Wednesday, December 31, 2025

From Scroll to Scripture: Bible Versions, Variants & their Histories (SM 11)



Supplementary Materials
Part VI, SM 11

From Scroll to Scripture:
Bible Versions, Variants & their Histories

by R.E. Slater & ChatGPT-5.2


Scripture did not survive
by escaping history,
but by being faithfully carried
through every history
by its sacred faithful.

What has endured of Scripture
is not a single manuscript,
but a sacred line of traditions
trusted enough to be carried forwards.

Scripture's authority is not preserved
by stillness, nor by rigidity,
but by translational continuity.
Its sacred words continue to live
because communities have kept
its intents and mindfulness alive.

Between scroll and scripture,
codex and page,
many hearts and minds
have participated.
From one inheritance
has come many forms,
many creeds and compassions.

Why? Because continuity never
required sameness but
loving, faithful translation -
into contemporary contexts
lived out era by era,
community by community,
soul by soul.


R.E. Slater
December 31, 2025
@copyright R.E. Slater Publications
all rights reserved


Preface: After the Evolution of Worship

The preceding 30-essay series, Evolution of Worship & Religion, traced the development of religious imagination, ritual practice, and theological understanding across cultures and centuries. That work examined how communities perceived the sacred, how symbols and narratives shifted over time, and how worship adapted to changing historical circumstances. Implicit throughout that series was a quieter but foundational assumption: religious meaning does not persist apart from the media that carry it.

This essay turns directly to that medium - Scripture itself. We began one essay ago, discussing the composition of Isaiah in its variants and textual transmission; today we'll look at the modern versions of the bible (c. 2025) as our final, year-end, discussion.

We should mindfully note that before the Bible could function as theology, doctrine, or moral guide, it had to survive as text. It had to be spoken, remembered, written, copied, translated, and taught.

Long before modern debates about authority or inerrancy arose, biblical writings were already traveling across linguistic, cultural, and political boundaries. What modern readers encounter as “the Bible” is therefore not a single artifact preserved intact, but the cumulative result of centuries of transmission.

This study does not seek to adjudicate between competing versions of the Bible, nor to rank translations by fidelity or purity. Instead, it asks a more basic historical question: how did Scripture come to exist in multiple forms, and what does that plurality tell us about the nature of biblical authority itself?

I. Scripture Does Not Travel Alone

Texts, Communities, and Time

No sacred text survives by virtue of its words alone. Texts endure only when communities recognize their value and take responsibility for their preservation. In the ancient world, this meant copying by hand, memorization, public reading, teaching, and translation. Every stage of this process was labor-intensive, interpretive, and human.

The biblical writings emerged gradually within specific historical settings: ancient Israel and Judah, the Jewish diaspora of the Hellenistic world, and the early Christian movement within the Roman Empire, etc. These writings were first oral, then written, and eventually collected. At no point did they exist as a single bound volume. Scripture lived as scrolls, fragments, and collections - often incomplete, sometimes overlapping, always embedded in practice.

Authority in such a world did not depend on verbal uniformity. It depended on community recognition. A text was authoritative because a community received it as such, read it publicly, shaped its life around it, and transmitted it to the next generation. Minor differences between copies did not undermine this authority; they were expected.

As Scripture crossed linguistic boundaries, translation became unavoidable. Hebrew gave way to Greek, Aramaic, Syriac, and Latin. Each translation required judgment: how to convey idioms, poetry, metaphor, and theology across cultures with different conceptual frameworks. Translation did not merely transmit meaning - it reshaped how meaning would be heard.

What resulted was not the fragmentation of Scripture, but its multiplication into forms capable of surviving in new worlds.

II. Many Bibles Before “the Bible”

The Ancient Textual World

Modern readers often imagine an original, pristine Bible from which all later versions diverged. Historically, no such object existed. From the earliest stages, biblical texts circulated in multiple textual forms.

In the Hebrew Bible (sic, the Christian Old/Jewish/First Testament) alone, this plurality is unmistakable. Manuscripts discovered among the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) reveal that, during the Second Temple period, different versions of the same books circulated side by side. Some align closely with what later became the Masoretic Text; others reflect alternative readings or structural differences. The Septuagint, produced by Greek-speaking Jews, often reflects Hebrew source texts that differ from later Jewish standard forms. The Samaritan Pentateuch preserves an independent Israelite tradition with its own theological emphases.

These were not marginal anomalies. They were living textual streams, used by real communities. Only gradually - through rabbinic consolidation in Judaism and later canonical processes in Christianity - did narrower standards emerge.

The New Testament exhibits a similar pattern. Written in Greek and circulated rapidly across the Mediterranean, early Christian texts were copied in multiple regions almost simultaneously. Variants arose naturally through this diffusion. No single manuscript ever functioned as a universal reference point.

