Darkness to Light Home Page

Books and eBooks by the Director

Analytical-Literal Translation:

Servant, Slave, or Bondservant?

A Translator’s Dilemma

By Gary F. Zeolla

       I am in the process of updating my three volume set Why Are These Books in the Bible and Not Others? The subtitles of the first two volumes are Volume I - A Translator’s Perspective on the Canon of the Old Testament and Volume II - A Translator’s Perspective on the Canon of the New Testament. As I am working on these books I am quoting from my Analytical-Literal Translation of the Bible. As I do, I was making any needed changes or corrections to it in preparation for a new edition of the ALT. In this article I will detail one such important change.

Doulos

      A major issue I am addressing in the Why These Books? set is who wrote the various Bible books. In the chapters on “The Pauline Epistles” and “The General Epistles” I am quoting from the first verse of most of these letters, as it usually gives the author’s name. Thus Romans 1:1 reads in the ALT: 

      ¹Paul, a slave of Jesus Christ, a called apostle, having been separated [or, appointed] to the Gospel [or, Good News] of God.

       Quoting this and similar verses reminded me of something I was never satisfied with in the ALT--the translation of the Greek word doulos. It is the word translated as “slave” in this verse. Some other versions also have “slave” (HCSB, NAB, NLT), while many versions have “servant” (KJV, NIV, ESV, NRSV). But neither of these renderings is truly accurate given their connotations in English today.

      The word “servant” means, “an employee who serves somebody else, especially an employee hired to do household tasks or be a personal attendant to somebody” (Encarta Dictionary). The key word here is “hired.” A servant voluntarily offers his or her services to the employer; the employer then hires him or her and agrees to pay a wage on a regular basis. The servant then can leave anytime he or she wants, with maybe a two-week notice.

      But “slave” means, “somebody who is forced to work for somebody else for no payment and is regarded as the property of that person” (Encarta Dictionary). Thus a slave can never leave, unless the slave’s owner sets him or her free. In American culture, there is the further implication of someone who is captured in a foreign land and forcefully brought to America against his or her will, and there are great racial overtones as well, with the master and slave being of different races.

      But which of these two situations reflect Biblical times? This is an important question as this and other Greek words from the same root occur hundreds of times in the Bible, if the Old Testament (OT) Greek Septuagint (LXX) is included, which is what the ALT: OT is translated from. Thus along with doulos (noun), there is douleuo (verb; “to serve”), and doulea (another noun; “slavery”). There are also a couple of words that are synonymous to doulos (pais, oiketes). These are the masculine forms. The first two words also have feminine forms (douln, paideske). Together, you are talking about thousands of occurrences in the Bible.

      Along with in reference to authors of New Testament (NT) letters, these words are used in reference to prominent OT figures. But in that case, I used “servant” to render the word doulos (e.g., “Moses His servant” – 1Kings 8:56). I thus needed to change to being consistent between the Testaments. But which word to use? Rather than slave or servant, the NKJV and NASB use “bondservant” in Romans 1:1 and related passages, but they use “slave” or “servant” elsewhere (e.g., Matt 10:24, the NKJV has “servant” while the NASB has “slave”). But neither is quite correct, as the following Bible versions notes on Romans 1:1 indicate:

      Slave of Christ Jesus: Paul applies the term slave to himself in order to express his undivided allegiance to the Lord of the church, the Master of all, including slaves and masters. “No one can serve (i.e., be a slave to) two masters,” said Jesus (Mat 6:24). It is this aspect of the slave-master relationship rather than its degrading implications that Paul emphasizes when he discusses Christian commitment (NAB footnote).

      Traditionally, “servant.” Though doulos is normally translated “servant,” the word does not bear the connotation of a free individual serving another. … The most accurate translation is “bondservant” … in that it often indicates one who sells himself into slavery to another. But as this is archaic, few today understand its force.

      Undoubtedly the background for the concept of being the Lord’s “slave” or “servant” is to be found in the Old Testament scriptures. For someone who was Jewish this concept did not connote drudgery, but honor and privilege. It was used of national Israel at times (Isa 43:10), but was especially associated with famous OT personalities, including such great men as Moses (Josh 14:7), David (Ps 89:3; cf. 2 Sam 7:5, 8) and Elijah (2 Kgs 10:10); all these men were “servants (or slaves) of the Lord” (NET Bible footnote).

