This was very interesting. Clearly two people who are very intelligent and well versed in their field. One thing I noticed a few times is Jennifer would throw out an acronym or word that most of us are completely unfamiliar with and Bart would clarify or ask her to do so. Of course, she's used to talking to other academics about this stuff, not us novices. That's something special about Bart is his ability to simplify complex concepts. Absolutely loving the podcast, and very thankful for every new piece of information I hear here.

As a research centre working on a new translation of the Quran, this was a useful insight! Thank you.

This podcast series has made me appreciate Dr. Ehrman even more. Both Dr. Ehrman and Dr. Knust are very talented and extremely smart.

Where Bart says that most people don't read the footnotes... I can't speak for "most people" but I know that when I was a small child (maybe 6 or 7?) my father gave me a Revised Standard Version bible. Before that I had only seen the King James. The RSV immediately seemed special to me precisely because it had footnotes that gave insight into the translation. It was always my favorite version and I *always* read the footnotes, usually giving them more credence that the actual text. If anything, I would have wanted the footnotes to be even more detailed.

This is fantastic Bart! I love this format. I’ve wanted you to ask the questions for quite some time now. Cheers Bart!

I can't imagine how hard it is to be on a translation committee with people that have a preference/bias toward what they believe and what they want others to believe..

Such a stimulating discussion. This was an absorbing episode which seemed to make time fly past!

This is a brilliant series of videos. Problems of translation are virtually unknown to most Christians. Most will tell you it doesn't matter because God will protect the scriptures from being mistranslated. Astonishing ignorance.

An incredibly interesting interview. Thank you very much!

So grateful for these two.

Great Guest, Bart. THIS IS EASILY ONE OF MY FAVORITE VIDEOS PRODUCED ON THIS PODCAST. AWESOME!!!!

Jennifer Knust was really interesting. Please have her on again.

Another definition of “boundaries” is BIASES These COUNCILS “mandate” is to translate ambiguous scriptures to reflect THEIR particular RELIGIOUS DOCTRINE. Dr. Jason Be Duhns book -“ Truth In Translation” , which discusses accuracy and BIAS in translations compares 7 of the most difficult scriptures to translate from Greek to English IN 9 MOST POPULAR TRANSLATIONS, INCLUDING THE KJV, AS,NIV, AB, etc. etc. It is an excellent book for scholars and lay people. It is fascinating for those who are searching for the TRUTH IN TRANSLATION WITHOUT BIAS.

I just can't overstate the relevance of such topics. Thanks, Dr. Ehrman, for enlightening us about it.

Extremely interesting! Thank you.

As a (liberal) Christian that believes in the salvific grace of Jesus’ resurrection, I have to agree that defending biblical inerrancy is not only hopelessly infeasible, but also results in deconversion trauma. Thanks Dr. Ehrman for all you do!

"Hapax legomenon" is such a fun term, thanks for that part of the discussion in particular!

I enjoyed every WORD of this discussion.

Wonderful episode.

Great! Loved this!

Great conversation!

That just whetted my appetite. I hope you have that pair again.

My grandfather was a KJV-only Baptist minister from the 1920s through the 1960s. He would call the RSV the “Devised Version”.

So funny and interesting. Thank you so much!!!

The way the guest dances around the word “slave”’is eye opening. You can feel she’s terrified of offending people who have never been slaves and yet they claim moral superiority. Very hard to take academia seriously given the sword of Damocles that’s over their heads.

"26 translations" is true I wrote a paper once about a single Greek word from the prodigal son and found 26 different translations of the same word. Not a single agreement. I saw a book once in the reference section of the university library. It a huge book of photographic plates of notes from one of the KJV translators. He had three columns: Greek to Latin to English.

Woot! New video!!!

