Wednesday, February 09, 2011

NEW THRU 30 (The Word, Part 4)

Have you ever completed one of those “Read the Bible in One Year” Programs – or at least tried?

I fall in the “tried” category. Growing up I made several attempts to finish a reading plan – each of them haphazard. They all went something like this:

In January, my older brother would ask if us siblings wanted to attempt a reading plan individually, often after some sort of “Kids-this-will-be-a-super-fun-challenge” rollout at our church or Christian school (e.g., “Get Excited! We’re gonna read the whole B-i-b-l-e in O-n-e Y-e-a-r! Readers get free pizza and ice cream!) Never saying no to a challenge – and a seemingly cool one that also involved the favored food groups – I’d agree to join in.

It always went downhill for me early on – like Numbers or Leviticus early (by contrast, my older brother always made it much farther, and I believe he’s completed a plan before). While the programs did not usually go in Book-of-the-Bible order the entire year, from what I remember they did for at least the first five Books.

For me reading the first couple Books about creation, The Fall, Flood and the Exodus from Egypt inspired story-book wonder, but the following parts about genealogies and laws on foods and sacrifices were a tough sell as a kid. I’d get bored, or behind, take one look at the long, 300-odd days still left to read and feel too far back to catch up.

My Turn?

The last time I remember attempting to complete a “thru-the-Bible-in-one-year” read was about 10th grade. Since then it has always been on my list of things to do sometime – at least before I die, but I had made no attempt to actually put the goal in motion. If it was ever mentioned, in a sermon, for example, I’d make one of those half-hearted comments to myself, such as “yeah, I need to do that,” but make no plans to actually complete it.

Then late last year I listened to a sermon challenging a congregation that the Bible could be read in a short period of time – in as little as about 80 hours (e.g., 8 hours a day for two work weeks sitting in a cubicle at an uneventful job) – or as long as one year (about 3.5 chapters daily). It was pointed out that we often clamor about how difficult the Bible is to understand – yet we never really just start digging into it, instead settling for a verse or two from a daily devotional. By contrast, we freely dive into books such as novels. A subsequent message involved testimonies from people who took the challenge and read the Bible in about 80 hours over a couple weeks, or were on their way to doing so.

That sermon charge really resonated with me, but it still did not quite spur me to action (i.e., I heard, but I didn't do, so I didn't hear). However, that also was about the time that God had been convicting me about the need to get deeper into His Word again through Scripture memory, and I responded the first week of this year by starting a memory plan.

God has an awesome way of showing us things when we seek Him. Just when I finally took a step to dig deeper into His Word, at church we started a doctrinal series on the importance of Scripture called "New Thru 30." But New Thru Thirty was not just a sermon series, but also a church-wide challenge to read the New Testament together in 30 days!

New in Thirty

Under the "New Thru 30" Plan, developed by Elevation Church, you read about 13 chapters of the New Testament Monday through Friday, for one month, and get Saturday and Sunday as Grace Days to catch up –or read ahead.

The program started with Matthew, then went to Acts, then back and forth between another Gospel (Mark, Luke, or John) and an Epistle (or letters to early churches, Romans – Jude), then finished the Epistles before ending with Revelation (which also means “Apocalyptic” literature, on the end times in the future).

This time, I took the challenge seriously. I read everywhere – in my room when I woke up; on the Metro to and from work; in my office when I had a lull at work; at the park in the afternoon on a weekend if I wanted to catch up or read ahead; on the dining room table at the end of the day before I turned on the TV (knowing full well that once I did, I would not finish the reading – which happened a couple days!). We finished the plan last week.

Early Lessons

Throughout the process I learned some things about reading the Bible at that pace. When I first started I was concerned with making sure I understood every word I was reading, and kept my commentary with me at all times. However, I learned quickly that a verse I may not have initially understood was often clarified as I continued reading. Also, I learned that in a 30-day read understanding every word is not as important as getting the big picture – which ends up making a lot of sense (although I did use my commentary more heavily in a couple books --Hebrews and Revelation). More useful than a commentary in this context was a study Bible, which provided an overview of each Book, its author, audience and context, before reading.