      Most lexicons give something like the following on this word:

(1) generally, as one who serves in obedience to another’s will slave, servant (JN 15.15); (2) literally, in contrast to (a) a master slave (MT 8.9); (b) a freeman bondman, slave (CO 3.11), opposite eleutheros (freeman) and polites (citizen); (c) a son (house) servant, family servant (GA 4.7); (d) a believer regarded as a brother slave (PM 16); (3) figuratively; (a) of relationship to God, Christ, one’s fellow man servant (GA 1.10); (b) of being controlled by sin slave (JN 8.34) (Friberg).

      Thus both “slave” and “servant” are indicated. Some lexicons just give these two words as possible renderings (e.g. USB Dictionary). But given the vastly different connotations of these words, both cannot be accurate. This is especially so since there are two other words that are generally rendered as “servant” in the Bible, theraponti (“Moses His servant” – Exod 14:31) and diakonos (“whoever among you* is desiring to become great, he will be your* servant” - Matt 20:26). I usually do not use Strong’s lexicon, as it is rather old and not very reliable, but in this case, I think it gives a good definition of doulos.

      1) a slave, bondman, man of servile condition 1a) a slave 1b) metaph., one who gives himself up to another’s will those whose service is used by Christ in extending and advancing His cause among men 1c) devoted to another to the disregard of one’s own interests 2) a servant, attendant.

      Thus here, the person bonds himself to someone else, as being opposed to being forced to do so.          

In these quotes the word “bondman” or “bondservant” occurs. “Bondservant” means, “a person bound to service without pay” … “A person obligated to serve without wages. A slave or serf.” (Your Dictionary). Thus the word does mean to serve without pay and can be equivalent to slave. However, there is no indication in the word of why the person is so obligated, and the word does not have the very strong negative connotation that “slave” has today.

Slavery in Biblical Times

      This all becomes important when we look at what slavery was like in Biblical times as compared to what people think of when they hear “slave” today.

      What many fail to understand is that slavery in biblical times was very different from the slavery that was practiced in the past few centuries in many parts of the world. The slavery in the Bible was not based exclusively on race. People were not enslaved because of their nationality or the color of their skin. In Bible times, slavery was based more on economics; it was a matter of social status. People sold themselves as slaves when they could not pay their debts or provide for their families. In New Testament times, sometimes doctors, lawyers, and even politicians were slaves of someone else. Some people actually chose to be slaves so as to have all their needs provided for by their masters….

      The key issue is that the slavery the Bible allowed for in no way resembled the racial slavery that plagued our world in the past few centuries (Got Questions?org; “Does the Bible”).

      The most important thing to establish is that the sort of slavery we encounter in the Bible is nothing like the slavery that jumps to the American mind—that is, racist chattel slavery that mercilessly captured and dehumanized African people until the Thirteenth Amendment passed in 1865. The Bible emphatically denounces this type of slavery in denouncing man-stealing (Exod 21:16) and its undermining racism (Numb 12:1-9; Gal 3:28).

      The slavery of Bible times was very different from the slavery we know and hate. It actually would have been much closer to indentured servitude. In ancient Israel, slaves were not expected to be enslaved for life (Exod 21:2). In the era of the New Testament, people embraced slavery as a form of voluntary employment. Many of them were highly educated (The Federalist.).

      It is hard in our day to understand someone who “embraced slavery.” But in a culture where only landowners had economic security, indentured servitude would be the only way for many non-landowners to be so secure. Thus some would willingly bond themselves to another for this reason. In doing so, they were now required to perform the will of their master, but they put themselves into that situation; they were not forced into it against their will.

      The clearest indication of this idea is 1Corinthins 7:23, “You* were bought [or, redeemed] with a price; stop becoming bondservants of people.” Most versions have “slaves” here, as did the ALT. But a person cannot choose not be enslaved in the American sense of the word, thus such a rendering makes little sense today. But a person can choose to bond or not bond himself to someone else. If he does so, he is bound to fulfill his master’s will. But as Christians, we are to fulfill God’s will for our life, and being bonded to a person could prevent this. Thus Paul is warning against such voluntary bonding of oneself to another person.

      But there were situations in Bible times when someone would be bond to a person against their will, though they may have put themselves into that situation by getting into debt over their heads. This idea was depicted very well in a movie I “just happened” to watch as I was struggling with this issue. It was a 1998 movie titled “Jeremiah” that starred Patrick Dempsey as the prophet.

