Blue Letter Bible for Online Bible Reading and Bible Study

 

I have recently discovered the usefulness of the Blue Letter Bible online and phone app (Android, iPhone) service. It is jam-packed with useful tools!

Bible Reading Schedule to Solidify your New Testament Knowledge

I know! This is the wrong time of the year to get people to start a Bible reading schedule. Is it not meant for New Year's resolutions? Yes and No! A Bible reading schedule can be started any time of the year. As Christians, we walk in the renewing power of the Holy Spirit by grace through faith. It is a daily walk, with daily renewal. 

In less than 90 days I will start the Bible reading program I will suggest below. I wrote in the beginning of the year about some Bible reading programs that you could follow.

1500 Consecutive Days of Reading the Bible

 Five hundred and twenty-five (525) days ago I published a post about having read the Bible on the YouVersion mobile Bible app each day for one-thousand (1000) consecutive days. I have now been reading the Bible each day on the Bible app for 1525 consecutive days.

Since then I have completed one other plan and I am more than halfway through the next.

Completed Bible Reading Plans on YouVersion

The last completed reading plan on the list is Prof. Horner's Bible Reading System. In this system, you read 10 chapters a day with each chapter from a different book of the Bible. If you read every day, you will complete the plan in 8 months. To put things in perspective, if you start from the beginning again, after your first year on this program, you would have "read through all the Gospels four times, the Pentateuch twice, Paul’s letters 4-5 times each, the OT wisdom literature six times, all the Psalms at least twice, all the Proverbs as well as Acts a dozen times, and all the way through the OT History and Prophetic books about 1½ times." See the plan's PDF here. This is a very enriching program, but also very intense. If you are a fast reader, unlike me, this will be no problem for you.

Currently, I am busy with the Canonical plan. This plan is a simple plan to read the Bible from cover to cover starting in Genesis, and ending with Revelation, in the order the books are found in the Bible.

When I have completed the Canonical plan, I am going to start with the John MacArthur plan. This plan is very New Testament oriented. In this plan, you will read the same 7-8 chapters each day for a month before moving on to the next set of chapters. You can really start the plan with any New Testament book. You can start with reading 1, 2, 3 John every day for a month, then move on to Matthew 1-7 for the next month followed by Matthew 8-14 the month after that. I will start with Matthew, and work my way through to Revelation.

Example of the John MacArthur Reading Plan

The way that I set it up as can be seen in the image above is to read 1-2 chapters of the OT a day, and then 7-8 chapters in the NT. It will take 3 years and 3 months to complete this plan. When you are done with this plan, you would have read through the NT about 30 times, and the OT twice (Americans: two times 😂). By reading the NT this way, you will really get to know the NT. The idea is to make it part of you, not just getting to know it, or finishing a plan. This plan is NOT available on any Bible reading app as far as I know, so completing it will not give you a plan completion medal.

Reading the Bible consistently is very important to every Christian, especially to read all of it. Apps like YouVersion can be a great help in doing so, but on the other hand, it can also be a distraction from eating the meat of the Word. Mobile Bible apps have all kinds of reading plans. There are 5-day plans, topical plans, seasonal plans, etc.

YouVersion Bible Reading plans

My contention is that if you as a Christian are not reading through the Bible on a regular basis, you are not being fed enough of God's Word. Reading a little plan here or there, or a chapter here or there, or a verse here or there, will not feed you sufficiently. 

Many of these plans are set up around a certain topic. If you only read topical plans, you are probably only reading those that you deem relevant to you. Topical plans are not bad in themselves at all, but when we only read those type of plans, we will become malnourished.

Remember, in God's eyes, ALL of Scripture is relevant to us, not just certain topics.

I would like to challenge each one of you to use a plan that will guide you from cover to cover through the Bible in a year. If you think it may be too much, then try a 2-year plan. There are many plans out there. Most mobile Bible apps have such plans to choose from.

If you don't want to use a Bible app to read the Bible, and prefer to use a physical Bible, check out the plans at Ligonier.

Finally, you can generate your own plan by using the Bible Reading Plan Generator. With this web app, you can generate your own reading plan by selecting all kinds of options: Time Frame, Format (Calendar, List, Weeks, Books, etc), Bible Books (All, OT, NT, selected books), Chronological, and more.

Tolle lege! Tolle lege!

Learning Biblical Greek has never been more accessible, and is needed more than ever!

When I studied at Bible College in the second half of the 1980s, we had to learn Biblical Greek, and I

loved it! It took a lot of work and dedication, but at the end of the 3 semesters of Greek that year I had an average of 96%. I found it fascinating!

