Mistranslating Scripture

MY BIBLE INTERPRETATION

Mistranslating Scripture

I have an interlinear Bible. It gives me the Bible text in the languages in which it was originally written (Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic) along with an English word-for-word translation. This is as close as you can get to the original version of the Bible without learning the other languages. This is significant, because most people who believe the Bible is inerrant and divinely inspired put their trust in the original version. They say that all of the copying and translating of the scriptures was not divinely inspired, and it could have introduced errors. So I'm very interested in the differences between my interlinear Bible's English translation and modern English translations. On this web page, I compare the interlinear Bible (IB) translation to the New International Version (NIV) translation of the Bible.


Sometimes, the translations are identical. Here's a verse where the NIV translation almost matches the Greek perfectly, word for word:
I am the way and the truth and the life no one comes to the father except through me John 14:6z
IB
"I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the father except through me." John 14:6z
NIV
The two translations only differ in punctuation and capitalization, and that's because the original version of the Bible didn't have any punctuation or capitalization. (I capitalized the word "I", because that word is always capitalized in English. So I'm not imposing an interpretation on you by capitalizing that word.) If you agree with the NIV's choice of punctuation and capitalization, and I do, then this is an excellent translation.

It's rare for the translations to be word-for-word identical, but for most verses, the differences are minor. Look at John 1:1.
in beginning was the word and the word was with God and God was the word John 1:1
IB
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. John 1:1
NIV
I underlined the differences between these two translations. I don't think they have any significant impact on the meaning of the verse.

Changes in word order and differences in the use of function words (like "the", "or", "to", and "not") are very common. And often, the words are not identical, but they have similar meanings. For example:
but he was pierced for our transgressions crushed for our iniquities the chastisement of our peace on him and with his wounds we are healed Isaiah 53:5
IB
But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed. Isaiah 53:5
NIV
The words "chastisement" and "punishment" are synonyms according to Thesarus.com. The greatest difference between the two translations is the addition of the word "brought", and this may indeed change the meaning. But in this case, I agree with the NIV intepretation.

Then in some cases, there are significant differences between the two translations. For example, the NIV cut out half of this verse:
and not lead us into temptation but deliver us from evil because of you is the kingdom and the power and the glory to the ages amen Matthew 6:13
IB
And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one. Matthew 6:13
NIV
However, the NIV does have a footnote that says "some late manuscripts one, / for yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen." So the problem is that the original version of Matthew's book has been lost, and the only manuscripts that still exist are copies of it. In the case of Matthew 6:13, the earliest copies that exist disagree, and nobody knows which one is right. Personally, I prefer the version that ends with "Amen." But the NIV claims that that was probably added by somebody who copied the book of Matthew. There is no way of knowing for sure which version is the same as the original.

But here's a case where the NIV deleted things without including a footnote.
he said and who are you sir and the lord said I am Jesus whom you persecute hard for you against prods to kick trembling both and astonished he said lord what me desire you to do and the lord to him rise up and go into the city and it shall be told you what you must do Acts 9:5-6
IB
"Who are you, Lord?" Saul asked. "I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting," he replied. "Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do." Acts 9:5-6
NIV

Now look at an example where, in my opinion, the NIV translators might be imposing an incorrect interpretation by changing the words.
and in the fulfilling of the day of pentacost they were all with one mind in the same place Acts 2:1
IB
When the day of Pentacost came, they were all together in one place. Acts 2:1
NIV
It seems to me that "in agreement" would be a better way to say "with one mind" than "together". I'm not saying that the NIV translation is necessarily wrong, but the NIV authors seem to have decided that my interpretation is wrong, because they chose a translation that cannot be interpreted my way. Anyone who reads the NIV might not realize that another interpretation is possible.

And then there are the cases where the translations really are different.
and having called near one of the children he inquired what may be this Luke 15:26
IB
So he called one of the servants and asked him what was going on. Luke 15:26
NIV
The NIV authors changed the meaning of the word "children" to "servants". I can't understand how they would justify this interpretation. Do they have any reason to believe that these children happen to be servants?

