Illuminating The Word
His Words, Our Translations (Part 1)
Examining the Unchanging Word of God and the Faithfulness of Modern Translations
When evaluating which Bible translation is “more true” to the original text — whether Protestant (Hebrew/Aramaic), Catholic (Latin), or Greek — the answer is nuanced and depends on several factors, including the source material and the purpose of the translation.
In this post, I’ll discuss the major points related to both the Protestant and Catholic traditions and then attempt to share my opinion on which is more true based on some of the translation priorities and differences. I will touch on word-for-word vs. thought-for-thought translations here briefly but will go into greater depth in a future post.
Hebrew/Aramaic (Protestant Tradition)
Protestant translations like the King James Version (KJV), English Standard Version (ESV), and New International Version (NIV) are based on the Masoretic Text for the Old Testament, which is the standard Hebrew text of the Jewish Bible. The New Testament is based on Greek manuscripts.
These translations aim to be as close to the original Hebrew (for the Old Testament) and Greek (for the New Testament) as possible, using the best available ancient manuscripts. It is also important to note that Protestant translators typically prioritize literal word-for-word translation where possible, but also employ a thought-for-thought translation for clarity.
This being said, while based on the Masoretic Text, Protestant translations sometimes differ from Jewish interpretations due to theological perspectives. For example, in some places, older the Greek Septuagint readings — which are often used in Catholic and Orthodox traditions — may better preserve ancient variants of Hebrew texts that no longer exist in the Masoretic tradition.
Latin (Catholic Tradition, Douay-Rheims)
Lesser known by Protestants is the Latin Vulgate which was primarily translated by St. Jerome in the late 4th century. This translation was based on Hebrew, Greek, and the earlier Latin. However, it became the standard for the Roman Catholic Church for centuries. We should also note that the Vulgate provides an important historical witness to how early Christians understood the Bible in the 4th century. While Jerome’s translation was considered faithful for its time, it drew directly from Hebrew and Greek where possible. On the other hand, the Douay-Rheims Bible, which is a Catholic translation into English, preserves this Latin tradition.
The Vulgate reflects some theological interpretations based on the early Church’s understanding of doctrine, rather than a strict linguistic translation. While the Vulgate is a translation of a translation (e.g., Hebrew → Latin → English), the Douay-Rheims Bible is less direct than translations from the original Hebrew and Greek texts. Some word choices in Latin are influenced by early theological concerns, which may introduce a slight bias in how certain passages are understood compared to the original Hebrew or Greek.
Greek (Septuagint)
The Septuagint is an ancient Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament), created in the 3rd–2nd centuries BCE. The New Testament was originally written in Greek.
The Septuagint is older than the Masoretic Text and reflects Hebrew texts that were available in the ancient world but may have been lost or altered over time. Many early Christians, including the New Testament writers, quoted from the Septuagint rather than the Hebrew text, suggesting its importance in early Christian thought. The New Testament in Greek is the definitive source of Christian scriptures, and many Protestant and Catholic translations rely on it.
In some places, the Septuagint differs from the Masoretic Text, leading to variation in translations (e.g., the Septuagint version of Isaiah is sometimes longer). Some believe that the Septuagint’s interpretation of Hebrew scripture can reflect theological shifts or interpretation, as opposed to a purely literal translation.
For the New Testament, translations from Greek manuscripts are typically reliable, though minor variations between manuscripts (textual variants) may lead to differences in translation.
Which is More “True?”
That is a good question! For the Old Testament, translations from the Hebrew Masoretic Text (Protestant translations) are often considered closer to the original Hebrew scriptures. However, the Septuagint (Greek) provides valuable insight into how ancient Jewish and early Christian communities understood the text and may preserve some older or alternative readings of certain passages.
In my opinion, the Latin Vulgate falls behind both the Hebrew and Greek sources in terms of directness, as it is a translation of these earlier sources. However, it has been very influential in shaping Christian theology and liturgy.
Since the New Testament was originally written in Greek, both Catholic and Protestant translations that rely on Greek manuscripts are considered close to the original. Differences arise primarily due to textual variants between ancient manuscripts and the theological preferences of translators.
Priorities & Differences
It also may be helpful to know that Protestant translations tend to prioritize the Hebrew Masoretic Text and Greek manuscripts, making them more direct in terms of fidelity to the original language. They focus on literal translations with the intent of accurately reflecting the original text.
As discussed previously, the Catholic translations (e.g., Douay-Rheims) are based on the Latin Vulgate, which itself is a translation of the Hebrew and Greek, and may reflect both theological concerns and Jerome’s interpretive choices. While not as close to the original languages, they carry a historical and doctrinal significance within the Catholic tradition.
Finally, the Greek Septuagint holds a unique place, especially in the Old Testament, as it is sometimes closer to older Hebrew texts than the Masoretic Text. This makes it an important source for both Catholic and Orthodox Christians.
Each tradition and translation has its value, depending on whether you prioritize linguistic fidelity, theological interpretation, or historical understanding.
Join the Conversation
As we’ve seen, determining which Bible translation is “more true” depends on various factors, from the source material to the translation’s purpose. Each tradition — whether Protestant, Catholic, or Orthodox — has its strengths and areas of focus. But what do you think? Do you prefer translations that prioritize literal word-for-word accuracy, or do you find value in thought-for-thought translations that aim to make Scripture more accessible?
The opinions expressed here are my own and do not reflect the views or positions of my employer.
I’m a dad who blogs about the intersections of life, faith, family, and technology. These are the threads that weave through my personal and spiritual walk.
© Dave Hallmon October 7, 2024.
