The Work Is Never Finished

Written By Beaux Hargrove

By J. P. S.

Most world languages sit between English’s abundance of Bible translations and the plight of Bibleless peoples. Though many languages do have a Bible, those Bibles may urgently need revising. The Great Commission, the nature of Scripture, and the nature of translations show that Christians can and must improve their Bible translations. See how the Bible in Arabic can and should be revised to better align with the divine intention of Scripture.

32 min read

pdf

Introduction

When someone hears the words “Bible translation,” two situations likely come to mind. First, he will consider the translation or translations which he personally uses. In the English world, there are many faithful translations, including the ESV, KJV, LSB, and CSB.1 The second situation that will probably come to mind is the global work of translating the Bible into languages that do not have the Word of God, languages that might not yet have a written form.

After reading this article, the reader will hopefully have a third situation clearly in mind. The majority of the world’s languages exist somewhere in between the abundance of translations available in the English world and the plight of Bibleless languages. These languages have fewer Bible translations than English does, but they do have a Bible. According to the “2025 Global Scripture Access” report of Wycliffe Global Alliance, there are 776 languages that have a complete Bible translation, representing 6.2 billion native speakers.2 In many of those cases, there is a pressing need for a revision of the Bible translation that can better serve the needs of the believers in that language group and be used more effectively as a tool for proclaiming Christ to those who do not know Him.3

Christians should continue to care that the Bible they hold in their hands is as accurate and clear as it can possibly be.4 They should also continue to care that people who have no Bible in their language will soon experience that great blessing. At the same time, Christians must be aware of and concerned for those whose Bible translations need a simple update, a more thorough revision, or even replacement with an entirely new translation.5

The aim of this article is to raise awareness and concern about the need for revision of Bible translations in major world languages so that Christians will pray for and support these efforts. If Christians have the ability to improve their Bible translations, they also have the responsibility to do so. This article will contain two main sections. The first section gives reasons for revising Bible translations. The second section takes the situation of the common Arabic Bible translation as a case study to demonstrate a process for revising Bible translations.

The Reasons for Revising Bible Translations

There are three primary reasons for revising Bible translations.6 The first is the nature of the mission, that is, the Great Commission. The call to make disciples demands an accurate, clear translation of the Bible in the language best understood by those potential disciples. The second reason for revising Bible translations is the nature of Scripture. The Bible is God’s self-revelation to man, which is accurate and preserved by God. The third reason for revising Bible translations lies in the nature of translations themselves. Translations must be faithful, but they are never perfect, and there is always room for improvement.

The Nature of the Mission

In Matthew 28:18–20, Jesus Christ spoke the familiar words that Christians know as the Great Commission. With these words, He declared His authority over the earth (v. 18) and His enduring presence with His followers (v. 20b), and He gave His disciples the command to go and make more disciples from all nations and baptize them (v. 19). Then He commanded them to teach these converts to obey His commands (v. 20a).7 An accurate, clear Bible translated into the language of the hearer is necessary for making disciples and for teaching those disciples to keep all of Jesus’s commandments.

Jesus’s commissioning of His disciples is also recorded in Acts 1:8, in which He informs them that they will be His witnesses, beginning in Jerusalem and extending to the ends of the earth.8 The book of Acts records that the apostles and other disciples of Christ did just that, and “reasoned with them from the Scriptures” (Acts 17:2). Not only did they use the Scriptures, the apostles, like Jesus, quoted the Bible extensively from a translation. The majority of the Old Testament citations found in the New Testament are derived not directly from the original Hebrew and Aramaic but from the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament.9 So the use of translated Scripture on the mission field goes back to the very inception of the church and the global missions endeavor.10

Christians should consider Bible translation and revision to be an essential complement to the Great Commission.11 Translating the Bible and revising those translations is not the Great Commission, but the Great Commission cannot be fully completed without that complementary work. Therefore, Christians should care that the Bible is available in an accurate and clear form for all peoples and in all languages, and this may require revising an already available translation.

The Nature of Scripture

To understand the rationale and importance of revising a translation of the Bible, one must also understand the nature of the Bible itself. The Bible is God’s Word and His self-revelation to His people. The Bible is inerrant in its original writings and has been well-preserved over the centuries. Christians can and should have great confidence that the text of Scripture available today reflects precisely what the Spirit, through the original human authors, intended to communicate.

Inspiration

The first aspect of Scripture to consider is its inspiration and, along with that, the concept of revelation. Scripture is God’s self-revelation. God proclaims Himself through His Word to His people. The manner by which God gave this self-revelation is called inspiration, that is, Scripture was breathed out by God (2 Tim 3:16). Scripture is God’s words, written by humans in their own style, superintended by the Spirit, so that the result was a divine and human work (2 Pet 1:20–21). Therefore, Scripture can properly be called “the word of God” (John 10:35).12

The fact that the Bible is God’s inspired Word means that an accurate, readable, and available translation is imperative. The stakes are high. One cannot be indifferent or passive. This is just as true when it comes to considering whether a revision or new translation is justified as it is when considering producing a translation of the Bible for a language that does not yet have it. The goal is the same: the Word of God accurately conveyed to the people of God. The encouraging thought is that if the Bible is God’s inspired Word, He will see the task through. God Himself cares deeply that His people have an accurate, readable text in front of them and will supply His servants with all the necessary strength and tools to do the work.

Inerrancy

Scripture contains no mistakes in its original writings, that is, it contains no errors in anything it presents as true.13 As John 17:17 says, “Your word is truth.” The Scripture records lies (such as those of Satan), but they are clearly identified as such. The inerrancy of Scripture flows directly out of the inspiration of Scripture. Because the Bible is God’s Word and because God cannot lie (Titus 1:2), the Bible cannot lie.14

The fact that Scripture is inerrant, and translations are not, does not mean Christians should throw up their hands in despair regarding translations. Rather, the infallible Scripture gives believers the best possible foundation on which to build. It also calls them to a high standard of excellence in translating and printing the Bible. Christians should strive for the best possible translations.

