You have before you in your hands, or on your computer monitor, a new translation of the Bible into English. Most likely you also have a few questions about this translation and how it came to be produced. We have attempted to address some of the most frequently-asked questions in the form of questions and answers to help you understand what you have before you and how it differs from the many other Bible translations available today to the English-speaking reader.

The NEW ENGLISH TRANSLATION, also known as THE NET BIBLE, is a completely new translation of the Bible, not a revision or an update of a previous English version. It was completed by more than twenty biblical scholars who worked directly from the best currently available Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts.

With over twenty-five different English translations of the entire Bible and approximately forty of the New Testament, an obvious question you may ask is, why another one? The project originally started as an attempt to provide an electronic version of a modern translation for electronic distribution over the Internet and on CD (compact disk). Electronic searchable versions of a modern English translation tend to be very expensive. Anyone anywhere in the world with an Internet connection will be able to use and print out the NET Bible without cost for personal study. In addition anyone who wants to share the Bible with others can print up to 1,000 copies and give them away free without the need for written permission. Pastors without expensive libraries, missionaries and Bible translators in the field, and people in countries where access to Bible study materials are restricted or prohibited will all benefit from access to a modern English translation with extensive notes. The notes accompanying the NET Bible can even help you understand other translations better. Ultimately what you have in your hands or on your computer monitor with this copy of the NET Bible is God’s Word, and we believe it should be available to everyone to read and study in a version that is accurate, readable, and affordable.

The history of the Bible’s translation into English is a long and complicated one, and can only be summarized here. Parts of the Bible appear to have been translated into Old English by Alfred the Great (died 901), including the Ten Commandments, parts of Exodus 21-23 and Acts 15, and a number of Psalms. Later in the tenth century Abbot Aelfric and perhaps others translated significant parts of the Old Testament into English, as well as the Gospels and some other New Testament books.

By around 1300 parts of the Psalms and the New Testament were being translated into Middle English. These were precursors of the famous versions associated with John Wycliffe (died 1384). The tradition that Wycliffe himself translated the Bible into English is founded on a statement by his follower Jan Hus. Whether he actually did the translation himself or it was carried out by his followers, he doubtless exerted a great influence over it. These translations were based on the Latin Vulgate, originally the work of Jerome finished at the beginning of the fifth century and the standard Bible of the Western church throughout the middle ages.

Several other events in Europe had a significant impact on the history of the English Bible at this point. First was the general revival of learning in Europe known as the Renaissance, which brought about renewed interest in Hebrew and Greek, the original languages of the Bible. Second was the invention of the printing press in 1455 by Johannes Gutenberg (the first thing he printed was a Bible). The third event was set in motion when Martin Luther nailed his ninety-five theses to the door of the church in Wittenberg in 1517, setting in motion the Protestant Reformation. These events combined to give considerable momentum to the translation of the Bible into everyday language. Luther’s New Testament, translated from the Greek into German, appeared in 1522, while William Tyndale’s, translated from the Greek into English, followed in 1525. Tyndale was arrested in Antwerp in 1535 and executed for translating the Bible into the vernacular, and his translation was vilified by the authorities. Yet almost every English translation for the next two hundred years borrowed heavily from Tyndale’s work, including in particular the King James Version of 1611. Before this landmark in the history of English Bibles, however, there were other translations, like Coverdale’s in 1535 and the version called Matthew’s Bible (really the work of John Rogers, a former associate of Tyndale) in 1537. Both these Bibles received the royal license in 1537. The year 1539 saw the appearance of the so-called “Great Bible,” actually a revision of Matthew’s Bible by Coverdale, which by royal decree of Henry VIII was placed in every church in England.

The reign of Elizabeth I saw the production of two more English Bibles, the Geneva Bible (published in 1560 in Geneva, with a dedication to Elizabeth) and the Bishops’ Bible (1568, with a second edition in 1572). The former was the Bible used by Shakespeare, and was thoroughly Calvinistic in its translation and notes. It was so far superior in translation to the Great Bible that it became very popular, although the Anglican authorities were not pleased with its Calvinistic leanings. The Bishops’ Bible was prepared as a response, and English-speaking Protestantism was left at the end of the sixteenth century with two competing Bibles. The problem was not resolved until the Hampton Court Conference of 1604, when King James authorized a new translation of the Bible and specifically forbade the use of marginal notes commenting on doctrine (notes commenting on the sense of words were permitted, and the original King James Version contained thousands of these). Gradually this translation established itself as the English Bible par excellence, and the last edition of the Geneva Bible appeared in 1644.