So fascinating and informative, thank you. 🙏

Absolutely fascinating. For almost all of my life I used the New World Translation 1984 Reference Edition which is produced by the Watchtower Society (Jehovah’s Witnesses). However, it is clear that this translation has some significant biases, biases which were only amplified in their more recent editions. I have been searching for a readable English translation with a philosophy similar to what Metzgar stated, ‘literal as possible while open as necessary’. I can’t tell you how helpful this conversation has been in helping me evaluate what translation(s) will be my go to going forward. This did not answer that question, but certainly added some tools to my toolbox in making that evaluation. Thank you Professor Ehrman. I would love to hear and speak with you in person someday.

Thank you very much Prof. Ehrman and Dr Krust for this fruitful and scholarly discussion.

What a great discussion.

This interview was fantastic! Loved it! Do more interviews with her! 🤗🤗

It is very interesting to me that people tend to think "how it is now" is "how it has always been." Language changes happen. All the time. To think that it won't happen to the bible is silly. Well, there was a Texan who said, "I English was good enough for Jesus, it is good enough for me." But it is not just language. They have shifted Jesus' appearance until he is a modern WHITE man. Not just a pale guy from the middle east. We have no idea if Jesus was a real guy, but we can with certainty say what we think of him is not what he would have been. That people have True Belief is rather telling and frightening.

Virgin on the ridiculous. I can remember reading about this translation back in the sixties. I am a protestant from a broadly C of E background, so ridiculous improbabilities were not required.

Awesome guest!

A fascinating episode. 👌

Thank you

I have been riveted to my laptop viewing and listening to this podcast, Bart! Let's have some more like this one! Very interesting!

Thank you for the illuminating discussion! Dr. Knust's description of the NRSV-updated decision process reminds me of the Quaker process of the Sense of the Meeting. The Sense of the Meeting is said to be revealed beyond consensus. Quakers discuss the business of their local and area Meetings. Typically allowing anyone to participate and voice their beliefs regarding the direction the group should take. But since Quakers are supposed to prioritize a unity of spirit and shared responsibility, it is almost easy to let go of how you want things to go when you discern that the Meeting as a whole is clear on how to proceed. No voting is needed when the Sense of the Meeting is clear to all. It feels like organic collective decision-making emerging from each individual's discernment. The main difference would be that no one owns the copyright and thus would have the final say on things. That kind of transactional structure is directly opposed to the Quaker process. Quakers will often set up committees to study and make recommendations. But these committees do not have any authority as such. Their findings, however, are typically treated with respect and as a rough guideline for the discussion. I have always hoped to see some version of this Quaker process adapted for other groups. I am an atheist, but I fell in love with how Quakers can do business beyond consensus. NGL, not all Quaker Meetings live up to this ideal. But in those moments when they do, the results transcend individual disagreement not by ignoring it but by incorporating each into the community at large via their powers of discernment. All order is an emergent structure based on random fluctuations in a field of chaos. Much love!

Thank you Dr.Erhman. Indeed in Greek ancient and modern, δούλος =doulos means slave and υπηρέτης= hypeeretees means servant. It is a bit strange hearing all foreign scholars using their Erasmian pronouncation. I am sure you know this is not the way these words are read (at least) in modern Greek. Adelfoi is pronounced like adelfee or adelfi. I really appreciate your very interesting videos and podcasts. Thank you for the spread of your knowledge to all those of us who seek the truth.

Great 👍

Bart looks like he is winning the battle of the college professors bookcase.

Great presentation regarding the translation of the Bible into english from the original language Greek. This should be required viewing for any serious bible study group that truely wants to understand what the original writings of the bible means and how we came by the translations we use. Especially enjoyed the discussion around 50:00 of the new word used by Paul, manbed. So much we don't know but good to know that you don't know.

I guess, one of the main reasons that many people prefer the KJV is the role of the King James Version in establishing what English actually is (or was at the time). As it was the most important book of its time and the most widespread, it was also setting the norm for a unified English. A similar effect can be seen for instance in Luther's German translation of the Bible, which more or less created the High German standard language everyone was at least trying to adhere to.

Interesting point that came up fairly early was cases when the NT authors were quoting the OT in translation and that translation itself was misleading. The translators of the Septuagint were doing the same process, but with less tools than we have today.