Preservation

The truth of Scripture has been carefully preserved. The same God who was able to communicate divine truth infallibly through human authors is able to preserve His Word accurately over time and by means of repeated copying of manuscripts.15 It does the believer no good to know that the Bible was written inerrantly but has not been well preserved so that he can access it today. The reality is the Bible has been remarkably preserved so that believers can have a great amount of confidence in the Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic texts available today.

Many ancient manuscripts of the Scripture in the original languages and in translation are available today. Though there is diversity among these manuscripts, many of the variants are very trivial in nature, including differences of spelling and other differences that do not affect the meaning of the sentence. Even variants that are of a more substantial nature do not threaten any essential Christian doctrine.

The discipline of textual criticism is important for determining the best readings from the various manuscripts. By God’s grace, and through the diligent work of many scholars, believers today have an amazing understanding of the history of textual transmission, of the scribal tendencies that led to discrepancies in the texts, and the best methods for determining which reading accurately reflects the original source. The fact that Christians perform textual criticism on the manuscripts of Scripture should cause them to have more, not less, confidence in the preservation of God’s holy Word. The concepts of preservation and textual criticism are important to understand because, like the work of translation, they are human acts. They will not be inspired and inerrant—those designations are reserved for the original writings of Scripture—but they can and should be as faithful as possible, undertaken with full trust in God’s power and help.

The Nature of Translations

Having laid a foundation by discussing the nature of Scripture, it is necessary to examine the nature of Bible translations and demonstrate how they differ from the original writings of Scripture. Translations are representations of the inspired Scripture that can and should accurately reflect the meaning of the original text of Scripture. Translations are also imperfect and temporary. They can and should be updated and revised as necessary to ensure that the Word of God is conveyed to the reader as precisely and clearly as possible.

Translations Are Representations of Inspired Scripture

The translation itself must be distinguished from the inspired and infallible Word of God.16 If the translation were in itself inspired and infallible, Christians could never nor should ever revise it. Rather, a faithful translation of the Bible is an accurate representation of the Word of God in a language that is accessible to the reader. And the good news is that the original text of Scripture is available for comparison. Preachers, commentaries, and Bible study tools all provide the careful student with insight into the Scripture in its original languages so that no Christian need be left in doubt whether the translation he is reading is an accurate representation of the Scriptures.

The question might come to mind: Can a translation be both the Word of God and fallible? One might ask the following three questions to get to the heart of the matter: Is the Word of God perfect without any error? Is the Bible on the bookshelf the Word of God? Can that Bible be updated to make improvements and even correct mistakes? If the answer to all three questions is “yes,” then a difficulty arises. If the Bible is God’s perfect Word and the translation is the Word of God, then how can the translation be updated? Does the Bible need to be updated?

It is important to affirm that translations are the Word of God, and they also can be revised and improved. But the reviser is not revising the Scriptures themselves. The Scripture that believers hold in their hands today is the Word of God, whether it is a Greek New Testament, the ESV, the LSB, or the CSB. The translators of the KJV affirmed this in their long introduction to the Bible, in which they explained what they were doing and why. They faced detractors among the Roman Catholics who thought that Protestants were corrupting the Bible. The KJV translators were arguing that their Protestant translations were, in fact, God’s Word. They stated, “Wee affirme and avow, that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English . . . containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God.”17

The KJV translators continued with an illustration: “As the Kings Speech which hee uttered in Parliament, being translated into French, Dutch, Italian and Latine, is still the Kings Speech, though it be not interpreted by every Translator with the like grace, nor peradventure so fitly for phrase, nor so expresly for sence, every where.”18 For the revision of Bible translations to take place, it is essential to affirm these two realities: (1) Faithful Bible translations are accurate representations of the Scripture that can rightly be called the Word of God, and (2) they are at the same time human works that are capable of being revised without compromising the integrity of Scripture.

Translations Are Imperfect

Translations are not guaranteed to be free from error.19 The Bible is perfect, and because it is God’s Word, it is incapable of error or deceit. But that does not mean that translations are inherently inerrant. It is probably best to speak of translations possessing “derived inspiration” and, therefore, “derived inerrancy.” As Eric Davis writes, “Translations are inerrant insofar as they reproduce the original manuscripts.”20 Thankfully, many translations in English and other languages do faithfully reproduce the content of the original biblical writings.

Because translations are imperfect by their nature, it is possible to find mistakes and weaknesses in any translation. There are some well-known examples of mistakes in modern printed Bibles. One such example is called The Wicked Bible, which made a simple but glaring mistake in the printed edition, omitting the “not” in the phrase “thou shalt not commit adultery,” leading to the reading of “thou shalt commit adultery.”21 Other shortcomings in translation or printing are more subtle.

A translation can be both faithful and imperfect, and it is important to hold these two affirmations together and not to move to extremes. If one views a faithful translation as perfect, he will resist all attempts to improve it. If one views an imperfect translation as unfaithful, he will needlessly discredit or discard a valuable resource that should be preserved and developed instead.

Translations Are Temporary

Translations must be subject to revision because they are temporary. One reason for the temporary nature of translations is that languages change over time.22 Old words fall out of use, and new ones are coined. Grammar, spelling, and other conventions change. Some words remain but completely change meanings, leading to confusion when the reader falsely assumes he understands them. For this reason, Mark Ward calls such words “false friends.”23 He mentions several examples of false friends in the KJV, including halt (1 Kings 18:21), which means “waver” rather than “stop”; commendeth (Rom 5:8), which means “demonstrate” rather than “praise”; and convenient, which means “suitable” rather than “easy to use.”