But, like they say, "If you don't use, you lose it!" I got married in 1990, and started working at a massive state company through which I studied software development, and I've been in software development ever since. Through the years, because of disuse, I had forgotten much of what I learnt about New Testament Greek. I don't know how many times I tried to pick it up again. Don't get me wrong! I could no longer handle it smoothly, differentiating between different verb forms, nouns, etc. Yet, I was quite capable of helping myself when I came across something in the New Testament that I wanted to check against the Greek. I had the resources, and I knew how to use them, but I couldn't pick up a Greek New Testament and just translate as I read.

1000 Consecutive Days of Reading the Bible

Today, one thousand days ago I started using the YouVersion Bible app to read the Bible everyday. Although I used the app to read the Bible everyday, I only started using the app to actually read systematically through the Bible using their different Bible-in-a-year programs. 

Review: How to Study Your Bible by Kay Arthur

This past week I read two books on studying the Bible inductively by Kay Arthur. The first one is "The BASIC STEPS of BIBLE STUDY" (BSBS), Harvest House Publishers, Eugene, OR, 2019, and the second is "HOW TO STUDY YOUR BIBLE" (HSYB), Harvest House Publishers, Eugene, OR, 1994.

IN GENERAL

Right off the bat, between these two books, I would recommend HSYB, since BSBS is simply the first part of HSYB. BSBS is a very simple introduction to inductive Bible study, whereas HSYB goes into much more detail.

Both books are easy to read, even HSYB, the more in-depth book of the two. In fact, for every part of the process, there are easy to follow steps. HSYB is not the theory of inductive Bible study, but a practical walk-through of the process.

SUMMARY

The book is divided into six parts. The first two chapters are an introduction. The rest of the chapters of the book are divided into five parts. The first introductory chapter, If You Want to Know God's Word, is written as a letter to the reader by the author, giving a little background to the development of the Precept Upon Precept Inductive Bible Courses. The second introductory chapter, The Joy and Value of Inductive Study, gives a very broad outline of the rest of the book. Arthur writes, "Inductive Bible study draws you into personal interaction with the Scripture and thus with the God of the Scriptures so that your beliefs are based on a prayerful understanding and legitimate interpretation of Scripture--truth that transforms you when you live by it." (p11)

Allusions in the Book of Revelation to the Old Testament

Currently, I am studying the last book of the Bible, the "Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show to His bond-servants, the things which must soon take place; and He sent and communicated it by His angel to His bond-servant John."

After I worked through the text in my first round, I wanted to return and work through it while studying all its allusions and verbal parallels to the Old Testament. I started looking for a complete list of allusions, but I couldn't find a complete list. In the 404 verses of the Book of Revelation, it has several hundred allusions and verbal parallels to the Old Testament, more than any other New Testament book. I found a list here and here. I still wasn't convinced that these two lists were complete. Greg Beale makes frequent reference to these allusions to the Old Testament in his "Revelation: a shorter commentary." He also mentions in his John's Use of the Old Testament in Revelation, Sheffield Academic Press Ltd, Sheffield, England, 1998, p60, that the UBS3 Greek text has 394 references of allusions and verbal parallels to the Old Testament. I checked in my copy of the UBS5 Greek text; it has over 600 allusions and verbal parallels in the Book of Revelation to the Old Testament (Aland, Barbara & Aland, Kurt & Karavidopoulos, Johannes & Martini, Carlo M. & Metzger, Bruce, THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT, Fifth Revised Edition, Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, Stuttgart, Germany, 2015, pp864-882).

My Bible Reading Plan for 2020

I haven't been blogging like I would like to, and I am sorry for that. Life has been very hectic in the last 5 years, really.

I'm a bit late in the uptake of this series of blog posts this year. Others have already written blog posts about their Bible reading programs for this year.

Five More Myths about Bible Translations

About 3 months ago I wrote about Daniel Wallace’s 15 Myths about Bible Translation.

He has also written a blog post called Five More Myths about Bible Translations and the Transmission of the Text.

It is definitely worth reading!

60 Days–600 Chapters-1900 to go to finish the Bible

Two pages from my Bible in Ephesians.

From reading the title of this blog post, you are probably thinking that my math is all screwy, because how can 600 + 1900 (2500) be the completion of the Bible in chapters? Especially since there are only 1189 chapters in the Bible!

Every year there are hordes of Bible reading plans to follow, and like it or not they are designed to be read from 1 January to 31 December. They are annual Bible reading programs. There are other programs that are designed to be read over 2 or 3 years. I know, many will say that you don’t have to read it starting at 1 January, it could be started at any time. The fact is that these Bible reading plans are promoted on scores of websites and blogs. . ., in the last week or so of December. Which leads the human mind to see these programs, plans or systems as new year’s resolutions. They are designed with the annual mindset.

