Introduction
Bobby Graham’s The Translation of the Word addresses a critical (and often underappreciated) foundation of Christian faith: how the Bible is translated from its original Hebrew and Greek into modern languages. Graham argues that translation is not a neutral enterprise, and that errors or biases in translation can distort Scripture. Therefore, Christians must evaluate translations carefully, insist on fidelity to the original text, and choose versions that preserve truth without sacrificing clarity.
In the following article, I present the core arguments and concerns Graham lays out, restated in fresh language and organized thematically, so you have a clear, cohesive account for your website or teaching.
1. The Necessity of Faithful Translation
Graham begins from a sobering premise: if the Word of God is to reach modern readers, it must be accurately translated from the original languages. He insists that any deviation from faithful translation turns Scripture into distortion or “twisting” rather than revelation. The translator, he says, must put principle ahead of personal theological preferences. If a translator forces his own doctrinal ideas into the text, he undermines the integrity of Scripture.
Key to his view is that no translator is inspired like the biblical authors. Thus, translations should not claim inspiration. Rather, their validity is judged on faithfulness, transparency, accuracy, and consistency.
2. Criteria for Evaluating Bible Translations
Graham proposes several criteria to determine whether a given translation is reliable:
- Faithfulness to the original meaning — A good translation should preserve what was originally written, not lose it for the sake of readability.
- Transparency of added words — Where translators must supply words or phrases not in the original, those additions should be clearly marked (e.g. in italics).
- Group, not lone translation — He argues that translation by committees is superior, because multiple checks reduce individual bias; solo translators are more vulnerable to injecting subjective theology.
- Consistency — A consistent approach to key terms and doctrines helps prevent confusion or doctrinal drift.
- Avoidance of doctrinal neutrality claims — Versions that deny or minimize inspiration or Christ’s deity often introduce error under the guise of modern language.
He notes that many modern versions violate these criteria—whether by omitting italics, altering wording in doctrinally sensitive passages, or making interpretive changes rather than literal renderings.
3. Critique of Modern Versions
Graham critiques several prominent modern translations, pointing out specific examples where he believes they distort doctrine or remove clarity:
- Revised Standard Version (RSV) — He cites its rendering of Isaiah 7:14 (“young woman” instead of “virgin”) and changes in Luke 1:34, arguing these shifts endanger traditional Christology. He also criticizes the omission of italics in added words and the exclusion (or relegation) of Mark 16’s longer ending.
- New English Bible (NEB) — He sees it as a British counterpart to the RSV, with similar liberal tendencies such as omission of italics and shifts in doctrinal terms.
- Today’s English Version (Good News Bible) — He accuses it of paraphrasing too freely, removing references to blood/atonement, and failing to translate consistently.
- The Living Bible — Admits it is a paraphrase, not a literal translation, and objects to its use in serious study due to liberties taken.
- New American Standard Version (NASV) — Though more conservative, Graham complains that it departs from earlier more literal versions in some passages by opting for more current English idioms, potentially losing precision.
- New World Translation (Jehovah’s Witness version) — He is especially critical, alleging systematic doctrinal bias in translation choices (e.g. denial of deity of Christ, misuse of terms) that conform to the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ distinctive theology.
- New International Version (NIV) — While acknowledging some strengths, Graham warns it also suffers from deletions/changes, omission of italics, and certain renderings that could obscure original meaning.
In each case, he points to specific verses (e.g. Matthew, Romans, John, Acts) and shows how shifting a word or omitting an italicized insertion subtly changes meaning, sometimes with doctrinal consequences.
4. The Principle of Clarity vs. Faithfulness
One of Graham’s recurring tensions is between readability and accuracy. He concedes that clear English matters — a translation that is incomprehensible is unhelpful — but insists that clarity must never come at the expense of truth. A version that is easy to read but mistranslates doctrine is worse than one that is harder to read but faithful.
When clarity conflicts with literal meaning, Graham urges conservative restraint. Translators should preserve difficult or obscure phrasing rather than water it down. The responsibility of the faithful reader or teacher is to wrestle through difficult texts rather than demand comfortable paraphrase that erases nuance.
5. The Translator’s Character and Bias
Graham emphasizes that translations reflect the character, theology, and method of their translators. Since translation is always interpretive, the personal convictions (conscious or unconscious) of the translators can influence how difficult passages are rendered.
He warns that versions produced by translators who deny biblical inspiration or who hold heterodox doctrines are especially suspect. When such versions make changes in Christological or soteriological passages, or omit key truths, he sees evidence of doctrinal agendas rather than honest translation.
Therefore, he counsels that readers should be familiar with the translators’ theological positions as part of evaluating a version’s trustworthiness.
6. The Best Versions and Practical Recommendations
Graham does not hold that any version is perfectly without error, but he does advocate for certain versions that come closer to meeting his standards (e.g. King James Version, American Standard Version 1901). He advises that Bible students use multiple reliable translations, compare them, and use more literal versions when critical doctrinal detail is at stake.
He also encourages transparency—learning how translations work, reading footnotes, consulting interlinear or original language tools, and being cautious about endorsing any one version as flawless.
7. The Stakes of Translation
Throughout, Graham underscores that translation matters for doctrine, worship, mission, and faith. A poor translation can mislead believers on key doctrines (Christ’s nature, atonement, forgiveness). Worship depends on accurate wording. Evangelism can be hindered if key passages are obscured. And Christian confidence rests on believing one has God’s Word, not a distorted version.
He insists that Christians must not be passive readers but discerning guardians of translation integrity.
Conclusion
The Translation of the Word is a vigorous plea for Christians to pay attention to how they read the Bible—not simply which version, but how that version handles the original text. Bobby Graham calls for translations that honor original meaning, guard doctrinal fidelity, show additions transparently, and are produced by translators who respect scriptural authority.
For your website or ministry, this work is a valuable resource in teaching believers to read Scripture intelligently and critically. It helps explain why version choice matters, how to evaluate translations, and how even small shifts in wording can have large theological consequences.