Translations of the Hebrew (and Aramaic) text of the OT, or Greek text of the NT, as a whole or in part, into vernacular languages. Manuscripts of the ancient versions of the Bible are used by scholars as one of the sources for the reconstruction of the original text of both the OT and the NT. Four ancient versions of the Hebrew OT have been preserved: the Greek Septuagint, the Syriac Peshitta, the Aramaic Targums (paraphrases), and the Latin Vulgate. These, together with the Hebrew manuscripts and the Samaritan Pentateuch, constitute our chief sources in the study of the text of the OT. Such other versions as the Old Latin, Coptic, Ethiopic, Gothic, Armenian, Arabic, Georgian, and Slavonic, are translations of the Septuagint. For the NT the most important of the ancient versions are the Latin, the Syriac, and the Coptic. The testimony of the Armenian, the Georgian, the Ethiopic, and the Gothic, is, however, of great value in the study of the NT text.

I. Ancient Old Testament Versions.

1. The Samaritan Pentateuch. Properly speaking, the Samaritan Pentateuch is not a translation or version, but an independent Hebrew text written in a modified form of the old Semitic alphabet and transmitted independently since the days of the Samaritan schism. It is therefore a check on the errors and corruptions that may have crept into the Hebrew text of the Pentateuch through its numerous copyings before the age of printing. Its value is lessened by the obscurity that surrounds the history of its text, and by the lateness of its manuscripts, none of which is known to be older than the 10th cent. a.d. The Samaritan Pentateuch differs from the Hebrew Masoretic text in about 6,000 instances, but the vast majority of the differences are of trifling import, many of them being simply variations in spelling and grammar. Some of the important variations, which reflect Samaritan ideals of religion and ritual, were doubtless introduced by the Samaritans to advance their views. In some 1,900 instances the Samaritan text agrees with the Septuagint where the latter differs from the Masoretic Hebrew. In such instances its testimony is regarded as important.

2. The Septuagint. The most important and the oldest of the ancient translations of the OT was the Septuagint (abbreviated LXX). With the exception of the epoch-making Dead Sea *scrolls, the oldest known manuscripts of the OT are copies of this Greek translation. The LXX is therefore of great importance from both a textual and a historical viewpoint. The apocryphal Letter of Aristeas, purported to be written by Aristeas to his brother Philocrates during the reign of Ptolemy II Philadelphus (285-246 b.c.), gives an account of the translation of the Pentateuch which is now largely discredited. According to this story the version was made by 70, or more strictly, 72, Jewish scholars in Alexandria, under the direction of the librarian, Demetrius Phalereus, hence the name "Seventy" (LXX) or Septuagint. Actually the LXX was the work of many different hands, as is evident from the variations in style and method, and was not completed until c. 150 b.c..

According to the Letter of Aristeas the translation was made because the Scriptures were regarded as worthy of a place in the royal library. Scholars today think that this cultural interest is an insufficient reason for its production, and that the real purpose for it was to meet the religious needs of the Greek-speaking Jews in Alexandria. Perhaps an added incentive in its production was the desire of these Jews to demonstrate the superiority of their religion, and thus to make a missionary appeal to the Greek world.

The version is of great value both textually and historically. Since it was made before the Christian Era it is an aid in recovering a pre-Masoretic text. The LXX prepared the way for Christian mission work and became the first Christian Bible. It was the OT of Paul and the early church, and many of the quotations of the OT in the NT are cited from it. It moulded the religious vocabulary of the NT. It was the version from which other important translations were made. Semitic scholars have also found it helpful in the study of Hebrew morphology and grammar.

The 2 best-known manuscripts of the LXX are Greek Bibles dating from about the middle of the 4th cent. a.d., Codex Vaticanus (B) and Codex Sinaiticus (a

). From the 1st half of the 5th cent. comes the Codex Alexandrinus (A). Also from the 5th cent. is the Codex Ephraemi (C), a palimpsest. All in all there are extant about 30 uncials, some rather fragmentary; more than 1,500 minuscules, which are in general of a later date than the uncials; and some 30 lectionaries, containing the text of the LXX. Older than these are the papyri. The Chester Beatty Biblical Papyri include parts of 8 distinct manuscripts of the LXX, ranging in date from the 2nd to the 4th cent. a.d. and representing portions of 8 books of the OT (Gen, Num, Deut, Is, Jer, Eze, Dan, and Est). There are also 21 leaves of Eze of the John H. Scheide Papyrus from the 1st half of the 3rd cent. a.d., and 33 mutilated leaves of the Freer papyrus codex of the Minor Prophets from the latter part of the 3rd cent. a.d. But older than any of these are 2 fragments of Deut: Papyrus Fouad 266 from the 2nd or 1st cent. b.c., containing parts of Deut 18, 20, 24-27, 31, and the John Rylands Library Papyrus Greek 458, containing portions of Deut 23-27, 28 and dated to the 2nd cent. b.c. The caves of Qumran yielded papyrus or leather fragments of Ex (7QLXX), Lev (4QLXX), and Num (4QLXX), dating either to the 1st cent. b.c. or the 1st cent. a.d. A fragmentary copy of the Minor Prophets in Greek, assigned to the end of the 1st cent. a.d., came to light in a cave of the WaÆdé µ Murabbaat in 1952.

3. Rival Greek Versions and Recensions. After the LXX became the Bible of the Christian church, it came, in the process of time, to be repudiated by the Jews. In theological disputes with the Jews, the Christians sometimes used the LXX in ways which the Jews regarded as invalid proof. Furthermore, the text of the LXX was at times at variance with the standard Hebrew. After the destruction of Jerusalem there developed among the Jewish scholars a so-called atomistic exegesis, which regarded the Scriptures as the embodiment of God's will in all its parts and in every word, even in every letter. The LXX, not agreeing in all parts with the accepted Hebrew text, was completely repudiated and branded as the work of Satan. In the 2nd cent. a.d. several other Greek translations were made in an attempt to meet the need of a faithful rendering of the Hebrew text acceptable to the Jewish community for use by Greek-speaking Jews.

(1) Aquila. The first of these was made probably somewhere between a.d. 130 and 150 by Aquila, a proselyte to Judaism from Sinope in Pontus, who, according to Jerome, was a pupil of Rabbi Akiba between a.d. 95 and 135. It was a slavishly literal and pedantic rendering, fully in keeping with the spirit of Akiba and his school. It carried the principle of literal accuracy to the point of absurdity and unintelligibility. It sought to render every word and every particle faithfully and consistently.