      At the beginning of the movie, the father of Jeremiah’s love interest was seriously in debt and could not repay his creditors. His creditors took him before King Jehoiakim. The king declared that people could not be allowed to borrow money and not repay it as that would cause economic problems throughout the country. He thus ordered that the father and his entire family, including Jeremiahs’ love interest, would serve as slaves for seven years.

      Now this sounds harsh in our day, but the king was right. We saw a few years back a good example of what Jehoiakim warned about. The economic meltdown of 2008 was caused primarily by huge numbers of people having borrowed money to buy houses that they were not able to repay. Those unpaid mortgages led to the banking crisis and resulting recession. Simply put, borrowing money and not repaying it is a serious matter, and thus in Bible times, people were forced to work to pay off their debts. A good example of this can be seen in Jesus’ parable of the ungrateful bondservant.

        ²³“Because of this, the kingdom of the heavens was compared to a person, a king, who wanted to settle accounts with his bondservants. ²⁴So when he began to be settling the accounts, one debtor was brought near to him [owing] ten thousand talents [i.e., about 950,000 pounds or 420,000 kilograms of gold or silver]. ²⁵But he not having [anything] to repay, his lord [or, master, and through verse 34] commanded him to be sold, and his wife and the children, and all, whatever he was having, and to be repaid. ²⁶So the bondservant, having fallen down, began prostrating himself in reverence before him, saying, ‘Lord, have patience with me, and I will repay you all.’ ²⁷Then the lord of that bondservant, having been moved with compassion, released him and forgave him the debt.

        ²⁸“But that bondservant having gone out, found one of his fellow-bondservant who was owing to him a hundred denarii [i.e., about 2.5 ounces or 350 grams of silver], and having seized him, he began choking [him], saying, ‘Repay to me if you owe anything!’ ²⁹His fellow-bondservant then, having fallen down at his feet, began pleading with him, saying, ‘Have patience with me, and I will repay all to you.’ ³⁰But he was not willing, but having gone away, he threw him into prison until which [time] he should repay the [amount] being owed.

        ³¹“But his fellow-bondservants, having seen the [things] having been done, were extremely grieved; and having come, they reported to their own lord all the [things] having been done. ³²Then having summoned him, his lord says to him, ‘Evil bondservant! All that debt I forgave you, since you pleaded with Me. ³³It was necessary [for] you also to be merciful to your fellow-bondservant, just as I also was merciful to you, was it not?’ ³⁴And having been enraged, his lord handed him over to the torturers [or, jailers], until which [time] he should repay all being owed to him (Matt 18:23-34).

      First it should be noted that that “fellow-bondservant” is sundoulos and thus another word of the same root as doulos. I have quoted this parable in full as it is very instructive. Some versions have “servant” in this passage (KJV, NKJV, NIV, ESV, NAB, NLT), while others have “slave” (NASB, HCSB, NRSV). The ALT did have “slaves” but I changed it to bondservants, as neither servant nor slave makes sense. A slave who was forcefully captured and forced to work for his master would not be in debt to that master, and such a slave would not own a slave himself, while a servant is a paid employer not a debtor to his employer. However, being in debt can be the exact relationship of a bondservant to his master, and someone can be both a debtor and a creditor. Thus with that background, this parable makes sense, except for maybe the last half of verses 30 and 34. Being put in jail or tortured would not enable the debtor to pay back his debt, but this probably shows the rage of the master and how much control a master had over someone bound to him. Thus though not as harsh as American-style slavery, being a bondservant could be a harsh existence, depending on the nature of the master. And that leads to why this discussion is so important.

Criticism of the Bible

      The Bible in general and Paul in particular have been much criticized for not commanding against slavery. But if the relevant words are translated as “bondservant” then a different picture emerges. Consider, for instance, the following passage from Colossians:

        ²²The bondservants, be obeying with respect to all [things] your* masters according to [the] flesh, not in eye-service as people-pleasers, but in sincerity of heart, fearing God. ²³And every[thing], whatever you* shall be doing, be working from [your*] soul [fig., heartily] as to the Lord and not to people, ²⁴knowing that from [the] Lord you* will receive the recompense of the inheritance, for to the Lord Christ you* are serving as a bondservant. ²⁵But the one doing wrong [or, acting unjustly] will receive back what he did wrong [or, did unjustly], and there is no accepting of faces [fig., partiality].

      ¹The masters, be providing the just [thing] [fig., justice] and equality [or, fairness] to the bondservants, knowing that you* also have a Master in [the] heavens (Col 3:22-4:1).

