New Testament History, Literature, and Theology

                                            Session 5:  Translations

                                            By Dr. Ted Hildebrandt


This is Dr. Ted Hildebrandt in his New Testament History, Literature, and Theology Course: lecture number 5. Finishing up the inspiration, transmission, canonicity and translation sequence.


A.  Review of the Historical Background [00:00-2:44]

            Welcome back, this is History, Literature, and Theology of the New Testament and we are still working on the background of the New Testament. We had started out with the background of the Medo-Persian Empire and Cyrus who was called the Messiah, the anointed one. Darius organizer and finisher of the second temple Xerxes and Artaxerxes then down to Alexander. We looked at Alexander taking over the world, turning the world Greek, and the spread of Hellenism. After Alexander died in his early thirty’s, the empire broke into four and we saw how the Ptolemies took over in Egypt from about 300-200 B.C.  The Ptolemies were tolerant and their great achievement was the Septuagint, which was the translation of the Old Testament Hebrew Bible into Greek. This allowed people around the world to read about the Messiah, from the Old Testament. The Seleucids then came down from Syria and tried to dominate the Jews and Antiochus Epiphanes who was a forerunner to the antichrist figure ran up against the Maccabees. The five Maccabees boys and their father Matthias revolted against the Syrians and the Seleucids and this is basically the Maccabean revolt about 165 B.C. Then the five boys all die except Simon who then becomes the High Priest.  It is through his line the Hasmonean line goes down to John Hyrcanus, Alexander Jannaeus, down to Salome Alexander and then the two boys fighting.  And then about 63 B.C. the Romans step in under Pompey and take over. Antipater, who is an Idumean from Edomite descent, makes a play for his son Herod and Herod the Great takes over about 37 B.C.  Herod the Great is going to be the great builder and builds Masada and builds Jerusalem, rebuilds the temple. He takes a small temple and makes it magnificent over a number of years. Herod the Great is king when Jesus is born. We talked a little about other Herod’s coming after him like Herod Antipas and the various Herods and John the Baptist's death.

B.  Inspiration, Canonization and Transmission  [2:44-5:23]

            After that we talked about the canonical study.  We claimed here that the Bible is the word of God. So we talked about inspiration, God speaking to the prophet or the apostle and the apostle writing it down.  That is the process of inspiration. And after the process of inspiration we then talked about canonization and how the books were spread and then scattered. Paul writes to Ephesus, Paul writes to Corinth, and Paul writes to Rome and the books of various Gospels were written to various communities. Those books were then scattered all over the Mediterranean. They had to be collected. There was a problem of circulation and then once you had that problem of circulation you also had to verify that these books were indeed from Paul and that these books were indeed the word of God and from the apostles.  They needed to be approved by the various churches that they were there. There were various influences, we looked at what caused the church to want to gather the books together.  This took about 300-400 years to gather and approve the 27 books that we have.  The books were immediately authoritative. And we said that Peter cites Paul and says that the letters of Paul are on the same level of scripture. So Peter in 2 Peter 3:15 there is a very strong statement. The letters were authoritative immediately but they had to be collected and approved by the church. So after you have inspiration, canonization we have the process of transmission, which is when the scribes copy them over and over again. The church was poor, the church was persecuted, the church’s scribes were not the best, but they did the best they could given the context they were in. So we looked at scribal problems and 5000 manuscripts with the papyri found last in the 1800-early 20th century and then to the uncial texts, which are largely Sinaiticus text, and the uncials, capital letter manuscripts and then the minuscule texts, which are the Byzantine texts that were the basis for the King James Version. This was called the majority text because there are just so many of these late manuscripts from after 700-800 A.D. So the manuscripts all get collected and then we analyze the different types of scribal differences between these manuscripts. There is no other book like it; we have a huge number of early manuscripts. Papyrus 52 [P52] we said goes back to within 30 years of the apostle John. It was found in Egypt so it had to have gone across the Mediterranean in that 30 years. It is pretty incredible what we have.