(2) Theodotion. The version of Theodotion, described by some as a Jewish proselyte, by others as an Ebionite Christian, was made between a.d. 180 and 192. Its style and character is very similar to that of the LXX. Many scholars regard it simply as a revision of the LXX to bring it into harmony with the received Hebrew text. It gained much popularity among the Christians. Its version of the book of Dan was incorporated into LXX Bibles in place of the original. The result was that the true LXX translation of Dan was known only from 1 late Greek manuscript and 1 version in Syriac until portions of it were discovered among the Chester Beatty Papyri.

(3) Symmachus. This version, produced between c. a.d. 170 and 200, was designed to be not only accurate but in good literary Greek. According to nearly all ancient authorities Symmachus was an Ebionite; on the other hand Epiphanius said that he was a Samaritan convert to Judaism.

(4) The Hexapla and Recensions of the LXX. In the 1st half of the 3rd cent., Origen made use of Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion in his effort to save the LXX by bringing it into line with the Hebrew text of his day. About the year 245 he and his associates, working at Caesarea in Palestine, completed a six-fold version of the OT known as the Hexapla. It was a stupendous task that required the diligent labour of nearly a quarter of a century. In parallel columns Origen presented (a) the Hebrew text, (b) a transliteration of the Hebrew into Greek letters, (c) the version of Aquila, (d) the version of Symmachus, (e) the Septuagint in his own revised text, (f) the version of Theodotion. When the LXX disagreed with the Hebrew text it was brought into harmony with it by the use of the other Greek versions and diacritical markings. While his work was done in good faith with a desire to arrest the corruptions due to repeated copyings, the actual result was increased confusion in the LXX text. The colossal size of this six-fold OT precluded its reproduction as a whole. At the beginning of the 4th cent. Eusebius of Caesarea and his friend Pamphilus copied and circulated the 5th column (the revised LXX text) of the Hexapla separate from the rest, with Origen's critical notations. Since the critical marks were meaningless apart from the rest of the Hexapla, the natural tendency with repeated copyings in time was to write the text without these critical symbols. The result for the textual criticism of the LXX has been disastrous, for without these marks the additions made by Origen appear as genuine and original parts of the LXX text. The problem of securing a pre-Hexaplaric text has therefore been a source of great perplexity to the textual scholar.

Two other recensions of the LXX made in the 4th cent. are known: (a) that of Hesychius, used in Alexandria and elsewhere in Egypt, and (b) that of Lucian of Samosata, which was used throughout Asia Minor from Antioch to Constantinople. Little is known concerning Hesychius, and the identification of the text of his revision is still involved in uncertainty. Lucian carefully revised the LXX with the aid of manuscripts both of the Hebrew and of the LXX, which contained frequent readings intrinsically superior to those we possess. These readings make the Lucianic recension of great importance for the textual criticism of the OT. Many of the alterations made by Lucian in the LXX, however, do not point to a different Hebrew reading; they are merely grammatical and stylistic changes in the literary form, made under the influence of the Atticist reaction.

4. The Aramaic Targums. In postexilic Judaism, Aramaic displaced Hebrew as the vernacular language (see Aramaic), and it became necessary to accompany the reading of the Hebrew text with an interpretation in Aramaic. Such interpretations or translations, which were originally oral, were called Targums, and the translator was spoken of as a turgeman or meturgeman. The Targums combined real translation with free paraphrase and explanatory material. In the course of time they became somewhat standardised and already were committed to writing in the pre-Christian era, as some copies found among the Dead Sea *scrolls show. Three Targums of the Pentateuch are known: (1) the Targum of Onkelos, or the Babylonian Targum, which is for the most part a strictly literal and simple translation; (2) the Jerusalem Targum I (pseudo-Jonathan), containing many paraphrases and midrashim peculiar to it; (3) and the Old Palestinian Targum, often spoken of as the Fragmentary Targum or Jerusalem Targum II, a complete copy of which was discovered by Diez Macho in 1949 in the Vatican Library as Codex Neofiti I. The official Targum of the Prophets is attributed to Jonathan ben Uzziel, a pupil of Hillel in the 1st cent. a.d. It paraphrases more freely than does Onkelos. The Targums on the Hagiographa are comparatively late. They cover all the books of this part of the Hebrew Bible except Ezr-Neh and Dan. The value of the Targums for the textual criticism of the OT is freely recognised, but this value is qualified by their introduction of explanations and alterations. However, used critically their witness is of considerable value. Moreover, they are a rich storehouse of Jewish religious thought and exegesis. The Palestinian Targum, in particular, has been regarded also as a source for the recovery of the Aramaic language Jesus spoke.

5. Syriac Versions. Syriac, often termed Eastern Aramaic, was the language of Christians in Syria and Mesopotamia. There are several translations of the NT into Syriac, but only 2 of the OT.

(1) The Peshitta, that is, the "simple" (translation). This version has had such a complex literary history that its origin has long been a matter of debate. As far back as it can be traced, it has been a Christian version, since it contains the NT as well as the OT, and the extant copies of it have come from Christian hands. Yet the OT shows such a strong Jewish influence that many scholars hold that it was, at least in part, of Jewish origin, though some explain it as of Jewish-Christian origin. It may have been produced at Edessa, though Kahle states that it came from the region of Adiabene, lying east of the Tigris, where King Isates and his mother Helena became Jewish proselytes in the 1st cent. a.d. There are passages in the OT that are little more than transliterations of western Aramaic Targums into the Syriac script. While the text agrees in the main with the Masoretic Hebrew, it seems to have been revised on the basis of the LXX. Originally this Syriac version lacked Chr, Ezr, Neh, and Est, as well as the Apocrypha, all of which were added at a later date. The most valuable Syriac manuscript is the Codex Ambrosianus from about the 6th cent., now in Milan. A manuscript of Gen, Ex, Num, and Deut, from the monastery of St. Mary Deipara in Egypt, bears a date corresponding to a.d. 464, and is thus the oldest copy of the Bible in any language bearing a definite date.

(2) The Syro-Hexaplar version is a rendering of the 5th column of Origen's Hexapla into Syriac by Bishop Paul of Tella in a.d. 616-617. Since the translation was very literal and included Origen's critical marks, it is our chief authority for reconstructing the revised Septuagint text of the Hexapla.