Textual plurality, therefore, is not a late problem introduced by scholars. It is an original condition of Scripture’s existence.

II.a. What Readers Mean When They Ask, “Which Bible?”

When modern readers ask, “Which Bible is the right one?” they are rarely asking a historical question. They are asking a question about trust.

Behind the question lies a modern assumption: that authority requires uniformity, and that difference implies loss or corruption. This assumption is largely a byproduct of print culture, in which identical copies can be reproduced indefinitely. Ancient readers did not share this expectation.

For them, Scripture was authoritative not because every copy matched perfectly, but because the text remained recognizable, meaningful, and effective within the community’s life. Variation did not signal instability; it signaled receptive use, imagination, hope, and help.

Understanding this shift - from manuscript culture to print culture - helps explain why modern readers often experience textual variation as unsettling. The anxiety is not rooted in the biblical world itself, but in modern expectations imposed upon it.


Illustration by R.E. Slater & ChatGPT

III. Variants, Versions, and What They Mean

When readers encounter differences between Bible versions - missing verses, alternate wording, explanatory footnotes - it is often experienced as unsettling. Yet these differences arise not from carelessness, but from careful comparison of ancient sources.

Textual variants fall into recognizable categories:

  • orthographic differences (spelling)
  • grammatical and morphological shifts
  • word-order adjustments
  • scribal phenomena such as omission or repetition
  • occasional lexical differences
  • rare expansions or omissions
Textual variants are an unavoidable feature of hand-copied texts. In the Bible, these variants fall into well-understood categories: spelling differences, grammatical adjustments, shifts in word order, scribal errors, and occasional lexical alternatives. Most are minor. A small number affect how passages are translated. Very few alter the theological thrust of a text.

Crucially, textual variants are not the same as translation differences. Variants exist within the manuscript tradition; translations exist between languages. Confusing these two areas leads to unnecessary alarm. When English Bibles differ, the cause is often translation philosophy rather than underlying textual disagreement. For example, differences between translations such as the RSV and NIV reflect distinct translation philosophies and stylistic aims, not competing manuscript bases.

Modern critical editions - such as BHS, BHQ, and the Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament - exist precisely to document and evaluate this evidence transparently. They do not invent Scripture. They make its history visible.

IV. Ancient Textual Traditions (Anchor Table)

Major Ancient Textual Traditions of the Bible
TraditionDateLanguage(s)Community of UseWhy It Matters
Masoretic Text (MT)7th–10th c. CEHebrewRabbinic JudaismStandard Jewish text; base for modern Hebrew Bibles
Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS)250 BCE–70 CEHebrew, Aramaic, GreekSecond Temple JudaismShows early textual plurality
Septuagint (LXX)3rd–1st c. BCEGreekHellenistic Jews; early ChristiansPrimary Bible of early Christianity
Samaritan Pentateuch2nd c. BCEHebrew (Samaritan script)Samaritan communityIndependent Israelite tradition
Targums1st c. BCE–5th c. CEAramaicSynagogue teachingInterpretive, explanatory Scripture
Peshitta2nd–5th c. CESyriacSyriac Jews & ChristiansSemitic translation tradition
Vulgate4th–5th c. CELatinWestern ChristianityPreserved Hebrew-based OT in Latin

This table makes one point unmistakable: textual plurality precedes modern debate.

V. Why Modern English Bibles Differ

And Why That Is Not a Problem

Modern Bible translations differ because they serve different purposes. Some aim for close formal correspondence to Hebrew and Greek syntax. Others prioritize clarity and readability in contemporary language. All must make decisions where ancient texts are ambiguous.

Behind every reputable translation stands the same scholarly discipline: careful comparison of ancient witnesses, informed judgment, and transparency about uncertainty. Footnotes acknowledging alternate readings are not confessions of ignorance. They are signs of intellectual integrity.

Translation diversity reflects not confusion, but stewardship.

VI. Modern English Translations and Their Textual Bases

The presence of multiple translations does not indicate that Scripture is unstable. It indicates that translators recognize the complexity of the evidence and refuse to oversimplify it.

Modern English Bible Translations: Textual Foundations

TranslationOT BaseNT BaseTranslation Philosophy
KJV (1611)Masoretic TextTextus ReceptusFormal, early modern English
NKJVMasoretic TextTextus Receptus (notes critical)Formal
NRSVueMT + DSS + LXXNA/UBSEcumenical, critical
ESVMT (primary)NA/UBSFormal
NIV (2011)MT + DSS + LXXNA/UBSBalanced
NASB (2020)MT (primary)NA/UBSVery literal
NET BibleMT + DSS + LXXNA/UBSTransparent, heavily footnoted
NJPS (Jewish)Masoretic Text—Jewish tradition centered

No serious modern translation relies on a single manuscript in isolation.