Well, this year I decided to do it a tad differently! I decided to follow Prof. Grant Horner’s Bible reading system which is kind of designed around a 250 day cycle, or a 28 day cycle, or a 31 day cycle, or an 89 day cycle. . . you get the drift! Horner’s system is designed around ten lists of Bible books of which you are to read one chapter from daily. That makes it 10 chapters each day, each chapter from a different book.

While most reading plans are designed to finish 1189 chapters in a year, Horner’s system is designed to read every chapter in the Bible in 250 days. His longest list of books is 250 chapters long (List 9, OT prophets) and his shortest list is only 28 chapters long (List 10, Acts). It means that by the time List 9 has been completed, Acts would have been read almost a complete 9 times!

The lists are made up as follows:

In 250 days you would have read the gospels just shy of 3 times, the Mosaic books 1.33 times, List 3 just more than 3 times,  List 4 almost 4 times, List 5 a total of 4 times, Psalms 1.66 times, Proverbs 8 times, and Acts almost 9 times. This makes for a lot of reading! By the end of the year, if you have read every day of the year, you would have covered 3650 chapters of the Bible. You would have read Acts 13 times! Do you think you would know Acts just a little by then?

Prof Horner recommends using the same Bible every day, the same one you always use. You will gain an affinity for the Bible you use. And, it helps for recollection. After reading the same passages from the same Bible for several years, you will start recalling entire pages in your mind, says Prof Horner. (Read more here.) You can also find Prof Horner’s system on Facebook. You can find his 10 Lists in a document that explains the whole system here. Simply print out the lists, and then cut them into individual strips and you will have bookmarks for each list.

What I’ve done to help myself keep track of what I have read was to create 2 documents. One is simply a foldable checklist of each chapter from each book in each list. Click here to download this checklist. Then I also created an Excel spread sheet with each list’s books and chapters (some repeated) all the way down to row 250. This way I can keep track with where I am supposed to be at all times while repeating some books several times. Click here to download this spread sheet.

What I have found with this system of reading is that there is no time to get bored or stuck in a rut. With the subject matter changing several times in a sitting, my attention is held fixed to the Scriptures.

UPDATE:
2 March 2014 - I have updated the Excel spread sheet. I have added a date column and a day column. The Date column is the first column. The dates start in row 2. If you did not start on 1 January with this program, then in the Date column, row 2, change your starting date and all the succeeding dates will change too. That way you can keep a check on your progress no matter when you start the program. The second column is the Day column. This you must leave as is. It simply gives you an idea of which day you are on in your reading progress. In my progress, yesterday (1 Mar 2014) was day 60. It means that I have read 600 chapters.

I hope this all helps!

How long does it take to read your Bible in a year?

That is like asking, “How much are your $3 ice-creams?” If you read your Bible in a year, that is how long it will take!

If you are planning to read your Bible through in 2014, then there are a load of plans to follow. You can get several at Justin Taylor’s blog. So, I won’t bore you with another list of Bible reading plans.

Justin points to a website that gives you the details on how many verses/words you will read in a session. At 200 words a minutes, and about 10.7 minutes a day, you will finish reading the Bible in 3922.9 minutes, or 65 hours, 22 minutes, 54 seconds. That makes it 2 days, 17 hours, 22 minutes, 54 seconds if you read it non-stop from beginning to end! Not so bad considering a year of 365 days!

If you read at 250 words per minute (wpm), you will complete it in 2 days, 4 hours, 18 minutes, 16 seconds.

Here comes the kicker: if you can read at 400wpm, you will complete reading your Bible in 1 day, 8 hours, 41 minutes, 22 seconds!

During that time you will have read around 31243 verses and depending on the translation, many tons of words!This is definitely do-able, isn’t it? Then get planning!

1 Peter: A Commentary by Karen Jobes

I just finished with Karen Jobes’ commentary on 1 Peter, a commentary in the Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament series.

As would be expected from a commentary, this was indeed a commentary! Who would have thought that? Seriously, I have found that Jobes’ commentary was extremely helpful, and that she didn’t shy away from difficulties with either the text or the meaning of the text.

This series that the commentary of 1 Peter is a part of, has been created to address the needs of pastors and those involved in preaching and exposition of the Word of God. Those that are serious about preaching through the Scriptures book by book, chapter by chapter and verse by verse will find great benefit in this commentary. On the other hand those that are used to preaching topical sermons and who don’t really do exposition of Scripture will only waste their money and time, since they probably won’t want to spend the time working through a commentary as thorough as this one! However, anyone who is serious about studying Scripture, and willing to look at textual issues—which Jobes handles superbly in a proper evangelical way—and issues of the Greek language behind 1 Peter, will truly benefit, and indeed enjoy this commentary.