6. Latin Versions.

(1) The Old Latin. The Latin rendering of the Bible probably originated in North Africa as early as a.d. 150. It is even possible that the Christians of North Africa adopted a translation of the OT from Latin-speaking Jews. Tertullian (c. a.d. 160 - c. 230) knew the Old Latin Bible at least in part, and Cyprian (c. 200-258), bishop of Carthage, quotes frequently from both Testaments of this Bible. Only fragments of the Old Latin of the OT have survived. Several of the Apochryphall books were incorporated unrevised into the Vulgate. As for the the rest of The Bible, scholars have been able to piece together manuscript fragments covering a considerable portion of the OT. These, together with quotations in the early Latin Fathers, are our sources for the reconstruction of the Old Latin text of the OT. Scholars distinguish 2 types of text: the African and the European. The Old Latin of the OT was made from the Greek LXX, and its chief value today is as an aid in recovering the text of the LXX as it was before Origen's revision of it.

(2) The Vulgate. The official Latin version was produced by Jerome in response to the request of Pope Damascus (a.d. 382) for a revision of the Old Latin Bible. Jerome made 3 revisions of the Psalms. The 1st of these, based on the LXX, is known as the Roman Psalter (a.d. 384) because it was officially adopted by Pope Damascus for use in the churches in Rome and Italy. It still remains in official use in St. Peter's in Rome, as well as in Milan. A more thorough revision followed c. a.d. 387 on the basis of the Hexapla. This revision, because it was first adopted in Gaul, became known as the Gallican Psalter. It is still embodied in the Vulgate. The 3rd version, known as the Hebrew Psalter, because it was a new rendering of the original Hebrew, never achieved popularity or general usage, though some manuscripts of the Vulgate contain it, generally in parallel columns with the Gallican. Jerome then spent several years in making a new translation of the rest of the OT books directly from the Hebrew. This translation, which is called the Vulgate, or "common" version, became the Bible of Western Christendom and is still the official Bible of the Roman Catholic Church. In the study of the OT text its value is qualified by its freedom of rendering, and by its late date. It was produced after the Hebrew text had been standardised substantially as it is today.

In all, there is a total of some 8,000 manuscripts of the Vulgate extant in Europe. Perhaps the most highly regarded manuscript is Codex Amiatinus, copied in England about the beginning of the 8th cent., carried as a gift to the pope, but now located in Florence. The 1st printed edition of the Vulgate was Gutenberg's. The official Bible of the Catholic Church has been a revision of the Sixtine Bible of Pope Sixtus V, known as the Clementine Bible because revised and reissued under Pope Clement VIII. A new critical edition, however, is now being prepared by scholars of the Benedictine order.

7. Other Eastern Versions.

(1) Coptic Version. Coptic, the language of Egypt in the early Christian period, consists of several dialects. The most important of these, so far as Bible versions are concerned, are the Sahidic (derived from the Arabic name for Upper Egypt, es-Said) and the Bohairic (from the Arabic name for Lower or Coastland Egypt, Boheireh). The Sahidic translation was probably made about the 3rd cent., and was current in Upper (Southern) Egypt. The Bohairic is to be dated sometime between the 3rd and the 5th cent., probably the 4th, and was current in Lower (Northern) Egypt. The Bohairic became the official version of the Coptic Church. In both versions the OT was translated from the LXX.

(2) The Ethiopic Version. This version, variously dated between the 5th and the 7th cent., was a translation of the Greek. The oldest manuscripts of this version extant today are from the 13th cent.

(3) The Gothic Version. This version, representing the 1st written literature of the Goths, was made from the Lucianic recension of the LXX by Ulfilas about the middle of the 4th cent. Only a few fragments of the OT are extant today.

(4) The Armenian Version. A translation made for the Christians of eastern Asia Minor from the LXX about a.d. 400, after the invention of the Armenian alphabet. The version shows definite influence from the Syriac Peshitta.

(5) The Georgian Version. A version made in the 5th or 6th cent., probably from the Greek LXX with some reference to the Syriac. The whole Bible is preserved in a manuscript of 2 volumes in the Iberian Monastery on Mount Athos.

(6) The Slavonic Version. A version of the 9th cent. attributed to 2 brothers, Cyrill and Methodius. Some of the books were translated from the Greek, some from the Hebrew, and others from the Vulgate.

(7) The Arabic Version. The Pentateuch and Joshua of this version were made by Saadya the Gaon (892-942) on the basis of the Hebrew. The rest of the OT books were apparently translated from the Peshitta and the Septuagint.

II. Ancient New Testament Versions.

1. Latin New Testaments.

(1) The Old Latin. The Old Latin translation of the NT was produced about the latter half of the 2nd cent. a.d., probably, though not certainly, in North Africa, where there was a flourishing church centring in Carthage. Since this version takes us back within 2 or 3 generations of the actual writing of the NT books, it is an exceedingly important witness to the primitive text of the NT. It is one of the chief witnesses to the Western type of text. About 50 manuscripts and fragments of the Old Latin NT survive. None of these contains the entire NT. However, these manuscripts, together with quotations in the Latin Fathers, contain almost the complete NT. On the basis of the patristic quotations the manuscripts are divided into 3 types: the African, used by Cyprian, the European, found in a 2nd-cent. Latin translation of Irenaeus' works, and the Italian, found in the writings of Augustine. Many scholars, however, dispute the existence of the Italian. A number of the Old Latin manuscripts go back to the 4th and the 5th cent., and are very important.

(2) The Vulgate. The Vulgate NT is a rather conservative revision of the Old Latin on the basis of some ancient Greek manuscripts. Jerome completed the revision of the Gospels in 384, and the rest subsequently. Whether Jerome did all the work is a matter of uncertainty. The new version was not immediately accepted with enthusiasm, but it won its way gradually. It was not until about the 7th cent. that the Vulgate was supreme. In the meantime the text of the Old Latin and the Vulgate had suffered an intermixture which has added to the complexity of their literary history. Several attempts were made during the Middle Ages to preserve the true text of the Vulgate: by Cassiodorus (d. c. 583), by Alcuin, under Charlemagne (8th cent.), and by Theodulf (9th cent.). At the Council of Trent, 1546, the Vulgate was officially recognised as the standard text of the Roman Catholic Church. It was the Bible of Western Europe for 1,000 years, and was the basis of the earliest English translations.

2. Syriac New Testaments.

(1) The Diatessaron. The earliest Syriac translation of the NT was in the form of a fusion of the 4 Gospels into one continuous narrative of the life and teachings of Jesus. This Diatessaron was produced c. a.d. 170 by Tatian, a gifted and powerful Oriental personality, who had studied under Justin Martyr at Rome. His work was in time so completely displaced by the "Gospel of the Separated" (see (2) below) that it has survived only in translations such as 2 Arabic manuscripts, 1 of which is in the Vatican Library, an Armenian commentary on it by Ephraem, and a 14-line Greek fragment found at Dura Europus in 1933.

