Best Bible Version for Scholars for Synoptic Problem?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Adam
Posts: 641
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 3:28 pm

Re: Best Bible Version for Scholars for Synoptic Problem?

Post by Adam »

We seem to have hit a wall, there apparently are no other choices. Aside from displaying research directly in Greek, how about asking for opinions on what has turned up so far.
As for "standard" translations, are there any others besides English Standard Version I should consider, versions we have not named so far. Swanson used the Revised Standard Version in 1975, is it outdated, and is some other derivative from it besides English Standard Version? For example, the New American Standard Bible is considered very literal.
Then there are the professedly "literal" versions, all presumably starting from scratch and assigning one English word per Greek word. (Unfortunately getting "clunky" if doing the right thing and never using the same English word for more that one Greek word. This faults the English Standard Version.):
Young's Literal several editions in the 19th Century.
Concordant Version, 1920's.
Literal Translation of the Bible, in progress (and as demonstrated above, pretty well unworkable), the Great White Hope.
User avatar
DCHindley
Posts: 3412
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:53 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Best Bible Version for Scholars for Synoptic Problem?

Post by DCHindley »

Adam,

Welcome to the whacky world of bible translation. I am not a translator, nor am I even a Greek expert (although I did take a couple years in college, 1yr each in NT & Classical, to satisfy my language requirement), but I can say that I share your frustration. The most literal ones are up to a century old and/or retain a lot of antiquated language (thee, thou, gaol, etc.).

The RSV is what I have been using, only because it is NOT gender inclusive (the original Greek was not, and I study the NT to understand the original meanings), but it likes to play with the English rendering to smooth out the syntax. In the process you loose the clause by clause structure, which is important to me at least. In the process of smoothing out syntax, you can see where modern interpretation now and then intrudes into the translation (i.e., eisegesis).

IMHO, the more ideologically oriented translations (almost anything published by Evangelical protestants, with the NIV a good example) are far more likely to engage in eisegesis, and love to employ "tricks" (as I call them) to interpret difficult passages. They find one or two examples where a grammatical construction seems to mean something closer to what they want the NT passage to mean, and they reason, "If it can mean what we want it to mean there (usually some author far distant from NT in terms of date and distance and genre), then it MUST mean that here in the NT!"

"How convenient!" the Church lady says. But as "Paul" says: "All things are lawful, but not all things are expedient."

You may just have to get used to the versions that preserve the syntax as it was, and learn a bit about the grammar to put it into perspective. Case endings and verbal forms mean much more to Greek writers than does word order. I prefer to follow clauses, but even there a clause may interrupt another clause (a clause within a clause) to complicate things, but not really as often as one might think.

FWIW, there are Interlinear" versions available, that give word for word, including ISA Basic ver 3.0, that can be downloaded from the web. Unfortunately, there is no good way to copy & paste the results, at least horizontally, and only then with much effort.

Have fun!

DCH
Adam
Posts: 641
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 3:28 pm

Re: Best Bible Version for Scholars for Synoptic Problem?

Post by Adam »

You've got me worried now, DC,
That identical English translations will falsely represent varying Greek word-order in the sentence. To what extent does my preferred ESV nevertheless preserve the original word order?
I had just been about to post a triumphant discovery. Might as well anyway.

Granted that there is currently no satisfactory literal translation, nor apparently a satisfactory interlinear, as I confirmed by asking the store manager at a religious book store. "But what about the English Standard Version REVERSE Interlinear? That's where the text is presented in English first, with the Greek below the line." I put in my order on the spot. Every variance in the original Greek verb for the various "see", "say", and ":sent" etc. will show up immediately and easily be incorporated into the text in the style I displayed above that Howard M. Teeple used for his Literary Origin of the Gospel of John.

Has anyone heard before of such a reverse interlinear Bible text? Perhaps there is one out there that is better for my purposes than the ESV? Like it has the English text in the same word order as the Greek? It would sound barbarous, of course, for some twisted syntax.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Best Bible Version for Scholars for Synoptic Problem?

Post by MrMacSon »

lol. The issue isn't the messenger(s) -i.e. the texts: it's the inconsistent messages.
Ulan
Posts: 1505
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2014 3:58 am

Re: Best Bible Version for Scholars for Synoptic Problem?

Post by Ulan »

Adam wrote:You've got me worried now, DC,
That identical English translations will falsely represent varying Greek word-order in the sentence. To what extent does my preferred ESV nevertheless preserve the original word order?
It's a principal problem, as DCH mentioned. As the English language lost most of its grammar in the course of the centuries (which makes it so attractive to foreigners), English is incapable of expressing a correct meaning without sticking to a strict word order. You cannot invert the order of subject and object in an English sentence without inverting those functions at the same time. You can only do that in languages that make use of proper declensions.
User avatar
DCHindley
Posts: 3412
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:53 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Best Bible Version for Scholars for Synoptic Problem?

Post by DCHindley »

Adam,

No, I have not seen a reverse interlinear. I do happen to often refer to an interlinear version, although of the traditional type.