Until 1885, when the Revised Version was published in England, the King James Version reigned supreme. An American version of the revision, known as the American Standard Version, was published in 1901. The twentieth century saw the publication of a number of Bibles and New Testaments, among them James Moffatt’s (NT 1913; OT 1924) and E. J. Goodspeed’s (NT 1923), which combined with J. M. Powis Smith’s Old Testament (1935) was published the same year as The Bible: An American Translation. One of the most important English translations of the twentieth century was the Revised Standard Version (NT 1946; complete Bible, 1952). This was a thoroughgoing revision of the KJV and ASV which many consider to be the first of the “modern” translations. The publication of the RSV was only the beginning of a flood of translations and paraphrases, including (among others) J. B. Phillips’ The New Testament in Modern English (1958), the Amplified Bible (1965), the Jerusalem Bible (1966), the New American Bible (1970), the New English Bible (1970), the New American Standard Bible (1971), The Living Bible (1971), and the New International Version (1973).

Twenty-five years have now passed since the release of the NIV New Testament.[1] This major English translation is taken as a benchmark because it was not a revision or update of an existing translation or a successor to a previous translation.[2] During these twenty-five years neither biblical scholarship nor the English language itself has stood still.[3] The NET Bible is the first completely new translation of the Bible to be done in the age of the Internet (World Wide Web) with full computer networking support. Biblical scholars exchanged not only email but entire documents over computer networks and the Internet for constant editorial revision and correction. The NET Bible truly is the first English translation for the next millennium. The original authors of the Bible made the books and letters they had written available for free. That is what we’re doing electronically.

Working with the format of electronic media, it soon became apparent to those of us involved in the translation project that we could do some things that had not been possible before, given the limitations of traditional print media.

• First, the NET Bible includes extensive notes with the translation, notes that operate on more than one level—a technical level for pastors, teachers, and students of Greek and Hebrew who are interested in the grammatical, syntactical, and text critical details of the translation, and a more popular level comparable to current study Bibles offering explanatory details of interest to lay Bible students. In electronic format the length of these notes, a considerable problem with conventional printed Bibles, is no longer a major limitation.
• Second, within the technical notes the translation team has taken the opportunity to explain and defend the translation given for a particular verse or passage.
• Third, the translators and editors used the notes to show major interpretive options and/or textual options for difficult or disputed passages, so that the user knows at a glance what the alternatives are.
• Fourth, the translators and editors used the notes to give a translation that was formally equivalent,[4] while placing a somewhat more dynamically equivalent[5] translation in the text itself to promote better readability and understandability.
• Finally, the use of electronic media gives the translators and editors of the NET Bible the possibility of continually updating and improving the translation and notes.

In short, the notes allow a sort of running commentary on the biblical text to a degree never seen before in modern translations of the Bible. The NET Bible New Testament with the complete set of translator’s footnotes is not just a readable modern translation, but a copy of the Bible with its own commentary attached containing an average of over two notes for each verse.

The project began in November 1995 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania at the annual meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature. There a group of Old and New Testament scholars met with the sponsor of the project to discuss the possibility of an English translation for electronic distribution over the Internet. While the initial discussions concerned a revision and update of some existing English translation, later discussions soon made it apparent that a completely new translation was both possible and desirable. The initial planning group was interdenominational and evangelical, although not made up of official representatives from church groups or denominations. A deliberate decision was made early on, however, to devote special attention to the avoidance of doctrinal peculiarities or sectarian bias.

A name and logo was chosen that would reflect our goals to provide the Bible to the electronic Internet audience as well as to readers of printed Bibles. Users of the Internet can relate to the NET Bible as an obvious name, plus the New English Translation fits well with the abbreviation. Our logo reflects a simple computer mouse linked to an open electronic Bible in the form of a net. This net represents a virtual fisherman’s net, to catch people on the Internet.