Take Home

Reading the full New Testament provided a clearer snapshot of Redemption than I typically get from studying just a few verses, or even a Book, of the New Testament.

Grasping the Gospels

One big takeaway was gaining a greater appreciation for how each of the Gospels were written through different lenses, but all tell the same story.

In my family we've had this tradition almost every Christmas of each taking one of the Gospels to read individually and discuss together. However, over the years my siblings and I had pretty much reduced the Gospels to descriptions based on size for reference when dividing the reading as a family: Matthew is "the longest one" (i.e., don’t take that one if you don’t have time to read a lot, or take it if you want the challenge); Mark the short one (not fair to take that one every year); Luke the other one almost as long as Matthew, but more exciting; John being neither the shortest nor one of the longest, and generally "a-o-kay" (I remember rarely ending up with that book, if ever).

During my read of all the Gospels this time, however, I saw them as holding greater distinctions that were unrelated to the number of chapters in each.

For example, I was reminded of how Matthew emphasized Jesus' life as a fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies, while Mark, a more fast-paced account, focused on personal encounters with, and acts of, Jesus during His ministry that really describe His humanity. I also was similarly struck by the personal encounters in Luke, as in the past.

Additionally, I gained a greater understanding of John as distinct from the other Gospels but still fitting in with the collective story. The Book struck me as the one with the most insight into the author’s personal experiences with Jesus. It also provided some details about Jesus’ ministry that the others did not. I love the way it ends:
"This is the disciple who testifies to those things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true. Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.” (John 21: 24-25).
After reading the whole book, culminating in that ending, I could not help but write “AWESOME!” in the margin. It reminded me of what wonderful things believers in Christ have to look forward to in heaven, in the presence of Jesus – greater than any this life can offer!

Fancying Faith

I also was reminded about the power of faith in God, and how through it so many in the New Testament were saved. There were ordinary people who had so much faith in Jesus’ power to heal them of their diseases that they knew just touching the hem of His garment or having Him say the word was all they needed to be well - and their faith healed them. Jesus also told His disciples many times that with faith they could do the miraculous. It was such a reminder that we are justified through faith alone- without faith it is impossible to please God; faith makes us righteous. I also was reminded to trust God with all of my life – and others’ too!

Honing in on Hebrews

Another victory was comprehending Hebrews. A few years ago I set out to read the Book cold, without a study guide, thinking it would be great because of several key verses I knew in it that had long resonated with me. However, I had stopped reading when I realized there were a lot of metaphors that I was not comprehending. I found a study companion on the Book but never did it.

This time I understood more clearly that it was written to Jewish Christians who were struggling to hold onto their faith amidst persecution, and had a commentary to translate the use of some metaphors rooted in the Mosaic, Old Testament Law. It also reinforced again the fact that when God’s Word was written, He, speaking through the authors, penned a book that was relevant to the immediate readers, yet also us today.

Paul, Peter and Prophecy

The reading also reinforced my study for the last couple years in Acts and several of the Pauline Epistles (Romans – Philemon). What struck me reading them here, however, was seeing them as fulfillment of Jesus’ words in the Gospels -- first reading of Jesus’ promise while on earth to send a Counselor, the Holy Spirit, the powerful arrival of His Spirit, and fulfillment of Jesus’ prediction that His disciples would do even greater things than he did while on earth, such as how God used Peter during the formation of the early church.

I also got a sharper picture of the Apostle Paul’s awesome story of radical transformation and devotion to God through intense persecution – first reading his conversion and trials and triumphs in spreading the Gospel to the Gentiles, chronicled in Acts, and then using that context to get a clearer understanding of the events surrounding the letters he wrote to churches during his ministry. I was even more deeply moved by His dedication to the Gospel, and his testimony through suffering, particularly these words from prison in 2 Timothy 2 (among others):
"8 Remember Jesus Christ, raised from the dead, descended from David. This is my gospel, 9 for which I am suffering even to the point of being chained like a criminal. But God’s word is not chained. 10 Therefore I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they too may obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus, with eternal glory."
What an example!

