First let me apologize.  As I’m sure you know, I haven’t been updating my blog regularly for the past few weeks.  I hope to correct that.  Thanks! . . .

Christians have always understood the Bible to be God’s self-revelation to humanity—a type of self-portrait of God.  It’s the account of His pursuit of and engagement with His creation.  Describing in terms such as “eternally binding” (Lk 16:17) and ”God-breathed” (2 Tim 3:16), the biblical authors recognized the Bible to function as a sort of window or corrective lens through which our spiritual myopia or nearsightedness might be corrected.  If this is the case, it nearly goes without saying that it ought to be our number one priority to understand and internalize what is contained in such a book.  And wherever we’re at on this journey of pursuing the study of God’s Word, it’s essential that we have access to it.  Therefore, it seems that the most basic of tools which we absolutely must have is a good translation of the Bible.  So, where do we begin?

The process of translation
The 66 individual books which comprise the Bible were originally written primarily in the two languages of Hebrew (Old Testament) and Greek (New Testament).  Hebrew’s sister language of Aramaic was used in a small portion of the OT (half of the book of Daniel and a few sections of Ezra). These languages are called the original languages—the languages we are translating from.  The receptor language is the language we’re translating into (in our case, English).  The challenging part to this process of translation is at least twofold: (1) we’re not only going from one language to another, (2) we’re also going from one historical moment to another.

Two challenges of translation:
(1) Language
I remember well the difficulty I encountered my freshman year in high school when I took Spanish 101.  Some of the trickiest elements in the new language for me were the littlest of things like word order.  For instance, in talking about things like a red ball, a black cat, or a white house in Spanish, I was told that I had to place the adjective (red, black, white) after the object (ball, cat, house).  So, my thinking had to change to “ball red,” “cat black,” and “house white.”  I also remember learning that some of our idioms like “time flies” don’t exactly carry over.  Instead, the Spanish language speaks of time “running.”  Other times there were Spanish words or phrases which simply didn’t have parallels in English.  Therefore, we were often forced to used an entire sentence in English in trying to get at a meaning behind a single Spanish word.  Now, obviously these examples are but small adjustments to be made when translating from one language to another.  Nevertheless, this at least hints at the complexity of the process of going from the original language(s) to a receptor language.

(2) History
Another challenge involved in the translation of the original biblical languages into English is the historical distance which exists between them.  This historical distance refers to all the linguistic, cultural, and historical differences between the world of the original language and that of the receptor language.  Think for example about the decisions involved in translating weights, measurements, or money.  Should we simply transliterate the original word by bringing it over into the receptor language (e.g. “ephah,” “shekel”), or should we find its equivalent in English?  Yet, in the case of money, if we chose to find the equivalent in English, what do we do with the unavoidable reality of inflation?  Some years down the road our translation will be miscommunicating and the reader may miss the impact of the story (e.g., Mt 18:24-28).

Three kinds of translations
Every translation or version of the Bible will fall somewhere along a continuum or scale.  On one side of the continuum is the very literal translation (formal equivalent), while the opposite side is a very loose translation (free equivalent).  The middle point between these two is what is called a functional equivalent translation.  Here they are again, along with some examples of popular translations:

(1) Formal Equivalent (e.g., NKJV, NASB, NRSV, ESV)
(2) Functional / Dynamic Equivalent (e.g., NIV, TNIV, NAB, NJB, REB)
(3) Free Translation / Paraphrase (e.g., Phillips, Living Bible, The Message)

Let me give you the descriptions offered by biblical scholars Gordon Fee and Douglas Stuart in their fantastic book, How to Read the Bible for All It’s Worth:

Formal Equivalence: the attempt to keep as close to the “form” of the Hebrew or Greek, both words and grammar, as can be conveniently put into understandable English.  The closer one stays to the Hebrew or Greek idiom, the closer one moves toward a theory of translation often described as “literal.”  Translations based on formal equivalence will keep the historical distance intact at all points.

Functional equivalence: the attempt to keep the meaning of the Hebrew or Greek but to put their words and idioms into what would be the normal way of saying the same thing in English.  The more one is willing to forego formal equivalence for functional equivalence, the closer one moves toward a theory of translation frequently described as “dynamic equivalent.”  Such translations keep historical distance on all historical and factual matters but “update” matters of language, grammar, and style.

Free translation: the attempt to translate the ideas from one language to another, with less concern about using the exact words of the original.  A free translation, sometimes also called a paraphrase, tries to eliminate as much of the historical distance as possible and still be faithful to the original text.

My suggestion
The purpose of any biblical translation is to make known the ancient texts to contemporary readers.  Therefore, our goal should be to have the most understandable version we can posses.  And while what is “understandable” might vary from person to person, I think it’s a fair generalization that the average person engaged in daily Bible reading would be best served using a formal or dynamic equivalent (e.g., TNIV, NIV, NRSV).  Please feel free to disagree with me, but understand that I’m thinking of the average Bible reader, recognizing that you may feel very comfortable with a more formal equivalent.   

Having made this general suggestion of a functional translation for daily Bible reading, let me also highly endorse the use of both formal and free translations.  A formal translation gives you a helpful window into what the original language actually looked like.  In fact, I would say that a formal translation would be preferable when doing a more critical study of word usage in biblical texts.  At times I also like using a more literal version when studying genres like Hebrew wisdom literature (e.g., Proverbs).  It can sometimes aid in getting the effect of pithy statements common in the book of Proverbs.  Nevertheless, it can also at times miss the point by trying to translate an ancient euphemism too literally (e.g., the KJV translates Gen 31:35 as “the manner of women is upon me,” whereas the NIV renders it more understandably, “I am having my monthly period.”

While a free translation or a paraphrase can at times act almost more like a commentary (due to the enormous amount of interpretation involved), it can also be very helpful to read a commonly known passage from a freer translation.  Doing so may open your eyes to some of the subtleties of the author’s attitude and passion.     

A Comment on the King James Version (KJV)
For anyone wanting to really engage with unchurched people in our culture, I don’t think I would advise making the KJV your primary devotional version of the Bible.  It’s not that it is a bad translation, but it is a translation which was completed 400 years ago in 1611, and its language is obviously a dialect which we do not use today.  The goal of all great translations (even the KJV in its day) has been to put God’s Word in the hands of people in their parlance and common language.  Think about it this way.  The version you use will be the version you will tend to memorize and therefore, the version you will recall when sharing it with an unchurched person.  And when you have the opportunity to communicate some portion of God’s Word to an un-churched and seeking person, you want to be as clear and meaningful as possible, applying God’s eternally relevant message to the particular context and issues of our day.  An irrelevant language can infer an irrelevant message.  “After all,” they might think, “if the language isn’t even relevant, why would the message be either?”

A Study Bible
Fortunately, along with a host of good Bible translations available to us, there are many good study Bibles out there as well.  I would highly recommend two particular study Bibles for both devotional and study purposes:

(1) The NIV Study Bible (or NASB for a formal translation)
(2) The Archeological Study Bible (Click here for a brief write-up that I did on this Study Bible a while back)

Go to a book store and spend some time flipping through both of these before you make a purchase.  Look up some of your favorite passages (e.g., John 1) in both study Bibles and compare the notes on each.  Ask yourself which one would be more helpful to you—holding your interest so you’ll be more likely to come back to it each day as you learn to read the Bible for all its worth.

Suggested Reading:
How to Read the Bible for All It’s Worth 3rd ed., by Gordon D. Fee and Douglas Stuart.

FEEDBACK?:
Which version of the Bible do you prefer to read?