So happy God gave us his infallible words so clearly!

EVERY episode feels like a university level lecture! 👏👍

Thank you for this! It got me looking up the New English Bible, which was a translation an Evangelical Fundamentalist bought for me a few years back when he was trying to convert my partner and I who are both liberal Quakers. He figured we'd trust it because it was contributed to by London Yearly Meeting. From my understanding, it is a late 60s/early 70s descendent of English Revised Version.

Most interesting. So effectively there are not only variations in the original manuscripts, but variations in modern translations. These, albeit carefully and collegially agreed, alterations potentially add to or alter the modern meaning of the text. As an Anglican born in the middle of last century I was brought up using the King James version. For a number of years I attended s Presbyterian school and as a year 8 divinity prize received a copy of the New English Bible. Now, having undertaken study in evolutionary biology and physics, I can reconcile my scientific understanding with a now more liberal belief focused on Jesus teaching of relationship between humans. My church, still Anglican has adopted a more evangelistic outlook and uses the NIV. My religious belief is now my own, informed by my life's experience, and I no longer feel the need to conform completely to the corporate beliefs encouraged through the church ministry.

Speaking of hapax legomena (as one so often does 🙂), I remember I had an Aramaic class where we read the Book of Daniel, and I couldn't help giggling over a footnote speculating about one hapax musical instrument might possibly be: | According to MacPherson, it might be a type of rattle, whereas Conley avers..." I'm a professional translator of modern texts so I know how incredibly complex translation can be, but this discussion really opened my eyes to all the problems specific to biblical translation: the maddening varietty of textual variants, the ideological minefield of scholars with their (hap)axes to grind, committee decisions (makes you miss the good old days where the 70 translators all spontaneously produced identical translations!). Anyway, great job, thanks a lot to both of you!

Thank you both for such an insightful discussion. I never realized the extent to which a copyright holder might influence the outcome of the work of scholars. The example of the difficulties in translating "doulos" seems doubly hard. On the one hand, there is the problem of what does the word "slave" mean to us today - as opposed to what it meant in 1820 or in 1420. On the other hand, there is the problem of what the word implied to the person who originally wrote it. It must be very hard to shed the accumulated cultural change over a couple of millennia to get to the state of mind and culture of an early writer. Alas, we don't have the first draft of the original writer so that we could see what that person was thinking about the story that they were transcribing from oral history. I think Bart makes the point very well in the Mary part of his book "Peter, Paul and Mary Magdalene". What does an ancient manuscript say? The first question is "what do you want it to say?" If we had done physics that way, we'd still be writing texts longhand. The challenge for the professionals is clearly to bring intellectual honesty into an endeavor that has so many ways to go wrong. Kind of reminds me of watching a video of a monkey peeling an artichoke.

this is excellent and so informative, especially about the slave/servant issue, i would say 99 percent of church goers in UK England don't know any of this

Very interesting discussion n deeply appreciate it..

Clearly, Bart did the driving and funneled Jennifer through the conversation. This experience was of benefit to both Jennifer and the hearer. Thank you, Bart, for giving her this opportunity and allowing us to witness it.

A great book on the problems of translating is "Le Bon Ton de Marot" by Hofstadter

The work:readership ratio would be garbage, so it’ll probably happen, but I’d LOVE to see a scholarly translated edition that’s ENTIRELY independent of any church.

awesome interview. i wish bart had asked jennifer about the value of transliteration in bible translations. regardless, excellent

Interesting discussion. Thanks to both Jen and Bart. I have a copy of Jen's book Unprotected Texts - very good book and a cheeky title to boot. In terms of arsenokoites, I see no reason why the actual Greek word can't be retained in the English translation, with a note saying that there is no scholarly consensus as to the definition. I think the translation referred to by Jennifer "men who have illicit sex" is in itself suggestive and problematic.