C.  Transmission—Rules for Evaluating Variants  [5:23-8:55]

            Today, I just want to finish up, we have our last step. Inspiration, which is God to man; canonization, which books are authoritative and collected; transmission, which is scribes copying them for hundreds of years. Let’s finish up with the scribes first of all. So what rules do you use for evaluating?  When you’ve got two manuscripts and the two manuscripts have different readings how do you evaluate them?  These are not hard and fast rules, that are absolute rules but these are generalities.  So you can't use these as gospel. Largely we said our first rule is that the more difficult reading is to be preferred. The scribes would have a tendency to make things easier to understand.  So the scribes would smooth out something if it was rough and so the original reading is probably the more difficult or that was hard.  The scribe would change it from easy to hard.  But a scribe would change it from hard to easy. So the harder reading is to be preferred. 

            The second category of how you evaluate the differences between the manuscripts is the shorter reading is to be preferred. We have some records in Acts that say “the church of the Lord.” Others say, “the church of God.” The 150 years later we have “the church of the Lord God.” You can see what happened here is that they didn’t want to delete things from the manuscript so they would add both. When they had two different readings they would combine them in this concatenation.  So “the church of the Lord” and “the church of God” 100 years later becomes “the church of the Lord God.” So the text had a tendency to grow. The title of the book of Revelation, let’s trace that down,  goes from “the apocalypse of John” to this huge, long biographical description of John. So the shorter reading is to be preferred as the earlier reading.  The text had a tendency to grow so the shorter reading is preferred.

            The third principle is that reading fits the style of the writer and matches that author is to be preferred.  If I said to my Greek students the word “alnlwn” means “one another” what writer would you think of? There is an author who uses that word a lot. So if you see “one another” you think that it is John. The style of the writing depends on the writer. Luke’s style will be very different than Matthew' and very different than Mark's and way different than John's. The "truly I say unto you" sounds like John and that is the way John writes. So, basically, certain writers have certain styles and certain styles fit with certain authors.

            To add a fourth one here, the one that comes from the best families. Remember how we talked about manuscript families, you had a parent child relationship and so you have some of the western and the Caesarean.  Those manuscripts that fit the best families have precedence over the weaker families [Byzantine]. So these are just different ways to find the best manuscripts.


D. Major Textual Variants in the New Testament: Mark 16, John 8, 1 John 5:7 [8:55-13:48]

            There are three big problems in the New Testament and these problems are in the text. The first text is Mark 16:8. At in the end of the book of Mark--and many of you have your New Testament it would be interesting for you to open up your Bibles to look at the last chapter of the book of Mark. There are basically two or three different endings. There is the short which ends at 16:8. There is an intermediate ending that ends a few verse long and there is the long ending which most of you have in your NIV or NRSV. In Mark 16:8, after verse 8 our best manuscripts end there. The problem is when you read Mark 16:8 it ends the book of Mark with these women trembling at the end of the book then all of a sudden--the book is over.  You think, “What kind of Gospel is that?” Ending the Bible--Gospel message, with fear and trebling and then that is the end of the book. So it is believed that that ending it was just very abrupt and, it was believed that in the early church, somehow this longer ending with the resurrection of Christ and the glory and the picking up and handling of snakes and things that are talked about were added on later. So you will notice that in your NIV’s that there will be a line drawn across and they will tell you flat out that some of the best manuscripts do not have Mark 16:9 and following. So they put it in there, they let you know what it was, but they also warn you. What they are saying is:  don’t base any major doctrine or anything new on these verses because we are not sure about them, they may have been added later. The general rule is never base a doctrine on a textual variant. There are enough Bibles that all agree about the deity of Christ and the inspiration of Scripture, about the sinfulness of man, about the greatness and glory of God. So if something has a textual variant we don’t have to use that in our construction of our doctrine. So that is Mark 16. If you have a King James Version or the NKJV it will read it just like Mark 16:8 through to verse 20 and there will be no division. The long ending comes from the miniscules, the later manuscripts that the KJV used in 1611 A.D.  The King James translators translated with the long ending of Mark. They did not have some of the best manuscripts they did not even know about the papyri. They had no clue.  That wouldn’t be found for another 250 years after publication. So therefore they couldn’t have known this. They went off the Majority Text, the miniscule text that multiplied that they had some problems. So the King James Version will run straight through, but other newer version will let you know that there is a textual problem there, just to be honest with you with what we know. So that is Mark 16:8 and therefore be careful. That is the one passage that talks about handling snakes, that if they bite you nothing will happen to you, be carful of the snake handler churches because they are basing their whole church on this variant. Stay away from snakes with fangs, so be carful. Don’t base doctrines on it.


