One thing that I think readers of the TEB might find interesting is the translation method I have used over the years. It is only possible through the use of sophisticated Bible software. For years I worked on a standard PC platform and used Bibleworks, which I found to be the absolute best for Microsoft Windows users. Back in 2004 I switched to Apple and have used a Mac laptop every since and I use the software program Accordance, that I consider to be the absolute gold standard in the Bible software business. Rather than simply beginning in Genesis, and working through verse by verse, one book after the other,  from beginning to end, I have used an entirely unique approach.  What I have done is to translate each key verb, and its associated nouns, adjectives, and adverbs, throughout the entire Hebrew Bible, one by one, as consistently and literally as possible. The Hebrew language is mostly based on these verbal roots.  For example, the word “create” in Genesis 1:1 (bara’ in Hebrew) occurs precisely 54 times in 46 different verses in the Hebrew Bible.  In order to obtain the most consistency possible, I have gone to all 46 of these verses, stretching from Genesis 1:1 to Malachi 2:10, and translated each occurrence.  For example, in Joshua 17:15 the King James Version has translated the verb as “cut down” in the sense of clearing a forest—but it is the same verb, bara’ in Hebrew.  In Ezekiel 21:19 this verb is translated by the KJV as “choose.” The noun, beri’ah, based on this very same verb, found in Numbers 16:30, is translated “a new thing,” which carries an entirely different verbal meaning—that of “newness” rather than “creation.”  I believe it is important to be as consistent as possible, so in each and every occurrence I have tried to use the same English term—to create, even though in many places it appears that verbs like “do” “make” “put” or even “cut” might be appropriate. I am not suggesting that words in Hebrew, or in any language for that matter, never vary in their usage and meaning, and one can adopt a completely mindless and wooden method of translation. What we have attempted to do, however, is to reflect a more consistent pattern for a given verbal root, and try to get at the “heart” of the concept or meaning that the verbal root/word carries.

I have identified hundreds of these important “conceptual verbal roots,” some of which occur many hundreds of times, and followed them through the entire Bible.  What this means is that my translation has grown like a giant grid, with more and more words being fit into the overall product all the time, and more and more verses of the Bible being included.  Common words like eat, sleep, walk, run, and so  forth,  present little difficulty, in any language.  The problem comes with trying to be accurate and consistent with the conceptual terms.  For example, there are five main Hebrew verbal roots dealing with the concept of “sin,” but the common English translations use a long list of terms such as blame, fault, trespass, offense, wrong, iniquity, perversion, crookedness, wickedness, etc. These are just mixed together in a totally arbitrary manner, as if there is no distinction, and the English reader has no sense of what the original term conveys.  In fact, one Hebrew word carries more the meaning of “missing the mark” or failing to meet a standard, while another has to do with “twisting” or perverting the standard, and the third deals with rebelling or actually going against, or that is opposing, the standard.  Since each of these verbs, and their associated nouns and adjectives, occur hundreds of times all through the Hebrew Bible, the task of being consistent throughout is greatly compounded.

In the first Genesis sample just released some have already written to ask, “Why did you use the English word ‘bad’ in Genesis 2:9, rather than the more traditional term ‘evil’ with reference to the ‘knowledge of good and evil?” The answer has to do with my attempt to get at the root meaning of the term, and to avoid standard translations that often have more of a theological than a linguistic basis. This can be a very difficult task, and there is no way anyone can carry out such an ideal method perfectly. There are always ambiguities and exceptions. Still, the general attempt is really amazing in terms of how it changes the way English readers can follow and understand the original–hence the name of this translation–the transparent English Bible.

Then there is the matter of the New Testament, written in Greek, rather than Hebrew.  However, since we have an ancient Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, known as the Septuagint (done in the 2nd century B.C.E.), we actually have a record of precisely how all the key Hebrew terms were first rendered into Greek.  In addition we have literally thousands of quotations and allusions from the Hebrew Bible, in Greek, within the New Testament itself.  This offers us the possibility to carry over, into the New Testament writings, the same conceptual consistency, that has been established for the Hebrew Bible.  So, in my example above, with the three terms for sin, we can search for approximate Greek equivalents, and when they exist, attempt to maintain that same consistency throughout the New Testament as well.

In future posts I will illustrate this method and discuss some of the problems we have faced along the way in this regard, and the solutions we have come up with.

In Hebrew, the normal word order in a sentence is opposite from English; verb first, then the subject/noun. Thus you would say “Walked Abraham from the city.” In such cases we do not keep the Hebrew order, since this, again, is an English translation, and we want to use “good” English. However, there are cases when the Hebrew reverses the norm and puts the subject/noun first, followed by the verb—precisely as we do in English. What this does then is to emphasize the subject. It is like saying “Abraham walked to the city,” as a way of stressing that it was Abraham and not another. Now as some of you have surely noticed, we already do place pronouns in bold type when they are emphasized. Thus, if you look at Genesis 3:15b: “ . . .he will strike you on the head and you will strike him on the heel.” Normally the Hebrew verb includes the pronoun, so it does not even appear. If a writer wants to show emphasis the pronoun appears, and we put it in bold type. I think this added feature of putting the subject of a sentence in bold, whenever the word order indicates emphasis, will add another unique and very useful feature to the TEB.

