Importance of the Bible at Messiah College

At Messiah College we help students contemplate the Bible's significance for everyday life. We encourage all members of the campus community to explore the relationship between their personal faith and their academic discipline. Faculty members must do this in the form of a peer-reviewed research paper as one of their prerequisites for promotion and term tenure. Likewise, students are called upon to ponder social and ethical issues in light of biblical teachings. We encourage them to make such effort a priority, whether their training is in engineering, education, nursing, music, biology, or any of our other areas of specialty. We take the Bible seriously. Therefore, we study it academically (with our minds as well as our hearts).

Academic Study

Courses in Biblical Studies at Messiah College are not the equivalent of Sunday School classes. They are, as we say, "Rigorously Academic." Some students find this a bit unnerving at first, because their previous experience with the Bible has been almost completely devotional in nature. When they begin to grapple with biblical texts in light of ancient Near Eastern and first-century Mediterranean cultural norms and literary forms, they realize that they have a great amount to learn about what biblical authors communicated to their original readers. Such study has dramatic implications.

For example, when interpreting Paul's letters, we stress that the apostle wrote to address the needs of specific groups of Christians who were facing particular sets of problems. To understand his messages to these people, and to apply his teachings to our own situations, requires careful analysis. To help accomplish this important task at Messiah College, we have decided to require use of a literal translation of the Bible in a version that lacks study notes.

Study Bibles have proliferated during the past decade. If you look on Christian book store shelves or in Christian book publishers' catalogs, you will see study Bibles targeted for specific ages, vocations, and stages of life. This market-driven trend has the positive effect of showing Christians that the Bible is relevant. However, a down side is that some study Bibles are filled with archaic, inaccurate comments. Another problem is that Christians may be lulled into letting their study-Bible notes do their thinking for them. For some, the notes almost become part of Scripture, which can be very problematic.

Inductive Approach

In our "Introduction to Biblical Studies" classes, we help students learn to study the Bible inductively. To facilitate this rigorous approach, we have students purchase an inexpensive, paperback version of the Bible that contains no study notes to distract them from reading the text. We chose the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible, a literal version whose translators have benefitted from the many recent discoveries made in biblical languages and archaeology.

This does not imply that we judge other translations to be inferior or without merit. All translations combine strengths and weaknesses. No translation is without problems, and this certainly includes the NRSV. Translators are human beings with individual beliefs and biases. No matter how brilliant their grasp of ancient Hebrew or Greek, they have only partial knowledge, and as new discoveries are made, translations need to be updated in an effort to make them as accurate as humanly possible.

New Revised Standard Version and Classroom Needs

The NRSV stands in the tradition of the King James Bible, which was a towering accomplishment for its time. Since the KJV was first published in 1611, scholars have learned a great deal about biblical manuscripts and have made considerable progress toward reconstructing the original reading of the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts that comprise the Bible. A good book to read with respect to the work accomplished by scholars who study the text of the Bible is Bruce Metzger's The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration, 3^rd ed. (Oxford University Press, 1992).

In keeping with our goal of careful biblical study, we want students to use a translation that seeks to maintain the words, grammar, syntax, and phrasing of the best Hebrew and Greek manuscripts of the Bible. Therefore, we opted not to use the New International Version, which is based on a dynamic equivalence theory of translation (meaning for meaning, not word for word). We also chose not to use Eugene Peterson's very popular The Message, because it is a paraphrase, not a literal translation. We do not discourage students from reading a variety of translations, for such comparisons can prove to be quite beneficial in seeking to understand and apply Scripture. But through practical experience we have learned the value of having a common translation in the classroom.

Indeed, with the lack of biblical literacy exhibited by most incoming students, we find it beneficial to be able to say, for example (at least at the beginning of a course), "Turn to page 842, and let's look at Amos 6:21-24," instead of simply, "Let's all turn to Amos 6:21-24." Professors of Biblical Studies face this same situation at Christian colleges all across the country, so there is nothing distinct about our experience here. But we are trying to address the problem and help our students to gain an adequate understanding both of the content of Scripture and of how to interpret the Bible responsibly.

The following descriptions of various versions of the Bible might prove helpful for those who would like further insight into why we chose the NRSV for classroom use at Messiah College. They are classified under different categories to illuminate the similarities and differences.

