Blogging about English Translations of the Bible

The Bible Translation Section of the Society of Biblical Literature is but one of a 100+ to schedule sessions at the Society’s Annual Meeting. The papers read, furthermore, often discuss non-English translations of the Bible, and/or delve into matters that require a thorough knowledge of the original language texts. It cannot be said that English translations of the Bible are the central research focus of the majority of SBL members.

The pros and cons of English translations of the Bible, on the other hand, is the favorite topic of a number of Bible bloggers. The single best post I have read on the Great Translation Circus was penned by a blogger who ranges widely, the inestimable iMonk (go here). He defends them all, from the Message to the NLT to the ESV. His defense of each of the three named translations is eloquent; that he has the ESV Study Bible on pre-order is indicative.

That’s my stance precisely, though I express it conversely: put any translation into my hands, and I will show you within a brief span of time why in this place and that place it messes up, and sometimes badly, within the parameters of the translation’s self-confessed translation technique no less.

I go at it in iconoclastic fashion because I am a jerk by nature out of love for the jots and tittles of Scripture itself, and also because I think, as does Calvin, that believers should throw their Bible translations into the fire and read and memorize Scripture in the original languages if at all possible.

Everywhere around me, I see believing Jews and Christians training to be scientists, doctors, lawyers, and engineers capable of commanding an immense wealth of detail with almost instant recall. There is no money in it, but why can’t a few Jewish and Christian men and women be trained to sight read the Bible in the original languages with just as much mastery and comprehension?

I know a few rabbis who can sight read the Tanakh, or at least the Torah, without skipping a beat, but let’s not pretend that is especially common. The last time I was at a synagogue with a confirmation class, and the rabbi opened up the Torah scroll to a column at random, and I read the unpointed text out loud without difficulty, my confirmation students were not surprised – they take it for granted that I can do this, because I quote and translate Hebrew from memory in class. The rabbi was surprised, I can assure you. So was I: it’s not everyday that I read unpointed biblical Hebrew. But that is what you get when you have had excellent (Jewish) teachers who use an oral method of teaching.

Still, I thoroughly enjoy picking apart a translation of a biblical text. There is not enough serious nitpicking going on online to satisfy my desire to learn more and hone whatever translation skills I possess. Here is a handy map of the best blogs known to me which discuss English translations of the Bible on a frequent basis.

Better Bibles Blog

A team effort and the premier blog in the field. The most frequent conversation-starters are Wayne Leman, Suzanne McCarthy, Peter Kirk, David Ker, and Rich Rhodes. All but Suzanne favor translations written in natural, easy-to-read English and disfavor more concordant, word-for-word, tradition-conscious translations in the Tyndale-King James mold. Some members of the team have had a tendency to single ESV out for criticism on occasions in which they might have targeted NASB95 or HCSB with equal vigor. But all in all, Better Bibles is not about tearing down a particular Bible translation, nor is it about engaging in anti-ESV politicking in response to anti-TNIV politicking by others. See this post by Jeremy Pierce on his blog in which he discusses the issue with care. Better Bibles is about discussing translation technique, and pointing out examples in which existing translations might do better. I feel indebted to Wayne Leman in particular, for his willingness to challenge my attempt to translate Psalm 51 on a case-by-case basis. In my book, that is true friendship.

This Lamp

Rick Mansfield favors what he calls “median” translations like TNIV and revised NLT though he grew up on NASB and knows Scripture by heart in that translation. Rick is well-known for lively and informative posts. Still, I get the impression that he could teach equally well from any of the above translations, and others besides like HCSB or ESV, if that was the Bible translation his audience knew and loved.

TNIV Truth

Wayne Leman, Rick Mansfield, Peter Kirk, Joe Myzia, and Ben Irwin are all listed as contributors. This blog notes ways in which TNIV is like and unlike other translations, with a view to deflating common stereotypes and promoting TNIV.

