What in the world could the Ethiopian eunuch and Philip have to do with English Bibles?
I hear you, I hear you. Let me explain.
In Acts 8 Philip is told by an angel of the Lord to go south to the road that goes from Jerusalem to Gaza (v. 26). On his way to the road he met an Ethiopian eunuch who was in his chariot. The Holy Spirit told Philip to go to the chariot and stand near it (v. 29). As Philip ran to the chariot, he heard the eunuch reading from Isaiah (v. 28), so Philip asked him if he understood what he was reading (v. 30). The eunuch said he couldn’t unless someone explained it to him (v. 31). So, Philip took the passage the eunuch was reading (Isaiah 53:7-8) and explained to him the good news about Jesus (vv. 32-35).
“He was led like a sheep to the slaughter,
and as a lamb before its shearer is silent,
so he did not open his mouth.
In his humiliation he was deprived of justice.
Who can speak of his descendants?
For his life was taken from the earth.” (Acts 8:32-33, NIV)
The eunuch believed and was baptized and then Philip was “taken away” from the eunuch and the eunuch went on his way rejoicing (vv. 36-39).
The story of the Ethiopian eunuch and Philip is a wonderful story of God’s mercy and grace in working through individual people to give the gift of salvation to someone who previously knew nothing about Jesus. God did this and still does this all the time. He loves to save people who know nothing of him.
Another wonderful aspect of this story has less to do with the actual story and more to do with how one particular detail of the story sheds light into our relationship and trust with English translations of the Bible. Perhaps you have noticed, in reading this passage before, a footnote at the end of the Isaiah 53:7-8 citation (provided the Bible you use has footnotes). This footnote (at least in the NIV2011) says: “Isaiah 53:7, 8 (see Septuagint).” The footnote is there to indicate that these two verses in Acts 8:32-33 are actually a quotation of Isaiah 53:7-8. The New Testament does this all the time and it’s nice to be able to see the quotations for what they are and where they come from. The other section of the footnote has to do with the translation of Isaiah 53 that is referenced—the Septuagint.
What’s up with that? Why the pointer to the Septuagint?
The Ethiopian eunuch was reading from Isaiah 53, but the words he was reading were a translation of the original Hebrew into Greek. This can be easily seen by comparing verse 33 in the citation in Acts 8 with Isaiah 53:8. You’ll quickly notice that a good number of the words are different. The difference is because the reading you have in Isaiah 53:8 is from the Hebrew, but the reading you have in Acts 8:33 is from the Greek Septuagint. Now, the Septuagint being reference to is a formal Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible that was probably completed in the 3rd or 4th Century AD (although it began in the 3rd or 2nd Century BC), so it’s not the actual text used by the eunuch; however, the eunuch is still using a Greek translation of the Hebrew, which is what the Septuagint is.
What does this mean to me?
It means that just like the eunuch was able to read and understand the message of Isaiah 53:7-8 (albeit with help from Philip) even though he was reading a Greek translation of the Hebrew, we’re able to read and understand the message of Isaiah 53:7-8 (albeit with help sometimes from others) even though we’re regularly reading an English translation of the Hebrew. This means, in part, that you can trust your English Bible.
Some have made a good business out of tearing down solid, trustworthy, English translations of the Bible either to encourage (often through fear) others to learn the original biblical languages (Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek), or to encourage others to read from a specific English translation. They tear down the NIV because they don’t think it’s as accurate as the KJV. They tear down the NASB because they think it’s more difficult to understand than the NLT. They tear down the CSB because it’s a denomination specific translation. They tear down the ESV because it’s considered a translation for the conservative Christian. The reasons are numerous, but they’re often misguided.
Are all English translations good?
I’m all for making sure we reading from solid and trustworthy translation of the Scriptures and (by God’s grace) nearly any popular English translation you pick up will fall into that category. There are those translations out there that specifically add to, take away, and edit the Scriptures to fit they’re specific theological stances (something like the New World Translation would fall into this category). The wonderful thing is that the KJV, NIV, NRSV, NLT, ESV, NKJV, NASB, CSB, LEB, NET, and RSV don’t fall into this category.
It’s important to be on the same page here. I’m not saying that every good English translation is equal. I’m also not saying that every English translation their own specific blunders. However, I am saying that most of the popular English translations available to the English speaking world are trustworthy.
Therefore, with all that said, let’s follow the example we find in Acts 8 with the Ethiopian eunuch and Philip, and trust the English translation of the Bible we have without thinking that we’re missing something because we’re reading a translation.
Translation is a good gift from God. Without translation most of us wouldn’t know Jesus. Let’s receive that good gift and give thanks to God that he’s had mercy on us to give us the Scriptures in a language we can read.