As languages change, so Bible translations must change. The words of the Bible in Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic are fixed. Christians do not update the Bible itself. They do not revise the source; they revise only the channel by which the reader accesses the source. In fact, updating the language of translations is a necessary means of preserving any Bible translation.

Translations are also temporary because Christians’ collective knowledge grows with time. The global church learns by continual biblical studies, analysis of manuscripts, archaeological discoveries, and more. This does not mean that the church today has a better understanding in all things when compared to the church of the past, nor does it mean that newer is always better, nor that the modern scholarly consensus should be assumed to be correct. It does mean, however, that Christians are gaining knowledge and insight over time, and the discerning student can benefit from these scholarly gains. Another improvement in modern times that can aid in translation work is the invention and development of computer and data analysis capability. Translations that were published before the invention of computers could benefit from the kind of analysis that computer technology provides.

In summary, three truths compel Christians to revise Bible translations. First, the mission to which Christians are called, the Great Commission, demands a Bible that is available in the language of the reader in the clearest and most accurate form possible. Second, the nature of the Scripture itself as the inspired, inerrant, and preserved Word of God demands that Christians strive for translations that best convey that life-changing Word. Third, the nature of Bible translations as faithful though temporary and imperfect demands that they be revised as necessary to preserve the truth for future generations.

The Process of Revising Bible Translations:
The Arabic Van Dyck Bible as a Case Study

After considering several reasons for revising Bible translations, it is necessary to describe how this work can and should be accomplished. The Arabic Van Dyck (AVD) translation of the Bible is an appropriate test case.24 Imagine a scenario in which there are churches and believers and a Bible in the local language. Then imagine that virtually everyone uses and trusts the same Bible translation. They grew up with it, memorized it, read it in the home, and heard it preached in church. Of course, other translations are available, but many people do not use them and may even view those translations with suspicion or not regard them as Scripture. Lastly, imagine that this beloved translation is one hundred and sixty years old and has not been significantly updated or revised since the time of its publication.25 That is the exact situation of the AVD.

The Middle East-North Africa region of the world is home to hundreds of millions of people, the majority of which use Arabic as their primary language.26 Many, if not most, pastors, believers, and churches in this region use the AVD as their primary, or perhaps exclusive translation of the Bible.27 The impact of this translation on believers in the region and the region itself throughout the past one hundred and sixty years is incalculable. If the Lord should tarry, the potential impact of a new or revised Arabic Bible translation is similarly incalculable. The remainder of this article uses the AVD as an example to demonstrate the steps necessary for producing a faithful revision that is useful for local believers and churches.

Evaluating a Translation

An important first step of any revision work is to properly analyze what is already available in the language in terms of Bible translation. It is necessary to consider the translation philosophy and the translation practice. These two areas of inquiry will help the researcher assess if a revision is needed and how that work should proceed to achieve the best result and receive the greatest acceptance from the intended audience.

Knowing the Translation Philosophy

Nothing is more essential to a translation than its underlying translation philosophy.28

What are the principles of a Bible translation that must be maintained, and what kinds of changes need to be made in any revision? The AVD is a time-tested, faithful representation of the inspired Scripture in the original languages. The one who began the work, Eli Smith, described the translation principles of the project in this way:

Principles.—Faithful conformity to the sacred original, of course, lies at the foundation of the whole. Uniformity in the translation of similar words and phrases is also aimed at with much care. Then clear and impressive intelligibility is labored after. . . . At the same time, it is a rule not to depart from the laws of ancient grammar, nor to admit words not sanctioned by classical usage without urgent necessity. . . . In this way, we are able to avoid, in a great degree, giving the work the savor of a local dialect. . . . We also bear in mind that the word is designed for a race, only a small portion of which are Christians, in a meaning not sanctioned by Mohammedan usage, lest by using them we convey a wrong idea to a Mohammedan mind. At the same time, it is our constant aim not to depart, without sufficient cause, from the phraseology consecrated by long usage in the current translations.29

One can distill seven principles from Smith’s writing: (1) faithful conformity to the original; (2) uniformity of similar words and phrases; (3) clear and impressive intelligibility; (4) adherence to the laws of ancient grammar; (5) avoiding the savor of a local dialect; (6) understandable to a Muslim audience; and (7) not departing from phraseology consecrated by long usage. These translation principles are sound.30

The AVD is an exemplar of a formally equivalent or essentially literal Bible translation, and any revision of it should adopt the same approach. Functionally equivalent translations can have their place in the life of the church and the believer, but one must beware of interpretations that may be included in the text. Paraphrases can be of limited value but should be viewed more as commentaries on the text of Scripture rather than faithful representations of the Scripture itself. Ideologically motivated translations have no place in the life of the believer. An example of a kind of ideologically motivated translation common in the Arabic world is Muslim Idiom Translations, which seek not merely to be understandable to a Muslim audience but to be acceptable to it.31 Muslim Idiom Translations make such compromises as removing the language of sonship in the Bible’s discussion about Jesus’s relation to God. The translation philosophy of revision is paramount, and any translation team must agree upon it from the outset.

Knowing the Translation Practice

The AVD is generally faithful to its translation principles. The translation was conducted with the utmost care, and the result was an accurate, consistent, understandable translation.32 But like all translations, it is imperfect. The comments here will focus on the areas of potential improvement. The AVD can be improved in eight areas.33

First, the AVD can be made more accurate. In Acts 7:38, Stephen speaks of the OT people of God and calls them the “congregation in the wilderness.” Though the word ekklēsia is used here, there is no evidence that it is being used in a technical way to mean church, and it would be anachronistic to do so, but the AVD uses the normal word for church, kanīsa, in this case.34 In Acts 20, when Paul gathers the Ephesian elders together, the AVD uses the word qassīs, which means “ordained pastor,” instead of the usual word sheikh, which appropriately means “elder.”

