World English Bible

[Logan]

I mentioned I was using the World English Bible in the other thread.
https://worldenglish.bible/

I started using it this year because I liked several things about it. In addition to being copyright-free, it seems very literal yet readable, uses modern English, and uses the Robertson-Pierpont Byzantine Text, which I respect. It also translates God's name as "Yahweh", which is a bit unique and I find in some ways refreshing.

I think they do have a paperback physical copy but the primary source is electronic, which isn't a problem for me since I just formatted it for Kindle to suit my own aesthetics.

However, there are some concerns, the primary one being that all decisions go through one point: one man named Michael Johnson. I know very little about him. The translation itself claims to be a slightly updated version of the ASV. Certainly it seems more readable to me.

After three months of using it I haven't found any issues and I've actually really enjoyed it. I also spot-checked a few passages and didn't find anything strange, but I was wondering if anyone else had more experience or thoughts.

 

[Taylor]

Regarding the issue that translation decisions come through one man, I have a few thoughts:

1) A one-man translation isn't inherently a bad thing. I general, there is safety in a multitude of counsel (Prov. 15:22), but we have seen multiple good translations of the Bible from one man (e.g., Wycliffe, Luther, Tyndale). On the other hand, these men were highly capable and trained linguists.

2) If I remember correctly, I did read on the WEB website that although the translation ultimately comes through the hand of one man, he does receive counsel from many people through correspondence. Any time a change is suggested, he does consult with resources such as the United Bible Societies' translator's handbook. So it doesn't appear, at least, that he is making any decision on a whim.

3) The maker of the WEB calls himself the "editor," not the "translator." I also remember that he is upfront about his expertise not being in biblical studies. So there doesn't seem to be any attempt to fool people into thinking he is a Bible scholar. He rather just seems, as his website says, to "[provide] free access to the Holy Bible in the languages people understand best, in the most useful formats."

4) Despite some odd statements made by the editor, he seems to be an evangelical inerrantist, so that is good.

 

[Jonathco]

Interesting, thanks for sharing this, Logan. I'll check it out.

 

[Taylor]

Here is a helpful list of FAQs from their website. Although nothing specific is provided in terms of people involved, it does alleviate fears that this translation (really just an edited ASV) is a one-man hack job. I can also appreciate the idea that they "don't want the World English Bible to be judged by the people working on it but rather on the results." At the same time, one of the basic principles we are taught in research methods courses is to avoid as much as possible nameless resources and articles (such as in dictionaries).

 

[Logan]

Just want to reiterate that I'm enjoying it. It seems very readable and being copyright-free means I can modify the formatting any way I please and distribute it. If anyone wants a nicely formatted and navigable Kindle edition or epub, let me know.

 

[Taylor]

If anyone wants a nicely formatted and navigable Kindle edition or epub, let me know.

Did you make one yourself? The ePub edition offered on their website seems pretty good to me. One thing I have been wanting to do is to figure out how to use the WEB as a base for my own little translation. Again, I love the Majority Text, but there are some idiosyncrasies that I would like to iron out myself. However, I cannot for the life of me figure out how to use XeTeX to edit their PDF edition. I have figured out how to modify the ePub, but I would like to be able to edit a PDF for my own use.

 

[Logan]

I did take their epub and edited it. I'm very particular about formatting and typography and some of the paragraphing, indentations, navigation, coloring, etc. were not the best.

I'm a bit of an expert on LaTeX so I should be able to figure out XeTeX, if I can help out in any way.

 

[Jonathco]

I did take their epub and edited it. I'm very particular about formatting and typography and some of the paragraphing, indentations, navigation, coloring, etc. were not the best.

I'm a bit of an expert on LaTeX so I should be able to figure out XeTeX, if I can help out in any way.

Logan, I would be very interested in a copy of your epub. Would you be willing to share it?

 

[Logan]

 

[Taylor]

View attachment 6765

Yes, that is exactly the type of change I was wanting to make.

In all seriousness, I think the WEB is a good translation. For my own purposes, though, I just think it would be cool to have a translation I could both read, and clean up as I go along, all based upon my own exegetical and language work. There are certainly some things I would change about it (like contractions), some lexical cleaning up I see needs done, etc. I think it would be a fun project, especially now that I'm stuck at home indefinitely.