Now look at this one:
... a judge certain was in a city God not fearing and man not respecting a widow and was in city that and she came to him saying avenge me from the adversary of me and not he would for a time after but these things he said in himself if even God not I fear and man not respect because yet causes me trouble widow this I will avenge her that not in end coming she subdue me Luke 18:2-5z
IB
... "In a certain town there was a judge who neither feared God nor cared about men. And there was a widow in that town who kept coming to him with the plea, 'Grant me justice against my adversary.' For some time he refused. But finally he said to himself, '˜Even though I don't fear God or care about men, yet because this widow keeps bothering me, I will see that she gets justice, so that she won't eventually wear me out with her coming!'" Luke 18:2-5z
NIV
NIV calls this "The Parable of the Persistent Widow," but based on the IB version, it doesn't seem that the widow asks the judge for help more than once. Perhaps she isn't persistent at all. But the NIV authors made some changes so that the widow appears to be persistent. Now, I will admit that the verses before and after this parable might imply that the widow is persistent, but I still don't see how that justifies the changes. I say: Let the readers decide for themselves how to interpret the parable.

And check this out:
if for not you believe that I am you will die in the sins of you John 8:24z
IB
"... if you do not believe that I am the one I claim to be you will indeed die in your sins." John 8:24z
NIV
Where did the words "the one I claim to be" come from? And the NIV authors did the same thing 4 verses later:
said therefore to them Jesus when you lift up the son of man then you will know that I am... John 8:28x
IB
So Jesus said, "When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am the one I claim to be..." John 8:28x
NIV
Maybe they know something about Greek that I don't know? But wait. The exact same Greek words appear again later in the chapter:
said to them Jesus truly truly I say to you before Abraham came into being I am John 8:58
IB
"I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!" John 8:58
NIV
This time, the NIV authors decided not to add anything to the translation. But in the very next chapter:
... that one said I am John 9:9z
IB
... But he himself insisted, "I am the man." John 9:9z
NIV
The Greek words for "I am" are the same in all four cases. So I must wonder how the NIV authors can justify these inconsistent translations. And these translations have had an impact on the theology. I have heard sermons claim that John 8:58 is a very important verse, because here Jesus refers back to when voice from a burning bush said to Moses, "I am." But the fact is, John 8:58 is not the only time, or even the first time he said, "I am."

A footnote in the NIV indicates that I Corinthians 2:9 quotes Isaiah 64:4. But look at what these verses say (both in the NIV translation):
... "No eye has seen, no ear has heard, no mind has conceived what God has prepared for those who love him"... I Corinthians 2:9z
NIV
... no one has heard, no ear has perceived, no eye has seen any God besides you, who acts on behalf of those who wait for him. Isaiah 64:4z
NIV
These are significant differences, not just in the words, but in the meaning, too. But both of these verses come from the same translation. Why can't the NIV quote itself correctly? Before answering that question, let's take a look at what the IB says for these two verses:
... things that eye did not see and ear did not hear and on the heart of man not came up how prepared god those loving him I Corinthians 2:9z
IB
... not they have heard not they gave ear eye not has seen a god except you who works for him who waits for him Isaiah 64:4z
IB
In the word-for-word translations, the quote in I Corinthians looks even less like the original in Isaiah. How could Paul (the author of I Corinthians) have quoted Isaiah so badly? Well, Paul was using a Greek translation of Isaiah's book, which is known as the Septuagint (Sept). So let's see how well his quote matches up with the Septuagint:
... "No eye has seen, no ear has heard, no mind has conceived what God has prepared for those who love him"... I Corinthians 2:9z
NIV
... have not heard, nor perceived by the ear, neither has the eye seen a God besides you, who works for him who waits for him. Isaiah 64:3z
Sept
Hmm. They don't match up so well. Okay, maybe the differences are caused by the English translations. But if Paul was copying the words right out of the Septuagint, in Greek they should be letter-for-letter identical, shouldn't they?
... ἃ ὀφθαλμός οὐκ ειόε καὶ οὐς οὐκ ήκουσε καὶ έπί καρδίαν άνθρώπου οὐκ άνέβη ἃ ήτοίμασεν ό θεός τοῖς άγαπώσιν αύτόν I Corinthians 2:9z
IB
... οὐκ ἠκούσαμεν οὐδὲ οἱ ὀφθαλμοὶ ἡμῶν εἶδον θεὸν πλὴν σοῦ καὶ τὰ ἒργα σου ἃ ποιήσεις τοῖς ὑπομένουσιν ἒλεον Isaiah 64:3z
Sept
I don't know Greek, but it seems to me that these two verses are not letter-for-letter identical. So wow. What does this mean? It appears that the Septuagint translated Isaiah 64:4 from Hebrew to Greek poorly, then Paul misquoted it, and then the NIV translated the result from Greek to English poorly.