E. Textual Variants in the New Testament:  John 8 [13:48-18:25]

            Okay that is Mark 16:8. Here is another one. This is in John 8. John 8, the first 10 or 11 verses of John 8. John 8 is a story of Jesus being confronted by the Pharisees, where they bring a women forward to Jesus and they say, "This woman was caught in adultery. Now according to the Law what should we do? The Law says we should stone her. What should we do? The Pharisees are trying to entrap Jesus. They are always trying to do that. They figure we’ve got him either way. If he says, “let her go” then he is violating the Jewish Law.  If he stones her, he is violating Roman law. Basically the woman couldn’t be put to death, as the Jews were not allowed to put people to death under Roman law. Even the Sanhedrin arrested and tried but they could not do capital punishment. So they got Jesus in a trap. What does he do? Jesus bends over--and they come to Jesus and the women is there and Jesus writes on the ground. He looks up and says, “Whoever is perfect, let them cast the first stone.” Then he goes back to writing in the ground and everyone knows what he wrote in the ground. Everyone makes up what they think Jesus is writing on the ground, but the Bible doesn’t tell us. So we have to back up and stop all these wild conjectures of what he wrote on the ground. The writing on the ground is not the point, the focus is Jesus and the woman.  It says that the older Pharisees went away first and why is that? Is it because older people have more sin? I am not too sure about that. The older people perhaps were more aware of the problems in their lives. Finally, Jesus is alone with the woman. He gets up and says, "Where are your accusers?" They are gone.  He says, "Neither do I condemn you."  Let's just suppose you are a scribal monk copying Scripture. All of a sudden you have an adulterous woman and you are a monk.  You have taken vows of poverty and vows of chastity and you don't do the things with women. Jesus has this adulterous woman and you want to say that what the woman did was wrong. But Jesus says, "Neither do I condemn you. Go and sin no more."  Jesus let’s her go. Can you see why monks would have problems with copying this text?  So this is what I have called the floating text. It occurs in John 8, first ten or eleven verses there, but that same passage is found in some manuscripts in Luke 21, the same situation and paragraph with the interaction with the woman. This story of Jesus had a tendency to float around and what I am suggesting is that this is a legitimate story. It is not in our best manuscripts. The King James has it with no problem, but if you look in the NIV, NRSV, ESV, NASB, or NLT they will all warn you saying this story is not in the best manuscripts. So it just gives you a warning there.  What I am suggesting is that is this reading really hard? Jesus saying, "Go and sin no more." I can see how scribes would want to drop it out especially if they are of the monkish type. I can’t see a scribe writing this story in. I can see a scribe leaving it out. And, therefore, the harder reading is to leave it in. I would suggest that it is legitimate story because it floated around and seems to be real and a valid tradition going back to Jesus.


