Category Archives: Bible versions

Provincialism and translations

There’s another surprising place where provincialism raises its ugly head within the realms of Christianity. That’s in the area of translations.

Most people take a fairly healthy view toward translations. They choose a translation according to their needs and give others the freedom to do the same.

But within Christianity, there are some who feel that there is no choice among translations. They believe that only one translation bears God’s seal of approval. In the English-speaking world, that’s usually the King James Version, particularly the 1611 version of the KJV (from the first edition in 1611 to the 1769 revision there were some 75000 changes, mostly regarding spelling and grammar). In an Internet discussion, one minister made the comment:

I am of the persuasion that if there isn’t a perfect translation in the English language, I will stand down from the ministry and get a secular job rather than teach and preach falsehood. Mind you, I am NOT of the Ruckman mentality the the KJV is inspired and therefor equal (or even superior) to the originals. I believe it is perfectly preserved. It is exactly what God wants us to have. As God overrode the human element in divine inspiration and gave us His Word perfectly in the originals, He overrode the human element in divine preservation and kept His Word pure through translation.

To some degree, I wouldn’t have that much of a problem with the above, except that he used the same reasoning to reject all other translations. Since the KJV is what God wants us to have, according to this minister, no other translation will do.

So why is this an example of provincialism? Because such views only work when you limit yourself to one language. Someone in that same discussion group made a similar claim about the 1569 Reina Valera. I told these two men that their views were completely incompatible. If the KJV is a perfect translation, the R-V can’t be. And vice versa. First, because there are serious differences between the two. Second, because you can’t have an exact translation between two languages. Not word for word, jot for jot, tittle for tittle.

Only if you limit yourself to one language can you say that one translation is perfect, complete and infallible.

KJV-onlyism has lots of other problems, of course. But provincialism is a necessary ally. Without it, there is no way to hold to that view.

Do more people prefer the KJV?

OK, I fell for USA Today’s headline. “Bible readers prefer King James version,” it said. And the story itself even said: “82% of those who read the Good Book at least once a month rely on the translation that first brought the Scripture to the English-speaking masses worldwide.” Now, as Peter Kirk over at Better Bibles blog pointed out, unless the USA Today is talking about the Geneva Bible, that sentence isn’t very accurate. But it’s inaccurate for another reason: the Lifeway Research study on which the article is based doesn’t say that!

Here’s how Lifeway put it:

Among those who read the Bible regularly the percentage of KJV owners is even higher. A full 82 percent of Americans who read the Bible at least once a month own a KJV.

That’s a far cry from saying that 82% prefer the KJV. Lots of people own a King James Bible; how many of them read it? How many prefer to read it? That’s not reported. Which is why the USA Today headline was totally misleading.

I’m not looking to bash the KJV. I’m merely pointing out the fallacy, which I fell into, of relying on second-hand media reports. When possible, check the original source. As I’ve said before, I’m uneasy when someone says “Paul says…” or “the Bible teaches…” unless what is reported is a direct quote from the Bible. Because you always run the risk of someone misinterpreting a passage and reporting it as the truth from the Bible. Like USA Today did with this report from Lifeway.

Photo by Ove Tøpfer; from Stock Xchange

Talking About What We Don’t Understand

I rarely read those group e-mails that get sent out. If someone wants to send me something, they can send it to me personally. I especially avoid anything that says “Fwd:” in the subject line.

But the other day I read an article that a brother was sending to a lot of us who work among Spanish speakers. When I got to the bottom of the article, I realized that it had merely been copied from a web site.

The writer was attacking the “modern versions,” especially focusing on Acts 20:28. He was defending the 1602 Valera version in Spanish and the 1611 King James version in English — not realizing, of course, that these two versions disagree with one another on the translation of this particular verse. The article railed against Westcott and Hort and the Alexandrian texts that they followed, praising the integrity of the Byzantine texts. It accused later versions of wanting to deny the deity of Jesus by changing “church of God” to “church of the Lord” in this verse.

Unfortunately, whoever wrote this particular piece apparently hadn’t done their homework. Several Alexandrian texts read “church of God” in this passage. Several Byzantine texts read “church of the Lord.” And there are lots of variants from there. In English, it’s the King James that reads “church of the Lord” and the modern texts which read “church of God.” It just so happened that that trend was reversed in Spanish.

What I find sad is that people can be so intent on arguing about something that they will argue even when they have little understanding of the subject they are arguing about! I especially tire of this when it comes to versions, as accusations are thrown around about “they made this change to promote ___.”