The Bible has already been translated by the best translators alive today in Mauro Biglino and Paul Wallis. Mauro Biglino is very well known and respected for his ability to accurately translate the original Jewish Bible to the Christian Bible used by the Vatican. Paul Wallis is also well known and respected for his knowledge and understanding of scripture. His Eden book series is shining a light on how the Church has kept people in the dark about the true nature of our existence. The problem people have with Mauro's and Paul's accurate translations of the scriptures is that the scriptures have been mistranslated numerous times over the centuries and those mistranslations (probably intentional) have told a very different story from the Jewish Bible. That, along with the intentional editing and omitting of original scriptures (the Books of the Apocrypha) at the First Council of Nicaea, have given us the 'King James' version of the Bible for Western Christianity. You know, the version that shows Jesus as a tall, slender, fair-skinned, long brown-haired white man. LOL. This has lead to many people, such as the ones presenting here, to perpetuate a false narrative regarding what the scriptures are actually telling us. The King James Version is the absolute worst version to use when trying to understand what these stories were about. The Old Testament is not a story about God, it is a story about Extraterrestrial intervention in the 'evolution' of human beings. I've always had a difficult time understanding why people believe in a God for which there is zero evidence and simultaneously reject the idea of Extraterrestrials for which there is a mountain of evidence of hundreds of sightings, videos, pictures and even physical evidence. I suppose it has to do with people fearing that there might not actually be a personal God who answers all our prayers.......because there isn't. Show me some evidence of Gods existence that is verifiable and I will gladly consider it, but since I've been saying that for many years now and no one has presented anything to me I must conclude that no such evidence exists. On the contrary, there is no shortage for evidence of human suffering on a global scale since the beginning of time. That's why the Old Testament is all about the cruelty of the 'Powerful Ones' not God who did heinous things to us in antiquity and are still doing heinous things to us today. Didn't you ever wonder why the 'God(s) of the Old Testament were so different from the God Jesus talked about in the New Testament? The difference is like night and day. Old Testament God(s) wanting to be worshipped and sacrificed to, and cruel beyond the pale. New Testament God no sacrificing, no worshipping, all about love. Anyway, if you have the courage to challenge your beliefs (and most of you don't) here's the link to Mauro and Paul's discussion of what the Bible actually says. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/d7Kdi6Zq1K2qg6s.html

Jennifer Knust was such a great guest!! Could you please bring her back? After learning about her here, I've begun reading her book Unprotected Texts - now that would make a riveting episode!

She needs to come back on

I address this rather technical question most directly to Prof. Knust, who may be in a position to know, but anyone in the know is welcome to chime in: How is this recent translation going to be referred to officially in the long term? Its producers and many others seem to be calling it the “NRSVue.” Is that likely to be what the _SBL Handbook_ ends up deciding on? Or will it be “NRSVUE,” “NRSV-UE,” or something else? Do you know or have a strong inkling?

A fascinating topic discussed with exemplary intelligence. Bravo to Jennifer and Bart. I suspect there are many here who have a much better idea what the authors of the Bible were trying to convey than I do. If anyone is interested, I'd be curious to know what scholars think of the word _BEG_ in Isaiah 40:22, translated as "circle" in the KJV and as "globe" in many other versions: "He sits enthroned above the _circle_ of the Earth". Strong's says that _BEG_ means "circle, circuit, compass (area encompassed)". This sounds plausible to me, and my feeling (admittedly not backed by any scholarship) is that the authors were not concerned with the shape of the planet, but just telling a story. But flat Earthers, and also Christian globers who want the Bible to be correct in all ways, are opposed on this. Any opinions out there? cheers from rainy Vienna, Scott

How was the word for Christ used in ancient Greek before the biblical use? Who did the Greeks apply it to before Jesus?