Why did Jobes write yet another commentary on 1 Peter? She hopes to offer 3 distinct contributions which she mentions in the Author’s Preface. (Location 96 in the Kindle edition)

1. She presents a new theory on the historical background of 1 Peter.
2. She attempts to make the role of the Septuagint for interpreting 1 Peter more accessible.
3. She presents an analysis of the syntax used in 1 Peter based on the principles of bilingual interference to question the regularly repeated opinion that the Greek of 1 Peter is of a high quality.

The structure of the book simply follows the flow of Peter’s letter, and then finally ends with an analysis of the Greek of 1 Peter. I have looked at several commentaries in the past, and what makes this one unique, at least for me, is that it is so thorough in dealing with the issues.

In my opinion, Jobes certainly succeeds in the handling of 1 Peter in her commentary. Those that want more depth in preparation for their sermons and expositions of the text will definitely not be disappointed.

Jobes stuck to the text of 1 Peter in such a way that it makes it easy for the reader follow. What I did find slightly confusing at times is that Jobes would deal with critics and then start with possible answers to the critics based on her studies of other commentators of 1 Peter. Then she would start giving her own opinion, and just when you think she is done on the point, she would go back to more opinions and possible scenarios from other commentators. I would have liked it more if she gave all the ideas and comments from other commentators and then to conclude with her own ideas on the issues. However, this is certainly not a deal breaker. The fact that she is so thorough makes up for any “anti” points concerning this commentary, of which I do not have many.

So, who should and should not read this commentary? Pastors, preachers and teachers of the Scriptures should certainly use this commentary. Also, those that want more depth beyond the mere handling of surface issues. On the other hand, if all you want is a devotional type of commentary, then this is perhaps not for you. This commentary is not for the super-spiritual ones among us, since this book may just make you work more at studying the Scriptures than you really want to!

Will I recommend this commentary? Certainly!

Daniel Wallace’s 15 Myths about Bible Translation

Daniel Wallace wrote a short blog post called “Fifteen Myths about Bible Translation” in which he sets forth these 15 myths.

The 15 myths are:

1. A word-for-word translation is the best kind.
2. A literal translation is the best.
3. The King James Version is a literal translation.
4. The King James Version is perfect.
5. The King James Version was hard to understand when it was first published.
6. There has never been an authorized revision of the KJV.
7. The Apocrypha are books found only in Roman Catholic Bibles.
8. Homosexuals influenced the translation of the NIV.
9. No translation can claim to be the word of God except the King James Bible.
10. Modern translations have removed words and verses from the Bible.
11. Essential doctrines are in jeopardy in modern translations.
12. “Young woman” in the RSV’s translation of Isaiah 7.14 was due to liberal bias.
13. Gender-inclusive translations are driven by a social agenda.
14. Red-letter editions of the Bible highlight the exact words of Jesus.
15. Chapter and verse numbers are inspired.

The only points above I did not know were considered myths are 3, 5, 12, and 15.  Do people really think that the KJV was difficult to its original readers? Just because the correct translation in Is 7:14 is “young woman” does not mean that 12 is actually a myth. But, since I do not have all the facts concerning the liberal bias of the RSV, I cannot make a decisive declaration here. However, many scholars think that the RSV has a liberal bias, although, that does not make it true either. Many scholars and academics have had wrong ideas about things before, not unlike those that believe that humans are responsible for global warming.

I would like to take issue with Wallace’s myths in points 1 and 2. Please, don’t think that I have anything against Wallace. In fact, in the world of Biblical Greek and ancient manuscripts, he is doing an immense amount of good work. I also have his “Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament,” which is an excellent Greek grammar.

While there are those that believe that literal translations are a direct word-for-word translation, most proponents of essentially literal translation (ELT) do not see it that way. Wallace perpetuates a myth that truly is a myth, since ELT Bibles are not what the claim makes it out to be. Wallace should know better, and I believe he does.

I have recently read and reviewed “Translating Truth: The Case for Essentially Literal Bible Translation.” In Crossway’s blurp on the book it says:

“Translating Truth advocates essentially literal Bible translation and in an attempt to foster an edifying dialogue concerning translation philosophy. It addresses what constitutes ‘good’ translation, common myths about word-for-word translations, and the importance of preserving the authenticity of the Bible text. The essays in this book offer clear and enlightening insights into the foundational ideas of essentially literal Bible translation.”