      Most versions have “slaves” in the first verse, as did the ALT. And many have criticized Paul for telling slaves to obey their masters, as if telling them not to obey would improve their circumstances. But the real kicker to the critics is Paul telling the masters to be just and fair to their slaves, rather than telling the masters to set their slaves free. However, if these were bondservants who had willingly bond themselves to their masters, then these injunctions by Paul make sense. A person who so bond himself should work heartily as he chose his situation, and if he is in this situation due to having gotten himself into debt, then it is right that he should work to repay that debt.

      Moreover, to tell the master to free him might not be economically feasible, and if done on a large scale could lead to an economic crisis. This is a great possibly given that, “During the time of Jesus and the first-century church, as much as one third of the Roman population were slaves.” Interesting, the rest of this sentence reads, “and another third had been slaves earlier in life” (Got Questions?org; “What”). Slavery as people think of it today was almost always for life, while the servitude of Bible times very often was not.

      Now, all this is not to say there were not times when people were forcibly put into slavery against their will and outside of their control. The Hebrew people were slaves in Egypt in that they were forcibly made to work for Pharaoh without pay. Thus in passages talking about this time period, “slaves” is appropriate. Consider Leviticus 26:13:

        ¹³I am the LORD your* God, the One having brought you* out of [the] land of Egypt, you* being slaves [fig., where you* were slaves]; and I broke the bond of your* yoke and brought you* out with boldness.

      In such contexts “slave” is the correct rendering and thus is still used in the ALT. But later in the history of Israel, when Israel was conquered by other nations, they were not so much slaves as “subjects” of that nation’s king. “Subject” in this context means, “somebody who is ruled by a king, queen, or other authority” (Encarta Dictionary). Thus Jeremiah 25:11 is now rendered in the ALT as, “¹¹And all the land will be for a vanishing; and they will serve as subjects among the nations seventy years.”

      The difference here is in Egypt the Hebrew people were used as slave labor, but in Babylon the Jews were free to live their lives and make a living however they chose, but they had to pay tribute to the king. That is why Jeremiahs enjoined them to:

        ⁵‘Build houses, and inhabit [them]; and plant gardens, and eat the fruits of them. ⁶And take wives, and father sons and daughters; and take wives for your* sons, and give your* daughters to husbands, and be continually multiplied, and you* shall not be diminished. ⁷And seek for peace of the land into which I resettled you* there, and pray concerning them to the LORD, for in its peace there will be peace to you*’ (Jer 29:5-7).

      This is not a description of slavery as we think of it today, but of relative freedom.

      All of this is to explain why I have changed to using “bondservant” to translate doulos unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. The female form of the word is douln and is now rendered female-bondservant (e.g. Exod 21:7). When both words occur together, doulos is rendered male-bondservant (e.g. Acts 2:18). The verbal form can mean “serve as a bondservant” (Matt 5:24) or “serve as a subject” (Gen 14:4). The related noun doulea can mean slavery or servitude. I initially used slavery but switched to servitude as it can include serving as a bondservant, while slavery would eliminate that connotation.

Pais and Oiketes

      That much is pretty straightforward, but where I ran into a problem was with the two synonymous words. The first is pais, and it actually has two different meanings. Along with being synonymous with doulos, it can also mean “boy or child” (UBS Dictionary). In such contexts, I rendered it as “male child” (e.g., Matthew 2:16). But I really struggled with how to render it when it is synonymous with doulos. My struggle was due to trying to render different Greek words with different English words. But there is no other word in English with the same connotation as bondservant. The term “indentured servitude” was mentioned in a previous extended quote, and “indentured servant” was the closest I could find.

      “Indentured servant” means, “A debt bondage worker who is under contract of an employer for a specified period of time, in exchange for transportation, food, drink, clothing, lodging and other necessities (YourDictionary.com). And “indentured” means, “To bind into the service of another by indenture. any deed, contract, or sealed agreement between two or more parties” (Free Dictionary) and “The description of indenture is a written contract of agreement, especially one in which one party is bound to work for another for a given period of time” (YourDictionary.com).

      The term thus can mean someone who is bond to work for another, and this does fit the meaning of the Greek word. However, this bond is through a contract, which was not always the case in Biblical times. Also, “indentured” indicates a specific period of time, while a bondservant could be bond for life.

      But most of all, “indentured servant” most specifically means, “a person who came to America and was placed under contract to work for another over a period of time, usually seven years, especially during the 17th to 19th centuries” (Dictionary.com). The example I remember from high school of this is Chinese workers who came to America in the 1800s to work on the transcontinental railroad. The railroad company paid their way to the New World, but they in turn had to work for seven years without pay before gaining their freedom. Thus this term has a very specific American cultural meaning that does not fit with Biblical times.