guest is Jennifer Knust , problems in translations such as grammar and different langauge family. she did phd in Columbia. she worked on nrsvue. growing up there were 2 translations ehrman knew, why are ther more translations now. says niv was reaction to nrsv and translating parthenos which means virgin. nrsv Isiash 7 translates alma as young woman. niv countered that and put it as virgin. nrsv was given to truman so it was this incident that made it popular. ppl toasted the rsv in public at times. some committes translations represent institutions. some individuals do it on their own. 10 :00 - jennifer says prefaces can give context of translations. she says during zoom in te co days, they would get together and tranlate, she worked with mike homes , previous groups would do it in a room. she would get replies from editors. if the disagree on how to translate a word, they would discuss it try to reach a consensus. doulas means abd. they can be a doulas of an imperial house and be well off then others. paul calls himself an abd of Christ but its translated as servant, nrsvue they changed it back to abd, and abds of ppl are called en-abds... national council of churches is copyright holder of rsv, nrsv and nrsvue switched it back to servant due to it being used in churches, not just schools. but they use footnote tha doulas can mean abd. she wanted to see the ties of abd in societies and churches... 20 :00 - doulas is translated as abd in parables or in paul talking about abds and how they should behave... greek is a gendered langauge, there ia adelpoi or delphoi which can mean siblings, so this can effect translations. the word for brothers can also include brothers and sisters. at times they would use believers. so they would put brthers and sisters. erhman was a researcher and not a translator for nrsv. erhman's groups had votes. 30 :00 - ehrman says we don't hve the original new testaments. how do translators decide which manuscript to translate? nrsv use europe's and NA's textual criticism. they try to figure out what the original text says. many coomittees know kjv have later manuscripts, a few other instances people can't decide. at times they put in footnotes, other manuscripts say such and such. paul iin corinthians did he say to the abds, use your oppurtunity, did he mean seek freedom or be good abds? 40 :00 - the national council of churches used both, abraham smith represented them in the nrsvue committee. jenn says every trnaslations confesses their christian bias. niv was envangelical and translated away the bible contradictions. thesarus of greek lingo... talks about greek in different times. word hadass has many meanings. half acts hogimnan. arsanecotoi... man and bed mushed together 1st ued in 1 corinthians by paul. 49 :45 - nongra khotah - 53 :00 50 :00 - jenn says kjv is not accurate and not based on earliest greek texts, receptus textus. says it was a big committee who cared but didn't always agree.

I’m very curious to know what version of the Bible Bart recommends to read from as an academic?!

Another example of why Ehrman is ja National Treasure.

How can you translate anything with the National Council of churches involved in the determining the meaning.

LOL, I was amused to hear in the portion where you were discussing the word "slave" that you said, "... do you slavishly follow a particular..." you pronounced it as "sl-aw-vishly". Is that a regional thing like drugged for dragged?

Using the word student loosely here! Us PhD students are definitely reading footnotes and translator prefaces... or at least I am...

Super interesting! Thank you for finally helping a born and raised UU understand some of Christianity! It's been a mystery to me my whole long life. You are a saint to me!

One thing that always got me about people that believed in Biblical inerrancy or infallibility is that I never encountered anyone who actually read the translators' marginal notes or footnotes (much less the preface) and thus were never aware that variant readings even existed, despite the fact that the pages of the Bible they held in their hand were covered in tiny superscript letters and numbers referring them to notes that explained these things. I remember in one case, I cited one of these notes to a woman who just stared blankly and kept asking me if I was citing some kind of "Skeptic's Bible." I'm like, no... these are the translators notes from the committees that translated the NIV, NASB, etc. She would respond, "huh?" Then ask me again if I was referring to some kind of "atheist thing about the Bible." And around and around we went. 🤣

I wonder when the earliest Greek books that are being translated, are from?

I have for years used the New Oxford Annotated Bible. Am I wrong?

Dr Ehrman, I was wondering if you could address the problems of translating into Greek words purportedly spoken by Jesus (or others) in Aramaic. For example, is it true that Petros and Petra are the same word in Aramaic? Are there similar problems elsewhere?

Idioms must be hard to translate through several languages over millennia.

This is both fascinating and disheartening. Am I to understand that the NRSVue is the closest thing to literal translation that we can get, but that it is still rife with mistranslations due to the potential religious ideology of the translators and the copyright holders?