The book indeed does what it sets out to do, and for those that believe the mythical nature of literal translations espoused by Wallace, this book is a must read to correct those wrong ideas about what literal translations truly are.

To find out more about this book, you can read my 5-part review of the book here.

Translating Truth: A review—Part 5 (Final)

We now come to the final part (Part 5) of my review of the book Translating Truth. The previous 4 parts looked at the foreword by Packer (Part 1), and then the first four chapters by Grudem (Part 1), Ryken (Part 2), Collins  (Part 3) and Poythress  (Part 4).

Chapter 5

The final chapter is by Bruce Winter and is called REVELATION VERSUS RHETORIC: Paul and the First-century Corinthian Fad.

Winter starts his chapter with a discussion of Seneca the Younger’s (4 B.C.-A.D. 65)  writing style to Lucilius, the procurator of Sicily, and also his friend. Seneca, a noted Stoic philosopher and Roman senator, was surprised by the criticism of his style of letter writing. Gallio, the proconsul of Achaea who was also the judge in the case of Jews vs. Paul in Corinth (Ac 18:12-17), was the brother of Seneca, and together they were carefully educated in Rome by their father, Seneca the Elder. Later, Seneca the Younger became the personal tutor of Nero before Nero became emperor.

Seneca responded to his friend Lucilius that his style of writing to him was of such a nature because of their friendship, and the way he would have spoken to Lucilius if they had been sitting together somewhere or were taking a walk together. Seneca said that the person who is the same when you hear him as when you read his words, is the one who has fulfilled his promise. Seneca stated

“that, ‘I should not stamp my foot, or toss my arms about, or raise my voice,’ for he leaves ‘that sort of thing to the orators [the rhetoricians]’” (p136)

with their “rhetorical delivery” (ὑπόκρισιϛ).

Letter writing in the time of Rome was very significant in that it had an awareness of the social connection between the letter writer and the recipient. The tone of the letter was affected by this social connection with its rank and status.

“Seneca helpfully reveals the options that were open to Paul as a letter-writer, an issue highly relevant to our subject of revelation and rhetoric in Paul. His letters [Paul's] had likewise come under scrutiny from some of his recipients, namely the Corinthian Christians and, in particular, his detractors.” (p137)

Some New Testament scholars have judged Paul’s letters as epistles structured along the rules of the rhetorical handbooks of the time.  Many scholars read Paul’s letters through this epistolary rhetoric grid. Also, remember, Paul and Seneca the Younger were contemporaries. Winter writes that this chapter will examine whether Paul’s communications weren’t, like Seneca’s, influenced by the writer’s relationship with the recipients. The fad among the educated of the day was to write in this grand epistolary style, a fad that did not escape the view of this proud Roman colony of Corinth. So, if Paul wanted to, he certainly could have written in this style. Winter writes concerning this issue,

“We have important information in 1 Corinthians 2 on the topic of revelation versus rhetoric, although it is not immediately obvious on an initial reading that in 2:1-5 Paul dealt with rhetoric or that 2:6-16 is Paul’s clearest declaration in any of his letters on the issue of revelation.” (p138-139)

In order to draw conclusions in this regard, Winter discusses four issues: (1) the relationship between Paul and the recipients of his letters, (2) his self-disclosure as to why he adopted his approach concerning rhetoric with the Corinthians, (3) Paul’s claim concerning revelation and the mind of Christ, and (4) Paul and the “grand style.”

1. Paul certainly breaks with the “grand style” of the day by addressing his recipients with the startling term, “brother” (ἀδελϕὸϛ). In Roman law, this term had no validity outside of sibling relationships. It was not just improper to use this term of those who are not siblings by birth or by adoption, but it was illegal too. It was significant that Paul chose to use this term, since it reinforced the idea of family, brothers and sisters in their relationships with one another. Sibling language in such a letter would have been deemed inappropriate.

2. Paul certainly refers to his modus operandi when he arrived in Corinth.

“On Paul’s coming to Corinth he refers specifically to the grand style of rhetoric in 2:1, asserting that in making known ‘the witness or mystery of God’ he did not retort to either rhetoric or wisdom. His phrases refer to superlative rhetoric and to knowledge achieved through learning.” (p141-142)

Paul’s preaching of the cross was not with cleverness of speech (the wisdom of rhetoric). Paul presented himself in complete antithesis to the virtuoso rhetoricians of the day (2:3). He came to them in weakness and fear, not with powerful speech and grandiose style. Paul’s abandonment of rhetorical demonstrations was that the Corinthians’ faith would rest not on the wisdom and demonstrations of men, but in the power of God. “By first-century reckoning Paul had adopted an anti-rhetorical stance and, in doing so, had clearly bucked the latest fad.” (p142) Winter concludes this section by writing that