Second, the AVD can be more consistent. Though the second principle put forth by Smith above is the “uniformity of similar words and phrases,” there are clear examples in the AVD where the same word is translated in various ways with no apparent reason for the variation. Some examples are more trivial, such as different Arabic words being used to render the same word for “wild ox” or the “terebinth” tree.

Other examples of inconsistent translation of single terms are more relevant. Many Christians are familiar with the concept of “loving­kindness,” which is also rendered as “faithful love,” “steadfast love,” or “mercy,” depending on the translation.35 Whether they know the Hebrew word, ḥesed, behind the term or not, they recognize the concept because it is used repeatedly in their translations. But this word is not clearly seen in the AVD because it is translated with many different words, including “benevolence,” “[doing a] favor,” “mercy,” “love,” among others. If a single Arabic term, such as maḥabba amīna, “faithful love,” or wafāʾ “loyalty,” were used to translate ḥesed in most cases, the Arabic reader would be more aware and knowledgeable of this important characteristic of God.

Third, the AVD can be clearer. In the OT, when the phrase “generation to generation” is used, instead of using the normal word for generation, jīl, the translators used the word dawr, which literally means “cycle.” This meaning is obscure and also lacks the appropriate reference to people which “generation” conveys, meaning God is faithful to His people year after year.

Fourth, the AVD can be modernized. There are many words in the AVD that are antiquated or unnecessarily difficult for the modern reader. This is evidenced by the fact that the two most commonly found versions of the AVD in print include dictionaries of thousands of difficult words in the appendices.36 The word for prize found in Philippians 3:14 is jaʿāla, which means “prize,” but is not well-known. The word jāʾiza is a better substitute. In Genesis, the word used for creeping things is dabbābāt, which now refers to military tanks, an invention that did not exist when the AVD was produced.

Fifth, the AVD can be more grammatically correct. In Psalm 121:1, it is best to understand the second line as a question, “From where does my help come?” with the answer immediately following in verse 2, “My help comes from the Lord.” The AVD instead renders this phrase as a statement.

Sixth, mistakes in the AVD can be corrected. In two places, Exodus 39:5 and 40:20, a few words are missing from the text in apparent random omission.37 Though it does not affect Christian theology or the interpretation of the text in any significant way, these are mistakes that should be corrected.

Seventh, the AVD can be based on more reliable NT Greek manuscripts. The original translators of the AVD faced the decision of what Greek texts to use for the NT. Though the Dead Sea Scrolls had yet to be discovered, there were still many Greek texts that were available for the AVD translators. The original director of the project, Eli Smith, translated the NT using a text-critical approach, relying on similar manuscripts and a similar approach to evaluating them as is found in modern English translations. In the end, the mission board determined that the textus receptus, the same textual tradition that is preserved in the KJV, should serve as the basis for the AVD.38 An initial revision of the AVD may leave this problem unaddressed. Gradual changes may be necessary so that the readership of the translation can support and adopt the revision with confidence and joy rather than respond with suspicion or outright rejection.

Eighth, clarifying notes can be added to the AVD. There are places where a change to the text itself is unnecessary, but a clarifying note would help the reader. For instance, there are two words for kingdom in Arabic, malakūt and mamlaka, but only one in Greek, basileia. Therefore, in the NT, the translators had to choose which Arabic word to employ whenever translating basileia. They chose to consistently use malakūt to refer to the kingdom of God and mamlaka to refer to any human kingdom. This could cause the reader to assume that the kingdom of God is not physical or concrete but only an abstract idea. It may not be advisable to change the terminology in the translation because it is deeply embedded in Christian understanding and usage, but a note to indicate that the two Arabic words reflect one Greek word would benefit the reader. These are examples of areas in which the AVD translation could and should be improved.

Methods

After evaluating the existing translation to determine the need for and direction of a revision, the team must engage in certain steps to prepare for the revision, accomplish it, and see it used profitably by churches and saints. These include communicating the need, responding to objections, doing the work of revision, and creating resources to accompany it.

Communicating the Need for Revision

After evaluating the existing translation and agreeing upon the way forward for a revision, especially the translation philosophy that is to be adopted, those who desire to see the Bible translation revised must communicate the need for revision to the believers who would benefit from it. They can do this in two key ways.

First, they can practice expository preaching.39 Perhaps more than any other activity, expository preaching demonstrates the need for revision of a Bible translation because it exposes believers to the depths of Scripture and its details.40 It also demonstrates to the people how they too may study the Bible in a deep and meaningful way. As they do so, they will desire more and more that the Bible in their hands be as accurate and clear as possible. Note that expository preaching is not the means to the end of a revised Bible translation. A revised Bible translation serves expository preaching, which leads to mature believers, which ultimately gives glory to God.

Second, they can engage in the education of Christians about the nature of Scripture and of Bible translation itself. This can be done through seminars, articles, and face-to-face conversations. Such education should include specific discussions of the existing translation, which honors its positive qualities and legacy but also demonstrates the need for improvement.

Responding to Objections to Revision

Those who wish to see the Bible in a given language revised must be ready to respond to objections.41 At least five objections to a revision are likely to be raised. The first is tradition. The translation may have become entrenched, and believers may be resistant to change simply because the existing translation is familiar. The second likely objection is distrust of something new. The existing translation may be highly trusted and may itself be considered a bulwark against drift in doctrine and philosophy of ministry. Doctrinal and ministry fidelity are crucial, but that does not mean that the development of translations must be stopped. It simply means that great care must be taken to preserve the best of the older translation while making the necessary improvements.