      But then I went back to Romans 1:1 and noticed that while the NKJV has “bondservant” (without a hyphen), the NASB has “bond-servant” (with a hyphen). I did some quick research and found the word can be spelled either way. In fact, I came across an article on GotQuestions?org titled “What is a bondservant / bond-servant?” The article states, “In Roman times, the term bondservant or slave could refer to someone who voluntarily served others. But it usually referred to one who was held in a permanent position of servitude.” Thus again, bondservant (or bond-servant) has the correct connotation for both doulos and pais.

      My decision was thus to use “bondservant” (without a hyphen) for doulos and “bond-servant” (with a hyphen) for pais. In this way, I am using the best possible translation for both words, while still showing the distinction between them, albeit in a manner that many might not even notice.  But this article will explain this distinction, which will be posted on my Christian website and will be revised and included in the planned new edition of the Companion Volume to the ALT, as mentioned in the “Writing Plans” article.

      The feminine form of pais is paidiske. I am now rendering it as “female bond-servant.” When the masculine and feminine occur together, I am rendering them as “male bond-servants” and “female bond-servants” (e.g. Gen 12:16).

      The second synonymous word is oiketo. It is from the same root as the Greek word for “house” (oikos – e.g., Matt 2:11), as is oiketeia, which means, “household servants, Luke 12:42” (UBS Dictionary).  The latter word only occurs twice with this meaning, in Matthew 24:45 and Luke 12:42. I originally followed the lexicons I had and rendered it as “domestics [or, household servants].” But reviewing it now, I noticed that the word is singular in both verses, not plural. I thus changed it to “household staff.” This is the meaning given in Danker’s Greek lexicon, which I just got access to when I upgraded to BibleWorks 10. Note that this word occurs twice more with the meaning of “healing” (Luke 9:11; Rev 22:2). The connection is explained in Danker:

      the basic idea is one of helpful service to ensure well-being] – 1. ‘restoration to health or well-being’, healing Lk 9:11; cure Rev 22:2. By metonymy – 2. ‘service personnel’, of those assigned to promote the interests of an estate, household staff, servants Lk 12:42.

      With this rendering of oiketeia and the relation to “house,” I thought it is best to render oiketos in a similar manner and thus originally used “household servant.” But its meaning is synonymous otherwise with doulos. I am thus now rendering it as “household bondservant” and the feminine form as “female household bondservant.” The synonymous nature of doulos and oiketeia can be seen in first the noun oiketeia and then the verbal form of doulos being used in Luke 16:13:

        ¹³No household bondservant (oiketeia) is able to be serving as a bondservant (douleuo) to two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to one and despise the other. You* are not able to be serving as a bondservant (douleuo) to God and to worldly wealth.”

      Further showing that doulos, pais, and oiketeia are synonymous is all three are used in the LXX to translate the same Hebrew word (aber; e.g., Gen 9:25; Lev 25:44; 1Sam 25:10).  However, there is a distinction between a regular bondservant and a household bondservant:

      There have been two basic types of slavery throughout recorded history. The most common has been what is called household, patriarchal, or domestic slavery. Although domestic slaves occasionally worked outside the household, for example, in haying or harvesting, their primary function was that of menials who served their owners in their homes or wherever else the owners might be, such as in military service. …

      The other major type of slavery was productive slavery. .. predominantly to produce marketable commodities in mines or on plantations (Encyclopedia Britannica).

      Thus a household slave or bondservant is more of a personal attendant, as contrasted with the productive slave working in the fields or mines, which is what most Americans think of when they hear “slave.” Moreover, an oiketeia is “one holding closer relations to the family than other slaves” (Thayer). Thus a household bondservant is closer to his master than a regular bondservant. This is probably why this term is sometimes used for those who serve the LORD. In such cases, “household bondservant” makes little sense, so instead I am rendering it as “personal bondservant” (e.g., Deut 34:5, “⁵So Moses the personal bondservant of the LORD died in the land of Moab by [the] word of the LORD”).

      Since these three words and words with their roots are different words in the Greek texts, I think it is best to render them in a different though related manner to show the distinction yet synonymous nature of these words. And with the renderings of bondservant, bond-servant, and household (or, personal) bondservant, I am showing this difference yet similarity.