Thoughts on Theology

The Read also reinforced recent study I had done on theological variances regarding issues such as worship; food; drink and dress. Seeing those and other issues from the vantage point of the reoccurring theme of grace from Matthew to Revelation really put them in sharper perspective. It also reinforced the importance of studying God’s Word not only for sifting through the myriad of teachings in our world, but also to live out the practical command of love that binds all other virtues we can express in perfect unity.

Finding a Favorite

Finally, I developed a new New Testament crush (yes, I am serious!). I’ve written about my Old Testament ones – David; Joseph and Daniel, but did not have a New Testament equivalent (although I have deep admiration for the Apostle Paul, but in a different sense, lol).

The new guy? Timothy, Paul’s protégé. Reading this time around I got a much better sense of his personality, and I like it! As I’ve mentioned, I appreciate how he knew Old Testament Scriptures from infancy that made him wise unto salvation through Christ, followed God from youth and had a good reputation. Paul thought Timothy’s walk with God was strong enough that he could be tasked with pastoring the church of Ephesus at a young age. He was instructed, and could be trusted, to treat all of his congregation with godliness - including the young ladies (I like a man who can stand up to temptation!). Paul referred to him as a “dear son” in the faith (2 Timothy 1:2; Phil. 2:22). We also see that Timothy was sincere in his faith and had a deep heart for ministry, as Paul witnessed.

Tidbits also indicate that he avoided trying to come close to crossing the line into any activity that had the potential to hurt his witness. In 1 Timothy 5, in the midst of advice from Paul about matters related to widows, elders and slaves in the church, he tells Timothy: “Do not be hasty in the laying of hands. And do not share in the sins of others. Keep yourself pure.” (1 Timothy 5: 22). In the next verse he says something I do not remember noticing before: “Stop drinking only water, and use a little wine because of your stomach and your frequent illness.” (v. 23). My commentary explained:
"This verse may be only a somewhat disjointed bit of personal advice to Timothy or it may flow naturally from the reference to purity in verse 22. Perhaps Timothy was inclined to an asceticism that may have associated purity with total abstention, which in turn led in Timothy’s case to stomach ailments and frequent illnesses, perhaps due to the poor quality of water he drank. Paul thus qualified his exhortation of purity by encouraging Timothy to drink a little wine for his stomach’s sake, because of frequent illness. This instruction applies only to using wine for medicinal purposes, of course, and therefore contributes little or nothing to either side of the debate over the use of wine as a beverage.” [In other words, any discussion about Christians’ varying view on alcohol is reserved for another time!]
David C. Cook. The Bible Knowledge Commentary. p. 760. © 1989.

Although the meaning of Paul’s instruction to Timothy here requires some conjecture, I found it interesting that Paul even had to give it to Timothy at all. Judging from the other characteristics about Timothy in the Bible, such as his knowledge of Scripture and his devotion to Christ – it appears this is another indication that even as a youth he watched his conduct closely, really trying to live out His faith and set a good example – despite the fact that he may have still been navigating exactly what that looked like. And that desire to please Him is part of the “raw material” that God uses to mold us into warriors for Him – another admirable characteristic of this young man.

Additionally, it seems that Timothy may have had to be encouraged to overcome some personal fears in order to step fully into his role as a pastor. Paul reminded Timothy: “For God did not give us a spirit of timidity, but a spirit of power, of love and of self-discipline.” (2 Timothy 1:7). Again, the reason for the admonition is open for some speculation, but whatever way it was advice that Timothy needed to face challenges that he may have wanted to run from otherwise (great advice for our lives as well)! I think it would have been awesome to see Timothy grow into an even greater man of God over the years (and perhaps we shall meet in heaven -- will have to look up if there is theological basis - or speculation -- for that wish)!

Next Steps

I’ve decided not to stop with the New Testament, but continue reading the Old, too. While Part 2 of the Bible gave me a snapshot of Redemption, it's not the whole picture. I have found a plan to read the whole Bible in 90 days. Since 30 days and 27 books are under my belt, shortly I’ll begin reading the other 39 Books of the Old Testament over 60 days. Finally I will stop talking about reading the whole Bible – I will actually do it! I also hope to be intentional about doing a one-year plan later as well – in light of my New Testament read, the 3.5 chapters per day no longer seems as daunting.