F.  Textual Variants in the New Testament:  1 John 5:7  [18:25-23:48]

There are three big problems in the New Testament. Mark 16, John 8, and then the last big one is 1 John 5:7. In 1 John 5:7 if you have a King James Version, it is based on the Byzantine/Majority Text, it will read something like this:  "These three are one, the Father, the Word (Logos), and the Holy Spirit."  Logos meaning Jesus as in John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, the Word was with God, the Word was God." You have the Father and the Word, which is Jesus (the word because flesh; was incarnated,  tabernacle, tented among us). So we’ve got the Father, the Word, and the Spirit: these three are one. That verse, 1 John 5:7: Father, Word, and Holy Spirit, teaches the doctrine of the Trinity more clearly than any other verse in the whole Bible. There is no other verse in the Bible that lays it out this simply. These three are one; there is no other verse that comes close. The early church was debating in the Trinitarian conflicts.  We have the church trying to understand that. What is the relationship of three persons in one? How does this relate to one another in their essence and in their division of the labor? How does that work? So they have huge debates.  We have records of the debates. Hundreds and hundreds of pages of the church fathers arguing back and forth using texts from the whole Bible. Thousands of texts were used to prove the doctrine of the Trinity. This verse is never cited one time by the church fathers. If this is the most outstanding verse on the Trinity: “The Father, Word, and Spirit and these three are one,” and it is never quoted, something tells you that there is something wrong here when it is never cited in that argument. When you go back prior to the Byzantine manuscripts, 700-800 A.D. miniscule manuscripts, it is not there.  It really seems to appear in the 16th century, which is awfully late.

Where did this come from? The suggestion is that there was a guy named Erasmus. I call him Erasmus the Rascal. He was a phenomenal scholar in the 16th century. What happened was he was putting together a Greek New Testament. While putting this together, rumor has it that there was a wager that he couldn't find this verse on the Trinity, so people think that Erasmus took a Latin text and translated it from the Latin text into Greek and put it into the Erasmus Greek New Testament.  The Erasmus Greek New Testament was the basis of the King James New Testament. It was believed that this verse was added in the 16th century.  Therefore in many of your Bibles the verse will not be there.  They won’t even give you much notification, because it is in no early manuscripts. This is nowhere until the time around Erasmus, therefore it was taken out. Does that mean the doctrine of the Trinity is in the air now that we lost this verse that teaches the Trinity? No! When the early church fathers argued they argued on the base of all these other verses, they didn’t have this verse.  Therefore this one should not be in your Bibles. I think the NIV the ESV the NLT and any of your modern translations will not have this verse, because everyone understand that it's from Erasmus.  So that is not a big deal.

These are the three big ones in the New Testament. People will try to trip you up and put them in your face. We know about them, to be honest it’s no big deal. No doctrine is affected. All our doctrines are solid. But these are the three major textual variants in the New Testament.


G. Translations:  Languages of the Bible  [23:48-28:46]

            Now this chart is a wonderful chart and I want to look through it I think it summarizes so much. Largely what it does says you have a “MT” [Masoretic Text] which is in Hebrew. The LXX that is in the Greek Old Testament in 200 B.C.. So from those two they make along with the Dead Sea scrolls, with be part of the mixture of all those manuscripts. It becomes your Old Testament.  In the New Testament you put the Papyri were found late, in the 19th century, the uncial in the middle of the 19th century and the miniscules--there are thousands of those. These are put together to have the New Testament with the Latin Vulgate. That is the New Testament and Old Testament translated by Jerome who lived in Bethlehem. But Jerome about 400 A.D., the problem was the roman Empire was switching from Greek to Latin. He wanted to learn Hebrew so he went there and did. He did a translation into Latin. This was so good that the church used it for 1000 years. So this Latin Vulgate was used from 400 A.D.-1400A.D. Still you can see the Latin Vulgate today with Monks. It was incredible.

