16

Is there a rigorous translation of the Bible, sponsored or produced by secular organization? Not that this translation would be necessarily more impartial, but it would be nice to have this version to read in parallel with other versions. There are several Parallel works (listed below) but they too seem to be affiliated with Christian organization or scholars.

Popular translations:

  • The NIV was sponsored by the Christian Reformed Church and the National Association of Evangelicals.
  • The KJV conforms to instructions by King James I to support the episcopal structure of the Church of England.

Parallel translations:

  • The Amplified Bible (which sources 2+ translations side-by-side) is a product of the Zondervan Corporation, the founding member of the Evangelical Publishing Association of America.
  • The Comprehensive New Testament - promising. I may read it, but also edited and compiled by Christians.
Improve this question
6
  • 5
    There's gotta be a Hebrew sourced and translated OT in English out there somewhere.
    – Peter Turner ♦
    Commented Jan 20, 2012 at 21:40
  • @PeterTurner, true that. "Hebrew sourced" w/o religious backing would be just great. Philologists and historians welcome.
    – Kyle
    Commented Jan 20, 2012 at 21:46
  • The problem is that there are figures of speech which are not translatable and there's a "old way" of saying things.
    – user1054
    Commented Jan 20, 2012 at 22:04
  • 3
    @DanAndrews, an etymological hurdle for both secular and Christian scholars.
    – Kyle
    Commented Jan 20, 2012 at 22:06
  • 2
    @DJClayworth, true. Hence why I said that in my question. I'm just looking to study by juxtaposition.
    – Kyle
    Commented Jan 24, 2012 at 6:23

6 Answers 6

Reset to default
12

The Society for Biblical Literature produces a well regarded translation (Logos even carries it). According to their own mission statement, they are concerned with biblical scholarship and not doctrine. Their vowed mission statement is simply "to promote biblical scholarship." They are a secular organization not affiliated with any religious organization (see comment below). Their Greek translation of the New Testament is available for free here, but I believe their translation of the Old Testament requires purchase.

Additionally, Isaac Asimov and Thomas Jefferson both have secular digests that bear some reading. (Admittedly, neither is an ad fontes translation, but they did look at sources to compile their versions.)

As for commentaries that speak to the translation difficulties that come from a decidedly secular point of view.:

  • The Oxford Companion to the Bible was the product of many well respected theological scholars, including several who are not Christians. Bruce Metzger is (was?) the chief editor.

  • Anything by Bart Ehrmann e.g. Misquoting Jesus should speak to the historical value of the source texts and give guidance.

  • Anything by John Dominic Crossan or The Jesus Seminar would also fall into this category. JDC is currently in the leadership of the SBL.

Improve this answer
3
  • I have heard it estimated that only 30% of the members of the SBL are professing Christians, but I cannot source that claim.
    – Affable Geek
    Commented Jan 20, 2012 at 22:36
  • 5
    I wouldn't really call Asimov or Jefferson's works (Tolstoy undertook a similar project, btw) "translations" but rather "digests."
    – Steely Dan
    Commented Jan 21, 2012 at 16:34
  • 2
    @Steely Dan: I strongly agree. There is a difference between a secular translation (which seeks to find out what the exact meaning of the words was when they wrote them down, meanwhile trying hard to avoid making choices based on current traditions/dogma/beliefs), and an atheist "translation" which actively seeks to change or omit everything which does not correspond to the personal beliefs of the "translator".
    – vsz
    Commented Feb 5, 2012 at 10:06
6

The obvious example (as it's been recently discussed here) is the Wikisource Translation It's not complete, though, and its value as a "good" translation is debatable.

Improve this answer
2
  • 1
    Ron Maimon and @nickecarlo provided some insight on the Wikisource Translation. That translation seems incomplete and not at all thorough. +1 for a correct answer to my question, though I've edited the question now to specify that I'm looking for a rigorous translation.
    – Kyle
    Commented Jan 20, 2012 at 21:39
  • Ohp, we edited at the same time. :)
    – Kyle
    Commented Jan 20, 2012 at 21:42
4

If you read French, the secular translation by André Chouraqui is very interesting. One nice part is that he often translates figures of speech literally, so some of the verses sound very foreign but more poetic. He also translates the names of the books and the people when possible. Also, he uses a single French word in literal translation for each use of a particular word in the original; so for the Hebrew "ruah" or Greek "pneuma" he uses "souffle" (breath), instead of something more modern like "spirit" (esprit in French). This captures the original idiom rather well, but it does make it harder for us modern folk to read it.

Here is the first part of Genesis, re-translated by me from his French into English:

Book 1: Heading.
1: Elohims (the s to underline that Hebrew "Elohim" is plural, literally "gods", even if it's the name of a single god) was creating the heavens and the earth
2: the earth was tohu-and-bohu (tohu is Hebrew for "waste"), a darkness on the faces of the abyss, but the breath of Elohims blew across the faces of the waters.
3: Elohims says: "A light will be." And it's a light.
4: Elohims sees the light: what good! Elohims separates the light from the darkness.
5: Elohims cries out to the light: "Day". To the darkness he had cried out: "Night". And it's an evening and it's a morning: Day one.
...

Like I said, it's kind of a foreign read. But then again, the Bible is a foreign anthology, isn't it.

Chouraqui also made a translation of the Qur'an; both are available online http://nachouraqui.tripod.com/id88.htm

Improve this answer
1
  • Chouraqui wasn't a Christian, but definitely not secular either. He appears to have been very involved in Jewish and interfaith affairs.
    – George Cummins
    Commented Jul 11, 2013 at 21:02
2

At the risk of stating the obvious, the entire Old Testament can be found translated to English by Jewish scholars. Wikipedia gives an overview.

Improve this answer
3
  • 2
    Not to respond to the obvious with the obvious, but a translation by Jewish scholars wouldn't meet the "secular" qualification of my question.
    – Kyle
    Commented Jan 24, 2012 at 6:24
  • 1
    Jewish does not necessarily mean religious. Many Jews are secular.
    – Steve
    Commented Jul 12, 2013 at 2:43
  • @Steve you got me there.
    – matheno
    Commented Jul 31, 2018 at 22:09
1

There is an update of the popular NIV translation about to come out or recently released. Whatever it's root, Zondervan (the publisher) is now owned by Harper Collins, which is in turn owned by News Corp. Harper Collins is decidedly secular, publishing many books that would definitely be out of place in a Christian home. Thus, while it involves mainly Christian scholarship, even the well-known NIV translation could no longer be said to be wholly Christian in origin. Many other common modern translations have similar conflicts of interest.

Improve this answer
1
  • I would not say it has a conflict of interest that is too strong for too little
    – user4060
    Commented Jul 13, 2013 at 4:45
-2

A. Nyland has written a couple of comontaries about mistranslation of the bible in the name of religious tradition. Basically her take is that no one who currently edits, 'writes', or publishes bibles is a professional linguist or translator, and the one company that attempted to publish a bible produced by a professional was threatened with economic murder. Nyland has produced her own translation of one of the gospels, it is interesting to read, but her excessive use of exclamation points is distracting and, frankly, irritating. Nyland's work is available from Amazon Kindle.

Improve this answer
2
  • That's patently false. There are lots of linguists involved in Bible translation.
    – curiousdannii ♦
    Commented Jul 14, 2019 at 20:35
  • As written, this does not provide information about a secular translation and is therefore not an answer. Dr. Nyland's translation, The Source, may well qualify. My understanding is that she translated the entire New Testament, not just one of the gospels. Welcome to CH.SE. I encourage you to read the tour and help center.
    – Bit Chaser
    Commented Jul 15, 2019 at 19:59

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .