Congratulations to the South Carolina Gamecocks women’s basketball team on their decisive win last night in the NCAA National Championship.
Choosing a Bible Translation
I recently saw this article that highlighted the bestselling Bible translations. It contained some surprises.
I wasn’t surprised that the New International Version (NIV), King James Version (KJV), and ESV (English Standard Version) were all in the top five. While my knowledge of these translations’ popularity is anecdotal, it certainly seems that these are among the most widely read versions.
Among the results that did surprise me was the emergence of the New Living Translation (NLT). It has now climbed to the second spot on the list of bestselling Bibles. Only last year it was fourth.
My memory is a bit hazy, but I think I first encountered the NLT during my junior or senior year in high school. I knew enough to know that the NLT wasn’t one of the more literal translations, meaning, it didn’t belong in the “Formal Equivalence” category. Rather, it was known as a “Dynamic Equivalence” version. These categories are sometimes disputed by linguists and Bible scholars, but they more or less convey the distinction between word-for-word precision versus thought-for-thought.
This itself is a bit of a hazy distinction. Words form phrases, which form sentences, which become responsible for generating thoughts. So even a translation that is presumably focused more on every individual word (let’s say the KJV or ESV) is still translated with some picture of the larger flow of the sentence, even if the main goal wasn’t to come up with a sentence that sounded best to 21st century American ears.
My own past experience with the NLT was positive. There was a plainness and familiarity to the language that I needed at that point in my spiritual development. It was especially helpful when working through some of the more challenging Old Testament passages. I think I even bought a copy or two for friends.
Eventually I stopped using the NLT because I didn’t feel that it was as precise as it ought to be on certain words and phrases. By 2004, I began using the ESV, and haven’t looked back since.
I realize that this subject is still a matter of great dispute in many churches, and personal consternation for some individuals. I’ve walked with more than one brother or sister through this discussion. The two books I recommend most often on this topic are Robert Picirilli’s How We Get Our English Bible (Randall House) and Mark Ward’s Authorized (Lexham Press). These are clear, concise, and sensitive to the real concerns of believers.
A few key admonitions emerge when I approach this subject.
First, we should be slow to draw massive conclusions from the recent list of bestselling Bibles. While it does tell us some things, it doesn’t tell us exactly what version was most used by English-speaking believers in the last day, week, or even year. Sales don’t exactly equate to usage, even if these two areas eventually intersect.
Second, we should be incredibly grateful to be having such a “first-world conversation” as this when many believers around the world fight and scrape to get a Bible. What’s more, many don’t even have a Bible in their native language. And while we’re at it, imagine the oral-based societies where they depend on someone delivering the Word in person, or at the very least, on an audio device that can recount the Scriptures to them. That people like us have multiple Bibles casually lying around our homes, gathering dust in many cases, says a great deal about us.
Third, as cliché as it sounds, the most powerful Bible is the one you actually read and apply. In all my years of reading different Bible translations, I cannot think of a substantial instance in which an alternate rendering of a particular verse was determinative for my obedience. Our disobedience to God isn’t translators’ fault; our weak wills and ignorance are.
Fourth, it’s reasonable to argue for certain Bible versions being more or less faithful to the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts. While most people aren’t equipped to engage in that argument, it’s a legitimate conversation, provided we distinguish between matters that are generally agreed upon by linguists and those that are ongoing matters of dispute. So the solution to disagreements isn’t to shut down any and all discussions. However, we must approach the issue with humility to know what we’re equipped to claim and not claim. And we also must approach the issue with patience knowing that our Sunday School teacher, small group leader, and/or pastor will probably serve us best by teaching from the translation that is familiar to him and sufficiently familiar to the group.
Finally, pulpit committees should be very slow to make a specific Bible translation a non-negotiable in their identification of and recommendation of a pastor to the congregation. I realize that such committees must keep a clear perspective on the unity of the body. However, there are so many issues of greater theological and pastoral consequence that must be prioritized over this particular congregational preference.
I find it wiser for committees to convey preferences and tendencies in the congregation so a pastoral candidate can make a wise assessment as to whether he is comfortable with the fit. Many pastors have the patience and wisdom to know whether this is a learning process they’re prepared to enter with the congregation, or whether the church would be better served with a pastor with a more closely aligned conviction in this area.
Some Thoughts on the Will Smith-Chris Rock Oscars’ Moment
I hesitated to write anything about the widely discussed moment that transpired last Sunday at the Oscars. I regret to admit that I’ve read at least a half dozen articles and listened to a couple of podcasts on this incident.
Honestly, I hope we appreciate what a strange situation this is. In an entertainment environment where memorable moments seldom cut through all the noise, this did.
The Oscars’ ratings have been down for years. I myself quit watching a few years ago, though I do follow the results on the bigger awards. I like to predict which films I think will win if I’ve had the chance to see a reasonable number of the more acclaimed ones. So needless to say, when I awakened to this moment, I thought what so many others thought, “What?!”
My experience of this moment was a bit different than many. I was in the process of traveling to see family the following day, so I got to hear the buzz surrounding the moment across state lines. Everyone was talking about it—even if no one had watched a Will Smith movie or seen a Chris Rock special in years!
I think it was also unique for my wife and me because we had started watching King Richard on our flight, the film for which Will Smith was nominated for his performance as the main protagonist. While we didn’t finish the film, we were riveted by his performance. We truly forgot for a few moments that “the slap” had even happened. Putting all politics and judgments about decorum aside, I believed Will Smith was Richard Williams. What, if anything, is that if not great acting?
When I heard that one of the possible consequences of Smith’s action was being stripped of his award, I honestly felt a swell of pity. I have no personal affection for Smith, but I appreciate great artistic performances. To think such an exceptional one would be overshadowed by what was clearly a regrettable moment just didn’t sit well with me.
Take a moment and consider what I’ve said here. Now think about your own opinion. Then consider everything you’ve heard about this incident and everything you’ve read about it. Isn’t it striking, even strange, how much interest this moment has generated?
One of the many journalists who wrote about this altercation attributed the widespread public interest to boredom. In a society shot through with triviality, of course we would fixate on such a moment.
I don’t doubt that contemporary popular culture is characterized by the banal. We’re certainly a distracted bunch! But I want to offer a different observation about the situation.
Notice all the commentary about the event. This event is ideal for all kinds of competing cultural pet narratives to congeal around.
“Will Smith has perpetuated the stereotype of the angry black man.”
“Cancel culture is at it again! Not even a celebrity of Smith’s magnitude is immune.”
“Finally someone is standing up for their woman! Chivalry isn’t dead after all.”
“Once again, testosterone-fueled men behave badly, as if women need men to defend them. Haven’t we come further than this?”
“The only reason people even care is because it was the most interesting thing at a woke Hollywood awards show that no one watches anymore.”
Notice how effortlessly any of these sentiments can be hung as a banner over the incident in question. They all represent a particular narrative about the decline of Western American culture, albeit it from quite different perspectives.
This is one of the great temptations Christians face. As I mentioned in a prior newsletter, nuance is in such scarce supply. Yet it is precisely what’s needed when it comes to evaluating complex events. Developing general interpretations about the state of popular culture is probably unavoidable. I certainly don’t think it’s illegitimate. But one has to work quite hard to resist the urge to take an event with more than one layer to it and force it into our particular ideological mold.
How is this different from the church’s embrace of the Christian worldview? Is a biblical worldview not a “particular take on reality”? Indeed it is. I think the difference is that something like a Christian worldview can offer the kind of moral clarity that’s needed on the issues that matter most, while leaving room for the Holy Spirit’s guidance, contextual wisdom, and the use of the conscience on matters of less consequence.
I can see Christians landing at different places on an issue like this. We believe firmly in forgiveness, reconciliation, and mercy. We also believe that bad behavior brings forth consequences. We believe that punishment is designed, in part, to deter future bad behavior. We believe that one can defend the honor of someone they love, but sometimes we can confuse another’s honor with our pride.
One of the things I love about the Christian worldview is that it gives us the moral resources to sort through thorny situations, while not forcing us to arrive at the exact same conclusion in each situation. This doesn’t make us relativists; it makes us wise. When God wants His people to come together, I believe His Word and Spirit give the clarity we need to do that. This requires that we love each other more than we love being right, and it requires that we trust God, knowing that faith will be required no matter which judgment we ultimately form.
Aren’t you glad Chris Rock turned the other cheek? Things could have been much worse!
Currently Reading:
Sam Rainer, The Church Revitalization Checklist