“it is important to reflect on the fact that Paul has renounced for presentation purposes the conventions of orators and the devices used by its promoters at the time of the flowering of what is known among ancient historians as the Second Sophistic. For him the grand style of the orators and the grand style of oratory were antithetical to the Christian messengers and message. . . His modus aperandi was shaped by the message and not by the contemporary fad.” (p143)

3. After Paul showed his antithetical stance with regard to rhetoric, he continues this stance in terms of the wisdom of God as opposed to the wisdom of men. Paul writes that this is “a wisdom, however, not of this age nor of the rulers of this age. . . just as it is written, ‘THINGS WHICH EYE HAS NOT SEEN AND EAR HAS NOT HEARD, AND which HAVE NOT ENTERED THE HEART OF MAN, ALL THAT GOD HAS PREPARED FOR THOSE WHO LOVE HIM.’ For to us God revealed them through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God.” (1 Cor 2:6, 9-10)

4. Almost a century ago there were scholars that argued that Paul did not write epistles, but real letters. A decade or so ago Janet Fairweather, who is a Cambridge classicist specializing in rhetoric, studied Galatians and came to the conclusion that Paul’s style rejected standard Hellenistic modes of argumentation and that it was not an Atticizing one, and that it was not well suited to writing.

What does this mean for the translator? Paul stuck to a style of simplicity and a word order that assured a forcefulness in delivering God’s Word. Paul was not interested in the fads of the day, and delivered the message of the gospel in plain language and not great sophistication.

Conclusion

This book is not always easy, especially if the reader is not familiar with translation issues or linguistics. However, with a little grit, most Christians should be able to comprehend the importance of Bible translation and what translators should give us in translations. I found most of the book easy reading and I think the issues were carefully covered.

I have to admit, I have always been an ELT proponent (see Part 1). What this book has done for me is to provide me with more grounding in the faithfulness of the ELT philosophy. When dealing with the words of God, the translator needs to be absolutely sure that what he is providing as a translation of those awe inspiring words do actually represent God’s words and not merely a human approximations of what God said.

I know there are some readers of this blog that feel that the DET philosophy of translation is the correct one, however, in my opinion, DET hides too much of the authors shared world and inserts too much of the translator’s shared world into the translation of the Bible.

In the end, you still have to make up your mind as to which translation you prefer, but I do hope that this review have stirred something about the importance of translation in your heart and that you decide to purchase the book to see the detail for yourself; or, at least you will reconsider your use of DET translations and start looking at ELT translations. To refresh your mind concerning the scale of translations between ELT and DET, revisit Part 1 and go down to the table called A SPECTRUM OF TRANSLATIONS.

Translating Truth: A review—Part 4

We have now completed looking at the foreword by Packer, and then the first three chapters by Grudem, Ryken and Collins.

Chapter 4

Chapter 4 is written by Vern S. Poythress, and is entitled TRUTH AND FULLNESS OF MEANING: Fullness Versus Reductionistic Semantics in Biblical Interpretation.

While Poythress is a brilliant scholar, he is also one of the writers that I find most difficult to read. I read his book GOD CENTERED BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION (P&R Publishing, Phillipsburg, NJ, 1999), and found it very difficult to stay with his train of thought. It was probably my own fault, since everything he said seemed to be important. When I read a book I use a colour marker to mark the important bits, and with his book I found I marked way too much, and as a result I could not deduce from his writings which was more important than the rest. I found this chapter in Translating Truth to be similar. Either he only writes what is important, or I can’t decipher from his writings what is really important.

That said, let’s give this a go!

From the get-go Poythress jumps into the nature of meaning in language and the origins of language. Evolutionists believe that language evolved from grunts to what we have today just like humans evolved from the goo to the zoo to you! Apparently it is a survival mechanism! However, the Bible portrays human language as a necessity from the beginning to serve as communication  between God and man. Poythress writes that

“it is plain from Scripture that God designed language in such a way that there can be multi-dimensional, complex, nuanced communication between God and man. God can tell stories, both fictional (parables) and nonfictional. He can expound and reason theologically, as in Romans, and he can express the full range of human emotions, as in the Psalms.” (p115)

Hence, the Bible contains all kinds of written genres such as prose or poetry, history, simple narrative and more. Meaning cannot be reduced to byte-sized isolated sentences thrown together at random. The meaning of a sentence comes from knowing who or what is in the sentence and what the surrounding context is. And, the full meaning only becomes apparent when you get to the end of the particular Biblical book. To discover whether modern theories of meaning are adequate to capture the richness of the Bible, Poythress looks at three technical tools that blossomed in the twentieth century. They are symbolic logic, structural linguistics, and translation theory.