A major consideration was the size of the translation committee. More than one person should do the work of translation, to avoid the unintentional idiosyncrasies that inevitably result from an individual working in isolation from a community of colleagues. At the same time, it was obvious to all of us that a smaller group of about twenty scholars who shared a number of basic assumptions and followed generally similar approaches to the biblical text in terms of interpretive method and general philosophy of translation would be able to work far faster than a larger committee. In addition, large committees are subject to more differences of opinion, forcing compromise and producing an output that is often neither elegant nor vivid. Our assumptions about the speed with which a smaller team could work proved to be the case, since the time from the commencement of the project to the completion of this first release version of the New Testament (version 1.0) was a remarkable thirty-two months.

Since the NET Bible is the first English translation done entirely in paperless form, we borrowed an idea from software developers, an idea which did not exist when the last totally new English New Testament translation was completed in 1973—a beta test. How do you beta test the Bible? Just like you beta test software, you let people try it and tell you where it could be improved.

By publishing every working draft of the NET Bible on the Internet from the very beginning of the project, more people have previewed the NET Bible than any translation in history. These pre-publication reviewers of the NET Bible have logged over one million review sessions and sent the translation committee countless comments. Each of these user comments is always taken seriously by the committee and many have substantially improved the translation. The translation committee continues to solicit comments to improve both the translation and the notes.

Now the NET Bible New Testament version 1.0 is available in both electronic and printed form. You have the opportunity to learn from a truly detailed, totally new Bible translation, plus our invitation to help us continue to improve the translation through its ongoing development. This is unique in history.

Absolutely. The goal of this translation is to be clear and detailed. While we think we’re close, that doesn’t mean we have yet achieved perfection. If you come across a place you feel needs improvement, you can obtain a comments form from <www.netbible.org/comments> or send an e-mail to <comments@netbible.org>.

There are four levels of comments which we request:

• I’m not an expert in Greek or Hebrew, but I don’t understand the English meaning of this verse. It uses awkward grammar or words that aren’t in normal English usage by everyday people. (Translation reflecting normal English usage was the primary goal of the original King James Bible.)
• I’m a scholar in the Bible’s original languages, and (a) I really think you could better translate this verse this way…; (b) here’s what your translation falsely implies in English which was not a nuance of the original; (c) here’s why people of my background will interpret the English phrase in a strange fashion.
• There is reasonable division about this verse’s implications amongst honest Bible students; you need a more balanced footnote. (Here you may specify the view you would like to see represented.)
• Other comments and endorsements: We don’t request improvement comments only. We do want to hear of specific passages where you particularly like what we have done or other features of the NET Bible that you are impressed with. Additionally, we would be very pleased to have your endorsement of The NET Bible.

The procedure that was followed in the making of the NET Bible, the New English Translation, involved the assignment of each book of the Old or New Testament to an individual scholar who was well-versed in the interpretation of that particular book and in most cases had extensive experience in research, teaching, and writing about the book. These scholars produced an initial draft translation of the books assigned to them along with a preliminary set of translator’s notes (and in some cases text critical notes and study notes as well). This work was then submitted to the New Testament or Old Testament editorial committee for extensive editing and/or revision. In some cases suggested revisions in form and content were carried out by the original translator, while in other cases an editor reworked the draft translation as needed. The work was then resubmitted to the editorial committee for final approval. An English style consultant, working independently of the appropriate committee, reviewed the translation for smoothness, clarity, and elegance of contemporary English style. Changes suggested by the style consultant were checked against the original Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek before final incorporation into the translation. In most cases a minimum of three different individuals edited and revised each book of the Bible. In this way the final release version of the NET Bible was checked and revised a number of times at different levels for accuracy, clarity, and English style. Countless hours of research, translation, revision, and interaction thus went into the production of the NET Bible.

No denomination, church, agency, or publisher determined the nature of the NET Bible translation beforehand. It was a translation conceived and designed by biblical scholars who were primarily specialists in the biblical languages and in the exegesis (interpretation) of the biblical text. At the beginning of the project the Executive Steering Committee, composed of members of both the Old and New Testament editorial committees plus the project director, held extensive discussions before approving the “Guidelines for Translators” (see Appendix A) which set forth the basic character of the NET Bible translation and notes. Faithfulness to the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek in which the biblical documents were originally written was the primary concern. This frequently extended to the connectives (“for,” “then,” “so,” “now”) used to introduce clauses, sentences, and paragraphs in the original languages. These conjunctions are often omitted in modern English translations since modern English style does not use them very often to indicate transitions and argument flow. The Executive Steering Committee felt, however, that in many cases it was important for the modern reader’s understanding to preserve these connections. (In some cases where this would result in awkward English style, these conjunctions have been indicated in the notes which accompany the text.)

