Essay with My Thoughts on This Important Issue
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
EVALUATING BIBLE TRANSLATIONS A!e Schri" von Gott eingegeben Pastor Brian R. Keller Reformation 2011 Introduction!...............................................................................................................2 Historical Timeline!...........................................................................................................2 Four Questions To Ask & Answer When Evaluating Bible Translations!....................5 Bible Translations!......................................................................................6 Luther"s German Bible!..............................................................................................6 The King James Version!...........................................................................................9 Modern Translations: Three Main Views!......................................................................11 Revised Standard Version (RSV)!...........................................................................12 New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)!................................................................14 Living Bible (LB) - New Living Translation (NLT)!................................................14 New American Standard Bible (NASB)!.................................................................16 An American Translation (AAT)!.............................................................................19 New International Version (NIV)!.............................................................................21 Colorado Springs Guidelines!........................................................................................42 What about the Collins Bank of English usage?!........................................................44 Verbal Inspiration and Bible Translation:!....................................................................44 Christian judgment: A booklet of corrections?!.........................................................46 New King James Version (NKJV)!..........................................................................48 English Standard Version (ESV)!............................................................................49 Holman Christian Standard Bible!..........................................................................52 Translation Discussion Points!................................................................55 Readability!......................................................................................................................55 Suggestions of “Better Solutions” for WELS/NPH!..............................................57 What is “doctrine”?!.......................................................................................................59 Introduction I sincerely thank the Translation Evaluation Committee (TEC) for asking me to write an essay with my thoughts on this important issue. Though I have not been asked to present this essay at the Symposium, it is a privilege to serve in this way. Most pastors probably do not have access to many of the materials that support this discussion, so Iʼve made an effort to include many web links in this essay so that the average pastor can do further research into many points. As with my presentations in the Michigan District, Iʼd like to provide the reader with information to make a more informed decision about Bible translations today. I pray that God will bless this effort of sharing information that I believe will be helpful. I am thankful that we all agree that the Bible is Godʼs verbally inspired, inerrant Word. Friends have described how I arrived in this position as a “journey.” My Savior has certainly guided this journey (Rom 8:28). May we follow his Word. About a dozen years ago, I was working pretty hard evaluating Bible translations. It had been a private interest for years. The reason for the intensive work was that Iʼd been asked to write a book on the Bible in the Peopleʼs Bible Teachings series (NPH). Some fairly clear opinions formed. Iʼve continued evaluating translations since then. Questions about Bible translations provided more opportunity to evaluate. When it became clear that the NIV Committee on Bible Translation (CBT) was going to revise the NIV, I was aware of the controversies surrounding the NIVI and the TNIV (see timeline below). It was clear that the plan was to merge the 1984 NIV and the TNIV. Concerned that it was going to be strongly in the direction of the TNIV, I suggested to President Schroeder and others that a committee be formed in WELS to evaluate Bible translations. The debate about “gender inclusive” translation is neither simple nor new. A good historian would be able to write a helpful book on the trend over the past few decades and the forces applying pressure (egalitarians and complementarians included). Until 2010, WELS was largely isolated from the controversy. But, much has been happening. Letʼs briefly consider a little of the history outside of WELS, since most of us are likely aware of what happened within WELS. This little timeline focuses on some of the history and the concerns surrounding the revision of the NIV. (You may click on the links to read the materials mentioned - online. This will greatly increase understanding of the issues too.) Historical Timeline 1978 NIV complete Bible published. 1984" NIV revised. 1992 NIV Committee on Bible translation begins work on an “inclusive-language” NIV. 1995 NIV Inclusive Language edition published in Great Britain (also 1996). 1997 March 29, World magazine article, “The Stealth Bible” (http://www.worldmag.com/ articles/229) reports that the NIV is “quietly going #gender-neutral!” NIV CBT member Larry Walker quoted as saying it was “consensus” on the CBT to have inclusive NIV “take the place of the other” NIV. (See page 35 of “Gender-Neutral Bible Controversy” cited in the footnote below.)1 1997" “The Stealth Bible” article, mentioned above, prompts an outcry among Evangelicals, and many questions. For some examples of resources in understanding why 1 For a more complete timeline see: “The Gender-Neutral Bible Controversy: Muting the Masculinity of God"s Words” by Poythress/Grudem. http://www.cbmw.org/Online-Books/The-Gender-Neutral-Bible- Controversy/The-Gender-Neutral-Bible-Controversy Evaluating Bible Translations Page | 2 Evangelical Christians have opposed gender-neutral translations visit this site: http:// www.cbmw.org/Gender-Neutral-Bible-Resources. 1997" The International Bible Society announces that it had abandoned inclusive language plans. 1997 Evangelicals meet in Colorado Springs and agree on some guidelines for translating the Bible, in an attempt to guard against some of the negative effects of “gender-neutral” translation. You may see these guidelines at this site: http://www.bible-researcher.com/ csguidelines.html . 1997 September 1, 1997 article in Christianity Today, entitled, “Gender: Biblical Feminists Press for Gender-Inclusive NIV” reports how Catherine Clark Kroeger, founder of Christians for Biblical Equality (CBE) was involved in applying this pressure and was promoting the NIVI. Kroeger was prominently mentioned in Prof. Panning!s WLQ article “Authentein: A word study.” Available online here: http://www.wlsessays.net/node/1648. When reporting Kroeger!s death in February, 2011, Christianity Today summarized: “CBE advocates that women may serve as pastors, teachers, and leaders of churches.” There was pressure coming from both egalitarians and complementarians. 1998" In February, the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod!s CTCR publishes a study called “Biblical Revelation and Inclusive Language.” This 39 page document may be found here: www.lcms.org/Document.fdoc?src=lcm&id=314. 1998" D. A. Carson publishes, “The Inclusive Language Debate: A Plea for Realism.” For balance on Carson!s views, see this free book: http://www.cbmw.org/Online-Books/The- Gender-Neutral-Bible-Controversy/The-Gender-Neutral-Bible-Controversy This helpful book is practically essential for fairly understanding this controversy and discussion. It is the best source, far superior to Ryken, for representing the view that opposes radical gender neutral changes. 1999" The International Bible Society encourages the NIV Committee on Bible Translation (CBT) to continue its work. June 5, World Magazine cover story: “There They Go Again.” 2000 Danker!s personal revision of Bauer (BDAG) is published, with inclusive-language suggested. Frederick Danker is the Christ Seminary-Seminex Professor Emeritus of New Testament at the Lutheran School of Theology, Chicago. A proud Seminex liberal, Danker worked alone on the revision. There was a definite shift in theology from William Arndt (old LCMS) to Danker (ELCA). For this reason, we need to be more careful with BDAG. In the area of gender language, Danker is progressive/liberal, so many of his comments must be weighed with that in mind. For some help on evaluating BDAG see: http://www.cbmw.org/images/articles_pdf/poythress_vern/poythress_jets46.4.pdf 2002 Todayʼs New International Version (TNIV) – New Testament published. 2002" May 28 - 110 Evangelical leaders sign a “Statement of Concern” opposing the TNIV. See: http://www.cbmw.org/images/jbmw_pdf/7_2/christian_leaders.pdf or h t tp:// www.bible-researcher.com/tniv2.html. For a summary of the concerns, see: http:// www.cbmw.org/Journal/Vol-7-No-2/A-Brief-Summary-of-Concerns-About-the-TNIV. Also: http://www.cbmw.org/images/jbmw_pdf/7_2/scholars_statement.pdf 2003" In September, the LCMS – CTCR answers the LCMS Commission on Worship request for