Skip to main content

A Note on Translations

Different languages
Q: I was studying in Philippians 1 when I came to verse 6. In the NASB version the verse reads, "For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus." In both the NIV and the KJV, the word "He" is not capitalized.

Why is it different? Are the NIV and KJV indicating that God is not the "He" that began a good work?


A: This is a really great question and actually touches on a very important aspect of Bible study that is often neglected. I say that up front because you may be disappointed with how simple of an answer this really is!

At the outset, I must say how thrilled I am to hear that a part of your "studying" method is to compare your passage in different translations. This is a really excellent practice. It is very helpful. As you've noted, the translations often read slightly differently. In this particular case, you'll see that the difference isn't substantive. But in other cases this practice of comparing translations will really bear good fruit in your study. So keep up the good work!

Why is comparing translations such a helpful practice?

We must understand that the original documents were written in three different languages. The Old Testament was written primarily in Hebrew, with some portions in Aramaic. The New Testament documents were written in Koine Greek.

If you've ever studied languages, in even the briefest fashion, you know that languages do not have an exact "one-to-one" correspondence. That means, that there is not an exact word in English to match every word in Greek. Most words in different languages don't cover the same range of possible meanings.

Part of the beauty and genius of language is that it is flexible. Adaptable. Capable of expressing both the simple and the complex. In different ways.

Lost in translation
In some cases, translation from one language to another is extremely straight forward. Simple. Direct. However, language contains many possibilities for word plays and intentional ambiguities. These are easily lost in translation. This is why it is incredibly difficult to translate a joke from one language to another. Very often, jokes play on contextual meanings beyond what is simply on the surface, or they play off of various word plays or ambiguities.

Here's an example from my son's favorite joke:

"Knock Knock"
Who's there?
"Boo"
Boo who?
"Oh, don't cry! It's just a joke!"

You see how that plays off of your understanding and fluency in the English language? To translate that into other languages may be much more complicated. The "punch" may simply be lost in translation.

Since the Bible contains such a diverse range of writing styles and genres, we really do see everything from riddles and poetry to historical narrative to fictional stories being told to illustrate poignant truths (i.e. "parables").

When comparing translations, you may find that the translator(s) tried their best to bring out some of the original nuance but their focus on one aspect necessitates their neglect of other "translational" possibilities. Comparing different versions will help you to identify these areas.

A quick example, compare John 3 in the following versions:

KJV Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

NAB Jesus answered and said to him, "Amen, amen, I say to you, no one can see the kingdom of God without being born from above."

NASB Jesus answered and said to him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God."

NET Jesus replied, "I tell you the solemn truth, unless a person is born from above, he cannot see the kingdom of God."

You'll notice that these translations read very similarly. But there is some disagreement between whether or not Jesus said "born again" or "born from above." So which is it?

In this case, the original Greek contains a word that is ambiguous. It contains both as a possibility, even though the difference in the English words ("again" and "above") are not very similar in meaning at all! Comparing translations will help alert you to possible ambiguities in the text so that you can study them more closely.

A second category of differences are not in the words used but in the grammatical decisions. This is the category that the Questioner's question falls into.

Something that most Christians that I know have never done is read the Translation Note in the front of their Bible. This section explains the philosophy of the Translator(s) and also explains some of the translational conventions that they use throughout.

Compare
Understanding these different conventions will be helpful for both understanding your primary translation better (whether you read KJV, NIV, NASB, or whatever). It will also enhance your ability to compare translations while studying.

In the above question, the differences arise between the grammatical convention of capitalizing pronouns (He, Him) when they refer to God in the NASB and not capitalizing pronouns (He, Him) when they refer to God in the KJV and NIV. This decision is consistent throughout the translation. So, consistently the NASB will capitalize these pronouns. Every time they are referring to God. But the KJV and NIV never capitalize these pronouns. Even when they refer to God. Unless, of course, other grammatical rules would necessitate capitalization (e.g. the first word in a sentence).

This grammatical convention of capitalizing He/Him when referring to God is customary for some. But is not necessitated by grammatical rules. It is a stylistic question. Not a substantive one.

Therefore, to answer the above question directly: the lack of capitalization is not making any commentary on the NIV or KJV thinking this does not refer to God. The difference is merely in style.

There is another translational convention that is used in the above example which many people may not notice. I want to briefly point it out.

Did you notice that the first three words ("For I am...") were italicized? Often in writing, italics are used for emphasis. But that is not what the NASB translators are trying to communicate. Instead of emphasizing these words, they are making it explicit that these three words do not appear in the original Greek. They are being supplied for context. This helps explain why this part of the passage reads differently than in the KJV and NIV. The translators of the NASB want you to know they think these words are rightly supplied because they are implied in the original. But they also want you to be aware that they are adding something that is their opinion.

A final type of decision in this last category includes the decision of translators to end and begin new sentences in English in different places. This is a result of the Greek tendency to use many run-on sentences. These are displeasing to our modern English sensibilities. The writings of the Apostle Paul are a good example. There are some cases where a single sentence spans nearly an entire chapter! Translators feel compelled to break this up. Comparing translations will expose that these decisions are not uniform. To gain a better understanding of Paul's intent (or any other author in Scripture), it is always a good idea to study these passages by reading them in several different translations. Especially across different translational philosophies.