Although one of the general principles of this translation is to indicate in the footnotes a more literal rendering, not every departure from such is noted. For one thing, Greek and English are sufficiently different that to document every departure would be an exercise in futility. No translation is completely literal, nor should that be a desirable goal. A completely word-for-word literal translation would be unreadable. John 4:15, for example, would be rendered: “Says to him the woman, ‘Sir, give to me this the water that not I thirst nor I come here to draw.” Matthew 1:18 would say, “Of the but Jesus Christ the birth thus was. Being betrothed the mother of him, Mary, to Joseph, before or to come together them she was found in belly having from Spirit Holy.” Such examples are not isolated, but are the norm. Claims for a literal translation must necessarily have a lot of fine print.

Literal is also not necessarily faithful. The word order differences between English and Greek, the use of the article, case, infinitives, participles, voice, mood, and other grammatical features are often so different that gibberish is the result if an absolutely literal translation is attempted (as in the two examples cited above). Not only this, but the idioms of one language have to be converted into the receptor language. Thus, in Matthew 1:18, no English translation (not even the King James Version) would dare speak of Mary’s pregnancy as “she was having [it] in the belly.” Yet this is the Greek expression for pregnancy. But it is not English. The real question in translation then is not whether it is literal, but whether it is faithful. And fidelity requires converting the lexical, grammatical, idiomatic, and figurative elements (to mention but a few) of the original language into the corresponding package in the receptor language. At times this can be accomplished by maintaining an approximately literal force; at other times, a loose rendering is required if the sentence is to have any meaning in English at all. Of course, this can be overdone. There are two dangers to avoid in translation. First, a translation should not be so literal that it is not good English. The meaning of the original needs to be as faithfully rendered into good English as possible. Second, a translation should not be so loose that it becomes merely an interpretation or allows sectarian interests to overwhelm the resultant text. All translation is interpretation; it cannot be otherwise. But how much interpretation and how idiosyncratic an interpretation is the issue.

Part of the problem is this: the more literal a translation is, the less readable it generally is; and the more readable it is, the less faithful it is to the original meaning (at least in many cases). Some modern translations are quite readable but are not very faithful to the biblical author’s meaning. A major goal of good translation is of course readability—but not at the expense of the intended meaning. The philosophy of the NET Bible translators was to be interpretive when such an interpretation represents the best thinking of recent scholarship. Thus, for example, in Romans 6:4, the expression “newness of life” is taken to mean “new life” by grammarians and exegetes alike and is thus translated this way. But when an interpretive translation is unnecessary or might suggest sectarian bias, and when a more literal rendering results in good English, we have followed the latter course.

A major category of non-literal translation involves certain conjunctions. For example, the Greek word kaiv (kai), meaning generally “and, even, also, yet, but, indeed,” is often left untranslated at the beginning of a sentence. When such is the case, there is usually no note given. However, if the possibility exists that an interpretive issue is involved, a note is given.

An additional consideration of the translation team was faithfulness (as far as possible without violation of modern English style) to the style of the individual biblical authors. Even within the New Testament, written over a short span of time in comparison with the Old Testament, the authors exhibit their own unique literary styles. Paul’s style differs from Peter’s, and both differ from John’s. The translators and editors attempted to give the modern reader an impression of these stylistic differences where it was possible to do so without sacrificing accuracy, clarity, or readability.

Beyond the primary objective of faithfulness to the original, a second major objective for the NET Bible was the clarity of the translation for the modern reader. This concern for clarity extended to the literary quality and readability of the NET Bible, and individual translators were encouraged to have their translations read aloud so that such factors as assonance and rhythm could be considered. Thus, although originally conceived as a study Bible, the NET Bible is designed to be useful for reading aloud, memorizing, and preaching, as well as private reading and study.