Strangely enough, it is published by the Watchtower Society (Jehovah's Witnesses). They had long ago purchased the printing plates of an older interlinear, The Emphatic Diaglott (the spelling is a bit weird, as texts in two languages are usually referred to as "diglots"), which was first published (by a protestant) in 1864, and based on J J Griesbach's eclectic Greek text and various readings from Vatican Manuscript 1209 (Codex Vaticanus). The JWs bought the plates and published editions in 1901, 1927 & 1942, which you can still get from them.

Later, in 1969, they created their own version based on the Westcott & Hort Greek text as published in 1881 (probably because it was out of copyright). I first saw one while in High school on the coffee table of a couple who hosted a bible study group, which they said they used to "refute" the JW's own New World Translation (1961, but republished several times). To the right of the interlinear word for word is their NWT in the 1984 rendition. While I do not really like their NWT, the interlinear word for word is very consistent and to be honest one of the best I have seen. This is also still in print.

Most of the other Interlinears prefer to use the Majority/Byzantine Text, because this is closest to the ever beloved KJV, and the English is usually KJV, NKJV or NIV. Yours uses the ESV, but I do not remember ever seeing an interlinear use that one. The ESV is based on the UBS and NA-27 Greek text (modern as modern can be) but I cannot guarantee the Greek text in the Interlinear is actually that. Depending on who publishes the interlinear, the publisher may try to pull a fast one and substitute the Majority Text, but I doubt that in this case.

Good luck with that.

DCH
Adam
Posts: 641
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 3:28 pm

Re: Best Bible Version for Scholars for Synoptic Problem?

Post by Adam »

182 views on this thread so far by perhaps 50 scholars/inquirers, but no one here is familiar with the American Bible Society's Biblehub, perhaps the standard place to look up parallel translations of a verse? Granted it's hot and new, in progress (New Testament on line but OT not before 2017), but I got curious about the "Berean Bible". This seems to be even more literal (for word order anyway) than Young's Literal Bible, but it's over a century newer (except that the Greek base for its interlinear is the 1904 Nestle no longer in copyright). It's FREE, people! We can download it for free or buy a bound book from ChristianBooks for $7.99. They also have a Study Bible, but I'm not too clear on how much of their vaunted four levels of translation that includes. (They have Greek text, interlinear, literal translation, and freer deeper translation.)

From what I can tell so far comparing with my Greek Bible, this Berean Bible seems to be more exactly literal even for word order. That's a lot better than waiting years for the Literal Bible (above mentioned in this thread) of the infinite grammatical complexities! We're only stuck with a superceded Greek text, which may not be too big a disadvantage as some scholars no doubt prefer the 19th Century Westcott and Hort to more recent versions that give more respect to D and the Western text.

Does anyone have any familiarity with the Berean Bible? My next best at the moment, the English Standard Version, is not as close for word order, yet is not that much more readable.
outhouse
Posts: 3577
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Best Bible Version for Scholars for Synoptic Problem?

Post by outhouse »

Adam wrote:182 views on this thread so far by perhaps 50 scholars/inquirers, but no one here is familiar with the American Bible Society's Biblehub,
The problem is there are many credible interpretations. The key is context, and in many cases its different from book to book and letter to letter. In many places the context is lost to time, and the evolution of text from being copies of copies adds to how difficult the text is.

DC made a great reply.
Last edited by outhouse on Sat Jul 02, 2016 10:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
Adam
Posts: 641
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 3:28 pm

Re: Best Bible Version for Scholars for Synoptic Problem?

Post by Adam »

I'm so observant! There on Biblehub Parallel Versions was not just Berean Study Bible (the $7.99) but also the Berean Literal. The samples and some explorations showed that the shorter Berean Study Bible includes the same specifically literal words, just not as many. That is, the Berean Literal Bible includes English equivalents for ALL the Greek words, even the ones best left out for smooth, concise English. So of course the Literal Berean is what I need. It reads well, however, which makes me doubt that it really has the needed one-and-only-one English word per Greek word. More likely the Interlinear Bible is that. That is, giving the Greek text in the exact order of the words. And is this English the same English as in the Berean Literal, or has some of the inevitable clunkiness been smoothed out between the English of the Interlinear and the English of the Literal? I can test this by inspection, so a few minutes' study and I easily determined that the word order varies a lot, and even the word used for translation of major words, like in Matthew 3:11 "mightier" for "more powerful".
Adam
Posts: 641
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 3:28 pm

Re: Best Bible Version for Scholars for Synoptic Problem?

Post by Adam »

Matthew 3:11
Berean Study Bible (fewer words, some even different, and the tense varies as well):
I baptize you with water for repentance, but after me will come One more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.
Berean Literal Bible:
I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but after me is coming He who is mightier than I, of whom I am not worthy to carry the sandals. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire,

Notice that the Literal paradoxically uses the shorter "mightier" instead of "more powerful". ἰσχυρότερός is the Greek one work, suggesting that the Berean Literal is a work that needs further editing to correspond one word "mightier" to it. But perhaps elsewhere "powerful" is the proper translation and "mighty" won't do?
Post Reply