 

[Logan]

Looks like I can't upload my epub here so I'll PM you a link. Here is my epub screenshot so you can see some differences:

Notice first that I've taken out any coloring. It might work fine to have colors on tablets but on e-ink screens it just looks washed out, the chapter links were particularly hard to see and I'm not sure why you would color verse numbers... I also don't care for red-letter bibles and they just look light grey on e-ink anyway so that's gone.

I've removed the specific font declarations: good ebook typography dictates that the font face and size is up to the user" the publisher should not get to determine the size font the reader has to read it in.

I've made the chapter markers a bit larger and easier to see.

I've removed the unsightly gaps in between paragraphs. Those are redundant with the indentation and just plain ugly. Also included gaps in between the quotations and stanzas, such as verse 2.

Those are just a few of the changes offhand. I also re-did the navigation table of contents to make it far easier to get to books.

 

[Logan]

Here, I'll host the epub here for a bit:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1QGB4seV9kmKe6ri-v3U4MR0Z4UPKrgkR

And the AWZ3 (Kindle file) here:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1HFJgbYeG-9V-n13KlEKFIBP-KTMjllI4

 

[Jonathco]

Here, I'll host the epub here for a bit:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1QGB4seV9kmKe6ri-v3U4MR0Z4UPKrgkR

And the AWZ3 (Kindle file) here:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1HFJgbYeG-9V-n13KlEKFIBP-KTMjllI4

Thanks sir!

 

[C. M. Sheffield]

I like that they've used the Byzantine text. But I'm not a fan of translating the Tetragramaton. I think it's best to stick with the very ancient practice of rendering, as in most translations, as "Lord."

 

[Logan]

I like that they've used the Byzantine text. But I'm not a fan of translating the Tetragramaton. I think it's best to stick with the very ancient practice of rendering, as in most translations, as "Lord."

I can see the argument both ways.

 

[Logan]

I like that they've used the Byzantine text. But I'm not a fan of translating the Tetragramaton. I think it's best to stick with the very ancient practice of rendering, as in most translations, as "Lord."

Also, it's not necessarily 100% consistent either (or it's consistent in a different way). The KJV uses "Jehovah" in multiple places, even though it usually uses LORD. Likewise the Geneva Bible...

Looks like NKJV is consistent in always rendering it "LORD" however.

 

[C. M. Sheffield]

The KJV uses "Jehovah" in multiple places, even though it usually uses LORD.

There are only four instances where Jehovah is used. So, no, not 100% consistent, but close.

 

[Logan]

Sure. I had 7 (including the places where "Jehovah" is prefixed to a location, e.g., Jehovajireh. Geneva 8 places (Exodus 15:3 is the difference). Wycliffe 7. Likewise Tyndale.

If it was in an effort to follow Jesus' and the apostles' example in quoting Greek translations, it's not entirely clear to me why the exceptions are acceptable. And if some exceptions are acceptable, why not in general?

I'd be very curious to know the history or debate around it. It's interesting!

 

[Taylor]

I'm not a fan of translating the Tetragramaton.

The WEB does have a British edition which uses LORD in the OT for the Tetragrammaton. I don't know what's distinctively British about that, but if you can deal with English spelling (I actually prefer it often), then there's that.

 

[C. M. Sheffield]

I actually prefer it often

 

[Jerusalem Blade]

Thanks for the Kindle version, Logan!

 

[Jake]

The WEB does have a British edition which uses LORD in the OT for the Tetragrammaton. I don't know what's distinctively British about that, but if you can deal with English spelling (I actually prefer it often), then there's that.

I'm guessing it's a nod to how one of the main changes from the (British) Revised Version (1881) to the American Standard Version (1901) was LORD vs. Jehovah.

Although if it's a "World" English Bible, I'd think British spelling should predominate. Same thing for the New "International" Version and the "English Standard" Version.

 

[C. M. Sheffield]

Although if it's a "World" English Bible, I'd think British spelling should predominate. Same thing for the New "International" Version and the "English Standard" Version.

You would think. I'm a little amused at the effort put into creating "Anglicized" versions of the different translations.

 

[bookslover]

nothing specific is provided in terms of people involved. . .I can also appreciate the idea that they "don't want the World English Bible to be judged by the people working on it but rather on the results."