If you have never read through the New Testament – or the whole Bible – there's no time to consider doing it like the present (or you can do it again – in some other way)! YouVersion.com has dozens of plans to choose from, at different paces (including the Elevation “New Thru 30” Plan).

Why Read?

Every word of a read through the Bible most likely will not be riveting, but there’s more to reading than momentary measure: there’s a power in digging into God’s Word that increases our faith over time. First Peter 2:2 says, “as newborn babes, desire the pure milk of the word, that you may grow thereby” (NKJV). God’s Word is His primary way of communicating with us. And we can only learn more about loving and living like Him if we get to sipping.

Thursday, February 03, 2011

NIV Makeover (The Word, Part 3)

Something strange happened about a month ago when I looked up a familiar Bible passage online in the New International Version.

I was on BibleGateway.Com, the popular Bible resource site with text of the Bible in many languages and versions, trying to link Psalm 119:9-11, one of my oft-quoted passages, to a blog entry. When I selected what I thought was the NIV, I noticed the first part of verse 9 read, “How can a young person stay on the path of purity?”

That’s funny, I thought to myself. Unless I had forgotten, I had always known the NIV to read, “How can a young man keep his way pure?” [emphasis added]

Just to make sure, I pulled out a hard copy of the NIV Bible. Sure enough, it said, “How can a young man keep his way pure?”

Then, I went back to the unfamiliar online translation I had read and wondered whether I had pulled up the TNIV (Today’s New International Version, an update of the NIV published © 2001, 2005 that was translated in more contemporary English language, one of the features eliminating male-only pronouns and adopting gender-neutral ones in many contexts). But when I clicked on the version choices, I confirmed that I had not selected the TNIV.

Am I mad? I asked myself, for just a moment.

I wasn’t - just uninformed. In case you too missed the buzz, the New International Version is getting an update.

NIV, Copyright 2011

Apparently, it’s been in the works for some time. The revisions were announced in September 2009. The Committee on Bible Translation (CBT), translators of the NIV, decided that as a result of growing knowledge about translating the original biblical texts into English and changing modern usage in the English language, there is a need to revamp the NIV to reflect those changes. In the CBT’s words (released by Biblica, formerly the International Bible Society, which publishes the NIV):
From its inception in the 1960’s, the team behind the NIV has recognized that Bible translation is a never-finished work. As more and more information becomes available about the biblical world and biblical languages, and as English usage develops and changes, the NIV also needs to change to maintain and strengthen its focus on transparency to the original text and ease of understanding for readers. Under the terms of the NIV charter, the CBT meets every year to monitor these changes and to reflect them in periodic updates to the text. The 2011 update is the latest fruit of this process.
Biblica has a timeline for rolling out the updated version. In November 2010 it was first made available for public viewing on BibleGateway and Biblica.com. The first printed versions are set to be released for retail in March.

After release, the current version of the NIV © 1984 (the first printing, of just the New Testament was in 1973; revisions were made and the complete NIV first printed in 1978), will no longer be printed and will be phased out of the marketplace (old, unsold 1984 copies will be donated to needy churches and ministries). Additionally, the newer TNIV will no longer be printed. The process of switching over to NIV © 2011 is expected to take about 2 years.

What’s Changing?

If you ask the translators, they’d say on the whole, not much. Ninety-five percent of the words in the NIV © 2011 will be the same as in the current version.

But there are marked differences. Perhaps the most controversial is the addition of gender-neutral pronouns in many contexts, as in the TNIV (although the NIV translators, the CBT, did not adopt the gender pronoun changes in the TNIV wholesale – in some cases, the pronoun changes were entirely new renderings than the existing NIV or the TNIV).

