THE MULTITUDE of Bible translations has led many
devout and earnest students to use a method of Bible study which seems
very attractive and interesting, but which, we are convinced, has little
to commend it when it is carefully examined. We may call it the Babel
method, for it is based rather on the discords between various
translations than on positive evidence. Like the mob at Ephesus, some of
our translators cry one thing and some another, and the trick seems to
be to find one who suits your own prejudices. This is the subconscious
reason for preferring one rendering above another. Consciously it may be
that we place our confidence in a majority, or a happy phrase, or we
seek to make a composite picture out of all. Whatever our method, the
result is confusion, not confidence, bewilderment, not satisfaction. At
best it seeks to get at God's revelation through fallible human minds,
which, by their very variety, proclaim their incompetence to guide us
into the truth.
When translators agree, it is often the result of following an
ancient tradition, rather than a harmonious consensus based on actual
independent investigation. When they disagree, it is evident that all
but one must be wrong, and, as we have no choice between them, and dare
not take the judgment seat ourselves to decide which are false, we are
compelled to the safe conclusion that all may be wrong. In all of this
we are concerned with human opinions, human judgments, human authority,
and are rightfully unsettled, for it is not God's intention that we
should be satisfied with human reflections of His revelation. Many
students have spent years in consulting various versions without making
nearly as much progress in the knowledge of God as the effort warranted.
If they had remained with one supposedly inspired translation they would
at least be firm, whether right or wrong, but, having seen how diversely
men may interpret the original, their ideas have become hazy and their
convictions confused.
We invite the saints and students of God's Word to an entirely
different method. Do not simply add the Concordant to your collection of
translations, or you will be more unsettled than ever, for, in many
places, it differs radically from all others. If you judge by
majorities, it is only one against many. If you are swayed by your
prejudices, which you will be slow to admit, you will probably reject
its renderings, for your prejudices have their source in the same place
as the translations you have used, if they have not been formed by them.
The Concordant is not another, but a different version. We do not ask
you to accept our report of what we have seen, but you are taken to view
the originals yourself. Versions will vary, but the three ancient
codices will not be altered. Dictionaries will continue to lack
definition in defining Greek words, but if you get your impression of
their significance from their usage and etymology, your studies will
stand and every step will be a foundation for further progress.