Conclusion

      This article has been quite technical, but it shows the dilemmas translators can have. To try to explain this to the readers of my translation, I will render Genesis 9:24-26 as follows, with a following note:

      ²⁴So Noah became sober from the wine and knew as much as his younger son did to him. ²⁵And he said, “Cursed be Canaan; a bond-servant of a household bondservant will he be to his brothers.” ²⁶And he said, “Blessed [be] the LORD God of Shem, and Canaan will be his bond-servant. ²⁷May God enlarge Japheth, and let him dwell in the houses [or, habitations] of Shem, and let Canaan become their bond-servant.

      [Note: A “bond-servant” (with a hyphen) is bond to the service of and subject to another; similar to “household bondservant,” though that is a different Greek word, as is “bondservant” (without a hyphen) ; e.g., Josh 24:30). All three words can also be rendered “slave” when forced servitude is indicated (e.g., Lev 26:13).]

      It should be noted these changes will not show up for some time in the published texts of the ALT. I will be waiting for quite a while, most likely many years, to publish a one volume ALT, as I want to be sure I have the text just as I want it before then. That will occur as I use the ALT for the many books I have planned, as discussed in my Writing Plans article. But to conclude this article where it began, Romans 1:1 will now be rendered as:

      ¹Paul, a bondservant of Jesus Christ, a called apostle, having been separated [or, appointed] to the Gospel [or, Good News] of God.

For further details on the translations seen in the ALT, see the Companion Volume to the ALT.

Bibliography:

      BibleWorks™ Copyright © 1992-2015 BibleWorks, LLC. All rights reserved. BibleWorks was programmed by Michael S. Bushell, Michael D. Tan, and Glenn L. Weaver.  All rights reserved.

      Danker, Frederick William with Kathryn Krug. The Concise Greek–English Lexicon of the New Testament © 2009 by The University of Chicago All rights reserved. As found on BibleWorks.

      Dictionary.com.

      Encarta Dictionary and Thesaurus. On Microsoft Word 2010.

      Encyclopedia Britannica. Slavery.

      Federalist, The. The Eight Biggest Myths About the Bible.

      Free Dictionary.

      Friberg, Timothy and Barbara. Analytical Greek New Testament. Copyright © 1994 and Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament. Copyright © 1994. Both on BibleWorks.

      Got Questions?org. Does the Bible condone slavery?

                  “What is a bondservant / bond-servant?

      New American Bible (NAB), revised edition © 2010, 1991, 1986, 1970 Confraternity of Christian Doctrine, Inc., Washington, DC. All Rights Reserved.

      New English Translation (a.k.a. NET Bible). Version 1.0 - Copyright © 1996-2006 Biblical Studies Press, L.L.C.

      Newman, Barclay M. Jr. A Concise Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. Copyright © 1971 by United Bible Societies and 1993 by Deutsche Biblelgesellschaft (German Bible Society), Sttugart. On BibleWorks.

      Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. Complete and unabridged. Being C. G. Grimm (1861-1868; 1879) and C. L. W. Wilke (1851) Clavis Novi Testamenti Translated, Revised, and Enlarged, by Joseph Henry Thayer, D.D., Hon. Litt.D., Professor of New Testament, Divinity School of Harvard University, 1889.  Electronic edition generated and owned by International Bible Translators (IBT), Inc., 1998-2000. Greek formatting modifications (such as adding diacritical accents) and improvements made by Michael S. Bushell, 2001. On BibleWorks.

      Your Dictionary. LoveToKnow Corporation.

Abbreviations for Bible Versions:

ALT – Analytical-Literal Translation.

ESV – English Standard Version.

HCSB - Holman Christian Standard Bible.

KJV – King James Version.

NAB – New American Bible.

NASB – New American Standard Bible.

NET – New English Translation.

NIRV - New International Reader’s Version.

NIV – New International Version.

NLT – New Living Translation.

NKJV – New King James Version.

NRSV – New Revised Standard Version.

Servant, Slave, or Bondservant? - A Translator’s Dilemma. Copyright © 2015 By Gary F. Zeolla.

The above article was posted on this website September 5, 2015.
It was first published in the free Darkness to Light Newsletter.
It was updated September 8, 2023.

Analytical-Literal Translation: Main Page

Background Articles for the ALT: NT

Text Search      Contact Information
Subject Index      Alphabetical List of Pages

Darkness to Light Home Page
www.zeolla.org/christian

Click Here for Books and eBooks by Gary F. Zeolla