Literal Translations

KJV (King James Version). Since its publication in 1611, the KJV has been updated many times. The 1982 New King James Version (NKJV) is but one example. In the nearly 400 years since the KJV appeared, the English language has changed considerably, and biblical scholarship has made significant progress. Words in the KJV such as agone, dure, emerods, gorget, graff, habergeon, hoise, knop, marish, neesing, sith, trow, sist, and wot are not part of our vocabulary today. The article "Obsolete Terms" in the Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, vol. 3, pp. 582-588, provides a marvelous listing of obsolete terms, words with meanings that have changed, words that have acquired more (or less) violent meanings, etc. It contains a five-page table that lists these terms and the passages in which they are found. Yet the changes in our language are not the only factor that make the KJV problematic for a college study Bible. In the past few centuries biblical scholars have made many discoveries that affect the way we translate the Bible.

ERV (English Revised Version). 1885 update of the KJV by English scholars. They used more reliable manuscripts than were available for the translators of the KJV.

ASV (American Standard Version). Woodenly literal l901 American response to the ERV. It maintained a lot of the archaic speech forms found in the KJV.

RSV (Revised Standard Version). A 1952 update of the ASV. It eliminated most of the Elizabethan speech forms that were holdovers from the KJV in the ERV and the ASV. However, in prayers, where God is addressed directly, forms like "Thee" and "Thy" were maintained.

NASB (New American Standard Version). This l971 revision of the 1901 ASV attempts a word-for-word translation in an effort to produce a completely literal translation. The resulting extremely literalistic rendering of the Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek produces an English translation that is often awkward to read. A more recent edition called the NASB update is also now available.
.
NRSV (New Revised Standard Version). This 1990 update of the RSV benefits from such significant discoveries as the Dead Sea Scrolls, which have facilitated our understanding of some passages in the Bible. The translation is quite readable while at the same time retaining a literal approach to rendering the Hebrew and Greek into English. Speech forms common in the KJV that are difficult for modern readers to understand are replaced with contemporary wording. For example, the meaning given to the word "conversation" in the 17^th century often meant what one does; now it refers to what one says:

Gal. 1:13

• For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it. (KJV)
• You have heard, no doubt, of my earlier life in Judaism. I was violently persecuting the church of God and was trying to destroy it. (NRSV)

In keeping with our English language development, the NRSV also uses inclusive language when biblical authors refer to both men and women. For example, when Paul addresses all the members of particular churches, the NRSV makes this clear in translation. "Now concerning spiritual gifts, brothers and sisters, I do not want you to be uninformed" (1 Cor. 12:1). After "sisters" there is a footnote, which indicates that the Greek simply says "brothers." Other passages might substitute another alternative: "My friends (Greek 'brothers'), if anyone is detected in a transgression, . . ." (Gal. 6:1). In this regard, therefore, the NRSV is less literal than the RSV, because it changes words to make female readers feel more included in the biblical authors' messages. Although the translators sought to do this sensitively, it does involve certain trade offs, and at times these can be problematic. Like the RSV, however, references to God retain use of masculine pronouns. But unlike the RSV, use of "Thee" and "Thy" in prayers is altered to the contemporary English forms "You" and "Your."

Translations based on Dynamic Equivalence

Instead of attempting a literal translation of the original Hebrew and Greek words and grammatical constructions (word for word), this approach seeks to duplicate the meaning of a passage. The benefit of such translations is that they produce very readable, modern English. The downside is that you somewhat lose the biblical authors' styles of writing, and there is greater possibility for theological bias to force its way into biblical translation. Choices include the following.

JB (Jerusalem Bible). First translated into French and then later into English, this 1966 Catholic version is one of the few that actually attempts to give poetic translations in Psalms and other poetic biblical literature. It tends to be quite literary. Some readers find it difficult to get used to the JB's use of "Yahweh" instead of "LORD" in the Old Testament.

NAB (New American Bible). A 1970 Catholic translation based on the original Hebrew and Greek.

NEB (New English Bible). A 1970 British version that uses idiomatic British expressions. It was revised in 1990 with some inclusive language as the REB (Revised English Bible).