Poythress finds symbolic logic to be obviously reductive in its approach to meaning and so moves on to structural linguistics. In this section Poythress looks at people such as Ferdinand de Saussure, Leonard Bloomfield and Noam Chomsky, who all had impact in this field.

Translating Truth: A review—Part 3

This is now Part 3 of a review of the book Translating Truth. You can find Part 2, a chapter written by Leland Ryken, here! The start of this multi-part review can be found here.

Part 1 covered the foreword by J.I. Packer and chapter 1 by Wayne Grudem. Part 2 covered  chapter 2, written by Leland Ryken.

Chapter 3

Chapter 3, is written by C. John Collins, and is entitled WHAT THE READER WANTS AND THE TRANSLATOR CAN GIVE: First John as a Test Case.

For Collins, the issues of Bible translation go beyond the linguistic and theological academy, down to the type of Bible ordinary people will read and study. Also, with the Biblical illiteracy that prevails in the modern church, a major challenge lies before us. While the discussions concerning translation philosophy have been vigorous, Collins feels that it should be vigorous. There have been many comparisons between Bibles by opponents of certain translation philosophies, and this is where Collins’ approach is different. He writes,

“[I]t is easy to score points against an opponent by selecting out particular Bible passages, and this is what many reviews have done: but this fails, whether because the translation under review may or may not reflect its stated philosophy well in that particular place, or because the reviewer may or may not understand how the translators applied their philosophy, or because we have to see how the version performs on a whole body of text.” (p78)

Collins then continues with his aim in this chapter of the book.

“In view of this, here is what I am to do: first, I will consider what an ordinary person might think of as ‘translation’; second, I will aim to make this more rigorous by considering the dynamics of communication; third, I will compare how the various approaches to translation perform on a continuous text, namely 1 John.” (p78)

Collins also calls “essentially literal” translation (ELT), “transparent” translation (TT). Since people have misunderstood this translation philosophy, Collins explains that

“The goal is for the syntax and semantics of the original text to govern the translation in such a way that such things as text genre, style (including irony and word-play), and register, figurative language, interpretive ambiguities, and important repetitions show through.” (p83)

While TT philosophy agrees that translation involves transferring text from one language to another language, yet “it aims to keep its interpretation to the level of recognized linguistic operations on the text.” (p83) That means, when an ambiguity exists in the text where it could mean two different things, the TT leaves it intact while other translation will attempt to remove the ambiguity, thereby leaving the reader in the dark about a possible difference in translation and meaning.

Translating Truth: A review–Part 2

I started with a multi-part review of “Translating Truth: The Case for Essentially Literal Bible Translation” in Part 1.

In Part 1, I looked at the foreword of the book written by J.I. Packer, in which he explained what it means to speak of an “essentially literal” or “word-for-word” translation, what I called ELT (Essentially Literal Translation). Packer also wrote about “thought-for-thought” or “dynamic equivalent” translations, what I called DET (Dynamic Equivalent Translation).

I also looked at chapter one, written by Wayne Grudem. In this chapter Grudem argues (1) that the Bible repeatedly claims that every one of its words (in the original languages) is a word spoken to us by God, and is therefore of utmost importance; and (2) that this fact provides a strong argument in favor of ‘essentially literal’ (or ‘word-for-word’) translation as opposed to ‘dynamic equivalent’ (or ‘thought-for-thought’) translation.” (p19)

Chapter 2

This chapter, entitled FIVE MYTHS ABOUT ESSENTIALLY LITERAL BIBLE TRANSLATION, is written by Leland Ryken. After explaining what an ELT is, Ryken jumps straight into the five myths he wants to clear up.

The first myth is that advocates of ELT are guilty of word worship and idolatry. Ryken writes:

“Questions arise at this point. What makes it either more or less idolatrous to assign priority to the words of the original as distinct from the ideas or meaning? All translation theorists assign priority to something. Nida, for example, evolved the rule that gave ‘the priority of the needs of the audience over the forms of language,’ and further decreed that ‘the use of language by persons twenty-five to thirty years of age has priority over the language of the older people or of children,’ and that ‘in certain situations the speech of women should have priority over the speech of men.’ While I believe that this ascribes an unwarranted and dangerous priority to the audience, surely it would be a strange polemical maneuver for me to say that Nida has made an idol of that audience.” (p59)

Ryken then lists a few passages that “assign primacy to the words of Scripture rather than the thoughts:” Jer 1:9; 1 Cor 2:13; Gal 3:16; Jn 6:63.