I have long said that I in my years of study I have only found one version that made intentional changes while translating: the New World Translations produced by the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Admittedly, there may be some that I haven’t seen. And I know that the Conservative Bible Project is doing their level best to produce a “translation” that will match their views. But in general, translators are trying to do just that: translate.

I’m going to try and do better about giving people the benefit of the doubt, especially those that disagree with me. I hope you’ll do the same.

Mosaic Bible Blog Tour Comes To The Kitchen

OK, today is the day. The Kitchen is the official stop of the Mosaic Bible blog tour. We’ll be giving away a copy of the Mosaic Bible (which I reviewed yesterday). If you’re interested, just leave a comment saying why you are interested in owning the Mosaic Bible. I’ll draw at random from the qualified comments.

But before we get to that, we have a Q&A with Kevin O’Brien, the acquisitions editor for the project.

Kitchen: Please tell us about yourself and your role in the Mosaic project.
Kevin:
My name is Kevin O’Brien, and I am the Director of Bibles and Reference for Tyndale House. This is basically a fancy way of saying acquisitions and product development. I got to Tyndale in a bit of a roundabout manner. I have Master’s Degrees in Divinity and Theology, have done some doctoral work in philosophical theology, I am an ordained minister, have been a youth pastor, and just prior to coming to Tyndale was the book, Bible, and music buyer for Lemstone Christian Stores. (And more importantly I am married and have three kids).

My job is to both maintain our existing Bibles lines and to find compelling new Bible projects that both meet real needs and which are economically viable. This is not always as easy of a combination as it would seem. In the case of Mosaic, I received the original proposal for the project from David Sanford. I immediately appreciated the goals of the project, in fact they were very much in line with some goals that I had. At the same time, I didn’t think that the proposal as initially presented to us was quite right. Because the base idea was so compelling, I got several members of our editorial team together with others from our development and marketing teams to discuss what this Bible should look like. At the end of two days we had wrestled through the goals and the details to come up with what we believed was a viable Bible. The final form was largely put together by Keith Williams who eventually became the editor on the project. After we concepted the idea, I re-worked the proposal, sent it back to David Sanford and began the process of internally getting approval from our publications committee. As you know, Holy Bible: Mosaic is more than a bit unique, so it was not a guaranteed approval. In fact we did not get approval the first go around. We did focus group testing, made some changes and then were able to get the project approved. After approval it was my job to work with David and Keith to make sure that we had everything that we needed from a content standpoint, as well as working with our marketing, design and production teams to pull everything together. I was also able to be involved in writing some of the introduction with Keith which was a treat for me. It was a long but ultimately very fulfilling process.

Kitchen: What sets Mosaic apart from the multitude of study Bibles available today?
Kevin:
First, I would say that Mosaic is not a study Bible in the traditional sense of the term. We toyed with the idea of calling it a “Reflective Study Bible” and that kind of gets at it, but when we tested that idea we found that we were confusing people because of the standard idea of what a study Bible is. Mosaic is also not exactly a devotional Bible. It really is something in between the two. We wanted to create a Bible that would give people new ways to engage with Scripture that would really drive them back to the text. We weren’t looking to explain the text in the ways a traditional study Bible would, nor were we looking to create a 20 minute devotional experience. Both approaches are valid and useful for some people in some situations. Mosaic was not intended to fulfill those roles, however. We were really looking to create something that would be a guide for significant wrestling with the text and which would take into account the breadth and depth of Christianity since its inception. This was a very high priority for me personally and for the team as well. I think that we have come up with something that is not only unique, but which will serve the Church well for years to come. Ultimately that is the most important thing that we could do.

Kitchen: Can you describe the selection process for the readings and artwork that were included in Mosaic?
Kevin:
The selection process for the content was largely handled by David Sanford and his team. We reviewed the “project map”, made some tweaks and then it was largely up to David. Keith did the heavy lifting on our end -cutting things down to fit, choosing which of the quotes fit best, etc. We did have to scramble on a couple of things near the end when we realized that we were missing a century or two – I believe the 8th was the troublesome one. So Keith and I went to work looking for someone who would fit the timeframe as well as the content need. The art was a bit trickier. Keith and I worked alongside David’s team to come up with art that would fit the content needs, give diversity, and frankly, that we could afford – there are a lot of rights issues involved. We found things from all kinds of places including a really cool Bible from the 1800s that we have here at Tyndale. I am personally very happy that I was able to find Daniel Bonnell in South Carolina (isn’t Google a lifesaver?). I ran across Daniel’s work and knew that we had to get some of his pieces into the project. I was really excited that we got not only one but 5!