(2) The Old Syriac Gospels. Although there may have been an Old Syriac version of all, or most, of the NT books, only the Gospels have been recovered. This version, called The Gospel of the Separated (that is, the 4 separate Gospels), was probably made c. a.d. 200. It is extant in 2 forms: (a) the "Curetonian," consisting of some 80 leaves of a 5th-cent. manuscript coming from the monastery of St. Mary Deipara in the Nitrian Desert of Egypt, and edited by Dr. William Cureton in 1842; (b) the "Sinaitic," represented by a palimpsest manuscript a half century older than the Curetonian, found at St. Catherine's Monastery at Mount Sinai by Mrs. A. S. Lewis and her sister, Mrs. A. D. Gibson, in 1892. These 2 manuscripts are highly significant witnesses to the early text of the Gospels.

(3) The Peshitta. The NT of the Peshitta (the "simple," or "common," version) is usually credited to Bishop Rabbula of Edessa (a.d. 411-435), who revised the divergent copies of the Old Syriac in accord with the current Byzantine Greek text. This version, which was in use in the Syriac church from the 5th cent. onward, is represented by about 250 manuscripts, some 15 of which date from the 5th and 6th cent. It lacked 2 Pe, 2 and 3 Jn, Jude, and the Apocalypse.

(4) The Philoxenian and Harkleian Version. A revision of the Peshitta was made in 508 by Philoxenus, bishop of Mabug. This, in turn, was revised by Thomas of Harkel (Heraclea) in a.d. 616, on the basis of Greek manuscripts from Alexandria. While the Philoxenian is free and idiomatic, the Harkleian is extremely literal.

(5) The Palestinian Syriac. There is a Syriac version known only in fragmentary form, largely through lectionaries, which in language is closely related to Western or Jewish Aramaic, the language Jesus is believed to have used. The version was probably made in Antioch not later than the 6th cent. and probably earlier.

3. Coptic New Testaments. Of some 5 known Coptic versions, the most important are the Sahidic and the Bohairic.

(1) The Sahidic. This version is the older version and was used in Southern (Upper) Egypt. It was formerly designated Thebaic, after the city of Thebes. Only fragments of this version are extant, but these fragments are of sufficient quantity to reconstruct the major part of the NT. The earliest manuscripts originate from the 4th cent. a.d..

(2) The Bohairic. This version was current in Northern (Lower) Egypt and eventually replaced the other dialects. It is the Coptic used to this day in the church services, and the complete NT has been preserved in it. Both the Sahidic and Bohairic versions of the NT contain principally an Alexandrian type of text, similar to a text such as is found in the Codex Vaticanus.

4. Other Eastern Versions of the New Testament.

(1) The Armenian New Testament. This version, made in the 1st part of the 5th cent., is noted for its accuracy and literary beauty. Scholars are still divided on the question of whether it was made from the Syriac or the Greek, and the ancient Armenian traditions are themselves divided on the matter. Recent studies have convinced some scholars that, as far as the Gospels are concerned, there was an Armenian translation earlier than the standard one, and that this translation was based on the Old Syriac Gospels. The Armenian version of the NT is regarded as an important witness to the Caesarean type of text. The oldest known manuscript of this version is dated 887. Some of the most beautifully illuminated manuscripts known are Armenian.

(2) The Old Georgian New Testament. This version is closely related to the Armenian, and, in fact, has been regarded as a translation of it. If so, the Armenian version on which it is based would be a form not now in our possession. The Georgian is another important witness to the Caesarean type of text.

(3) The Ethiopic New Testament. This version was produced probably around a.d. 600. The current text of the version was made from the Greek, but some scholars have found traces of an earlier form of it based allegedly on the Old Syriac. The manuscripts are late, the earliest being from the 13th cent., and the majority between the 16th and 18th cent. These late manuscripts have been influenced by an Arabic version.

(4) The Gothic New Testament. This version was made directly from a Greek text of the Byzantine type by Ulfilas c. a.d. 350. Since the version is almost slavishly literal it is valuable for recovering its Greek original. The most famous of the Gothic manuscripts is Codex Argenteus, a 5th or 6th cent. Gospel manuscript on purple vellum of Bohemian origin, which is now in Uppsala, Sweden.

III. English Versions.

1. Anglo-Saxon Versions. The metrical paraphrases of Biblical narratives by Caedmon in the 7th cent. constitute the earliest attempt to translate the Bible into Anglo-Saxon. Partial translations followed, such as Aldhelm's rendering of the Psalms (7th cent.), Bede's translation of John (8th cent.), and Egbert's version of the Gospels. But the earliest translations of the Gospels into Anglo-Saxon which have survived are in the form of word-for-word interlinear glosses of Latin manuscripts. These are represented by the Lindisfarne Gospels, which have a Latin text written about 700, and an interlinear translation in Anglo-Saxon of about 950, and the Rushworth Gospels, which have glosses of a slightly later date. The West Saxon Gospels of the 10th cent. are the earliest copies of an independent translation in Anglo-Saxon, separate from a Latin text. After the Norman Conquest (1066) brought in a new language, there was linguistic fusion and confusion, but in the 13th cent., after the Norman-English combination emerged, Orm produced a metrical version of the church service, including parts of the Gospels and Acts, known today as The Ormulum. In the same century a metrical translation of the Psalter appeared, which is extant in several copies; before 1350 there was also a prose version in the dialect of West Midlands, sometimes attributed to William of Shoreham; and a version with a verse-by-verse commentary by Richard Rolle, a hermit living at Hampole in Yorkshire.

2. The Wyclif Bible, c. 1382. The 1st complete Bible in the English language was produced under the influence and direction of John Wyclif. Just how much of the work of translation was done by Wyclif himself we have no way of knowing. It is quite certain that most of the OT was produced by an ardent friend and supporter of Wyclif at Oxford, Nicholas of Hereford. The Wyclif Bible was a translation of the Latin Vulgate, not of the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Since it was made before the invention of printing, it circulated in manuscript form. The version has come down to us in 2 editions, represented by about 170 copies. Less than 30 copies represent the original form, and the remainder a revised edition produced shortly after Wyclif's death, in 1388 or later, by one of Wyclif's closest friends, most probably John Purvey. The Wyclif Bible helped to mould the language of the English Bible. We owe to it such expressions as "strait gate," "make whole," "compass sea and land," "son of perdition," and "enter thou into the joy of thy lord."

