In reading the introduction to Blomberg’s updated edition of his Jesus and the Gospels, I came across the following:
Who would have imagined twelve years ago the balkanization of the Bible reading public into clumps of vociferous supporters of their favorite English translations, often accompanied by vitriolic rhetoric against other versions? That was then a distinction of the almost defunct King James Version only movement! Today, not only has that movement actually revived but it seems that far too many scholars, professors, pastors, and theological students, not to mention quite a few laypeople, rally in “groupie-like” fashion around one and only one of the NASB, NIV, NRSV, NKJV, NLT, TNIV, NET, HSCB, or ESV! Meanwhile, most of the people of the world continue at best to have only one resonable translation of the Scriptures in their native tongues, while non-Christians in English-speaking countries too often assume that none of the translations is reliable or else we would not keep making new ones and quarelling over existing ones! Surely, God grieves over the amount of energy and rancor that has been exercised creating and critiquing all these versions, when everyone of them is highly reliable and far more than adequate in communicating God’s Word to readers of English. Still, each meets a definable need, either real or perceived, and I have been privileged to be a part of the translation process, at varying levels, of four of them (NLT, HCSB, ESV, TNIV). The best up-to-date primer on the strengths and weaknesses, distinctives and commonalities, of these and other important versions is now Gordon D. Fee’s and Mark L. Strauss’ How to Choose a Translation for All its Worth.
from: Craig Blomberg’s Jesus and the Gospels: An Introduction and Survey, 2nd Edition (Broadman & Holman, 2009), 4
——————–
I, henceforth, REPENT of any involvement I have had in speaking harshly (or inappropriately) against any one translation or another and or against any particular Bible publishing company and its marketing strategies, or against particular people or persons who pomote one translation philosophy over or against another.
Doing so, I feel has cause me to loose focus on what really matters: To know God (and being known by him), and to make him known. This can adequately be accomplished with any one English translation of the Bible or another and not necessarily one specific English translation or another necessarily.
Grace and Peace.
Good call Brian! Very wise words from Blomberg, very wise indeed!
yes, they are wise. perhaps even prophetic.
Great post.
Brian, thanks for that. I think that we can be too critical at times and instead of being thankful for the many good translations, and we are way to easy to find fault with the ones we disagree with.
I know that some of it is in reaction to defend for example the TNIV which has been harshly misrepresented. Well that is my new approach thankfulness for the many good English translations that are at our disposal. Like Blomberg said “…each meets a definable need”, we need to remember that. Also I am glad to see that he has worked on the 4 major translations that I typically use (TNIV, NLT, HCSB, ESV).
Wise words indeed. Thanks, Brian.
I make no apologies for factual comments that ESV English sucks or that Wayne Grudem & Co. have acted obscenely.
they sure did. ESV isn’t my peference but I can’t vilify it anymore.
Tony, you are too funny
But hey I know what you mean, but with Brian, ain’t going to vilify, ain’t gonna do it.
You’re of course right Brian. I’m well over arguing English translations when we all know Jesus read the NRSV
What? Moses didn’t use the NIV? Jesus and Paul didn’t speak HCSB? I am shocked, SHOCKED! LOL
It is frightening to see the “My version-only” mindset arise in recent years. I grew up around a group of folks that were KJV-only types and have rebelled against that ever since. That may be in part why I have not warmed up to the ESV. But I should not let the over zealous advocates of a translation determine if it should be used.
Great post. I pray that your tribe increase.
Thank you,
Bravo Brian. I respect and appreciate your spiritual maturity with this post. Fees’ and Strauss’ recent book on translation is good. I also recommend an older book written by Don Carson titled The King James Only Debate: A Plea For Realism (Baker Academic 1979).
You have raised the bar for dialog about translations and reminded me of the essence of the matter. For that I thank you. The situation for a lay-person can be quite overwhelming as you navigate many points of view, but your commentary should remind us all that we are nipping at the fringes when debating the merits of different translations. I’ll endeavor to hold the same standard henceforth also.
Does this mean we should also reserve judgement about inclusion of Apocrypha? This seems to me a difficult line of division to set aside, but I’m eager to find similar peace on that matter.