            Now what happens is people in England don’t speak Latin well anymore. You know it would be really nice if we had the Bible in our own language. I probably said this but I am going to say it again, God always speaks the same language. What language does God speak? God reveled himself in Hebrew because it was simply a Canaanite dialect around 1880 B.C. It was the land of Canaan when Abraham went to canon. When he went there he adopted that language but it was just a dialect really. God spoke to them in Hebrew. When they went to Babylon, God switched to Aramaic. So, some of the Old Testament is in that language. When Alexander goes and takes the whole world. Then God reveals the New Testament in Greek.  So the New Testament is in Greek. God speaks the language of the people. Today what is the language of the people? Would you say Mandarin? English on the Internet. Today the alphabet has gone down from twenty-six letters down to two that is the 1 and the 0. This is the digital language. You are watching a video it is all 1’s and 0’s presenting thirty pictures a second. You are hearing my voice and watching my hands this is all the digital language.  It is what one my big passions. He always speaks the language of the people. We listen to music and video and that needs to be the language of God. That is the language of the people. The language today is digital. That is what we are doing.


H. Translations—The English Bible  [28:46-34:18]

            The English said we would like the Bible in our own language. But the church did not want that. The church wanted it in a language like Latin where they could control the exposition and meaning because they viewed the people as being stupid. They did not want these people to have the scriptures and create heresy. This way they could control it. What happened about 1380 John Wycliffe. Some of you may have heard of these translators. When I tell you about people I look up to it is the Wycliffe Bible Translators in the world  that will go into a tribe. I have a friend Joel Harlow who would go into a tribe and they do not even have a written language and you speak with them and figure it out and understand the language and its sounds and its meanings, the way it is made up linguistically. Then you write down their own language and then you teach it to them so they can read the Bible. These translators are all over Africa and Indonesia, translating the Bible into languages. I have another friend in Brazil, in the tribal groups there, up in the Amazon in Brazil. She’s doing a fantastic work.  

            In 1380 the Bible is translated by John Wycliffe. After him, William Tyndale about 1536 now do you see we’re in the 1530’s here and now this is where we start recognizing some of the kings of England here. About 80 years before Tyndale the printing press was invented in 1450. Tyndale is about 80 years later. And so Tyndale starts making this translation, he is a wonderful scholar but basically England is not ready for him yet and so he goes to Europe and does his translation, he works on it and then he prints it on the printing press there and ships it back to England in boats.  He smuggles his translation back into England. When the people get it, they love it but the church says this guy is going around us.  So basically the church went after him and captured him. They went to Eourope and caught him and burned him at the stake. So William Tyndale-- has any one heard of the William Tyndale Bible College in Detroit? They named it after him. There is also a Tyndale House that I did some work for over in the Tyndale that comes out in England they have a whole place called the Tindal House at Cambridge University. So William Tyndale then was burned at the stake for this now this is 1536.  I say what is going on here it is interesting, the King James Version will be less than 80 years later in 1611.  William Tyndale, the last words out of his mouth were: “Lord, open the King of England’s eyes,” and within 80 years the king of England is funding an English translation of the Word of God called the King James Version. The king hired fifty translators or so and has them work as a group and that is better by the way. Tyndale was great but when you have one translator that is a problem for checks and balances. So this is how the Bible came to English. You know what they did to John Wycliffe? They were so angry with him that they dug up his bones and burned them. That is what the church did. The church, at times, does not want the people to have the word of God because they want to control the message. That is the wonderful thing of the word of God it breaks out. So that’s two early guys William Tyndale and John Wycliffe and then of course coming up to the King James Version.