The third likely objection is disagreement. Believers will have differing opinions regarding the appropriate translation philosophy, which manuscript tradition should be the basis for the revision, who should do the work, and many other issues. These differences may lead to reluctance in pressing forward. The fourth likely objection is the difficulty of the work. Translation revision is hard and may not seem worth the effort, but the potential spiritual fruit to be gained by a better understanding of the Scriptures should stimulate everyone toward the goal.

A fifth objection is avoidance of criticism and accusations. In a majority Muslim context, fears of criticism are warranted because Islam contends that the Christian Scriptures are corrupted.42 Muslim beliefs about the Qur’an differ from a Christian understanding of the Bible in at least three key ways. First, they understand the Qur’an to be munzal, that is, “sent down.”43 For Muslims, neither Muhammad nor any other human wrote the Qur’an; it was written by God. Muhammad was simply a recipient and speaker (prophet) of God’s words. Second, Muslims understand the Qur’an to be preserved without any variants. They believe that the verses they have today are exactly the same as what was revealed to Muhammad in the seventh century.44 They do not practice textual criticism or evaluate manuscripts. Third, Muslims understand the Qur’an to be untranslatable. The Qur’an does not exist outside of the language of Arabic. Because it was handed down intact to the prophet, it cannot be changed. Any rendering of the Qur’an into English or any other language is considered to be a “transliteration of the meanings” of the Qur’an—it is like a paraphrase or a restatement of the Qur’an, but not the Qur’an itself.45

Considering their starkly different view of their religious book, it is not hard to see how Muslims would attack Christianity and view the Bible as corrupt. In a majority Muslim context, and especially in an Arabic-speaking one, gospel ministers must be even clearer about the nature of the Bible and must communicate these truths clearly to the believers so that the necessary revision of the Bible translation does not lead to charges of corrupting the Bible.

Doing the Work of Revision

After communicating the need and responding to objections, one must engage in the work of revision itself. There are several aspects to this work, but four can be mentioned here. The first aspect of the work is prayer. Time, skill, principles, and methods are not sufficient to bring about a faithful translation. Prayer is an acknowledgement that God’s help is required. God cares about His truth even more than His saints do—such an appeal will be heard.

The second aspect is forming a translation team. Among the most necessary qualifications are that the translator is a Christian believer, committed to sound doctrine, engaged in the local church, knowledgeable of Scripture, and competent in the language and in the practice of translation. Pastors and missionaries have often seen fit to devote a significant portion of their time to Bible translation.46 Martin Luther and Adoniram Judson are both examples of gospel ministers who engaged in the work of Bible translation alongside their evangelistic and pastoral functions.47 Some translations have been produced by a single person, but they are often the product of a team.48 It is often necessary to form a team because all of the necessary characteristics, such as knowledge of the Scripture, the target language, and translation skill, are not found to a sufficient degree in a single person.

The third aspect is the revision work itself. Katharine Barnwell mentions ten steps of a translation work, but they can be summarized in six essential components: (1) gathering resources such as dictionaries and commentaries; (2) studying the text of Scripture; (3) drafting the translation; (4) evaluation of the translation by the team, experts, and ordinary readers; (5) editing of the work; and (6) approval of the final product.

The fourth aspect of the work is gathering partners to publish and distribute the revised translation. Eric Weathers explains how God used not only William Tyndale but a network of accomplices to produce and distribute his famous English translation:

God providentially appointed William Tyndale to translate the New Testament from Greek into English, even though his translation made him a criminal. The Lord also assigned courageous individuals to print, smuggle, and distribute these Bibles throughout the English-speaking world. In 1524 and the years following, he was blessed with astute believers with the financial resources necessary to underwrite the costs of translation as well as the associated expenses within the supply chain from printing to smuggling and distributing Bibles.49

Any revision of a Bible translation must not only exist; believers must hold a copy of it—physical or digital—in their hands, and this requires much more work than just translation.

Creating Resources to Accompany the Revision

In addition to the revision work itself, many tools can and should be developed before, during, and after the revision is completed. A first example of a resource that can accompany a revision is translation notes. Simple, concise notes can be included in printed and digital versions of the Bible. These would include alternate translations (especially in cases where it is difficult to render the text literally), significant textual variants (reflecting different readings in the biblical manuscripts), and explanatory notes (especially for weights and measures, animals and plants, and cultural objects and customs). The translation team can also produce and make available more extensive notes that explain translation choices and give further insight into the meaning of the text in the original languages.50 Many currently published additions of the AVD lack such notes and could benefit from their addition.

A second example of a resource that can benefit a Bible revision is a collection of tools that aid in exegesis.51 This collection could include the capability to do word studies based on the original languages, an interlinear display of the biblical text, and information regarding the grammar and syntax of the original languages. Such tools should be in the target language of the revision so that all literate believers can access and benefit from them.

A third example of a resource that can be produced alongside a Bible translation revision is commentaries. Commentaries are collections of information about the biblical text gleaned from the context, biblical languages, cross references, theology, and even extrabiblical sources, evaluated and expounded by someone with experience and expertise who can clearly explain these matters to students of the Scripture. Quality commentaries from other languages, such as English, can be translated into the target language. As the community of faith matures, local believers should write commentaries in their own language.

Such resources provide all believers with the ability to study the text of Scripture and evaluate for themselves the strengths and weaknesses of the Bible translation that is available to them. This knowledge should lead them to desire the best possible translation of the Bible and to welcome any revision that improves the translation.

Conclusion

Christians must view the revision of Bible translations as an essential complement to the fulfillment of the Great Commission. God’s unchanging truth must remain accessible to God’s people by improving existing Bible translations—or producing new ones—so that the words of Scripture are accurately and clearly conveyed in the reader’s language. This is a difficult but necessary task, and one that requires understanding of the nature of Scripture itself and of translations of it as well as a commitment to employing wise methods to revise the translation, build trust among the potential readers of it, and produce quality resources that will supplement the translation and help readers to understand God’s Word more clearly and accurately. Christians must pray for and support such work and entrust it to the God of all truth.