NIV (New International Version). This 1973 translation was produced by an international team of evangelical scholars. Their work on the Old Testament was based on the Masoretic Text, and their translation of the New Testament was based on a Greek text much like that found in both the United Bible Societies The Greek New Testament and the Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece. The NIV translators' own interpretations of meaning (or theological bias) may often be seen in their rendering of biblical passages. For example, when Paul uses the word "flesh" (Greek sarx), the NIV commonly substitutes "sinful nature" (e.g., "I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature" Rom. 7:17--see also Rom. 7:5, 25; 8:3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 12, 13; 13:14).

GNB (Good News Bible). Robert G. Bratcher of the American Bible Society completed this translation into very simplified English in 1976. His earlier New Testament translation was published as Today's English Version (TEV). Bratcher avoided using difficult vocabulary and geared his translation for about a sixth-grade reading level.

Paraphrases of the Bible

Authors of these works are even more concerned to reproduce what they consider to be the meaning of biblical passages than are those who produce dynamic equivalence translations. They do not attempt to follow the words of biblical authors. They try to make the language resonate with modern readers. Because these books freely add material considered helpful to make the text come alive for readers today, they are a poor choice for serious study. The more popular include the following:

Phillip's Paraphrase. J. B. Phillips published his popular paraphrase for British audiences in 1958. He changed such statements as Paul's "Greet one another with a holy kiss" (Rom. 16:16) to "Give each other a hearty handshake all round in Christian love."

Living Bible. Published by Ken Taylor in 1971, this highly readable paraphrase has been extremely popular among American readers. Taylor took many liberties with the text, sometimes with humorous results. For example, Philip's rebuke of Simon the magician in Acts 8:20, "May your money perish with you" is changed to say "To hell with you and your money!"

Amplified Bible. This rather odd volume appeared in 1965. It works on the somewhat strange premise that if one gives the variant meanings of particular words in a sentence, the meaning will become more clear to the reader. More often the result is confusion.

The Message. Eugene H. Peterson began publishing the initial books of his paraphrase in 1993. His work has been quite popular with many readers. He contends that the NT was written in "a rough and earthy language that reveals God's presence and action where we least expect it, . . . in the soiled ordinariness of our lives." For example, he translates Romans 8:3, "God went for the jugular when he sent his own son. . . . In his son, Jesus, he personally took on the human condition, entered the disordered mess of struggling humanity in order to set it right once and for all."

Web pages with information about Bible translations

http://www.christianbook.com/Christian/Books/cms_content/53132907?page=73521&sp=1003

This web site provides a brief explanation of translation theory and gives links to descriptions of various versions of the Bible.

http://www.geocities.com/bible_translation/

This web site contains numerous links to articles on translation theory and to information on a large number of translations.

http://www.ntgateway.com/bible.htm

This web site provides helpful search engines that allow you to compare the ways in which various translations render particular passages. For example, here are various ways of translating 1 Cor. 7:36.

• But if any man think that he behaveth himself uncomely toward his virgin, if she pass the flower of her age, and need so require, let him do what he will, he sinneth not: let them marry. (KJV)

• If anyone thinks he is acting improperly toward the virgin he is engaged to, and if she is getting along in years and he feels he ought to marry, he should do as he wants. He is not sinning. They should get married. (NIV)

• But if any man thinks that he is acting unbecomingly toward his virgin daughter, if she is past her youth, and if it must be so, let him do what he wishes, he does not sin; let her marry. (NASB)

• If any one thinks that he is not behaving properly toward his betrothed, if his passions are strong, and it has to be, let him do as he wishes: let them marry-it is no sin. (RSV)

• If anyone thinks that he is not behaving properly toward his fiancée, if his passions are strong, and so it has to be, let him marry as he wishes; it is no sin. Let them marry. (NRSV)

• KJV, NRSV: "It is good (or well) for a man not to touch a woman" 

• IV: "It is good for a man not to marry" (NIV footnote: "It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman")

• EB: "It is a good thing for a man to have nothing to do with women"

1 John 5:7-8

• For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one. (KJV)

• For there are three that testify: the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement. (NIV)

• There are three that testify: the Spirit and the water and the blood, and these three agree. (NRSV)

The Making of the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible. Edited by Bruce Metzger, et al.
        Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991.

Metzger, Bruce. "Translating the Bible: the NRSV," in Reminiscences of an Octogenarian.
        Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1997.

For articles on the debate stirred by the NRSV decision to seek more inclusive terms for humanity, see

    Christian Century 114 (July 2-9, 1997), p. 618; and

    Christianity Today 41 (Oct. 27, 1997, pp. 26-39.