Illustration by R.E. Slater & ChatGPT

VII. How Scripture Actually Travels

This model replaces the myth of a single unbroken textual line with a historically accurate picture of continuity through transmission.

Conceptual Diagram

Local Composition
(Hebrew / Greek)
        ↓
Manuscript Transmission
(multiple copies)
        ↓
Textual Streams
(MT / DSS / LXX / others)
        ↓
Translation Traditions
(Greek, Aramaic, Latin, Syriac)
        ↓
Critical Editions
(BHS / BHQ / NA / UBS)
        ↓
Modern Bible Versions

VIII. Scripture After the Autograph

Authority Without Fixation

No original biblical manuscripts survive. Nor did any original manuscript ever function as a final or controlling authority in the ancient world. From its earliest existence, Scripture was known through copies, collections, translations, and public use. What later generations would call “the Bible” was always encountered as a living textual tradition rather than as a single, fixed artifact.

By authority without fixation, this essay means that Scripture’s authority has never depended on one frozen textual form, one perfect manuscript, or one verbally identical wording preserved across time. Instead, biblical authority emerged through faithful transmission, communal recognition, and enduring use. Texts were authoritative because communities trusted them, read them aloud, shaped their lives around them, and handed them on - even while recognizing that no two copies were entirely identical.

Historically, this is simply how Scripture functioned. Ancient Jewish and Christian communities were aware that textual differences existed. They lived with them. Variants did not undermine authority because authority was not located in microscopic precision. Sacred authority was located in continuity of meaning, stability of tradition, and the shared recognition that these texts mediated the sacred.

The fixation on a single, exact textual state is a much later development, shaped largely by the rise of print culture and modern expectations of uniformity. Once identical copies became technologically possible, it became tempting to project that expectation backward and assume that divine authority must always have operated in the same way. The historical evidence does not support this assumption.

At the same time, authority without fixation does not imply relativism or instability. Scripture did not dissolve into endless variation. The textual tradition shows remarkable consistency across centuries, even as it allowed for limited and intelligible diversity. Stability was achieved not through rigidity, but through resilience - the capacity of the text to endure copying, translation, and reinterpretation without losing its identity.

In this sense, Scripture’s authority is relational rather than mechanical. It is grounded not in exemption from history, but in absorption within it. The Bible speaks today because it first survived being spoken in many voices, written in many hands, and carried across many worlds.

Conclusion: A Living Inheritance

The history of Bible versions is not a narrative of decline from purity to corruption. It is a story of expansion - of texts moving outward from local origins into global circulation.

Scripture endures because communities believed it mattered enough to preserve, translate, and trust across difference. Its variations are not failures. They are evidence of life.

To read the Bible today is to receive not a fragile relic, but a living inheritance - durable, adaptable, and historically grounded.


~ Continue to Part VI, SM 12 ~


Evolution of Worship & Religion


BIBLIOGRAPHY

Primary Texts & Critical Editions

  • Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (BHS). Edited by Karl Elliger and Wilhelm Rudolph. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1997.

  • Biblia Hebraica Quinta (BHQ). Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, ongoing.

  • Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum Graecum. Edited by Alfred Rahlfs and Robert Hanhart. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2006.

  • The Greek New Testament. 5th ed. (UBS5). Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2014.

  • Novum Testamentum Graece. 28th ed. (NA28). Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2012.

  • The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible. Translated and edited by Martin Abegg Jr., Peter Flint, and Eugene Ulrich. New York: HarperOne, 1999.

Textual Criticism & Transmission

  • Tov, Emanuel. Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible. 3rd ed. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2012.

  • Ulrich, Eugene. The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Origins of the Bible. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999.

  • Flint, Peter W. The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Bible. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2013.

  • Parker, D. C. An Introduction to the New Testament Manuscripts and Their Texts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.

  • Metzger, Bruce M., and Bart D. Ehrman. The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.

Septuagint & Translation Studies

  • Jobes, Karen H., and Moisés Silva. Invitation to the Septuagint. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2015.

  • Law, Timothy Michael. When God Spoke Greek: The Septuagint and the Making of the Christian Bible. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.

  • Pietersma, Albert, and Benjamin G. Wright, eds. A New English Translation of the Septuagint. New York: Oxford University Press, 2007.

Canon, Authority, and Interpretation

  • Fishbane, Michael. Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985.

  • Kugel, James L. How to Read the Bible. New York: Free Press, 2007.

  • Sanders, James A. Torah and Canon. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1972.

  • Childs, Brevard S. Biblical Theology of the Old and New Testaments. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1992.

Manuscript Traditions & Versions

  • VanderKam, James C. The Dead Sea Scrolls Today. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010.

  • Cross, Frank Moore. The Ancient Library of Qumran. 3rd ed. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995.

  • Würthwein, Ernst. The Text of the Old Testament. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995.

Digital & Reference Resources


at

No comments:

Post a Comment