To the question of whether the goal of the changes was to make the NIV more “gender inclusive,” the CBT responds:
"The CBT’s mandate under the NIV charter is to maintain the NIV as an articulation of God’s unchanging Word in contemporary English. To the extent that gender inclusive language is an established part of contemporary English and that its use enhances comprehension for readers, it clearly was an important factor in decisions made by the translators…In addition, particular attention was paid to external feedback in the area of gender language…”
The CBT maintains that none of the changes relate to describing God:
Nowhere in the updated NIV® (nor in the TNIV®, nor in any of the committee discussions leading up to either version) is there even the remotest hint of any inclusive language for God. The revisions solely surround inclusive language for mankind.” [emphasis in original] (See Q&A, “What was decided about inclusive language?”)
A few other examples of changes in NIV ’11:

“Forefather” to “Ancestor”: The term forefather, used in the 1984 version, is believed to have all but “disappeared” from the English language, in favor of the term “ancestor,” which the NIV 2011 adopts in most cases “unless a specific, limited reference to the patriarchs or to another all-male group is intended.” [emphasis in original] [law school folks: sounds like statutory construction:)]

“Saints” to “Lord’s Holy People…”: The term "Saints" is now often translated as "God's people," "the Lord's people," or "the Lord's holy people," to highlight that the meaning of the term in the original text often refers to all believers and is not necessarily a “good person” as the term “saint” in modern day commonly connotes.

Changing “Jews” to “Jewish Leaders”: In some places in the New Testament, most prominently in the Gospel of John, the use of “Jews” has been retranslated as “Jewish leaders” or other similar language to reflect that rejection of Jesus in those contexts was from Jewish leaders and not Jews generally.

For more information about the changes, including more examples, visitWhat Improvements Have Been Made?”)

Note About the Inerrancy of Scripture

Before I comment on the changes, it is important to note that I believe firmly in the inerrancy of Scripture. But translating the Bible from its original text to any other language – including English – cannot necessarily render every single word exactly as in the original language (not to be overly technical, but I say “necessarily” because of my lack of knowledge of what circumstances, if any, a translation could allow every single word to be rendered exactly as intended in the original. An educated guess says none, but I do not want to guess here!) . However, this does not discredit the doctrine of the inerrancy of Scripture as the being God’s literal, breathed words – that teaching rests on the infallibility of the original text itself. However, that is a more fundamental topic that I have no intention – or preparation – to cover here. For a basic understanding of the doctrine of “inspiration, inerrancy and infallibility” of scripture, and how it relates to Bible translation, click this link.

(Initial) Pros

Regarding the new NIV, on one hand my initial thought is that I appreciate the Committee on Bible Translation (CBT)’s commitment to rendering God’s Word as understandable and accessible to as many people as possible, and believe that this update could certainly help the cause.

I also think Christians – especially longtime ones – have a tendency to get riled up over changes such as the ones in the new NIV just for the sake of keeping things the way we have always known them and not “pandering” to society – leaving things “traditional,” you might say. We often have this sense that things are more “holy” – or even more biblical – because they are older. But the Bible does not command us to preserve all “older” traditions – in fact, the New Testament, while fulfilling Old Testament prophecy, also was a break from tradition– radical, countercultural – just like the life that we are called to as Christians even today.

Further, the NIV itself is not a “traditional” translation. The current NIV © 1984, the most popular English translation for the last 20 years, has endured substantial controversy, particularly when it first came out, in New Testament only, less than 40 years ago. Some called the translation inaccurate – sometimes even heretical – as compared to the time-honored King James Version. And this opposition persists in some circles today. In short, the NIV © 1984 that is the most popular English translation is only 26 years old, and the intention of that translation has been stated as the same as the © 2011 version today.

Further, when the Bible was first written, it was in the common language of people at that time. Translating the Bible in a way that makes it more accessible in our language can be consistent with the context under which the Bible was written – another reason not to automatically write off the new NIV.

Cause for Pause (Cons?)

At the same time, personally, I am not ready to decide how I will use the new NIV, particularly if it will be my primary text. As followers of Christ, we have a responsibility to devote ourselves to a clear understanding of Scripture and to study it for ourselves. One way we can do so in this context is to make an effort to understand how the changes to the New NIV were made in translation, comparing other translations and sources as necessary, and be open to how God may speak to us in the process.

