My first bible was your standard, black, large print, KJV. I got it for free when I signed a card (at the age of 8) during a Billy Graham crusade. Say this prayer, sign this card, now you're a believer, here kid, here's a bible.
Awesome.
I didn't read it much, but I had a bible, and that seemed cool to me. I wasn't saved of course, but I did associate myself with church and Christianity.
My next bible was a paperback NIV New Testament that someone gave to me shortly thereafter I am not really sure who gave it to me, but it was easier to read for me, though that ease didn't translate into actual reading. It was a dust collector just like the KJV.
Years past, and one day I heard the gospel "for real" - and gave my life to Jesus. I didn't buy any bibles, but had a renewed interest in scripture, right up until the next day when I sinned, and believed that by doing so I had not only lost my salvation, but could never get it back.
Ten years past. I sinned a lot, got married, and began to start a family. That was when the Lord put someone in my life who had actually read the bible and believed it - and this same person showed me that I hadn't lost my salvation for ever, but that I had been fed a lie and believed it to my own misfortune. After I learned that there was still hope for me, I went out and bought myself a "good news bible" (TEV) and began reading it. I was quite amazed to learn that many of the superstitions about God that I had believed, were just that - superstitions. As I began to grow, and lear, I was astonished to discover that my translation was not the same as other people's translations - that in some places it was even radically different!
I thought - what is this? Which translation is right? I mean, I wasn't reading God's word in order to impress other people, I just wanted to know what God had to say. If there were an hundred different English translations, I wanted to know which one was the most accurate. I think that is why I wanted to learn the biblical languages. I simply did not "trust" any translation, given that they could radically disagree on the way a text was translated. Of course, I have to trust the translation when a passage surpasses my own (limited) knowledge of the original language - but I mean only that my ability to be satisfied by a translation is proportional to my certainty of its accuracy - and unless I know firsthand that it is accurate, I am at the mercy of well-meaning, but often conflicting opinions about which translation is best.
When I expressed my desire to study the biblical languages, I remember that I was immediately accused of being unspiritual. I heard again and again, that old smug phrase, that "the only reason a person studies the original language is because he doesn't want to do what the text tells him to do in the English!"
It is kinda sad, but I don't expect it is all that rare: people who desire to study the scriptures in the original languages are often accused of doing so out of arrogance, rebellion, or both. I find that the loudest objections come from a rather vocal but small minority. I speak only from my own experiences, but the attitude that I have met with from time to time is was one of "confused piety" - for these seemed to regard as holy and humble their own accepting at face value their particularly favored translation. Such would not regard the Bereans as noble for examining the scriptures to see if they said what was being attributed to them - but would rather regard them as arrogant doubters who only checked the scriptures because they were unwilling to take Paul's word for it. I suppose therefore that I am of that variety that refuses to take man's word for anything.
Not that I thought everyone else was wrong, but that I knew my own self to be so fallible, I began to regard all men as equally fallible, as individuals and even collectively. Do we not regard those faiths which disagree with our own as being in error? How many millions are being misled not only daily, but yearly, and how many false teachings span centuries? Surely there is room in the rational mind to press a matter beyond its face value and see if it holds true or not. It is, in my opinion, no virtue to be naive and gullible. Is there not wisdom in the multitude of counselors? But if we accept everything at face value, we never need consult anyone else again.
To be sure, I expect anyone who is promoting naivety and gullibility as virtuous is probably either knowingly or ignorantly, inspiring people to follow them and what they say instead of follow Christ and what he says.
When I began to examine scripture itself critically I began to take very seriously verses like 2 Timothy 1:13. Here Paul instructs Timothy to retain the same patterns of speech that he had heard Paul use. That is, I see scripture itself teaching that the word of God is so profoundly important, that in handling it we ought not to even change the pattern of words - that is, we ought not to present the truth in a different way that Paul (and by extension, all of scripture, and by further extension, the Holy Spirit) originally delivered it. That is a powerful argument for the supremacy of literal translations over such things as dynamically equivalent translations, etc.
If God's word is so weighty that Paul instructs Timothy to make sure that he didn't even change the manner in which Paul had expressed these things - I reason that the text supports the view that we do well to pursue the most literal translation available, and by contrast, that we would do very poorly indeed to embrace translations that massage the text for us, or to take a laissez faire approach and let be what will be. This was the very thing Paul was instructing Timothy to avoid - don't take liberties with the text - don't word it differently, don't find "better" ways to say it - just repeat it as you heard it, adding nothing to it, and changing nothing of it.
I should say at this point, that I regard the KJV as an excellent, literal translation of its underlaying texts.
Though I don't regard the underlaying texts as the most accurate - having studied to my own satisfaction the science of textual criticism, I am satisfied that the 27th revision of the Nestle-Aland eclectic text is a very accurate representation of the original Greek, and as such I am inclined to favor Bibles that are not only highly literal, but use what I believe to be the most accurate NT texts around.
To this end, I regard the NASB as perhaps the most literal translation, and close behind it, the ESV.
I don't really care for the NIV, and I confess, when I first began to become convinced of the NASB as the best translation out there - I became something of a translation snob. I remember with shame looking down my nose at one of the older members in a previous church who was using an NIV. I don't know if my open disdain was noted, but it was certainly unbridled - and God be praised, I am not so exalted in my own opinions today.
Many of you know that I like to read different translations of the bible. I have read more than half a dozen different translations cover to cover - but I find that my favorite is always the NASB. I know it has been described as a "wooden" translation by those who desire a more flowery translation - but frankly, I like it. I like the clarity of it.
I still use and compare many other translations, and I think it is good to do so, especially if one doesn't have an exhaustive dictionary library of the original languages, as often some nuance may come out in one translation that is less obvious in another. But by and large, if I had to choose, it would be NASB out front, next the ESV, and after that I don't know. I don't have to make choices like that so I don't spend a lot of time thinking about it.
My encouragement to you, reader, is that you take to heart the words of Paul - that we regard the "patterns of words" Paul delivered to Timothy, and by extension, Paul used everywhere in his own writings - as foundational in our evaluation of a translation. I still read other translations, but when I make doctrinal distinctions - I am careful to plumb, not the chaff, but the wheat - that is, I don't turn to a translation that is known for its flowery dynamic equivalence when I want doctrine, no, I get my hands on the most literal translation I can, and deal from there.
If I have any advice for new "bible readers" it is this: Don't let other people chew your food for you. God's word is most effective when it has not been watered down for easy consumption. Get a hold of the most literal translation you can find - do the research yourself - then read, read, read.Labels: bible translations |
- 
- 
- 