3. The Tyndale New Testament, 1525. The 1st printed English New Testament was translated by William Tyndale directly from Erasmus' Greek text as published in 1516 and revised in 1522. Tyndale's translation was made in Hamburg, but was published in Worms. As subordinate aids Tyndale made use of the Vulgate, the Latin translation of Erasmus and Luther's German version. More than any other man Tyndale moulded the language of our English Bible. Practically nine tenths of the language of the King James Version of the NT is Tyndale's. He deserves the credit for much of its beauty and dignity. Tyndale discarded many of the cherished ecclesiastical terms such as "priest," "church," "charity," "penance," etc. He made a revision of his New Testament in 1534 and again in 1535. His labours, however, were not confined to the NT. In 1530 there was published at Marburg a translation of the Pentateuch he had made from the Hebrew. This was followed by a translation of Jonah in 1531. It is also believed that during his imprisonment he made a translation of the OT books from Joshua to Chronicles, which was not published till after his death, having been left with his friend, John Rogers. In October 1536 Tyndale was strangled and burned as he cried, "Lord, open the King of England's eyes." To William Tyndale the King James Version is largely indebted for its character, form, and style.

4. Miles Coverdale's Bible, 1535. Coverdale's was the 1st complete printed English Bible. The printer and place of publication are unknown; it was probably printed at Marburg. According to the title page Coverdale translated this Bible "out of Douche [German] and Latyn in to Englishe." The NT was simply a revision of Tyndale's, in which many of the beloved ecclesiastical terms were restored. In the OT, use was probably made of Tyndale's Pentateuch, and the remainder was translated from Luther's German and the Zürich Bible of 1529, the Vulgate, and the Latin text of Pagninus. It was dedicated to Henry VIII and was apparently sponsored by Thomas Cromwell. The revised edition of 1537 asserted that it was "set forth with the king's most gracious license." This was the year after Tyndale's martyrdom. The Coverdale Bible is especially noteworthy as the 1st English Bible to separate the Apocrypha from the OT. In earlier versions these Apocryphal books were interspersed among the books of the OT. Coverdale segregated them under the heading: "Apocripha, the bokes and treatises which amonge the fathers of olde are not rekened to be of like authorite with the other bokes of the byble, nether are they founde in the Canon of the Hebrue." In all later versions the example of Coverdale was followed, or the Apocrypha was omitted.

5. The "Thomas Matthew" Bible, 1537. The 1st licensed English Bible was a revision produced by John Rogers, a disciple of Tyndale, and was probably printed at Antwerp. Through the efforts of Cromwell and Cranmer, permission for its public sale was secured from Henry VIII. The actual translation was taken largely from the published and unpublished works of Tyndale, including his NT of 1535, and his rendering of the OT books from Gen through 2 Chr. The remainder of the OT and the Apocryphal books were a revision of Coverdale's Bible. In order to hide the actual sources of this version, Rogers placed the name "Thomas Matthew" on the title page.

6. Taverner's Bible, 1539. An independent revision of Matthew's Bible by Richard Taverner, the 1st English Bible to be completely printed in England.

7. The Great (or Cranmer's) Bible, 1539. Coverdale's revision of the Thomas Matthew Bible was the 1st English Bible authorised by the King of England and by Parliament for use in the Church of England. It was prepared by Coverdale at the request of Thomas Cromwell. Coverdale revised the OT in accordance with Sebastian Münster's Latin version of 1535, and the NT with reference to the Vulgate and the Latin version of Erasmus. The name "Great" Bible is derived from its large size. The pages measured 15 by 10 in. It is called Cranmer's Bible because of the preface written by Cranmer, who was then the Archbishop of Canterbury. The printing was begun in Paris and finished in London. Cromwell ordered that every church in England was to have a copy in a convenient place. The Book of Common Prayer still makes use of the Psalms from this version.

8. The Geneva Bible; NT 1557, OT 1560. The scholarly revision by Protestant refugees in Switzerland during Mary's reign, under the leadership of William Whittingham. It was the 1st version printed in Roman type. Not only was it the most scholarly English version that had thus appeared but it was in a handy quarto size. It became the popular household Bible for 3/4 of a century. It had a strong influence upon the King James Version, and was also the 1st complete English Bible to have verse divisions.

9. The Bishop's Bible, 1568. The 2nd authorised English Bible, a revision of the Great Bible by a group of scholars that included a number of bishops. It showed considerable borrowing from the Geneva Bible, including the division into verses. The version was of uneven quality because of the lack of consultation between the revisers, and became the occasion and the basis of the later revision known as the King James Version. It immediately superseded the Great Bible in the churches, but never displaced the Geneva Bible in the homes of the people.

10. The Rheims-Douai Version; Rheims NT Douai OT 1609-10. The popularity of the Protestant English Bibles resulted in a Roman Catholic translation of the Latin Vulgate. The title page speaks of it as "The Holie Bible, Faithfully Translated into English out of the Authentical Latin." The translation is so literal as to be stilted and at times unintelligible. Nevertheless, it influenced the revisers of the King James Version, especially in words of Latin derivation.

11. The King James (or "Authorised") Version, 1611. A revision of the Bishops' Bible, by a large group of scholars, made at the request of King James I (hence the name, now abbreviated to KJV). A long and scholarly preface by Miles Smith set forth the purpose and principles employed in the translation. Unfortunately this preface, entitled "The Translators to the Reader," is not now generally printed in the King James Bible. It states the purpose of the new version in these words: "Truly (good Christian Reader) we never thought from the beginning, that we should need to make a new Translation, nor yet to make a bad one good one, €¦ but to make a good one better, or out of many good ones, one principal good one, not justly to be excepted against; that hath been our endeavour, that our mark." This goal the translators achieved. They produced a scholarly and adequate rendering of the then-known Hebrew and Greek texts in an English style known for its beauty, dignity, and charm. The influence of this version on the religious life and literature of the English-speaking peoples is incalculable. It is often spoken of as the Authorised Version, though there is no record of any order or decree by either Parliament or the King authorising its use in the churches, as the title page implies. The King James Version was revised in minor details a number of times in the 17th and 18th cent. The generally accepted current form of the version is substantially the revision of 1769.

12. The English Revised Version; NT 1881, OT 1885. The phenomenal discovery of new manuscripts in the centuries that followed the production of the KJV gave rise to a new, radical revision, as scholars now had a more ancient text of the Greek NT from which to make their translation. Also a better understanding of Hebrew resulted in a clearer rendering of the OT. The result was the Revised Version. An effort was also made to eliminate obsolete words and archaisms. The paragraphing of the text by verses was superseded by a division into sense units or paragraphs. The version, however, lacked the literary charm of the King James Version.