In particular, gaining a deeper understanding of the different Bible translations and allowing it to influence which translation(s) we use could easily make a list of top ten fascinating and worthwhile things we should do but probably haven’t. In light of the changes to the NIV, however, it’s a timely pursuit.

My Story

Until fairly recently, I did not give much thought to the different translations – for the most part I just went with what was standard around me or what was given to me. And it varied. All told, growing up at some point I used five different versions, either for study or memorization: KJV, NKJV, NIV, NASB and the New Century Version – although at most points the NIV has been my primary version.

I do not remember paying close attention to the different translations in personal study until my first year of law school, when I went looking for a pocket Bible that I could carry on the Metro with big, heavy legal books. My Bible, then NIV, was standard-sized and too big to lug around.

The only discount pocket bible I could find was an NKJV – it was just $5. Since I already knew some verses in NKJV and liked it alright, I went with it (and, again, it was $5 - a mighty fine price on my law student budget!).

For a while I enjoyed using the NKJV as my primary text, although I would still use the NIV online or at home. About a year later, however, after finding myself comparing the NIV and NKJV more, and noticing the NIV to resonate more with me, I went back to using the NIV primarily.

Digging Deeper

The experience made me focus more on the different translations. I recalled lessons growing up that the KJV was a more “literal” translation than the NIV, but beyond that tidbit I did not remember much else about how Bible translations I had used differed. I decided to research. And what I read fascinated me. A rough, lay person’s overview, or refresher:

Methods of Bible Translation

Generally, the original Old and New Testaments were written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. There are two main approaches to biblical translation: Formal Equivalence and Dynamic (or Functional) Equivalence.

“Formal Equivalence” is often called “word for word” translation because it involves trying to match each word in the original language with a corresponding word in the language of translation. (e.g., if the word being translated is “book,” a translator would look for the word meaning “book” in the text being translated, doing the same for each individual word). The rationale for formal equivalence in biblical translation is that it most accurately conveys the literal meaning of all words as intended in the original texts, minimizing personal interpretation.

Examples
King James Version
New King James Version
New American Standard Bible (often considered the most literal translation originating in the 20th Century and the most common Bible in churches)
English Standard Version (like the NASB in many respects, but more colloquial)

Dynamic (or Functional) Equivalence: This method is dubbed “thought for thought” because, rather than translating each word, entire ideas or thoughts are translated as a whole. A common rationale for dynamic over formal equivalence is that because not all words in one language have identical or accurate translations in another, the “word for word” method may result in awkward, hard-to-read translations, while thought for thought captures the meanings of the words in the language they are being translated better.

Examples
Good News Bible
Contemporary English Version/Today’s English Version

“Balance” or Mix of Formal and Dynamic Equivalence: This is a somewhat artificial category, as versions that fall under it are often generally classified as just dynamic for the fact that they use this technique at all. However, from my study, when this "balance" category is added, it is presented as a way to distinguish among the varying degrees that a large number of Bible translations use dynamic equivalence. I appreciate it for the nuance - and color - it adds to the broad category of "dynamic."

That said, this "balance" category involves translations that combine both formal and dynamic equivalence based on the idea that neither pure “word for word” nor pure “thought for thought” can always accurately convey the meaning of the original text because of variances in languages. “Word for word” is used where it is considered a more accurate rendering of the original text, and “thought for thought” when it is deemed a more exact translation than word for word. One translation calls this “optimal equivalence.” Translations that use both formal and dynamic have been said to be on a “sliding scale” based on the degree to which each technique is used.

Examples
New International Version (Has been explained as “lower” on the dynamic scale, sliding more toward formal than a number of the translations in the dynamic category)
New Century Version (translated for a fifth grade reading level and often targeted for teens, but has been known to keep a good balance between dynamic and formal)
New Living Translation (often pointed out that this translation is on the “edge” of the combined method, leaning more toward dynamic than formal equivalence)

Some Sources on Bible Translations:What are the Different Bible Translations - addresses the differences – sometimes nuances – among each; BibleGateway.com- click on individual versions for information. Note that there is some variance among sources on how to classify translations.)