The fact that they're coy about who worked on it is almost never a good sign. I'd want more information - a lot more information. For starters: who is Michael Johnson and what makes him qualified to be involved?

 

[bookslover]

The fact that they're coy about who worked on it is almost never a good sign. I'd want more information - a lot more information. For starters: who is Michael Johnson and what makes him qualified to be involved?

UPDATE: In the FAQ, they say that they don't publish a complete list of those who work on it because "to be honest, we lost track" of the names. Well, that's convenient. But, in that same section, they tell you where you can send money to them. I'll bet they won't lose track of that.

They also say they don't demand credentials from the volunteers who work on it. Not reassuring.

Also, it appears that Johnson is an electrical engineer by training. No language training. Harold Camping was a civil engineer by training, and we all know how well that turned out during his "ministry."

Pardon my skepticism, but I'll stick with Bible translations that are transparent about who did the work and what their qualifications are.

 

[Logan]

Richard, these are very nonconstructive comments.

I don't know Michael Johnson, and neither do you. I certainly wouldn't be comfortable accusing him of deceit ("coy", "Well, that's convenient") or of greed ("I'll bet they won't lose track of that.") or with issuing slanderous comparisons ("Harold Camping was a civil engineer by training, and we all know how well that turned out during his 'ministry.'").

1) It's a volunteer project. And like lots of online volunteer projects, many people contribute in small ways. I've even submitted some technical improvements myself and I certainly don't expect to be credited.

2) It states it is largely based on the ASV. This is not a brand-new translation, I don't even know how much translational work went into it. It seems to me to be mostly technical, and for those minor places where the translation might need an update (e.g., differences in the Byzantine Text), a lexicon will probably get the job done.

3) As has been said before, Michael Johnson is more of an editor, and being an electrical engineer does not disqualify him or even really speak to his abilities on any subject anyway. In fact, it probably makes him more qualified for this type of technical project than a language expert would be.

4) I am honestly stunned how someone who has obviously labored hard for many years and then offers the fruit of that labor for free, can be slandered for having a donate button.

If you have some legitimate, constructive critiques of the text itself, I'd appreciate that. I don't care for suspicious speculation about the people working on the project.

 

[JimmyH]

Just want to reiterate that I'm enjoying it. It seems very readable and being copyright-free means I can modify the formatting any way I please and distribute it. If anyone wants a nicely formatted and navigable Kindle edition or epub, let me know.

Thanks so much for the epub and kindle links Logan, and most of all for the re-formatting you've done on the text. I loaded it on my Kobo and it is beautifully formatted. I've read Galatians and Ephesians and I am really liking the Robinson/Pierpont text translated.

I have a reader's edition of their Greek NT, but it is very slow going for me, though J.J. Dodson did a wonderful job of providing glosses of obscure words at the foot of the page.

I'm unable to get the mobi file on my Kindle. I've tried emailing it to my unique kindle address, but no love. Perhaps because it is available for sale on Amazon/Kindle ?

 

[Logan]

Thanks Jimmy! I don't think Amazon like AZW3 files to be sent as personal documents. They just seem to disappear. But you can load it onto your Kindle's documents folder with a USB cable and then it should show up.

 

[JimmyH]

Thanks Jimmy! I don't think Amazon like AZW3 files to be sent as personal documents. They just seem to disappear. But you can load it onto your Kindle's documents folder with a USB cable and then it should show up.

Thanks Logan. I'm a bit technically challenged apparently. I've tried that avenue, and when I connect the device it shows a still screen of some sort of cable and what not, but I cannot get past that. Tapping or pushing buttons. I dragged and dropped the file into the kindle window on my PC, but it isn't showing up on the device itself. I've googled how to ... but I'm not 'smart' enough to figure it out !

 

[Logan]

When you plug in your kindle, it should show the picture of the cable on the kindle. On the computer you should be able to open up a file explorer window and see your Kindle. It will look something like your C: drive and be labeled "Kindle". So on your computer you open it up just like a folder. There will be a folder called "Documents". Open that folder up and put the AZW3 file in it, then unplug your Kindle once it finishes copying. Wait a second and it should show up on the Kindle. See below (Kindle is F: drive in the photo).