Much concern has recently been expressed by people unhappy about modern translations of the Bible which employ “gender-inclusive” language. Some of the changes causing such concern involve the inclusion of references to women in almost all places where the biblical text refers to men, the pluralization of singular references to avoid the use of masculine pronouns like “he” or “him,” and even, in extreme cases, the application of such inclusive language to God himself. This last idea is one completely foreign to the original authors of the canonical texts in question.

Having said this, it is also true that many of the ancient texts of the Bible are less gender specific than the modern English translations often suggest. In many cases an ancient reader encountering a masculine noun or pronoun would have recognized it to be generic without having to be told. With modern readers accustomed to the inclusive tendencies of Modern English, the opposite is often assumed to be true: if both genders are not explicitly mentioned, an assumption of exclusivity is frequently the result.

It is important to distinguish two approaches to gender inclusivity in the history of the Bible’s translation into English. The first approach we might call “Ideological Gender Inclusivity,” since it attempts, on an ideological basis, to remove “objectionable” elements like patriarchalism or even male metaphors for God himself. No such radical approach has been followed with the NET Bible. The other approach could be called “Translational Gender Inclusivity” or “Gender Accurate Translation,” which simply means translating terms without respect to gender when the intended meaning or application is broad and not gender specific. This type of translation has been around at least since the publication of William Tyndale’s New Testament in 1526, when he rendered the phrase uiJoiV qeou' (Juioi qeou, “sons of God”) as “children of God,” a gender neutral translation. Along these same lines the KJV of 1611 rendered /B@ (B@n, “son”) or its plural 2,822 times as “son” or “sons” and 1,533 times as “child” or “children,” resulting in a gender neutral translation 35% of the time. A further example of gender neutral translation can be found in Hos 2:4, which refers to Gomer’s three children, two sons and one daughter. The Hebrew text of Hos 2:4 literally reads “Upon her sons also I will have no pity, because they are sons of whoredom.” Yet the Greek translation of the OT, the Septuagint (LXX), uses the Greek term for children, tevkna (tekna, Hos 2:6 LXX, which is neuter gender), and among English translations the KJV, ASV, NIV, and NRSV all employ “children.”

With the NET Bible our concern was to be gender-accurate rather than gender-inclusive, striving for faithfulness to the original biblical texts while at the same time seeking to attain accuracy in terms of Modern English. The English language constantly undergoes change. Acceptable conventions for dealing with gender-related language have undergone a great deal of change in the last few decades, and more change in this area will certainly come in the future. As the conventions of the English language change, new translations and revisions of existing translations will have to take this into account. This is especially important when the goal of the translation (like that of the NET Bible) is faithfulness to the original.

At the same time, we do not employ “Ideological Gender Inclusivity,” since we do not believe the Bible should be rewritten to incorporate gender-inclusive language foreign to the original. The Bible is a historical document rooted in a particular set of cultures and languages, each with their own conventions in the area of gender-related language. In addition these languages and cultures are separated from us not by mere decades, but by millennia. In all cases the goal for the NET Bible was to be as accurate as possible with regard to gender-related language, faithfully reproducing the meaning of the original text in clear Modern English. In some instances this meant allowing gender distinctions found in the original-language texts to stand in the translation, as for example in a historical setting—like Jesus crossing the Sea of Galilee with his disciples in a boat—when it is almost certain that only males were present. In other instances when a group of people are addressed by the Greek term anqrwpo" (literally, “men”) and it is clear from context that both men and women are addressed (with the term used in a generic sense), the translation “people” has been used. Here are some of the other typical features of the NET Bible’s handling of gender-related language:

• Adelfoi (traditionally “brothers” or “brethren”) has been rendered as “brothers and sisters” in the epistles where the church is addressed at large. Ample evidence for this usage can be found in nonbiblical (secular) documents as mentioned in standard lexical reference tools like BAGD. This evidence is typically mentioned in the notes.
• Participles have been translated “the one who” or (rarely) “the person who” with the following pronoun left as masculine, because English has yet to develop a gender-neutral pronoun for the third person. Only infrequently, when a participle refers to Deity, has it been translated “he who.”
• There are a very few instances where anhr, which typically means “male” or “husband” in Greek, has been rendered as “someone” (e.g., James 1:23) or (very rarely) as a generic (e.g., Acts 17:34, where Damaris, a woman, is explicitly mentioned as a member of the group).
• In some cases in James, 1 John and a few other places adelfo" has been rendered as “fellow believer” or “fellow Christian” following usage outlined in standard lexical reference tools.