My Picks

After researching several different translations, I made some changes to my use of versions. Although currently the NIV is my primary text, I also reference three additional versions, in the following order: NKJV, NASB, and NLT (as I do when I link to Scripture on my blog).

I became more appreciative of the formal equivalence method used in texts such as the NKJV and the NASB that generally seem to steer clearer of any hints of interpretation – in favor of “purer” translation methods than the ones using dynamic equivalence in some form (the formal method is especially useful for Books of the Bible such as Proverbs, which have been said to be more understandably translated very literally - which I have found true in personal study).

I also began referencing the NASB more because of its common status as the most literal translation of the 20th Century – which I believe adds another dimension to studying Scripture in our language. Additionally, I appreciate the authority it tends to have as the choice translation for most churches – including the ones I have attended. However, the NKJV is my top “literal” translation; although the two have similarities, I find the NKJV easier to understand than the NASB (but that also may be because I have used it more often than the NASB). There are exceptions –Philippians 1:9-10, for example, is most clearly understood for me in NASB as compared to the NKJV (similar, but slightly less clear for me) and the NIV.

At the same time, I valued the “balance” approach taken with the NIV to translate the Bible into more modern English for understandability, but still maintain a level of sensitivity to the actual meaning of words - which I also saw can be a more accurate translation in our language than a literal one in some instances (common example: 2 Timothy 3:16– the original text is believed to mean that Scripture is literally “God breathed,” but a “word for word” rendering, as in the KJV/NKJV and NASB, result in the English word “inspired,” rather than “God breathed”. However, the NIV, using some dynamic equivalence, renders the word “God-breathed,” known to be more accurate as compared to the original text).

Additionally, after reading about the history of the New Living Translation and its efforts to still maintain some use of formal equivalence along with dynamic, I use it to reinforce my understanding of passages I’ve first read in the NIV, NKJV or NASB. I’ve found in many instances it has a way of making the meaning of verses really clear in our language in light of other translations I use. (I prefer it to, for example, The Message, which is at best a paraphrase of the Bible – not a translation. I think The Message can have good use as a secondary source, in some ways like a commentary, but in light of how it was translated I think it’s problematic to give it study-Bible status).

Collectively, referencing all four translations tends to really illuminate the meaning a passage for me and cause me to meditate on each word more carefully than I do when I read just one version. I enjoy taking parts of one sentence in one version, placing it next to part of a sentence that is more understandable in another, and then going back to reading the entire sentence in each version individually. When I’ve completed the process, I definitely gain!

Why Study?

Ultimately, studying God’s Word is not meant to be just for seminary students or pastors, but for all Christians. Second Timothy 2 admonishes believers dissect It as “workmen” so that we can apply it rightly (my paraphrase!). Second Peter 1 also tells us to pursue spiritual growth constantly, and that in doing so we will always exhibit godly fruit. Awareness of what translation we are reading – and how it affects our understanding of Scripture –can be a useful part of studying the Word of Truth for application.

At some point in our lives we may find that to increase our understanding of scripture, it may be necessary to study one of the original Hebrew, Greek or Aramaic languages in order to grow from reading the Bible in the language it was written. I have heard testimonies of not just Bible professors or pastors – but also lay Christians, who, for example, studied the Bible in Greek and said it added a dimension to their pursuit as workmen that they could only describe as incredible! Of course God does give us insight as we study His Word even in our own language and ask Him to open our eyes to wonderful truths in His law, but reading the Bible in its original form can be an amazing way to pursue an understanding of God's Word.

To Be Continued…

It will take some time for me to figure out how I will use the New NIV. I have begun comparing it with © 1984 online, and know if I were to decide to switch to it as a primary text it would be adjustment – as for many of us. I plan to really make an effort to understand the translation method and ask God for discernment in how to use it.

God’s priceless training program in Righteousness comes with a manual, His Word. And the cool thing about His class is that if we study The Text, we can all be on the Honor Roll. And making the grade has something to do with learning about an NIV makeover.