Now here's a real doozy. Read these different translations of Galatians 5:19-21x.
clearly revealed now are the works of the flesh which are adultery fornication uncleanness lustfulness idol service sorcery enmities fightings jealousies angers rivalries divisions heresies envyings murders drunkenness revellings and like things to these Galatians 5:19-21x
IB
The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. Galatians 5:19-21x
NIV
Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like... Galatians 5:19-21x
KJV
The wrong things the sinful self does are clear: being sexually unfaithful, not being pure, taking part in sexual sins, worshiping gods, doing witchcraft, hating, making trouble, being jealous, being angry, being selfish, making people angry with each other, causing divisions among people, feeling envy, being drunk, having wild and wasteful parties, and doing other things like these... Galatians 5:19-21x
CEV
Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, envying, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these... Galatians 5:19-21x
NASB
Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lewdness, idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions, heresies, envy, murders, drunkenness, revelries, and the like; Galatians 5:19-21x
NKJ
When you follow the desires of your sinful nature, the results are very clear: sexual immorality, impurity, lustful pleasures, idolatry, sorcery, hostility, quarreling, jealousy, outbursts of anger, selfish ambition, dissension, division, envy, drunkenness, wild parties, and other sins like these. Galatians 5:19-21x
NLT
The wrong things the sinful self does are clear: being sexually unfaithful, not being pure, taking part in sexual sins, worshiping gods, doing witchcraft, hating, making trouble, being jealous, being angry, being selfish, making people angry with each other, causing divisions among people, feeling envy, being drunk, having wild and wasteful parties, and doing other things like these. Galatians 5:19-21x
NCV
What the sinful nature does is clear. It enjoys sexual sins, impure acts and wild living. It worships statues of gods. It also worships evil powers. It is full of hatred and fighting. It is full of jealousy and fits of anger. It is interested only in getting ahead. It stirs up trouble. It separates people into their own little groups. It wants what others have. It gets drunk and takes part in wild parties. It does many things of that kind.... Galatians 5:19-21x
NIRV
Now the doings (practices) of the flesh are clear (obvious): they are immorality, impurity, indecency, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, anger (ill temper), selfishness, divisions (dissensions), party spirit (factions, sects with peculiar opinions, heresies), envy, drunkenness, carousing, and the like. Galatians 5:19-21x
AMP
It is obvious what kind of life develops out of trying to get your own way all the time: repetitive, loveless, cheap sex; a stinking accumulation of mental and emotional garbage; frenzied and joyless grabs for happiness; trinket gods; magic-show religion; paranoid loneliness; cutthroat competition; all-consuming-yet-never-satisfied wants; a brutal temper; an impotence to love or be loved; divided homes and divided lives; small-minded and lopsided pursuits; the vicious habit of depersonalizing everyone into a rival; uncontrolled and uncontrollable addictions; ugly parodies of community. I could go on. Galatians 5:19-21x
MES
Let's compare them. My best attempt to align these translations can be found here.


Based on this analysis, I conclude that it is risky to trust any translation of the Bible. Even an interlinear Bible includes some interpretation in the way it resolves ambiguities, though I don't know the original languages, so I can't tell when the IB translations are questionable. But my advice is, if you're ever thinking about doing something significant with a Bible verse or passage, like teaching a class or changing your life, you ought to first check an interlinear translation or a word-for-word translation to find out what it really says.


References

Notes