13. The American Standard Version, 1901. An American edition of the Revised Version incorporating the readings and renderings preferred by the American Committee of Revision but not accepted by the British revisers, also containing further changes.

14. The Revised Standard Version; NT 1946, OT 1952. The newest revision by an American committee of scholars, embodying the latest in Biblical scholarship, and presenting God's Word in the American English of today. Its translators state in the preface: "That Word must not be disguised in phrases that are no longer clear, or hidden under words that have changed or lost their meaning. It must stand forth in language that is direct and plain and meaningful to people today."

In 1957 The Apocrypha of the Old Testament, Revised Standard Version, was published. This revision was prepared by a group of scholars appointed by the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the U.S.A., in response to a request by the General Convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church in 1952.

In 1965 there was published a Catholic Edition of the Revised Standard Version of the NT, which had been prepared by the Catholic Biblical Association of Great Britain with the approval of the RSV Bible Committee. The changes, approximately 50, which were made in the text are of 2 kinds: (1) changes in the underlying Greek text, and (2) changes in translation. These changes are all listed in Appendix 2 of the edition. Appendix 1 contains a series of "Explanatory Notes" as prescribed by Canon Law. Most of these interpretative notes would be acceptable to Protestants, and, indeed, many are helpful. In 1966 RSV Catholic Edition of the whole Bible was published. It consisted of the RSV OT without any changes in the text, the RSV Apocrypha, and the Catholic Edition of the RSV NT. With the exception of 1 and 2 Esdras and the Prayer of Manasseh (which are excluded), the apocryphal books are interspersed among the books of the OT in harmony with Catholic practice. Explanatory notes of various passages are given at the end of the OT. Another significant development in 1965 was the imprimatur that was given by Cardinal Cushing, Archbishop of Boston, to the Oxford Annotated Bible (RSV), containing also the Apocrypha, and explanatory notes. This was the first English Bible to be approved by both Protestants and Catholics. In it the Apocrypha are printed as a separate group.

The RSV Bible Committee is a continuing committee with authority to recommend further revisions in the RSV text when in their judgement these are needed. It is also now an international committee consisting of members from Canada and Great Britain, as well as the U.S.A., and from Catholicism, as well as the various bodies of Protestantism. A few changes in the translation of the NT were made in 1959-1960. But more were made both in the underlying Greek text and in the translation in the 2nd ed. of the NT. In the interests of ecumenism the RSV Common Bible was published in 1973, consisting of the 2nd ed. of the NT, the OT, and the OT Apocrypha. The apocryphal books are printed between the 2 Testaments and arranged in 2 groups: (1) The Deuterocanonical books, regarded as authoritative scripture by Roman Catholics, and (2) the remaining apocryphal books, 1 and 2 Esdras, and the Prayer of Manasseh, which are not regarded as authoritative scripture. The production of a Bible endorsed by Roman Catholics, Greek Orthodox, and Protestant leaders is a significant event. It is a new day when all major Christian bodies can use the same English Bible.

15. Jewish Versions. Several translations of the Hebrew Bible (OT) into English by Jewish scholars have been made, such as the version by Abraham Benisch (1851), and the Jewish Family Bible edited by Michael Friedländer (1884) in England, and Rabbi Isaac Leeser's version (1853) in the U.S.A. During the last decade of the 19th cent. the Jewish Publication Society took steps to prepare a more adequate translation. A board of editors, 6 in number, worked with the editor in chief and translator, Max L. Margolis, of Dropsie College, to produce The Holy Scriptures According to the Masoretic Text, A New Translation (1917). Its aim, according to the preface, was "to combine the spirit of Jewish tradition with the results of biblical scholarship, ancient, medieval, and modern." The style of the version was patterned after the classic non-Jewish English versions. It is not surprising that the need came to be felt for a brand-new version that would speak in modern idiom to 20th-cent. man. Hence in 1955 the Jewish Publication Society appointed committees to prepare a fresh Jewish translation, completely independent of any other version, Jewish or Christian. Harry M. Orlinsky acted as editor in chief of the 7 scholars who produced the Torah (the Pentateuch), which was published in 1962. A 2nd ed., with a substantial number of improvements, appeared 11 years later. H. L. Ginsberg was the editor in chief of the committee for The Five Megilloth and Jonah (Song, Ruth, Lam, Ec, Est, plus Jon), published in 1969, and Is, which was published in 1973. Another committee has been working on the remainder of the Kethubim (the Writings). The first product of this committee is The Book of Psalms, published in 1972. Another part of The Prophets appeared in 1974 with the publication of The Book of Jeremiah. The New Jewish Version promises to be an outstanding translation of the traditional Hebrew text in contemporary idiomatic English.

16. Roman Catholic Versions. Several important Catholic translations have appeared in addition to revisions of the Rheims-Douai-Challoner version, and the RSV Catholic Edition, previously mentioned. The 4 most prominent are:

(1) The Westminster Version of the Sacred Scriptures. An excellent translation by English Roman Catholic scholars, based on the original texts in both Testaments. The NT was begun in 1913 and completed in 1935 under the editorship of Cuthbert Lattey and J. Keating. The whole Bible has not been completed, but the following parts have been published: Mal (1934), Ruth (1935), Nah and Hab (1937), Jon (1938), Ps (1939, 1944), Dan (1948), Ob, Mic, Zep, Hag, Zec (1953). The work of producing this version was a private project without official sponsorship.

(2) The Ronald A. Knox Version. A new and fresh translation of the Latin Vulgate by the gifted son of an Anglican priest who converted to Roman Catholicism. The NT appeared in 1945, and the OT in 1949. The translation was designated as an official version for use by Roman Catholics in Great Britain by the hierarchies of England, Wales, and Scotland. It is unfortunate that the version had to be made from the Latin Vulgate.

(3) The New American Bible. Begun in 1936 as a revision of the Rheims-Douai-Challoner version based on the Latin Vulgate. It is the work of scholars from the Catholic Biblical Association of America. The version was sponsored by the Episcopal Confraternity of Christian Doctrine, hence it was at first known as the Confraternity Version. The revision of the NT appeared in 1941. In 1943 Pope Pius XII issued the encyclical Divino afflante Spiritu, which enabled Catholic scholars to work directly from the original languages rather than the Latin Vulgate. Hence the OT was translated from the original language. A trial version of Gen appeared in 1949, and the entire OT, including the Apocrypha, was completely published in 1969. Then the NT was retranslated from the Greek for the final publication of the entire Bible in 1970. The New American Bible has the honour of being the first complete American Catholic Bible translated from the original languages. It is a clear, simple, straightforward, and generally accurate rendering.