Another issue that some of our readers have raised is the matter of chapters and verses. Someone wrote recently: “I think it would be fantastic if there could be a special version of the TEB that did not include the man-made chapter and verse divisions. I understand the practical use for them for study purposes, so I’m not suggesting that no version of the TEB have them. I’m just suggesting that there be two versions–one with the chapter and verse divisions and one without.”

It is the case that the chapter and version divisions currently used are not in the original manuscripts and they are often quite arbitrary, senseless, and sometimes even misleading. It is also true that for purposes of reference they have become essential. It is possible that we could easily produce an electronic version of the TEB with the chapters and verses removed. I doubt we would ever do that in a printed edition. The appeal would just be too limited. However, if you look at a page of our text as we currently produce it, you will notice that the original “white spaces” or manuscript divisions of the text stand out, even with the “chapters and verses” included. In other words they dominate the page and give the reader the feeling of the original. For example, here is Gen 18:33-19:1.

33 And YHVH walked, as he finished speaking toward Abraham, and Abraham returned to his place. Chapter 19:1 And two of the messengers came Sodom-ward in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gate of Sodom. And Lot saw, and he rose to meet them, and he bowed himself down, two nostrils toward the soil.

You can easily see at a glance that although we have the modern chapter division marked, there is no break in the original text—and for good reason. The author wants you to read straight from 18:33 to the next verse, without a pause. It is all one context and still very much a part of the same story. This is a feature, combined with the “white spaces” that do occur in the original manuscripts, that virtually no other English translation offers (the Koren Jerusalem Bible is a welcome exception). The overall look of a page of the TEB does in fact reflect the look of the original manuscripts in terms of spacing and breaks. Here is a sample of the page look.

Quite a few of you have urged us to adopt “Hebraic” names and terminology for persons and places mentioned in the Bible. Thus “Abraham” would be “Avraham,” “Jacob” would be “Yaaqov,” “Jerusalem” would be “Yerushayim,” and “Judah,” would be “Yehuda.” The idea is that the English reader would be able to hear and become familiar with the “original” Hebrew way of pronouncing names. The idea has a certain appeal, but how many of you could figure out the following: Mitzraim (Egypt); Paras (Persia); Yishme’elim (Ishmaelites); and Par’o (Pharaoh)? Several English translations have adopted this practice, including the Koren Jerusalem Bible Tanakh and David Stern’s edition of The Complete Jewish Bible. We made a decision several years ago that since this is an English translation, we should stay with English versions of Biblical names. What is the point of pronouncing names as if one were speaking Hebrew? Think about it—the word Yochanan in Hebrew becomes Ioannes in Greek, John, in English, but then Juan in Spanish, Johann in German, and Jean in French! There is one obvious exception—we have determined, as most of you know, to leave the various names of God untranslated—thus YHVH, ELOHIM, EL SHADDAI, and so forth.

Most modern/font translations in keeping with traditional prohibitions against pronouncing the name of God have adopted a complicated and confusing system of translating the names and designations for Deity in the Hebrew Bible. The Tetragrammaton (Yahweh) is thus translated LORD in all capital letters. The problem with this practice is that it then creates confusion with the Hebrew term Adonai which does mean Lord. Accordingly most modern translations distinguish this without the capital letters. This is fine until you have the terms used together: YHVH Adonai which would then become the nonsensical LORD Lord. To address this redundancy the translators in such cases opt for GOD (all caps) for YHVH. But here another problem is createdthe normal terms for God (El Eloah and Elohim) are also rendered God throughout with no distinction so that you can end up with GOD being redundant with God if Adonai is also used. The simple solution is to reflect in every case the Hebrew terms actually used without attempting translations that only further confuse. So in the TEB you will find written in all CAPS these special names or terms for Deity:

YHVH (Yahweh or Yehovah)brYAH (shortened form of YHVH)
ADON (Master or Lord)brADONAI (plural of ADON)
EL ELOAH and its plural ELOHIM (the terms for God)
ELYON (Most High)
SHADDAI (Breasts or Protector/Destroyer)

The TEB has also included notes on the 134 places where it is said that the scribes (Sopherim) removed the name YHVH for theological reasons altering it to ADONAI in the standard Masoretic text (MT). For example in Genesis 18:3 27 30 and 32 where Abraham is speaking to Yahweh the traditional text has Adonai or Lord to avoid what was considered an extreme anthropomorphism. The TEB notes the 18 emendations of the Sopherim for example see Genesis 18:22.