The author of this article serves at TMAI’s Middle East training center, where he teaches courses on the Old Testament, exegesis, and building godly character, and develops online resources to help believers study the Bible in Arabic. He is also partnering with a training center graduate to plant a church in the capital city of his country.

  1. 1.  The English Standard Version (ESV) and Legacy Standard Bible (LSB) are among the best examples of formally equivalent or essentially literal Bible translations, suitable for preaching, study, and personal reading. The King James Version (KJV), because of its age, textual basis, and other factors, is less desirable for today’s use but is still a faithful translation and has greatly influenced all subsequent English translations. The Christian Standard Bible (CSB) is an example of a functionally or dynamically equivalent Bible translation, sometimes sacrificing precision for the sake of clarity, but is still useful for reading and comparison.

  2. 2.  Wycliffe Global Alliance, “2025 Global Scripture Access,” accessed August 27, 2026, https://wycliffe.net/global-scripture-access/. Great progress has been made in the last thirty-five years. D. A. Carson reported that by the end of 1990, there were complete Bibles in 318 languages. D. A. Carson, “New Bible Translations: An Assessment and Prospect,” in The Bible in the Twenty-First Century, ed. Howard Clark Kee (American Bible Society, 1993), 37–67. That number, 318 languages, has now been more than doubled. Praise God that many more people now have access to His life-changing Word.

  3. 3.  One example of this is the Albanian language, which, until 2025, had no trusted, formally equivalent translation from the original languages. There was only a Bible translated from the Italian version and a dynamic equivalent translation that had errors due to interpretive decisions made by the translators. See Astrit Allushi, “Insert 51.1 Bible Translation in Albania, Yesterday and Today,” in Biblical Missions: Principles, Priorities, and Practices, ed. Mark Tatlock and Chris Burnett (Thomas Nelson, 2025), 608–10, and the website for the Albanian Bible translation project at www.biblapro.com.

  4. 4.  This article sets forth accuracy and clarity as the two most essential attributes of a faithful translation. Katharine Barnwell lists these alongside naturalness and acceptability to the reader as essential components of a quality translation. Katharine Barnwell, Bible Translation: An Introductory Course in Translation Principles, 4th ed. (SIL International, 2022), 28–36. Translation principles are discussed in the second major section of this article. 

  5. 5.  In this article, the term revision is used to encompass any work of improving the Bible translation available in a particular language. Many different revisions can be performed, depending on the need. A simple update might be done, such as was done with the 2011 edition of the ESV, in which minimal corrections and improvements are made and the translation is still recognized as the same work. A revision might be done in which more significant, noticeable changes are made. The 2020 update of the New American Standard Bible (NASB) might be considered such a revision. 

    A re-translation might be done such that an earlier translation inspires and provides the starting point for a new work of translation. Such is the relationship of the ESV to the Revised Standard Version (RSV). Finally, a new translation might be done, in which a completely new work, independent of any previous translation, is undertaken. The needed variety, whether update, revision, re-translation, or new translation, will depend on the quality of translations currently available.

  6. 6.  For more discussion on reasons for doing Bible translation, see Aaron Shryock “The Rationale for Bible Translation,” in Biblical Missions, 582–90.

  7. 7.  For more on the Great Commission, see William Hendriksen, Exposition of the Gospel According to Matthew, New Testament Commentary (Baker, 1973), 998–1003.

  8. 8.  Mark Tatlock also notes the connection between languages and missions at Pentecost in the immediately following chapter of Scripture, Acts 2. Mark Tatlock, “Why Bible Translation Is Critical in God’s Plan of Redemption,” in Biblical Missions, 576–77.

  9. 9.  To be precise, the Septuagint is not a single translation, for there were multiple Greek translations of the Hebrew Old Testament completed before the time of Christ, and the history is complicated. Karen Jobes and Moisés Silva write, “The Septuagint . . . was produced by many people unknown to us, over two or three centuries, and almost certainly in more than one location. Consequently, the Greek OT does not have the unity that the term the Septuagint might imply.” Karen H. Jobes and Moisés Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint, 2nd ed. (Baker Academic, 2015), 46.

    It was completed by the Jews before the time of Christ after Alexander the Great Hellenized the known world and enforced the use of the Greek language in education.

  10. 10.  Gleason Archer and Gregory Chirichigno write, “The very reason for using the LXX [Septuagint] was rooted in the missionary outreach of the evangelists and apostles of the early church.” Gleason Archer and Gregory Chirichigno, Old Testament Quotations in the New Testament: A Complete Survey (Wipf and Stock, 1983), ix.

  11. 11.  Tatlock notes the importance of keeping Bible translation connected to the Great Commission and church planting, “Modern Bible translation proponents tend to espouse the motto ‘Bring the Bible to unreached people groups,’ which can disconnect from the church-planting focus of biblical missions. However, those that see translations as essentially linked to disciple-making operate with a different motto: ‘Mature churches become sending churches become translating churches.’ ” Tatlock, “Why Bible Translation is Critical,” Biblical Missions, 581.

  12. 12.  See B. B. Warfield’s explanation of the meaning of these verses in 2 Timothy 3, 2 Peter 1, and John 10 related to inspiration in Benjamin B. Warfield, The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible (SBTS Press, 2014), 133–140.

  13. 13.  The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy states, “We affirm that Scripture in its entirety is inerrant, being free from all falsehood, fraud, or deceit.” International Council on Biblical Inerrancy, “Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy,” Defending Inerrancy, Article XII, 1978, https://defendinginerrancy.com/chicago-statements/.

  14. 14.  It is important to distinguish between the autographa (what the biblical authors wrote), later copies, and translations (including LXX and other early ones). Unlike the Qur’an (discussed below), the Scripture can be translated into other languages. Those translations are not inerrant and infallible, but they can and should be faithful reflections of the true original. See “Chicago Statement,” Article X.

  15. 15.  For more on the topic of preservation, see Mark D. Thompson, The Doctrine of Scripture: An Introduction, Short Studies in Systematic Theology, eds. Graham A. Cole and Oren R. Martin (Crossway, 2022), 114–18.

  16. 16.  R. Scott Clark writes: “We should distinguish between the act of translation and the inspiration of Scripture. No translators, not even those who translated the Hebrew and Aramaic Scriptures into Greek (the LXX), were inspired. Jerome and the others who made Latin translations were not inspired and neither were those who did the King James version or the NIV [New International Version] and ESV translations. They did not see themselves as inspired in their work of translation.” R. Scott Clark, “Are Translations of the Bible Inspired and Inerrant?” Beautiful Christian Life, June 2, 2025, https://beautifulchristianlife.com/blog/are-translations-of-the-bible-inspired-and-inerrant.

  17. 17.  “The Translators to the Reader,” in The Holy Bible, Conteyning the Old Testament, and the New: Newly Translated out of the Originall Tongues, King James Version (Robert Barker, 1611).

  18. 18.  “The Translators to the Reader.”

  19. 19.  The exposition of the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy affirms, “Similarly, no translation is or can be perfect, and all translations are an additional step away from the autographa.” That statement goes on, though, to give an encouraging word regarding access to the Word of God via modern translations, “Yet the verdict of linguistic science is that English-speaking Christians, at least, are exceedingly well served in these days with a host of excellent translations and have no cause for hesitating to conclude that the true Word of God is within their reach.” “Chicago Statement,” Exposition. The same could be said for hundreds of other world languages which possess a faithful translation of the Bible.

  20. 20.  Eric Davis, “How True is the Bible? – Inerrancy,” The Cripplegate, March 26, 2018, https://thecripplegate.com/how-true-is-the-bible-inerrancy/.

  21. 21.  Paul D. Wegner, The Journey from Texts to Translations: The Origin and Development of the Bible (Baker Academic, 1999), 312.

  22. 22.  Ray Elliott, “Bible Translation,” in Origin of the Bible, ed. Philip Wesley Comfort (Tyndale House, 2003), 265.

  23. 23.  See Mark Ward, Authorized: The Use & Misuse of the King James Bible (Lexham, 2018), ch. 3.

  24. 24.  Arabic-speaking Christians commonly refer to this translation simply as “the Van Dyck,” named after the principal translator and editor of the final edition, Cornelius Van Alen Van Dyck, though there were four others, notably Boutros al-Boustany and Eli Smith, who contributed to the translation work. For simplicity and in accordance with common usage, this article employs the designation Arabic Van Dyck (AVD).

  25. 25.  The situation of the AVD is similar to the KJV. The KJV is older, over four hundred years old, but it has been updated since its original publication. Wegner, The Journey from Texts to Translations, 314. The Bible Society of Egypt is to be commended for its work on the Van Dyck, beginning in 1991, to digitize, format, and fix punctuation and a few spelling issues. But the text of the translation was virtually unchanged. See Youssef Nathan’s comments in the appendix of J. P. S., “Applying Formal Equivalence Translation Theory to an Existing Bible Translation: Toward a More Accurate, Coherent, and Consistent Arabic Van Dyck Translation in the Old Testament” (PhD diss., The Master’s Seminary, 2025), 293–95.

  26. 26.  There are over 400 million people in the Arab League according to current International Monetary Fund (IMF) data. International Monetary Fund, “Report for Selected Countries and Subjects,” World Economic Outlook Database, April 2025, https://www.imf.org/en/publications/weo/weo-database/2025/april/weo-report.

  27. 27.  Three other Arabic Bible translations are often used by evangelical Christians and deserve mention here: The New Arabic Version (Kitāb al Ḥayāt), the Good News Arabic Bible (Al Mushtaraka), and the Simplified Arabic Bible (Al Mubassata). They each have their own strengths and weaknesses, and are useful, but for various reasons have not replaced the AVD as the standard Bible for evangelicals in the Arab world. 

  28. 28.  Wayne Grudem explains different translation theories and argues for an essentially literal approach (often called “formal equivalence”) in Wayne Grudem, “Are Only Some Words of Scripture Breathed Out By God? Why Plenary Inspiration Favors ‘Essentially Literal’ Bible Translation,” in Translating Truth: The Case for Essentially Literal Bible Translation, eds. Wayne Grudem, Leland Ryken, et. al. (Crossway, 2005), 19–66. Chris Burnett argues that the nature of Scripture informs one’s translation theory in Chris Burnett, “The Word of God and Translation Faithfulness” in Tatlock and Burnet, Biblical Missions, 591–97. 

  29. 29.  Eli Smith, “Report of Rev. Eli Smith, D.D., in March 16th, 1844, on the existing Arabic Versions of the Scriptures,” in Brief Documentary History of the Translation of the Scriptures into the Arabic Language by Eli Smith and C. V. A. Van Dyck (American Presbyterian Mission Press, 1900), 1–2.

  30. 30.  William Barrick would affirm almost all of the same principles in his book, Understanding Bible Translation, except for numbers two and seven. See William D. Barrick, Understanding Bible Translation: Bringing God’s Word into New Contexts (Kregel Academic, 2019), 22–32, 43–50, 58, 68, 214–15. On principle number two, Barrick argues for favoring the word choice that best fits the immediate context, rather than striving for consistency of word use across the Bible whenever possible. He states, “contextual consistency has priority over verbal consistency,” Understanding Bible Translation, 148. Principle number seven is not directly addressed in his work.