(4) The Jerusalem Bible. The 1966 English equivalent of La Bible de Jerusalem prepared by scholars of the Dominican Biblical School in Jerusalem. While most of the English translation was made directly from the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek it was compared with the French. The Introduction and Notes are directly translated from the French. The notes are largely explanatory in nature, and are helpful even for Protestants. The translation is in contemporary English and rather free. Its copious and informative notes are of great value. The version has the distinction of being the first Roman Catholic Bible to be translated into English directly from the original languages.

17. Some Private and Modern Speech Translations.

(1) The Fenton Version, 1883-1903. Ferrar Fenton was a London businessman who devoted many years of his life to fulfil a youthful resolve "to establish the authenticity of the Sacred Scriptures as revealed from Him to Man, by making them intelligible, through the use of modern English, to my countrymen. €¦" In 1883 he published his translation of Paul's epistles, in 1895 his NT, and in 1903 The Holy Bible in Modern English.

(2) The Twentieth Century New Testament, 1898-1901. A new translation of the NT said to have been inspired by a mother's desire to have a version her children could understand. It was produced from the Greek text of Westcott and Hort by an anonymous group of about 20 American scholars. The "tentative edition" was published in 3 parts in 1898, 1900, and 1901. The text was then thoroughly revised and published as a permanent edition in 1904. The version was reprinted in 1961 by the Moody Press, of Chicago. Some 75 changes were made in the text, many of which are not improvements, the traditional order of the books was restored, and the introductions were left out.

(3) Moffatt Bibles. James Moffatt produced 2 entirely distinct translations. In 1901 at Edinburgh he published The Historical New Testament; being the literature of the New Testament arranged in the order of its literary growth and according to the dates of the documents, in which he followed the critical literary theories of his time. In 1913 appeared his brilliant and stimulating The New Testament: A New Translation, a rendering of Von Soden's Greek text in the modern colloquial English of Britain. In 1924 he added The Old Testament: A New Translation, and in 1935 he published his revised and final edition of the complete Moffatt Bible.

(4) Weymouth's New Testament. Richard Francis Weymouth prepared a dignified but free and idiomatic translation into everyday English of his Resultant Greek Testament (1892) with special attention to the Greek tenses. Because of Weymouth's illness the version was edited and partly revised by E. Hampden-Cook, and published as The New Testament in Modern Speech, in 1903. An American edition, "newly revised by James Alexander Robertson," was published in Boston in 1929.

(5) The Smith-Goodspeed Bible. In 1923 Edgar J. Goodspeed published The New Testament: An American Translation, in the simple, common language of everyday life in America. He used as his basis the Greek text of Westcott and Hort, with some variations. In 1927 appeared a companion volume, The Old Testament: An American Translation, the work of T. J. Meek, Leroy Waterman, A. R. Gordon, and J. M. Powis Smith, who also acted as editor. These were combined in 1931 as The Bible: An American Translation, and in 1939, with the addition of Godspeed's version of the Apocrypha, as The Complete Bible.

(6) The Riverside New Testament. A sort of eclectic rendering of Nestle's Greek text by W. G. Ballantine, who confesses his indebtedness to other modern versions. It was published as the Riverside New Testament in 1923, and revised in 1934.

(7) Centenary Translation of the New Testament. A version to commemorate the first 100 years of service by the American Baptist Publication Society, published by Mrs. Helen Barrett Montgomery in 1924 in Philadelphia. Many of her colloquial paragraph and chapter headings are striking, such as "Play the Game," "A €˜Close-up' of Sin," "Paul's Swan Song," and "Orchestrate Your Virtues."

(8) The Williams New Testament. Charles B. Williams, a professor of Greek, in 1937 (Boston) published The New Testament, A New Translation in the Language of the People in which he gave special attention to the rendering of the Greek tenses. The version was reprinted in Chicago in 1950.

(9) The Berkeley Version. A version produced by Gerrit Verkuyl who, in the translation of his NT, based chiefly on Tischendorf's 8th edition of the Greek text, aimed to produce "a translation less interpretative than Moffatt's more cultured in language than Goodspeed's, more American than Weymouth's and freer from the King James Version than the Revised Standard" (The Bible Translator, Vol. II, No. 2, p. 81, April, 1951). Verkuyl also edited the OT, and in 1959 The Holy Bible: The Berkeley Version in Modern English appeared (named for Verkuyl's home, Berkeley, California). The edition of 1969 contains an extensive revision of the NT text and the explanatory notes by groups of scholars. The OT was also improved. The new edition is called The Modern Language Bible.

(10) The Bible in Basic English. A version prepared by a committee under S. H. Hooke of the University of London. In 1941 the New Testament was produced using about 1,000 words, of which 850 are Basic English, 50 are special Bible words, and 100 others are words giving most help in reading English prose. The whole Bible appeared in 1949.

(11) Phillips' Translation. A work by an Anglican priest, J. B. Phillips, a remarkable modern speech version in flowing language, based on Souter's Greek text. In 1947 he published his Letters to Young Churches, in 1952, The Gospels, in 1955, The Young Church in Action [Acts], and in 1958, The New Testament in Modern English. The version is fresh and challenging though at times a bit free, as in phrases such as "dear old Stachys" (Rom 16:9), and "Give one another a hearty handshake all round for my sake" (v 16).

At the urging of friends Phillips also tried his hand at translating the OT. In 1963 his Four Prophets, consisting of Amos, Hos, Is 1-35, and Mic was published. He discovered that the Hebrew of the OT was much more difficult to put into modern English than the Greek.

Phillips designed his translation of the NT to communicate the gospel to the youth of London. "This passion of mine for communication," he writes, "for I can hardly call it less, has led me sometimes to paraphrase and sometimes to interpolate clarifying remarks which are certainly not in the Greek." Because of this freedom in rendering, Phillips was alarmed when he learned that his version was being used as authoritative in Bible study groups. Hence, he decided to produce a revised edition which would be truer to the Greek, and also to use a better Greek text (the United Bible Societies Greek text) than he had for the original edition. This revised edition was published in 1972.

(12) The Rieu Gospels and Acts. In 1952 The Penguin Classics published The Four Gospels, A New Translation, by E. V. Rieu, then editor of the Penguin series. The translation is characterised by accuracy, readability, and dignified simplicity. Rieu's son, C. H. Rieu, translated The Acts of the Apostles by Saint Luke in 1947, also published by the Penguin Classics.