Lingamish

David Ker prefers easy-to-read translations like CEV and NLT but if you catch him on the right day, he will confess a desire for a translation that is faithful to the stylistic choices of the original and fearless about preserving the otherness of biblical content. I’ve tried to shame him into learning Hebrew more than once – he’s a fine linguist, so it will be a snap for him. He seems to be giving in, the old sap. If he really wants to learn Hebrew, I suggest he go study it in Israel with Randall Buth.

He is sufficient

ElShaddai Edwards is a first class connoisseur of English-language Bible translations. He has a soft spot in his heart for REB, a risk-taking translation which often sparkles and does not seek to be word-for-word as the classical translations often did (the Septuagint, the Vulgate, Luther’s translation, the Bible of Zurich, Tyndale, Geneva, KJV, etc.), but also differs from easy-to-read translations like CEV and NLT insofar as it does not avoid unusual expressions and vocabulary that field-testers eliminate as beyond the ability of the average 4^th or 7^th grader to understand.

Church Discipline

A newer blog by an anonymous author who calls himself CD-Host. He likes to deflate claims to the effect that word-for-word translations are ipso facto more accurate than translations which are more interpretive, restructure syntax, and remove ambiguities.

Ev Epheso

Mike Aubrey is a fine linguist in the making. It is a crying shame that he has found few if any correspondents online who can keep up with him as he takes a passage in Greek and patiently turns it into sparkling English. I did so once, for the fun of it, and I wish I had time to do it more often. Mike appreciates the importance of metaphor for metaphor translation, and this sets him apart for many other practitioners of DE (dynamic equivalence) who love to reduce metaphors to abstract propositions.

Iyov

Iyov has a deep interest in the history of reception of the Bible as it manifests itself in the history of Bible translation and in the history of exegesis. He argues for Bible translation that is faithful to the stylistic choices of the original and careful to preserve or footnote textual complexity and ambiguity. I often land on a comment thread on another blog only to discover that Iyov is making a point I would have wanted to make if he had not done so before me. But we are no match for the legions of souls who want their Bibles as easy to read as the Lord of the Rings trilogy would be if it did not contain specialized vocabulary, unusual diction, diverse literary genres, and various other oddities, such as worlds, cultures, and values which do not match our own and which we can only imagine, not to mention countless phrases which, if field-tested on 6^th graders, would score as incomprehensible. Iyov is an encyclopedia Brown, so good luck skimming the posts on his blog to find those that deal with translation issues (go here and here and succinctly, here).

There are a few other rising stars I’ve noticed, and others I’m sure I’m forgetting. These three bloggers blog a lot about translations: New Leaven: TC Robinson (go here) has a preference for TNIV and is always ready to challenge tradition and his own former preferences; New Epistles: Kevin Sam (see his “posts on scripture” index) knows how to see the good in translations and study Bibles of various stripes; Discipulus Scripturae: Nathan Stitt (go here) – likewise.

Another blog worth visiting is that of SIL Bible translators Eddie and Sue Arthur (go here). Eddie prefers NLT to all other translations for his daily reading and I wouldn’t doubt that he makes considerable use of it when going about translating the Bible into African languages. Eddie defies the old stereotype of the Western missionary who looks down on the culture of the natives. With Eddie, the tables are turned. The vantage point of African culture allows him to be self-critical about Western culture.

 

Comments

[Esteban Vázquez]

Thanks for this, John! I have just recently put a "Bible translation" blogroll in my sidebar which includes the usual suspects, but I was unaware of some of the newer blogs out there. I'll be checking them out!

[Simon Holloway]

I really enjoyed this post, and I agree with you completely. I can read the unpointed text although, I am embarrassed to say, I do make mistakes. Most of those have to do with punctuation, rather than pronounciation, although there are definitely some errors of pronounciation there as well.

They say that Max Margolis could be given the te'amim (just the te'amim, mind you) for any three consecutive words in the whole Tanakh and he would know which words those were and quote the passuq. I heard this from Gary Rendsburg; I very much like to think that it's true!

