How does the Revised English Bible differ from others?

Overview and Historical Background

The Revised English Bible (REB) is an English translation first published in 1989 as a revision of the New English Bible (NEB), originally completed in 1970. Sponsored by major British church bodies—Anglican, Roman Catholic, Scottish Church, and others—the REB was intended to refine the NEB’s literary style and update its language, while retaining a broadly ecumenical approach.

Despite its collaborative sponsorship, the REB remains distinct in key ways from other major translations such as the King James Version (KJV), the New International Version (NIV), the English Standard Version (ESV), and others. To understand these distinctions, it helps to look at the REB’s unique history, translation philosophy, manuscript basis, and approach to language.

Translation Philosophy

The REB’s stated aim was to produce a translation that balances accurate representation of the original Hebrew and Greek texts with readability in modern English. Unlike more literal translations such as the NASB or the ESV, the REB leans toward an idiomatic or “thought-for-thought” style similar to the NIV, though it is often considered more literary in its expression.

Large committees of scholars and church leaders collaborated to keep the text broadly acceptable within a variety of denominations. This desire for wide acceptance is reflected in the REB’s attempt to present theology in a way that reads smoothly for both mainline Protestant and Roman Catholic readers—while also choosing wording that they believed remained faithful to the historical manuscripts.

Manuscript Basis and Textual Considerations

The translators worked from critical editions of the Hebrew Bible (commonly the Masoretic Text, with occasional reference to the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Septuagint) and the Greek New Testament (primarily the Nestle-Aland and United Bible Societies critical texts). These critical texts reflect a scholarly consensus formed by examining the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, aided by the discipline of textual criticism. This approach is shared by many modern translations, though details of interpretation can vary.

While the REB aims to reflect the best available texts, readers may find differences in word choices when compared to versions that prioritize more formal equivalence. For example, words in the Hebrew or Greek that have no direct English equivalent may be rendered with explanatory phrases to convey the sense more naturally. Compare this to the ESV’s choice, where the translation might preserve the original grammatical sequence, even if it seems more formal in English.

Stylistic Changes from the New English Bible

The New English Bible (NEB) was known for its sometimes unconventional renderings. Its language was occasionally seen as too colloquial or too novel. The REB committee sought to smooth out those points, clarifying passages that had been criticized for obscurity. They also opted to remove some archaic or anachronistic expressions.

In practice, this transition yielded a text that remains literary but is more accessible than the NEB. For example, the committee revised some Old Testament passages to better align with literal readings when doctrinal clarity might otherwise be impacted, while still aiming to preserve the NEB’s freshness of language.

Approach to Inclusive Language

One of the notable ways the REB differs from some older translations is in its measured use of inclusive language. Though not as intentionally inclusive as certain editions of the NIV or other recent translations, the REB does make changes in instances where word choice can clarify that the original text’s reference is broader than just men. An example might be rendering “brothers” as “brothers and sisters” when it is clear from the context that a faith community as a whole is meant (cf. Romans 12:1–2).

At the same time, the REB attempts to remain cautious, keeping masculine pronouns where the context of the original text specifically references men. This balanced approach has garnered both appreciation for its clarity and critique for not going far enough in some circles.

Key Differences from Other Modern Versions

• Literary Style – Compared to the NIV or NLT, the REB retains a more distinctly British and somewhat elevated literary style, although it aims to be more natural than the NEB.

• Ecumenical Purpose – Its ecumenical heritage differentiates it from translations produced by particular denominational settings (e.g., the KJV’s historical connection to the Church of England, or the ESV’s strong use in conservative Protestant circles).

• Editorial Decisions – While based on the same or similar critical text as the NIV, ESV, and others, the REB’s editorial committees sometimes chose alternate renderings for nuanced passages (e.g., certain Old Testament prophecies or subtle references in the Pauline Epistles).

• Consistency in Translation – The REB attempts consistent rendering of significant theological terms but sometimes prefers different English words for repeated Hebrew or Greek words if considered contextually appropriate.

Examples of REB Renderings

• Isaiah 7:14 – Where some translations preserve the word “virgin,” the REB may footnote textual and interpretive possibilities regarding “young woman.” Readers may notice that the REB tends to explain the context in footnotes more than some translations, allowing a broader audience to understand interpretive debates.

• John 1:1 – The REB maintains a distinct style but remains consistent with the traditional rendering, emphasizing the eternality of the Word. In this sense, it preserves the doctrinal emphasis without straying into looser paraphrase.

Archaeological and Historical Connections

Although the REB does not diverge significantly from other mainstream modern versions in its use of manuscripts, its footnotes and cross-references often reflect continued engagement with archaeological finds such as the Dead Sea Scrolls, which help clarify certain rare Hebrew words and variant readings.

These discoveries also validate the historical claims of Scripture, as seen in artifacts supporting biblical customs (e.g., clay seals and inscriptions confirming ancient names and places mentioned in Kings and Chronicles) and in sites like Jericho and Jerusalem, which align with biblical events (cf. 1 Kings 9:15–16). While the REB is primarily a literary translation, it indirectly benefits from these archaeological insights through its reliance on updated scholarship.

Readability and Modern Usage

In church settings, the REB’s approach can be described as a middle ground between more literal translations and paraphrases. Many readers find its graceful English suits liturgical reading and personal devotions. Others might prefer a simpler approach, turning to the NIV or NLT.

From a scholarly perspective, those researching the text’s underlying sources will note it parallels the textual basis of other critical editions. The differences in wording, however, may require consulting a variety of translations for detailed study.

Factors to Consider When Choosing the REB

1. Purpose – If one desires a translation designed for public reading and a literary feel while staying close to critical texts, the REB might offer a solid balance.

2. Ecumenical Scope – Those who enjoy a translation endorsed by multiple Christian traditions might consider the REB.

3. Comparative Study – Reading the REB alongside translations like the ESV, NASB, and NIV can illuminate subtle interpretive choices in certain passages.

4. Reference to Original Languages – Individuals who consult Greek and Hebrew may see where the REB’s translators exercised careful dynamic equivalence.

5. Archaisms and Colloquialisms – Users interested in fewer archaic words than the KJV but still preferring a dignified tone might appreciate the REB more than more contemporary-sounding translations.

Scriptural Emphasis on Accuracy

Scripture’s emphasis on fidelity to God’s Word underscores the importance of accurate Bible translations, whatever the version chosen:

“All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for instruction, for conviction, for correction, and for training in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16).

The REB translators endeavored to uphold this scriptural principle by producing a translation that—though different in style from the KJV, NIV, and others—still seeks to convey the historical, grammatical, and theological truths found in the original languages.

Conclusion

The Revised English Bible stands apart from other modern translations in its literary style and its ecumenical heritage. By combining an updated idiomatic approach with a continued commitment to scholarship, it offers a unique reading experience. Readers seeking to compare nuances across translations can benefit from the REB’s perspective, recognizing that each Bible version—when faithfully translated—serves to illuminate the profound truths of the Word.

Though it may differ from more literal or more colloquial translations, the REB remains a carefully produced work that aims to reflect the biblical message in a manner accessible to a diverse audience. Its committees, grounded in modern textual criticism and a desire to represent the breadth of Christian traditions, sought to advance knowledge and understanding of Scripture while preserving the essential teachings found in the ancient manuscripts.