28th November, 2003

Making the Bible more accessible or trivialising the Word of God? LLOYD HARKNESS takes a look at the balance between keeping the message intact and being culturally relevant...

As a young Christian I happily walked down the road of believing there was only one truly untainted English translation of the Bible: the Authorised King James version. It was the culture of the church, preached out of from the pulpit and owned by everyone who wanted to be a scholar of the Word. The perception was other translations had been compromised in some way; except perhaps the Amplified, which was a handy tool in helping you deal with any language barrier the King James posed.

In the last 25 years there has been a proliferation of translations with the fundamental desire being to make the bible more accessible. This of course was the purpose of the King James Bible, to hear and read the Word of God in your own tongue. The Bible was being taken beyond the hands of the few to become more intrinsically the backbone of faith for many. What joy there must have been in heaven at such a move! One Lord, one faith, one baptism and one clear translation in God’s own tongue.

I wonder if there is still joy in heaven now that we have 326 versions of the Bible in English. I wonder if we have created a problem with oneness: one Lord, one faith, one body. I wonder?

I ponder these questions because we need to still be able to say this is what God said. This is THE God breathed, God inspired scriptures. The Bible is truth exposed and God revealed. It is the foundation of our relationship and fellowship with God. If we lose the capacity to say this is the exact, pure Word of God, then we are shaking our foundations.

We all know how the intent of a message can be lost when we pass it down the line of half a dozen people. Unintentionally, the message takes on a different meaning and if we’re the last on the line we’re left bemused or confused. If the proliferation of translations is having this effect then it’s time for some straight teaching on the matter from our pulpits and in our seminaries; teaching as to the nature of Scripture and translations.

“All Scripture was God breathed” (2 Timothy 3:16). “(N)o prophesy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation - men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.” (2 Peter 1:21-21).
God guided the Biblical authors in the process of recording His message, whatever the form: history, poetry, song, proverb, epistle and so on.

Translators, no doubt, look for similar guidance, in a somewhat different task - interpreting meaning. Their burden - and delight - is to capture accurately the nuance of every word and phrase, the structural elements of each poem or parable, the vastness of vision where language struggles to explain (such as John’s eschatological prophesy in the book of Revelation) and the unity and harmony of the whole text. If the translators succeed then the Word remains infallible and authoritative and Jesus, the Living Word, is revealed and lives are impacted. In fact, Scripture becomes a sycamore tree which we, like Zacchaeus, can climb to see Jesus more clearly. However, if translators fail to capture the full original meaning when reaching for a vernacular equivalent then, in some small way, God is diminished.

When Scripture becomes locked away in a foreign language it is difficult, if not impossible, to see Jesus clearly. No doubt, that is a truth pertaining to the King James. Many recent translations have been attempts to capture the voice of today.

Eugene Peterson says in his introduction to The Message that “a contemporary idiom keeps the language of The Message current and fresh and understandable”. His stated purpose is “to convert” into the way we actually think and speak.

At times the tone and imagery in Peterson’s translation is Canadian/American but given his primary audience (North America) and the difficulties of finding more universal vernacular equivalents to phrases or ideas, his version for today’s tongue - is still at the top of Zacchaeus’ tree for me. The reason I say that is because I recognise that this is not an exact word-for-word translation and I can make allowances for American slang. Jesus didn’t say: “Why all this gossipy whispering?” but that was the intent of his words.

Yet what are we to make of the latest digression in Bibles coming from America - Revolve? Here the Bible is given a makeover into a fashion magazine format for 12 to17 year old girls. The difference with this Bible is the add-ons are not footnote explanations of scripture, but what is deemed as culturally relevant hook-ins or good advice for the intended audience. This raises a different set of questions, questions like: when you put beauty secrets on the same page as Christ’s words, are they then given an equal weight of authority? Are we mixing the holy with the unholy? Are we trivialising Jesus in the name of cultural relevance? Should the Bible stand-alone as it’s own book with no blending of ideas, values or advice from “godly” authors?

The writers of Revolve state: “We acknowledge the infallibility of God’s word and yet our own frailty”. It’s this frailty, as in add-ons like lots of photographs of good looking, smiling girls - an editorial bias you might call it, which definitely takes me into a grey area with this Bible’s presentation. Yet I can see evangelism written all over it, just like the new Aussie Bible.

Ah...for the old days, the communal sense of opening the King James together, in contemplation of the sermon. Actually I’ve used the New International Version (NIV) as my primary Bible for some years now, and at my church most people tend to dip together into this version.

“One Lord, one faith, one baptism” and one infallible Bible, although there is room for more than one translation to immerse ourselves in. As scholars of the true Word of God we need to be doers and not bookaholics who have read 326 versions of the Bible.

Climb your tree Zacchaeus and draw near to Jesus.