In most of these instances, further explanation of the way the gender-related language has been handled in the translation is given in a translator’s note.

Considerable time was spent discussing many significant NT texts with regard to gender issues. One example of such a text is 1 Tim 2:5, “For there is one God and one mediator between God and anqrwpoi (men / mankind / humankind), the anqrwpos (man / person / human) Christ Jesus.” The NET Bible NT translation team discussed this intriguing example at length. The basic question was, “Is the key to Jesus’ role as mediator that he mediates for males, or for both men and women?” There was also the need to be sensitive to the word play in both halves of the verse involving anqrwpos. Typically the objection has been that a rendering like “human” compromises Jesus’ maleness which is also involved here. But the translators had to ask, “Which rendering might cause more confusion, a use of “men” in a generic sense, or a rendering like “humanity”? Which point is more central to this particular context, the redemption of humanity, or Jesus’ maleness? Everyone knows Jesus was a male human, so his maleness is not in question here! Deciding that the redemption of humanity was the primary point in the context, and that Jesus’ participation in humanity was central to his mediatorial role, the translators opted for the rendering “For there is one God and one mediator between God and humanity, Christ Jesus, himself human.”

Finally, with regard to the issue of translational gender inclusivity it is important to note the flexibility shown by the NT authors themselves when citing OT texts. A few examples will suffice: in Isa 52:7 the prophet states “how beautiful on the mountains are the feet of him who brings good news;” this was incorporated by Paul in Rom 10:15 as “the feet of those who proclaim the good news.” In Ps 36:1 the psalmist writes, “There is no fear of God before his eyes,” while Paul quotes this in Rom 3:18 as “There is no fear of God before their eyes.” Again, the psalmist writes in Ps 32:1, “Blessed is he whose lawless deeds are forgiven, whose sins are covered,” while Paul in Rom 4:7 has “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.” Even more striking is the citation by Paul in 2 Cor 6:18 of 2 Sam 7:14, where God states, “I will be a father to him and he will be a son to me.” Paul renders this as “I will be a father to you, and you will be my sons and daughters.” Furthermore, it cannot be claimed that Paul is simply following the common version of the Greek OT (the LXX) here, since the LXX follows the Hebrew text closely at this point, literally, “I will be to him for a father, and he will be to me for a son.” Although considerable flexibility is shown in Paul’s handling of this text, hardly anyone would charge him with capitulating to a feminist agenda!

Absolutely. No translation can achieve perfection, and even if it could, the English language itself would change and the translation would still become dated. The supplement to the Oxford English Dictionary, the standard reference source for English vocabulary, contains over 85,000 entries of words that did not exist in the English language when the OED was published in 1924. No one has any idea of the number of words and phrases that have dropped out of English usage in the same period. No one reading the KJV who comes across expressions like “meteyard” in Leviticus 19:35, “vain jangling” in 1 Timothy 1:6, or the “mean man” in Isaiah 2:9; 5:15; 31:8 can fail to see how words change in meaning over time. Even terms like “usury” (Neh 5:10; Ezek 18:17) or “she-camel” (Jer 2:23)—both found in the NIV—are not familiar to many modern readers.

Additional research, additional discoveries of new manuscripts, or archaeological discoveries that shed additional light on first century history and culture, also contribute to the need for revision. Attempts to produce notes better suited to the needs of users will also result in frequent revision of the notes accompanying the NET Bible. Thus the production of the NET Bible is not a one-time undertaking to be completed and put aside, but an ongoing project with planned improvement and revision.

See Appendix A.

No matter how bad or good a translation may be, it will do you no good at all unless you read and study it! The words of the Prologue to Ecclesiasticus[6] (also known as Sirach) are appropriate here: “You are therefore urged to read with good will and attention, and to be indulgent in cases where, in spite of our diligent labor in translating, we may appear to have rendered some phrases imperfectly.” It is our desire and earnest prayer that the Lord add his blessing to our endeavor at the translation of his word.

The NET Bible Project Director

for the Translators, Editors, and Sponsor of the NET Bible