Translational philosophies range dramatically. You can have "literal" or "word for word," which is sometimes referred to as "formal equivalents" or "wooden" translations. You can have more "idea for idea" translations, sometimes referred to as "dynamic equivalents," or "loose" translations. There are also "paraphrases." These are not really "translations" at all but actually closer to an interpretive commentary. Paraphrases (e.g. The Message, NLT) should never be your primary Bible. They can have an appropriate place being read alongside genuine translations during your study process.

Question
I hope that this brings clarity and doesn't muddy the waters for you.

To recap: the difference you noted does not imply that the KJV and NIV are saying that it's not God who does the work. All of these translations indicate the same understanding. God is the one at work. He will complete the work He has begun.

As an action step, I encourage all who desire to understand their Bible as well as possible to take a few minutes to turn to the front of your Bible and read the Translational Note. See what the philosophy of the translator(s) really is. Learn what conventions they employ to communicate the translational decisions they have made.

May the Lord bless you as you continue to seek Him and follow Jesus in this life!

Comments

P. Scott said…
Great explaination and one that should be shared as much as possible. I sometimes like the idea of "not" capitolizing the "he" which causes the person studying to have to "read around" the text to gain understanding. Most of the time if we read what comes before and after a passage like that, then it will become clear who the "he" is. Another point is that we often forget that whether it is the "Father" or the "Spirit" or the "Son"...it is "God" who is doing it. Not capitolizing the "he" leaves some interesting ambiguity. Just my opinion...:)

Popular Posts

Prayer vs. Petition

Q: What's the difference between prayer and petition? Phil 4:6 for example.

A: An excellent word study question! When attempting to study words from the text it is necessary to analyze the word being studied in the original language (in this case Greek) as attempting to look up the words in English will often produce erroneous results.

For example, in English the word petition has within its range of meanings things that are certainly not within the scope of meanings for the Greek word (i.e. “a sheet that is signed to demonstrate agreement with some principle or desire for some social action to be taken” is part of the range of “petition” but not of the Greek deesis from which “petition” is translated).

The word most commonly translated as “prayer” in our English Bibles is proseuche, which appears 36 times in the New Testament (NT) in one form or another (for the purposes of this study, we are only examining the usage of these words as nouns – the verbal forms will not be included…

10 Things An Evangelist Is Not

You've probably heard the term Evangelist before.Most people have. The term most likely brings something to mind. Sometimes positive. Often negative.

Does your idea match what other people think of when they hear the term evangelist?

More importantly, do any of these ideas match what the Bible tells us an evangelist is?

The truth is that most of the popular ideas about what an evangelist is and does are based on the culture, not the Bible.This is a problem.

The cultural idea of an evangelist is so popular that it is beginning to be used by companies. If you go to popular job sites and put the term evangelist into the search bar you will find many non-church jobs looking for evangelists. Many of these positions include the duties of spreading knowledge about a particular company, product, service, or idea.

The Bible tells us that Jesus gave some Evangelists for His church.And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers (Ephe…

5 Keys To Effective Witness

Content is important. But it's not the only thing. Some evangelistic methods are presented as if they are the perfect witnessing method. Some think memorizing a method and mechanically delivering the content means you have effectively witnessed.

Witness throughout the New Testament demonstrates this is not accurate. There is not a cookie-cutter approach that is applied the same way every time.
Content is extremely important. Without the right content our witness cannot be effective. Messing with the content of the gospel voids its power. For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not in cleverness of speech, so that the cross of Christ would not be made void. (1 Corinthians 1:17) Focusing only on content fails to recognize that we are not preaching to the air. We are preaching to persons.
To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak; I have become all things to all men, so that I may by all means save some. I do all things for the sake of the gospel,…

Lift Up The Son, Part 2

For whatever was written in earlier times was written for our instruction, so that through perseverance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope.
(Romans 15:4)


(If you missed Part 1, you can read it here.)

The Apostle Paul quoted a verse from Psalm 69 before making his comment in Romans 15:4. When he speaks of whatever was written before he means what we have recorded in the Old Testament. He simply called them the Scriptures.

God inspired the Hebrew Scriptures, our Old Testament. Paul said they were written for the instruction of New Testament believers. Through perseverance and encouragement in the Scriptures we can have hope. The Old Testament is not supposed to be ignored by Christians.

As we apply this to our task of lifting up the Son, that in and through Christ our Father may be glorified, we encounter a word of caution.

It is easy to agree on the surface that the church ought to talk about Jesus. That's a given. But are we aware that not everyone means th…

Fullness By Design

My wife and I are expecting our 8th child this year. I want my children to grow to full maturity. That's not to say that I want to skip the fun things that accompany young kids. I don't want to skip any of it. As each day passes I realize how quickly these moments are gone.

The march toward adulthood is inevitable. Every day, we all get older. I must be aware that my children are growing up, whether I like it or not.

But maturity is not the same as age. It is possible to get older while never really growing up.

When I say that I want my children to grow to full maturity what I mean is: I desire my children to realize their potential. I want them to grow into responsible adults.

I don't want my three sons to live in my house indefinitely. They shouldn't be expecting their mother to cook and clean for them into their thirties. Part of my responsibility as a father is to steward the children God has so graciously given us. We are to raise them so that they can be delivere…