I.  Translations:  The King James Version of 1611  [34:18-39:35]

            This is a list of the Bible translations, I just want to go through this rather quickly. You have John Wycliffe 1380 and his bones were burned. You could probably not read English from 1380 that’s old English. We would have a real hard time reading 1380 English. The Gutenberg printing press comes about 1450 that was a phenomenal instrument. Martin Luther used the printing press. If there was no printing press no one would have heard of Martin Luther, he would have been a monk up in Germany. He got a printing press to print what he wrote and all of a sudden Luther and the reformation took off because of the printing press. The irony now is:  what do we have now? We have something much more powerful than then printing press. We have the Internet now. Where one person can do something and it can go out to thousands of people in the word. Millions of people can watch various videos and things, the Internet holds huge potential for Christianity based on things that we see in the Old days. William Tyndale 1536 he was martyred burned at the stake as a Christian martyr. You have after Tyndale the Great Bible, which was chained to the pulpits in England. It was huge and chained to the pulpits in the churches in England.  Then there was the Geneva Bible. When you said Geneva in this time period, about 1550’s, John Calvin is in Geneva. They have a Geneva bible in English, which is very well done. If anyone knows anything about Calvin, he was a good Greek Scholar. They do this Bible in Geneva and it was so good that the King said we have to make our own Bible. So King James comes out in 1611. By the way you should know that many of you who are King James people you should realize that the King James Version is actually an updated version. In 1880 we call the old King James is not the 1611 version, in 1880 the King James Version was updated and that is what most of you have and grew up with. Now there is the NKJV in the last 20 years.  This new version they have updated it more but basically using that Majority Text sources again but updating the language so that is a good thing the NKJV.

            Why do we want to change away from the King James Version?  I think there are several reasons. One is we have better manuscripts than they had in 1611. We know about these manuscripts from all over the world 5000 manuscripts and some go back to within thirty years of when John lived. We have papyri. The King James knew nothing of those manuscripts. They did not have any of our better uncial manuscripts. So we have better manuscripts today.  That Language has changed. How many of you if you read something like this:  “I do you to wit the grace of God.”  When is the last time you did somebody to wit? “I do you to wit the grace of God” what does that mean? We don’t do that any more. All it is saying is: “I wanting you to know about the grace of God.”  Well it is so much easier understood to say, “I want you to know.”


J. Translation Theories  [39:35-44:22]

            Now translation theories, some of your Bibles will try to be more word for word, literal or modified literal. Whenever you go between languages the languages never match up perfectly.  Then there is dynamic equivalent, which translates meaning for meaning. It doesn’t match up word for word like the NASV [New American Standard Version]. That will be very literal and something like the Message would be more free.   The New Living Translation [NLT] is more meaning for meaning, not word for word, there is a span there between the literal to this free wild thing. You have to be carful and look for ones in the middle. The truth is people publish Bibles because of money. They want to make money. I am sorry that is really cynical but it seems like that is the reason. Because we don’t need an ESV, there is no need.  You can get an NIV and a NRSV. That is skeptical in my part, I need to back down.

            Here are some recent ones the NASV in 1970. I will never forget when it came out I was in training in Pennsylvania. I read psalm 19. It is beautiful. “The heavens declare the glory of God, the firmament shows his handy word, day unto day they speak.” is the King James. It is beautiful when you read it in the King James. Absolutely beautiful. The NASB tried to do word for word and it is wooden.  I read Psalm 19 and I just closed the book up.  It was so stiff.  It was not good literature.  It didn’t flow. It was not beautiful. Beauty matters in translations. There is good reason for using the NASV if you are going word for word study and you don’t know Hebrew. This book is very helpful. In certain types of Bible study you want an accurate word for word back and forth.  But other times you want to read and have something beautiful to inspire you in the language to reflect the beauty of it. So NASV tries to be literal.

            The NIV came out in 1973, actually today they have played around with the TNIV they basically updated it with gender inclusive language taking the masculine gender down a couple notches and pull the feminine up. In Proverbs when it says listen “my sons” they will say listen “my child.”  It is gender neutral.  But the TNIV didn’t go over too well so they made a new one in 2011 and many of you will have the updated to the NIV from 2011 and they have made a lot of small changes to the NIV that I think overall were helpful. It is very well done. Many of you know Dr. Marv Wilson that teaches at Gordon College, he worked on the NIV. I worked under Dr. Allen MacRae he worked on the Izah passages I believe in the NIV translation. These tremendous respect for these men of God who did the NIV largely published but Dr. Wilson and Dr. MacRae are two people I know. A lot of people use this in evangelical churches. It is beautiful and excellent.


