Disclaimer: I borrowed this book from a library, giving or receiving no money, and have no obligation to write a good review.

The physical book I borrowed was bound in good quality and seemed fairly sturdy.

Metzger gives a good overview of the English translations of the bible up until about the year 2000. Just to put that in perspective, when the book was written, only parts of The Message had been published, and the ESV did not exist. If you were looking for a review of versions over the last 17 years, you won't find them here. I would love Metzger to write an expanded version covering more recent editions.

Overall, within its time-frame, this book is good; but I have a few issues with it.

I disliked the way that many statements such as "this seems to have been a later addition", or "but most scholars now agree..." were not footnoted or cited. Citing another book which overviews the arguments on that issue would be of great help, but most of these generalising statements are not cited, which is irritating when one wishes to read further.

Metzger focuses almost entirely on translation, and barely refers to textual criticism. He mentions the C16/17 Textus Receptus's defects in about two sentences, and refers to other critical editions as being 'better' or 'inferior' without discussing why - or (usually) even citing some further reading to explore that issue.

Seemingly out of high respect for the KJV, the author also skated over some of the issues with it, such as how the translators were banned from certain words such as 'tyrant'. (So I have heard, anyway... I realise the irony in me not citing this!) He does detail a good number of the flaws, I just felt a couple more could have been given, to make the chapter comprehensive. Still, it's a good chapter.

When he covers the story of various translations Anglicised/Americanised versions; although as an American he tends to only mention when the British version presents problems for an American, and not the other way around. (I am British but live in America so am very aware that the Anglo-American language divide works both ways.) But this slight colouring is to be expected from any person and hardly a major problem, in hardly a major area. In fact I wouldn't even call it a 'problem', it's just perspective.

So those were the issues, medium and small (but not large), that I had with the book. However, I would still recommend it, despite these caveats, it is a good work. It has a generally academic tone; with the occasional unexplained academic word such as Hagiographical; and will reference things like the Masoretic Text without defining or explaining it; but this is partially made up for by the writing style being concise and clear. I am a strong academic reader and read it in about 2 hours, but a weaker reader could still do it within a day.

I particularly liked the chapters on the ancient non-Greek/Hebrew/Latin versions of the bible (such as Syriac, Gothic, Armenian), including one or two I'd never heard of. The wide range of time (until 2001) covered also includes some obscure 17th-19th century versions.

I would recommend this book to the beginner perhaps as their 2nd book on the subject after they have read a more general layman's explanation of how translation works (e.g. Glassman's 'the translation debate'); however even a well-read person such as myself can find some new information and interesting points to consider. Overall, a good book whose caveats don't prevent it being recommendable.

Formal Book Review

by

Wesley B Rose, PhD

Genre: Christian - Academic

Non-Fiction

Book Title: The Bible in Translation:

Author: Bruce M Metzger

Publisher: Baker Academic

Year: 2001

Does title on book cover match the Title Page?

Yes

Does book cover relate to book content?

Somewhat

Is the Table of Contents page accurate? Yes

Overall appearance of the book. Interesting cover graphic inviting one to look into the depth and breadth of the book contents. It also includes an element of mystery and offers a taste of the ancient scribe or Biblical author. Most impressive is the lion ignoring the individual seated. This could draw on the account of Daniel and his experience in captivity. Indeed, most intriguing.

Does the Introduction provide a good overview of the material in the book?

Yes. I was very accomplished and thoroughly set the stage or the contents and scope of the imagery generated by the book cover and title.

What was the stated purpose of the book?

To cover the translations of scripture in two parts; The ancient versions and or translations; To cover the numerous English versions of the Bible and even ore those of the New Testament alone.

Does the book coincide with the stated purpose?

Most certainly, and the effort is a very good work in scholarship and study. But maybe just a bit short and the brevity of some areas does open the possibility of misunderstanding by the reader. However, the author needs no laurels or commendations for his work. He is obviously a god scholar and the work represents much intense focus and research - as well a instructive reflective statements and observations. It also afford the reader an opportunity to disagree and even has such instances where a challenge to the conclusions is encouraged.

How well is the materials organized? Does the content move smoothly to the reader?

Th material is well constructed and structured. The main substance of the serious student's study of the Bible; i.e. Vocabulary, Idioms, Phrases ad Dialect were well employed and very accomplished in the flow of material balanced with keen notes and clarifications. Indeed, this application of study in language, ancient texts, and the mode of changes for language. One are also of importance was the stress placed on incongruent vocabulary and ravages of time on translations and the four above stated elements.

If there are questions after each chapter, what is the comprehension level? N/A

A. requires simple recall of information

B. requires some comparison of presented material

C. requires analysis of material presented

Are there errors / mistakes in the book? If so, how much do they detract from the book? There are very few minor errors but none that detracted from the intent and accomplishment of the books stated purposes.