  31. 31.  For more on this topic, see Ayman Ibrahim and Ant Greenham, eds., Islam and the Bible: Questioning Muslim Idiom Translations (B&H Academic, 2023).

  32. 32.  For more on the method of the AVD translators, see John Alexander Thompson, “The Smith-Van Dyck Version,” in The Major Arabic Bibles, 2nd ed. (American Bible Society, 1956), 20–27.

  33. 33.  Ghassan Khalaf argued for a revision of the AVD, and a few of his suggestions for improvement and biblical examples are included in this section. He summarized his arguments in Ghassan Khalaf, “al-Āsbāb al-Dāʿiyyah īlā Tanqīḥ Tarjamat al-Bustānī – FānDāyk wa-Naẓrah īlā al-Mustaqbal [Reasons for Emending the Boustani-Van Dyck Translation and a Look into the Future],” in Aʿmāl al-Muʾtamar al-Duwalī bi-Munāsabit murūr 150 Sinih ʿlā al-Tarjamah al-Īnjīlīyyah al-ʿarabīyyah al-Kitāb al-Muqaddas [Proceedings of the International Conference on the Occasion of the 150th Anniversary of the Arabic Evangelical Translation of the Holy Bible], ed. Rana Issa (Bible Society, 2018), 207–25.

  34. 34.  There is theological debate concerning the relation of the church to Israel and whether Christians should speak of a “church” in the OT. But that is not Stephen’s point here in Acts 7. Marshall writes: “The word translated congregation is ekklēsia, which Christians took over as a designation for their own community; it could be that Christians would see a certain parallelism between the presence of Moses with the Israelites on their pilgrimage through the desert and the presence of Jesus with the new people of God on their earthly pilgrimage. But it is unlikely that this is part of the primary message of the passage for Stephen’s Jewish hearers. The point is rather that at this assembly of the people Moses received the law, the living words of God (Rom. 3:2).” I. Howard Marshall, Acts: An Introduction and Commentary, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries 5 (InterVarsity Press, 1980), 151–52. Stephen is not making the point that something called “the church” existed in the OT, nor is he contradicting that view. He is merely referring to the Israelites as a gathered congregation. 

  35. 35.  The translations “lovingkindness,” “faithful love,” “steadfast love,” and “mercy” are found in NASB95, CSB, ESV, and KJV, respectively.

  36. 36.  These two editions are published by the Bible Society of Egypt and the Arabic Bible Outreach Ministry. See “Mu’jam al-Kalimāt al-Ṣaʿbah li-l-ʿahd al-Qadīm,” in al-Kitāb al-Muqaddas [Arabic New Van Dyck Bible], 6th ed. (Bible Society of Egypt, 1999), 5–55, and “Maʿānī al-Kalimāt al-Ṣaʿbah,” in al-Kitāb al-Muqaddas [Arabic Bible – Van Dyck] (Arabic Bible Outreach Ministry, 2017), 337–74.

  37. 37.  See the textual notes in ArabBible, version 6.14.632 for macOS and OSX (URF, 2023), Exod 39:5; 40:20, http://arabbible.com.

  38. 38.  See Joshua Yoder, “The Greek Texts of Eli Smith and Cornelius Van Dyck,” Cairo Journal of Theology 2 (2015): 29–41.

  39. 39.  The organization hosting the present article, The Master’s Academy International, offers training in expository preaching through its international training centers, including one located in the Middle East, which offers this kind of training to local believers in Arabic.

  40. 40.  Thomas notes the strong tie between expository preaching and Bible translation in Robert L. Thomas, “Bible Translations and Expository Preaching,” in Rediscovering Expository Preaching, ed. John F. MacArthur Jr. (W. Publishing Group, 1992), 303–20. See especially his explanation of the goals of expository preaching on page 304.

  41. 41.  See the comments of key pastors and leaders in the MENA region on the AVD in the appendix of J. P. S., “Applying Formal Equivalence Translation Theory,” 281–99. Many of those leaders support a revision but note that there are important objections that require a response.

  42. 42.  See James White, “Did the ‘People of the Book’ Corrupt the Gospel?,” in What Every Christian Needs to Know about the Qur’an (Bethany House Publishers, 2013), 165–192.

  43. 43.  See Ayman S. Ibrahim, A Concise Guide to the Quran: Answering Thirty Critical Questions (Baker Academic, 2020), 10.

  44. 44.  Ibrahim, A Concise Guide to the Quran, 11.

  45. 45.  Ibrahim, A Concise Guide to the Quran, 27.

  46. 46.  Tatlock, “Why Bible Translation is Critical,” in Biblical Missions, 578–80.

  47. 47.  Ronald H. Bainton, Here I Stand: A Life of Martin Luther (Meridian, 1995), 255–62; Courtney Anderson, To the Golden Shore: The Life of Adoniram Judson (Judson Press, 1997), 400–14.

  48. 48.  Barnwell, Bible Translation, 299–304.

  49. 49.  Eric Weathers, William Tyndale’s Accomplices: Essential Partners of the Forbidden English Bible Revealed (The Master’s Academy International, 2026), 9.

  50. 50.  Compare the New English Translation (NET) Bible translation notes and the LSB translation notes. The NET Bible (Biblical Studies Press, 2019), and The Tyndale Center at The Master’s Seminary, “Legacy Standard Bible Translation Notes” (2023), accessed August 27, 2026, https://tyndale.tms.edu.

  51. 51.  A few such resources are available in the Arabic language. See Word of Truth, accessed August 27, 2026, www.kalimatelhaq.com; Arabic Bible Outreach Ministry, “The Bible,” accessed August 27, 2026, www.injeel.com.

Beaux Hargrove
Next

The Autobiography of John G. Paton (pt. 1): My Home in Scotland and the Example of a Godly Father