[JohnFH]

Esteban,

it is always a pleasure when you grace this blog with your presence. And it's good to have you back blogging, with excellent quotes from your beloved teacher Moises Silva.

[JohnFH]

Simon,

the Margolis anecdote is intriguing. A sequence of three neumes would not be enough to distinguish one verse from all others, but, given the vowels that go with the consonants of three consecutive words, it might be done.

[David Ker]

Thou almost persuadest me to become a student of Hebrew. (A certain Encyclopedia Brown is taking me in hand)

I will admit that it is hard to talk about the almost vulgar excess of resources in English when I know that people are dying for lack of knowledge in almost any other language. On a positive note, English resources do trickle down to other less profitable markets.

[JohnFH]

David,

you have to admit it would be fun to learn Hebrew in Israel with your whole family along. Trouble is, if you spent a year there, and you sent your kids to school, they would effortlessly absorb the holy tongue into their bones while you struggled every day.

[ElShaddai Edwards]

[...] a first class connoisseur of English-language Bible translations.

Hmmm, I think I'll need to go find a burgundy velvet coat to go with my glass of Syrah as I sit in my fine leather chair and read the REB...

Thanks for the kind words and link!

[David Ker]

Children really are capable of things that adults flounder at (See my post on art today for example).

You never know...

[tc robinson]

John, thanks for the link. I'm kind of a maverick guy who respects some traditions.

I find looking into the various translations to be a fun venture. One of the things I was taught was to question why a verse was translated a particular way. I guess that's why I'm always into retranslating. :-)

[Suzanne]

My purpose has always been to blog against the boycott against the TNIV. Over 100 Christian Leaders Claim that the TNIV Bible is Not Trustworthy.

I believed this was a worthy cause in the interests of better Bibles. Every post on the ESV was to demonstrate what translation the boycotters of the TNIV have produced themselves.

I don't think we can discuss better Bibles without dealing with this boycott.

However, since my proactive concern and blunt honesty have caused me to become the target for unsubstantiated and untrue attacks on my character, I have decided to quit the Bible blogosphere. I will take this opportunity to say good-bye.

I am happy to remember how I have been able to introduce many of the bloggers you mention to each other. The Bible translation blogosphere will carry on in a lively manner.

[tc robinson]

Sue,

I've learned so much from you. The few exchanges we've had opened up my eyes to the beauty of gender accuracy in translations like the TNIV.

As you know I'm pro-TNIV, and despite the senseless attack, I believe it will have its day.

It will be used in my pulpit for sure.

Thank you, Sue.

[JohnFH]

El Shaddai and TC,

thanks to the both of you for your willingness to blog about your experiences with English translations of the Bible. Bible publishing houses are probably wise to take the concerns of Bible experts with a grain of salt, but they ignore your concerns at their peril.

[Rick Mansfield]

Actually, I do still occasionally teach from the HCSB and believe it is one of the better translations to come along in recent years. I'm anxiously waiting to get my hands on the 2009 revision. In many places it is more technically accurate than the TNIV (for instance in John 3:16), but in public I feel convicted to use a gender accurate translation most of the time.

As for the ESV, I own two copies of it in hardback, and have a copy in both Accordance and Logos. And I've also been contracted by Oak Tree to tag Romans through 2 Corinthians in the ESV to the Strong's dictionaries. But I don't know, after going "under the hood" of the ESV, so to speak, I still haven't warmed to it.

So if my audience were primarily ESV users, I guess I'd apologize and teach from the NASB :-)

[JohnFH]

Suzanne,

as the cases of Rick Mansfield, Jeremy Pierce and the iMonk prove, it is possible to be accepting of a translation like (1) TNIV or NLT both of which are easy to read, fearless in their quest for semantic cohesion at the verse and paragraph levels to the detriment of a representation of the semantic cohesion that obtains across tbe entire Bible, and resolutely committed to the use of horizontal inclusive language (with some collateral damage along the way to the representation of other semantic features of the text), and of a relatively literal or even literalistic translation like (2) HCSB, ESV, or NASB95.