I wonder what percentage of motivation for a new translation is Bible sales. It has to play a role. Bible collection is a thing. Collect all 327!!! Great interview, Bart. Not as good as Megan, of course, but great.;)

51:58 Bart is shocked that the translation he worked on had saw/doh/mites.

I have been doing some research regarding Matthew 28:19. Is this verse an original verse written by Matthew or it was interpolated by the early Catholic Church when the Nicene creed was formulated or forged. Is the Apostolic creed the same as the Nicene creed and if not what are the problems we have regarding these problems?

Great interview!! Would love to see an entire episode dedicated to slavery in the Bible.

Hapax Legomenon: a term of which only one instance of use is recorded

What do scholars say about the NIV?

Very interesting, the whole "slave" vs "servant" word she mentioned is very interesting. I totally get why scholars would want word for word translations vs churches:) HA! I would think the safest way to go about something like that is to use the word that best fits the authors point, while at the same time being sensitive to current language society uses:) However, that may not be full proof, because she mentioned for example, "Paul being a servant/slave to (in) Christ." Concerning that one in particular, I'd want the word for word, because that's like two very different meanings. I mean, a servant seems willing to serve in my mind, but a slave seems made to serve despite one's willingness. OMG! What to do? What to do?

Coming originally from a country where issues e.g. trans-Atlantic slavery is not a relevant issue, it is interesting for me to hear that American Bible translators consciously adjust their translation to pander to the prejudices of their readers. I'm not criticising the American translators -- it's just interesting to see this happening. I was also quite surprised recently when comparing the modern translations in my own language against e.g. the King James, how often the King James uses "servant" where our local translations simply use "slave".

Arsenokoites is a term not seen before its usage in 1 Corinthians 6:9 & all later usages are quoting or discussing 1 Corinthian 6:9. BUT it is two words and those are used together in the same order in the Greek translation of the Hebrew bible, the LXX, of Leviticus 20:13. That verse reads in the NRSVUE ( a translation of the Hebrew, not of the LXX Greek translation:) “If a man lies with a male as with a woman…” In the LXX putting the pertinent Greek words in gives us, “If arsen koites a male as with a woman…” Literally it’s “If a male beds a male as a woman…” If you cram the words into one and change the verb into the participle you get arsenokoites, which then means “a male who beds.”

I'd like to add one more possible problem. It has to do with the way ancient languages are taught. The ubiquitous "grammer translation method" is being attacked by some "comprehensible input method" classical scholars. The general argument being that to really know a language you need to be able to speak (at least a little) that language.

Consensus is a point of view that you don't totally agree with; but can support. There is usually some quid pro quo.

But words can be used in different contexts, having different meanings

Catholics think, as Jerome did, that adelphoi means cousins, because the Gospel authors were Hebrew speaking Jews and wrote Greek as if it were Hebrew. Which uses the same word for cousin and brother.

Great discussion. In Islam, having less sleep to wake up at night and pray is a virtue. When I heard this compound word, arsenokoitai, men-bed, I immediately thought about men who likes to lay in bed sleeping rather than waking up and worshipping.

The aim when translating any Holy Book is to make sure the book appears to be good. So if there is a story that indicates God is an evil monster, then maybe it's been taken out of context. Or maybe there is some greater good that we cannot perceive because we are miserable sinners.

I would very much appreciate a discussion on the evidence we have that the Gospels were written in Greek and not in Hebrew as tradition has it.

Can I get an unbiased scholar version please???

I read the NRSVCE/NIV. There are many NRSV updates, revisions, etc. There will be more in the next coming decades, just a fact. ☦

40:52 Bart face is visibly disgusted. Hilarious.

Who has time to pay attention to the Hebrew version? Actually, Orthodox Jews read the Hebrew text of the pentateuch every Saturday, completing it in an annual cycle (in addition to reading certain portions of the Tanakh as well)

has there ever been a translation of the new testament that captures in english the flavor of this famously rough and countrified greek they use?

Angloffôns talk of the The King James. In my country we have the William Morgan.

Slave comes from Slav/Slavic. The Servile wars would them mean The Servant Wars?