(13) The New Testament: A New Translation in Plain English. A version by Charles Kingsley Williams, published in London in 1952. The translator makes good the title; the translation is in simplified English, the vocabulary containing only about 2,000 words.

(14) The New English Bible. The first official Protestant Bible to break away from the Tyndale-Coverdale-King James tradition in that it is not a revision of earlier standard English versions, as the RSV is, but an entirely fresh rendering into contemporary, living English. The translation is not based on one of the current critical Greek texts of the NT, but on one constructed by the translators as they went along on the eclectic method of selecting "for translation in each passage the reading which to the best of their judgement seemed to represent what the author wrote." Some of their choices were, in the opinion of textual scholars, quite bold and in the direction of the Western text. The method of translation was dynamic, rather than formal. Speaking for the translators the Introduction to the NT declares: "We have conceived our task to be that of understanding the original as precisely as we could (using all available aids), and then saying again in our own idiom what we believed the author to be saying in his." Some Bible students will find the resulting translation too free to be satisfactory. The language of the version is vigorous, colourful, and arrestingly good. It does, however, contain a number of Anglicisms quite foreign to the American reader. The NT appeared in 1961, and the whole Bible in 1970. The OT Apocrypha has also been translated in this version.

(15) The New American Standard Bible. An attempt by the Lockman Foundation of La Habra, California, to rescue the American Standard Version from oblivion by modernising it. It represents an honest attempt to be faithful to the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek original, though the critical Greek text is modified in the direction of the Textus receptus. The NT was published in 1963, and the whole Bible in 1971. Unfortunately, its goal of producing "a fluent and readable style according to current English usage" has not been achieved, for although the language is intelligible it is often stilted and nonidiomatic. The chief value of this version is as a study Bible. Its cross references taken over from the American Standard Version are of great value for the interpreter, and its marginal notes are helpful.

(16) The Living Bible. A modern-speech rendering into living English by Kenneth Nathaniel Taylor, of Wheaton, Illinois, which has become very popular among Evangelicals, with special appeal to youth. Beginning with the NT letters in 1962, Taylor published major portions of the version during the next 9 years, culminating in the complete Bible in 1971. The appeal of The Living Bible is in its readability, clarity, and English style. Its accuracy and faithfulness to the original documents are, however, subject to question. It is not a direct translation from the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, but began as a paraphrase of the American Standard Version. The underlying Greek text of the NT of that conservative version was modified in the direction of the Textus receptus. The one-man paraphrase is often unduly free, and frequently offers questionable interpretations both in the text and in the notes. The careful Bible student will need to check it by a more literal and reliable translation or, better yet, by the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek originals.

(17) Today's English Version. The NT was translated by Robert G. Bratcher on the basis of the United Bible Societies Greek text at the request of the American Bible Society. The 1st ed. was published by the society in 1966 under the title Good News for Modern Man. In the 2nd (1967) and 3rd (1971) editions many improvements in style and substance were made. The principle on which the translation was made was that of "dynamic equivalence," which holds the ideal that the translation should be of such a nature as to produce the same effect in the receptor language on present-day readers as the original produced on first-century readers. This principle is not peculiar to the translator of this version. The real hallmark of Today's English Version is its use of common-language English. This means that use was made of that part of the English language which is understood and used by people from all levels of society and all grades of education who read and write English. The translator studiously sought to make the language simple, direct, and intelligible to non-Christians, as well as to Christians.

The United Bible Societies requested the American Bible Society to produce a translation of the OT on the same principles. This translation, prepared by a committee, was published along with the 4th edition of the NT as the Good News Bible, Today's English Version in 1976. An added feature of interest is the approximately 500 line drawings by Mlle. Annie Vallotton, a Swiss artist. These simple, imaginative drawings are designed to reinforce various aspects of the printed text. Today's English Version clothes the Bible in a language that is simple, plain, and meaningful to modern man.

(18) The New International Version. Sponsored by Evangelicals and financed by the New York Bible Society International, this is one of the newest of the major versions. Though plans for it were laid in 1965, the NT was not published until 1973. It was produced by a large team of international and interdenominational scholars. The NT is based on an eclectic Greek text. The translators' first concern was accuracy, fidelity to the text chosen. They had also a concern that the English be simple, clear, and idiomatic. They sought to use international English, which avoids "overt Americanisms on the one hand, and overt Anglicisms on the other hand." Several portions of the OT were published, including Is, Prov, and Ec. The entire Bible appeared in late 1978. This promises to be one of the most satisfactory versions of recent times.

(19) Other Recent Versions. Among other recent versions, mention should be made of: Hugh I. Schonfield's Authentic New Testament (a translation by a Jewish scholar, 1955); George M. Lamsa's The Holy Bible From Ancient Eastern Manuscripts (a translation of the Syriac Peshitta, 1957); The New World Translation of the Jehovah's Witnesses (1961); Olaf M. Norlie's Simplified New Testament in Plain English (1961); Kenneth S. Wuest's Expanded Translation of the Greek New Testament (1961); William F. Beck's The Holy Bible in the Language of Today (NT, 1963; OT completed, 1966; whole Bible published, 1977); The Holy Name Bible (1963); The Amplified Bible (1965); F. F. Bruce's Expanded Paraphrase of the Epistles of Paul (1965); Clarence Jordan's Cotton Patch Version (1968-1973); William Barclay's The New Testament (1969); Jay P. Green's King James II Version (1971); and Dave J. Klingensmith's The New Testament in Everyday English (1974).

Lit.: F. F. Bruce, The English Bible (new rev. ed.; London, 1970); Cambridge History of the Bible (Cambridge, 1963, 1969, 1970), 3 vols.; Frederic Kenyon, Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts (rev. ed. by Adams; New York, 1958); Ralph W. Klein, Textual Criticism of the Old Testament (New York, 1974); Sakae Kubo and Walter Specht, So Many Versions (Grand Rapids, Mich., 1975); Bruce M. Metzger, The Text of the New Testament (2nd ed.; London, 1968); I. M. Price, The Ancestry of Our English Bible (3rd ed. by Irwin and Wikgren; New York, 1956); Bleddyn J. Roberts, The Old Testament Text and Versions (Cardiff, 1951); Luther A. Weigle, The English New Testament (New York, 1949); Ernst Würthwein, The Text of the Old Testament (New York, 1975); H. Wheeler Robinson, ed., The Bible in Its Ancient and English Versions (rev. ed.; London, 1954).

Sign Up for our Newsletter