The Politics of Bible Translations
Just a rant here, but I can’t keep my peace any longer.
I track about 100 Bible blogs and I am observing a disturbing trend. It is acceptable, in fact even trendy, to crack on, complain about, or trash the ESV. But if someone suggests their disdain for the TNIV, then that person is part of the ESV propaganda machine. What? Why is it acceptable to blast the ESV, but no one can show problems with the TNIV and not be discounted as an out of the loop, ultra traditional fanatic?
Am I not allowed to like a translation without being lumped into some sort of group or pigeon holed into some sort of category? I like the NRSV, but I am not a liberal by anyone’s definition (well, maybe a couple people – LOL). I like the HCSB but I am certainly not a Baptist. I like the ESV but am definitely not a reformed evangelical. I just like these translations. I do not like the TNIV because I think it has some translation faults. The TNIV improves upon the faults of the NIV, but it still has some renderings that I think are just wrong. For example, compare the TNIV and NASB (or ESV, HCSB, etc) on Romans 1:17. I think the TNIV is wrong to read, “the righteousness that comes from God.” At least the TNIV fixed the NIV’s “a righteousness that comes from God.” But this reading not only does not make much sense in the context of Romans 1, in my opinion, but it removes the other interpretation possibility – that Paul is talking about God’s righteousness. I do not like the TNIV and NIV’s “sinful nature.” I think that rendering creates more problems and more confusion than it solves.
I don’t hate the TNIV. I have a leather TNIV. I have preached from the TNIV on occasion. I have read with TNIV. But this does not make me an egalitarian revisionist. The reason I do not study from the TNIV often is NOT because of some blind loyalty to another translation. The reason I have not regularly used the TNIV is NOT because of some warfare with other translations. The reason I do not use the TNIV as my main translation is NOT because I think the TNIV/CBT has some sort of egalitarian agenda. The reason I do not use the TNIV every day is NOT because I think anthropos ought to be translated “man.” I simply think the TNIV has some bad renderings, so I don’t use it too often. Often I do not like how the TNIV reads. These renderings bother me far more than some clunky renderings that the ESV, NASB, NKJV, NRSV, or HCSB have from time to time. It is my great hope that the NIV 2011 will repair these problems and then I might use the NIV as my primary translation.
I guess I am part of an rare group that will use any translation for reading, preaching, and study as long as translation is accurate on a given passage and communicates that passage in a fairly clear way. I think God’s Word translation has some good readings, like 1 Peter 3:21.
Don’t forget that Peter said that Paul wrote some things that are difficult to understand (2 Peter 3:16). While we should not intentionally complicate English translations, we cannot oversimplify difficult texts or concepts with our Bible translations. Some stuff is hard, requires thought and study, and cannot be always be made “easy to read.”
God did not choose reveal his words like this:
“See Jesus. See Jesus come to earth. See Jesus die on earth for you. See Jesus raise from dead. Follow Jesus.”
God chose not to insult our intelligence but expected us to search the mind of God revealed to us through his Word.
By the way, if you are an adult and say that you cannot “understand” the ESV, HCSB, NASB, NKJV, or NRSV (just going in alphabetical order), then I think you need to go back to your high school and demand a refund from your teachers. They obviously did you a great disservice. All of these translations are considered to be at a high school reading level. Only the KJV demands a reading proficiency higher than high school.
Okay, my rant is done. Back to your regularly scheduled programming….
Don't forget to browse Translations.
Your Thoughts
6 Comments so far6 Responses to “The Politics of Bible Translations”
By submitting a comment here you grant Christian Monthly Standard a perpetual license to reproduce your words and name/web site in attribution. Inappropriate comments will be removed at our discretion.
Gary Zimmerli
September 8, 2009 at 9:16 am
Good rant, Brent!
Robert Jimenez
September 8, 2009 at 3:31 pm
Brent, I understand where you are coming from. Much of our preferences are personal and we should not condemn other translations. I am not a big fan of the ESV as my primary bible, but I like it, use it, compare it, and study with it as well. That goes for the HCSB, and NLT, and all the other translations that I own. They all server a purpose. I feel the same way you do about the HCSB. The 2nd edition is better but still can be better.
Keith
September 8, 2009 at 7:59 pm
I think it is crazy when people label each other based on what translation they prefer. Currently my two favorite translations I use for study are the ESV and TNIV. But I’m not apposed to looking at any of the other translations that I own or have access.
Terry Thomas
September 12, 2009 at 7:07 pm
Amen!
I agree wholeheartedly. Though I am not much of an ESV fan ( I would use the NASBu instead) I must agree. Personally, I use the HCSB as my main translation though I refer to many translations.
On my shelf I can see NIV, ESV, NASB, NLT, NET and the GNT. All have their place and use from the most dynamic/paraphrase (NLT/GNT) to the most formal (ESV/NASB). In all cases good and godly men worked to put God’s words into English for us all to read, study and hear from our Sovereign Lord.
It is time for the “translation wars” to cease. Though I would not teach or preach from the NLT, GNT or the NET for that matter, I still consult them, read from them and recommend them for specific purposes. The HCSB as I said is my main choice, again a personal preference, not a test of godliness.
I hope I never become part of an HCSB-only crowd like some are beginning to do with the ESV and I fear many did with the NIV, thus the overabundance of fighting when the TNIV arrived and I think we are destined to see again with the NIV 2011.
Just my thoughts though.
Blessings,
Terry Thomas
Claudio
September 15, 2009 at 10:58 am
Brent, I understand were you are coming from. Personally, if I could only use just one Bible translation for the rest of my life, it would probably be the KJV. I trust it, and it is a formal translation. However…..since I can use as many translations as I want to, I have to say that I like the NLT, NIV, etc. Why? Because these are written in the way I generally speak and am spoken to. The problem with a translation like the KJV, for example, is not the fact that many words are difficult and archaic. The context defines most of those words. What makes the KJV, NKJV, etc, more difficult to undertand is the grammar and syntax of the Hebrew and Greek. These version, albiet formal and well translated, follow non english grammar. This makes for unusual and ackward sentences that have to be read a few times to make sense of what the text says. This is were a more dynamic version has an advantage. I speak two languages and am often called by my boss to translate for him (I work in a school district with a very large hispanic population.) When I translate, I don’t do it word by word…this would be impossible. I rephrase, omit, add, and basically do what I have to in order to communicate the original message. In my mind, this is what the easier version are for and why I like to use them.
Jim Swindle
October 3, 2009 at 8:50 pm
Thank you for saying what needed to be said. The translations you mention are basically honest translations from different perspectives. Any one of them is sufficient to tell a person how to know God through Jesus.
I’m very uneasy, though, about paraphrases that are looser than the NLT and God’s Word translation. I think it’s dangerous to read a paraphrase as if it’s God’s pure word. If we read it carefully, it’s more–not less–work. I find such “Bibles” too hard to read (harder than the NASB or ESV), because I feel duty-bound to mentally compare every verse to memories of a more reliable translation, so I can see whether the paraphrase is right on that particular passage. Doing that is too much work, so I avoid those paraphrases.
Having said that, we can and should be thankful for the excellent translations, including those that “our kind of Christians” generally don’t like.