Kitchen: Why was the New Living Translation selected as the basis for the Mosaic Bible?
Kevin:
The short answer – because the NLT is the primary translation that Tyndale publishes. The NLT is owned by the Tyndale House Foundation, the non-profit foundation that owns Tyndale. It wasn’t simply that, however, as we do publish Bibles in the NIV, the NKJV, and the KJV (as well as an interlinear with the NRSV). The NLT makes a nice compliment to the variety of voices and images that we were able to include. The beauty of the NLT is that it speaks the language of the common person. It doesn’t sound like church if you know what I mean. And while we wanted to take into account things like the Church calendar and a connection to our larger shared history, we also wanted to remember that the New Testament was written in what was essentially the trade language. The first converts were fisherman and tax collectors – average Joes if you will. That was the goal of William Tyndale when he translated his Bible in the 16th century and it’s our goal with the NLT.

Kitchen: I could envision a broader Mosaic project, encompassing other types of media: music, video, etc. Has there been any talk of such an endeavor?
Kevin:
We have certainly had discussions about other media types for Mosaic. At this point we are starting a bit slow. We have devotionals for Advent and Lent (forthcoming) and an iPhone App that should be coming pretty soon. We will be looking at a variety of possibilities for further products in the future, but there is nothing definite right now.

Kitchen: If you could share with my readers one compelling reason why they should consider purchasing the Mosaic Bible, what would that be?
Kevin:
I think that the most compelling reason that I can give to buy Mosaic is this. The Christian story is much bigger than you or me. It is really easy as in the west, especially in America, to get fixated on our safe, suburban lives (OK, my safe suburban life). It is really easy to see what we have always seen and to hear what we have always heard. I grew up in a very fundamentalist Church. I was taught a lot of great things about the Bible. I memorized Scripture when I was young. But I was totally unaware of the larger swath of Church history. When I thought of Christianity in other parts of the world my thoughts turned to Sunday night slide shows from missionaries. It was totally beyond my comprehension that there are significant Christian thinkers and leaders from Africa or Asia. That I could learn something about God from art. I am very thankful for many parts of my upbringing, but the picture I had of Christianity was also very incomplete. And because of it, my view of God was much too small. I truly believe that Holy Bible: Mosaic will help to broaden the picture for many in the Church. It is the reason why I and so many others worked for over three years to get this project done. In the end it is not about me, but I am glad that I get to be a tile in the larger Mosaic of God’s redemptive plan.

Thanks for having me.

Kitchen: Thanks for joining us in The Kitchen!

The quest for the perfect version of the Bible

bible1Over on the Better Bibles Blog, Rich Rhodes talked about listening to an audio version of the King James Version. He found that the epistles were very difficult to listen to because of the vocabulary employed. He concludes his post by writing:”This is why I’m so passionate about getting a translation that speaks to the heart of English speakers.”

That’s what I find with the versions I use in Spanish. In my radio programs, I use the Spanish equivalent of the GNT, which isn’t my favorite version. I use it because it’s the easiest to understand in a spoken format like that. In our bilingual service, I use the bilingual NIV/NVI Bible because our congregation owns a number of those and most of our Spanish-speakers use them. (I like the NIV in English, but don’t like the Spanish version much at all)

Maybe I’m too picky, but I really haven’t found a Bible that truly fits what I would like to see in a Bible. For now, I settle for “the lesser of evils.”

What about you? Have you found what you’re looking for in a Bible version?

[Edit at 3 p.m. CDT: Matt Dabbs tells about a church burning all non-KJV Bibles. I’m guessing they’ve found the version they like!]


As I mentioned before, I’ve been participating in the Tyndale Blog Network, reviewing products that I receive from Tyndale. This time I’m a part of one of their virtual book tours, the Mosaic Bible blog tour. This Friday, October 16, The Kitchen will be hosting the tour, with Kevin O’Brien doing a Q&A session about the book.

In addition, Tyndale will be giving away a copy of The Mosaic Bible to one of the readers of this blog. On Friday, leave a comment indicating that you would like to be in the drawing for the giveaway.

Today’s stop on the blog tour: Internet Monk