character(s)".

QUESTION: Does this have to be done in every entry, or is this a global change for the whole global content which will then apply to all the cells of all the verses for all the entries in the tables in the whole database? What causes the SQLite to ripple the effect to all entries?

QUESTION: Does this change have to be done separately for each verse, and for every verse, of every section of the e-Sword module table, for the OT, and for the NT, and the Apocrypha, depending on which has been provided in the Arabic Bible? Or is this a global change to the structure of the whole content of the database, on all rows of the database?

QUESTION: What is the meaning of "Version" number? Does this refer to creating a "bblx", in RTF formatting, or to creating a "bblx" in HTML formatting, or to creating a "bbli" in HTML formatting for the e-Sword module which will then be created from the content of the SQLite database file?

Then select the option to "Apply" at the bottom right corner.

APsit190, you forgot to tell the person to:
Then remember to select the option to "Write Changes", which will Write changes to the dabase file.

QUESTION: Does one have to Execute SQLite?

QUESTION: Does the user then have to "Save Project" or "Close Database", becore accessing this with e-Sword?

I ask, because I have not experimented myself. Your TAKE TWO just did not explain yourself fully and you just ended your lesson in the middle of the lesson, without explaining how to save and close the module..

#45870 Arabic bibles and viewing the text right to left

Posted by Olaf Bacon on 06 February 2024 - 07:56 PM in e-Sword Questions & Answers

Good day to you, Stephen (also known as APsit190), is your audio "on" for this video? Please view it from this website and check that you can hear your reply.
https://www.youtube....h?v=djTM4YvUcsA

#45864 NEWS e-Sword updated the MODULE CONVERTER

Posted by Olaf Bacon on 03 February 2024 - 10:17 AM in e-Sword Questions & Answers

The converter installs directly into your e-Sword folder location in your Program Files (x86) folder

Dear Mr Higgins, have you tried this personally, during the year 2024? When I run the convert.exe wizard, after clearing the Security block using permissions, the "convert.exe" just disappears, and I cannot find the file in the folder in which the e-Sword files are stored. What is the name of the Conversion exe file after it has been loaded, please? If the user is running with e-Sword in another folder, how do you get the file to go to the other folder? The installer option to change the destination seems to have disappeared also.

#45860 iPad V12.1.1 - Study notes displaying in Hebrew? - HELP!

Posted by Olaf Bacon on 30 January 2024 - 11:56 AM in e-Sword Questions & Answers

The latest currently available versions for e-Sword are listed at:
http://www.biblesupport.com/topic/11792-current-available-versions-of-e-sword/

These include: e-sword X for the MAC, e-Sword HD for the iPad, e-Sword LT for the iPhone, e-Sword for Android devides, e-Sword for Android phones, e-Sword for the PC.

#45811 Transferring ESword to a new computer

Posted by Olaf Bacon on 17 January 2024 - 01:16 AM in Tutorials

Comment on APsit190's setup of the e-Sword folder on his additional drive.

With e-Sword for PC version 10.4 (July 2014), a New option User Files Location field in the Resources dialog (under the Options menu) was provided by the e-Sword for PC developer, Rick Meyers, for customizing where you wish for your user files to be located. This is very convenient for setting up with backup or synchronizing programs, such as Dropbox. Initially these files will still default to your "My Documents\e-Sword" directory, but now you can easily change that!

Microsoft changed the name of the user folder from "My Documents" to "Documents" in Windows Vista. The change was made to simplify the folder structure and make it more user-friendly. Since then, the folder has retained the name, "Documents" in all subsequent versions of Windows, including Windows 10. and Windows 11.

Because APsit190 places all his Topics Editor Files in the same folder as where the usual user has his e-Sword files in the directory folder at C:\Program Files (x86)\e-Sword\ [on a 64-bit operating system PC], the *.topx files used by APsit190 are able to be accessed by him all in the same folder.

If you, instead, have two different folders, and use the C:\Program Files (x86)\e-Sword\ folder for the e-Sword Resources Location, then the *.topx files that are there are to be read with the Reference Library option window. Then the personal *.topx files that you create with your Topics Editor, will be in your User Files Location. This is useful to remember, especially if you want to correct spelling and cross-reference hyperlink "tooltips" to Bible verses, in some of the older pre-2014 files provided from Bible Support in the .topx format, and to do that you need to place these .topx files in the User Files Location folder, so that you can access them with the Topics Editor..

Also remember that if you access your PC with a different user name, this can affect where the User Files Location for e-Sword is located, depending on which user name you used to set up the personal profile for that version of e-Sword.

#45810 Where to put modules on a Family Computer

Posted by Olaf Bacon on 17 January 2024 - 12:06 AM in e-Sword Modules / Resources

The member "frozedout" joined 16 Jan 2024, is no longer active. His last post::

If Windows does not have the necessary permissions to place files in the e-Sword software directory, it creates a "Virtual Store" folder for them. These files will display in e-Sword as if they are supposed to be there, but they are not.

You will need to search Google for advice on how to find the "Virtual Store" folder for your specific version of Windows. Once you've found that folder, you can transfer the Bibles and other materials to the real e-Sword application directory.

To "fix" the rights, set the "Security" on the e-Sword application directory (usually C:\application Files (x86)\e-Sword\) to enable the "Everyone" user Full Control.

x trench run

ought to be updated on the last instruction line, to:

To "fix" the rights, set the "Security" on the e-Sword application directory (usually C:\Program Files (x86)\e-Sword\) to enable the "Everyone" user Full Control.

Updated by Olaf Bacon.

#45803 I cannot get my downloaded Bible module to work in E-Sword 10.0.7

Posted by Olaf Bacon on 14 January 2024 - 05:01 PM in e-Sword Modules / Resources

If you have downloaded a *.BBLX module, for e-Sword for the PC, after the module has downloaded, please browse to the file, and edit the filename, to change the file type from all captal letters, such as ".BBLX" to ".bblx". Then the Bible Support Module Installer utility designed by Josh Bond, will work. Then, when you then select the downloaded module, the module installer will help you to copy that module to the directory folder in which you have assigned the e-Sword Resorces Location to be saved. That utility as at version 0.6 refuses to process the modules that have the file type in all capital letters.

Also check that you selected the Panin module download for the entry for e-Sword, and not the module for mysword which is not designed to work with e-Sword. The module with the file type *.bbli is the preferred module to download, because the characters are coded in HTML format.

Olaf Bacon's Content

By content type

See this member's

Sign In