K. More English Translations [44:22-48:26]

            The NRSV is based on the RSV of 1952. The RSV has all sorts of they were back in kind of the old modernist days and were trying to get rid of the miracles and prophecy’s and the virgin birth.  They would try to lessen them in the text. They would try to tone them down. The new RSV was done. Bruce Metzger from Princeton was on that. It was a lot better. It is a great translation. A lot of scholars like Steve Hunt and Dave Mathewson use the NRSV. A lot of folks from England will use the NRSV. It is more an English kind of thing.  So it is excellent they made a lot of changes that were good.

            The NLT [New Living Translation], notice it is not a paraphrase. The original Living Bible was done by Ken Taylor.  Billy Graham loved the Living Bible and gave out the Living Bible at his crusades.  It was a paraphrase when he was riding the train in Chicago he would do so many chapters a day. He used the ASV of 1901 and used that and then made his own translation.  He was a very good writer. He wrote it; I know my sister came to the Lord because of the Living Bible.  It was written for about 6-7th grade level, so very easy to understand.  That was its great strength it wasn’t literal it was a paraphrase and not a translation from Greek and Hebrew.

            In 1996 they went out and hired scholars.  I always tell people you have to be careful with the NLT.  I know the translators and I don’t trust them. [I was one of the translators of Proverbs.]  But the NLT, we basically worked from the Greek and translated and tried to make it also a dynamic equivalent, tried to make it meaning for meaning, and tried to make it easy for folks to understand. That was done in 1996 it was updated in the 2000’s.  We did an update on Proverbs and the poetry.
            The ESV came out in 2002. It seems to be a knock off of the RSV in many cases. The message is by Eugene Peterson who teaches in Regent in Vancouver, Canada.  He’s a godly, godly man. He did this translation. It is brilliant and then it will go flat and then spike up and then flat and flat. I think it is a problem of one translator doing the whole thing.  You sometimes just smile and say, “I wish I could translate like that” and others are rather flat. The Message, if you want something creative it gives you a different perspective, check it out. It is really interesting, he is godly man.

L. The DASV [Digital American Standard Version] and Conclusion [48:26-52:27]

            I tried my own hand using the DASV in 2011 last year in the fall I finished the DASV.  What I am doing in the DASV is taking the text from the page and put it on a screen and when you put on text from text from a book onto the screen, the screen is the different medium and therefore communicates in a different way.  Therefore, for example, I had a good friend in my class her name was Maggie and I had to blow up her test so she could read them It was about a 50 page test because you could only get two questions per page at font size 28. Wouldn’t it be great if she had a Bible that she could blow the text up and now you can do that on your phone. I made this--I had a girl in one of my classes, Katie, and she was blind. Wouldn’t it be great if she could hear the text the DASV because it is on the screen I can change the font and I can do all sorts of things with audio too.  I can mix audio and text so she can listen to the Bible with MP3.  So that whole audio is up online free. That is the difference too.  It is free and it is up there and is available to anyone in the world. I am also experimenting. I had another girl who sang songs and she made up songs so I had her take the memory verses and sing them. So you take the digital and you can turn it into music.   Then I also took some pictures and notice I wanted to experiment with putting pictures and text together so we went though a walk say around New Hampshire and I said I wanted to take my students into the text in Proverbs he is taking his son and having him choose between paths. I have pictures of the words and then it is Proverbs chapter 1.  I basically had these images come up and I was trying to mix images and text. What is the relationship of the meaning of the text when it is in the context of the image.  So I am experimenting. You can look at it is all online on our website. So, in short in this class you can use whatever translation you want. Most of you use the NIV some of you use the NRSV and some of you hopefully will play around with the DASV and others.

            What I would like to do is end it right there and when we come back--I want to jump into the book of Matthew. We will start looking at the basic themes and structure of the book of Matthew. Thank you very much. See you in a few minutes.


                        Transcribed by Rachael Marz

Edited by Ben Bowden

Rough edited by Ted Hildebrandt