If an Academic book does the material lend itself to classroom instruction? Yes, but the level of introduction in the classroom should be chosen carefully. The material content has a fairly large range of knowledge that must be a prerequisite to fully glean the many notable points made in the books. This, however, goes without saying as or when this book is considered as foundation for course(s) and or other formal presentations.

Is it research oriented? How well was the research documented?

The book is easily seen as a deeply researched book and establishes that plateau early in the material. Documentation was of course comprehensive and provided explicit means of comparing and evaluating the "meat" of th material presented. Well done.

Are footnotes correctly matched to the book text? Yes

Are illustrations properly labeled and applicable to book text? N/A

However there are graphics in the form of graphs and or tables. Each instance completely supported he thesis statement(s) with comprehensive well comprehended results.

Is the book Biblically accurate? It the greater content of the work it is indeed biblically accurate within the scope of the book. I found no serious inconsistencies or areas where the spirit of the Biblical record (in manuscripts and extra-biblical writings) was compromised or altered through ingratiation.

Is it historically Accurate? Within the parameters established in the work it is as accurate as the author's research and available references would permit. However the specifics of the historical content is limited to a narrow margin of toics and subjects within those topics. And again, well done.

If there are controversial points presented?; how well did the author defend the works overall viewpoint?

This particular area was not fully assessed but rather the intrinsic educational content and focus on biblical purity and accuracy examined in the book.

Are theses well presented and defined?

Absolutely, with out any doubt or disceptation of the common purpose of the book and the authors insights.

Does textual content and examples given support each hypothesis or conclusions? Patently. As perfectly as sincere, earnest scholarship demands.

What academic level was the book intended ? Although not stated it presents material that would be of greater employment and comprehension in a Graduate or as a minimum the last year of a Undergraduate program.

If books are recommended for further reading:

Are they provided to support a fact or conclusion in the book? Certainly

Are they recommended to accompany the book for instruction? Yes, but not the full list of recommended reading.

Is the book part of a set or series? N/A

Overall, how well was the book written and did the content challenge the reader?

This of course is where objectivity is somewhat limited and ones opinion goaded by background and experience would produce. How so much ever, the

Reader Comments:

It is clearly a fine job of scholarship and historical research of the bible illustrating its dramatic and often tragic trek through the centuries. As a renown leader in Biblical language and New Testament studies, Metzger has again attained the high standard of excellence the community has come to expect. One broken down into sections

Constructive criticism:

One broken down into sections and augmented by one or more reference books this could well be one of the best course texts availed the student of the bible and one who teaches it. As Christian Historian I can fully appreciate the work and thought-challenging comments that provide a mental forum of debate with visages of days past sitting in the classroom trying to make sense of some of the rapidly introduced ideas, events, and implications that sometimes missed the mark - not the fault of the professor.

Would you recommend the book to colleagues and/or universities?

In its current form it could well serve as a text for certain mid to higher level courses. Of course the syllabus and course objective must necessarily follow the text judiciously and pretty much verbatim as an upper level undergraduate course. Its usage as a text for graduate course would necessarily require a good bit of deviation from the text in areas such as manuscriptal evidences and greater detail about the transition of thought, changes in alphabets and even the syllabic differences before and after the Babylonian captivity. The reference to extra-biblical texts and introduction of some of the material is well done but unfortunately feels a bit incomplete.

Informal thoughts and Comments.

I am an admirer of good scholarship and particularly interested in publications that have as part of the books heart a historical rendering of the Bible in history as both part of that history and at ties a major influence. In so may cases the structured d0cumentation of the biblical record becomes a mirror of our own society and the way the scriptures are viewed, treated, and sometimes desecrated and abused. I agree with the author that in some instances renderings, called versions or new translations perpetually reduce the holy scriptures to either literature or just another ancient outdated document that can only be understood if it can be transformed into the style and content of current writings.

The 19th century was one of the most troublesome and difficult eras for America and more specifically for the Bible and how it was viewed - especially in the era when Darwin and Biblical critics became a branch of Biblical studies. Just as the physical world of that era experiences wars and rumors of wars (with one of the bloodiest and terrible wars between brother and neighbors as th country began to tear itself apart in every sense of the word. It was a transitional period for the Christian, the church, and the family as challenges to biblical beliefs and rocked the foundation of the church. Doubt and the tendency to look at other beliefs and false religions became more and more common and appealing to a confused, heart sick, angered mass. Do not my comments even reflect the scholarship and thought provoking material presented in this somewhat short book. Yes, I enjoyed reading the book (several times) because of the many trips down memory lane it afforded.

Was the book provided free to reader in exchange for a formal book review? Yes

Was it provided for evaluation as a textbook for a specific course or courses? Yes