The bloggers just mentioned disassociate themselves from the anti-TNIV boycott implicitly - this is sometimes the more effective critique - or explicitly. Indeed, I think Rick could be classed as an anti-ESVer in a sense not too far removed from the qualified sense in which you are anti-ESV. More precisely, in his own words, it is not a translation he has warmed to, though that does not hinder him from helping in the production of electronic helps related to it.

But all three, I think, would agree that the best critique imaginable of the anti-TNIV boycott would avoid anti-ESV politicking altogether, and consist of the production of a best-selling, moderate DE, inclusive language translation similar to TNIV but, if anything, an improvement on it: that would be the revised NLT.

Viewed historically, TNIV accomplished its purpose by running interference for NLT.

I wish you well in your doctoral program. It sounds as if you have excellent teachers. I can't say that I will miss some of the more caustic exchanges the two of us were party to - and I bear my part of the shame for not following James' advice about the tongue with greater consistency, but I will miss your advocacy of paying attention to thinks like concordance in translation, your devotion to KJV, and your exemplification of translation technique as found in the Vulgate and later Latin versions from the Hebrew.

[JohnFH]

Rick,

thanks for the clarification, and for the exciting news of an upcoming revision of HCSB.

[Suzanne]

I am not in a doctoral program nor do I recall ever saying that I was.

[JohnFH]

I wish you well, then, in whatever program of graduate or post-graduate studies you are pursuing.

[Iyov]

You are hanging out with too many Reform Jews, John, if you believe that the ability to read unpointed text is rare. Almost all Jewish (Hebrew) religious literature (with the notable exceptions of the Siddur and Tanach) is unpointed.

You are to be commended for reading the Torah without pointing. If you can lein the Torah without cantillation marks (which the chazzan does three days a week plus holidays) then you get bonus points.

[Iyov]

PS: Thanks for the link!

[Iyov]

PPS: Not to imply that I can lein! I dare not even try lest I insult the Torah!

[Iyov]

PPPS: And hey, you polymath, who are you calling an Encyclopedia Brown? Your blog covers a breathtaking range of topics.

[JohnFH]

Iyov,

I don't plan to spend less time with my Reconstructionist, Reform, and Conservative friends, you will understand, but I wish I knew of a Chabadnik rabbi or the like in the Milwaukee area who would not be scandalized if a Gentile read Tanakh and Talmud with him.

No, I can't chant, unfortunately - you don't want to hear me sing in English either - but my Hebrew is good enough that I once tutored a cantor in preparation for certification exams, which she passed with flying colors. Hearing her chant, of course, brings me a special pleasure.

[Iyov]

There are other groups than Lubavitch! Even in Milwaukee.

[JohnFH]

I'll have to look into it, Iyov. Thanks for the encouragement.

[Nathan Stitt]

I always enjoy the posts by Michael Spencer, he has a great perspective on things and always challenges my thinking. My epiphany this year has been that the translation debates are petty, and that I find myself enjoying the different characteristics of all of the translations. Looking at the Greek and Hebrew helps me to notice the nuances in scripture, and our English translations helpfully do the same. The variety is a good thing, and we would do well to read from as many translations as we can find. My challenge to myself is to simply spend more time reading scripture in any language or translation, and to quit wasting my time trying to find out which translation is best. Granted I have learned a lot from the debates, but sometimes the reactionary comments do more harm than good (see Sue's comments above). Anyways, thank you for the excellent post and link.

[JohnFH]

Nathan,

you are a joy to have around in the blogosphere. Soon and very soon, others will be learning from you as much as you are learning from others.

[Eddie]

Thanks for the link John. Of course, I use the NLT when translating - what else would I use? :-)