Christians are, or at least should be, very sensitive about idolatry in their lives. We want to please God, and we want Him as the ruler on the throne of our lives. That is why this myth, or the claims by people like Nida concerning word worship and word idolatry, is such a cheap shot. In fact, in a boxing match, it will be counted as a low blow! These kinds of comments are usually thrown around by people that have run out of arguments. They are simply mythtaken!

Translating Truth: A review–Part 1

I recently discovered this fairly small book, written by five members from the Translation Oversight Committee for the English Standard Version (ESV) Bible. The foreword of the book was written by the General Editor for the ESV Bible, Dr. J.I. Packer. Just to put you at ease, I prefer the NASB over the ESV. So, I am not promoting the ESV here at all.

General Info

Title:	Translating Truth: The Case for Essentially Literal Bible Translation
Format:	Paperback
ISBN-10:	1-58134-755-3
ISBN-13:	978-58134-755-5
Size:	13.97cm x 21.59cm
Weight:	201.3gr
Published:	30 November 2005

The five authors of this book are: C. John Collins, Wayne Grudem, Vern S. Poythress, Leland Ryken, and Bruce Winter. You can find out more about them at the book’s site at Crossway.

Blurb on the book

“In an age when there is a wide choice of English Bible translations, the issues involved in Bible translating are steadily gaining interest. Consumers often wonder what separates one Bible version from another.

“The contributors to this book argue that there are significant differences between literal translations and the alternatives. The task of those who employ an essentially literal Bible translation philosophy is to produce a translation that remains faithful to the original languages, preserving as much of the original form and meaning as possible while still communicating effectively and clearly in the receptors' languages.

“Translating Truth advocates essentially literal Bible translation and in an attempt to foster an edifying dialogue concerning translation philosophy. It addresses what constitutes "good" translation, common myths about word-for-word translations, and the importance of preserving the authenticity of the Bible text. The essays in this book offer clear and enlightening insights into the foundational ideas of essentially literal Bible translation.” (Crossway)

Foreword

In the foreword of the book, Packer goes into general descriptions of the three categories that have been used for translating the Bible in the last 60 or so years.  First, the “word-for-word” or “essentially literal” translations (ELT). These versions “aim to be as transparent as possible to the vocabulary, sentence structure, thought process, literary purpose, situational context, personal style, rhetorical strategy, and communicatory technique of each author, within the limits that good English allows.” (p10) He then mentions versions that fall into this category: Tyndale, King James Version, RSV, NKJV, NASB and ESV, with the NRSV, NET and HCSB not too far behind. He then clarifies that these versions are not “word-for-word in any mechanical sense; they seek simply to catch all the meaning that the text expresses..., in a way that the original writer, were he with us today, would recognize as a full and exact rendering of what he sought to put across to his own readership...” (p10-11)

Second, he mentions the “thought-for-thought” or “dynamic equivalent” translations (DET). Here translators aim “to induce, directly and immediately, the same positive complex of compelling interest and intellectual, emotional, and volitional response that the original writers sought to trigger in their own readership, and the developed method is to modify the wording and imagery of the text as a means to this end.” (p11)

Translations that fall into this category are: GNB, Living Bible, NLT, CEV, NCB and God’s Word. The problem with these translations is that they try to be interpretive and tend to paraphrase somewhat too. This makes them try to be more than a translation and has some danger in them as follows: (1) Focus is blurred: Where one or more understanding of the Biblical text is possible, this method smooths over the difficulty leaving readers completely unaware that any difficulties exist and that other options are available. Also, Biblical technical phrases are eliminated. (2) Fidelity is restricted: In the case that a literal rendering would not “make sense” to the casual reader, this method will substitute that rendering with modern day word pictures that may even convey equivalent meanings as the original. The problem here is that the reader will never know where this had been done  and where not. (3) Foreshortening is imposed: By this, Packer means cultural foreshortening. “Colloquial paraphrase, however dynamically equivalent, cannot but pre-empt recognition of the cultural gap between the Bible worlds... and our own world of today... Distancing (that is, discerning the differences between our world and worlds of the past) must precede assimilation (identifying transcendent similarities that reach above and beyond the differences). Cutting corners here, in rendering literature from the past—the Judeo-Christian past no less than any other—is always under-translating.” (p12-13)

The third category Packer mentions is what may be called “exposition-for-text” or “expanded paraphrase.” “These elaborate and amplify what is found in the semantic field of each text and passage, just as a pulpit expositor might do.” (p13) These are J.B. Phillip's’ The New Testament in Modern English and, of course, Eugene Peterson’s The Message. The danger of these dangerous translations (my classification), is that they may read way more into the text than what is actually there, which Packer calls “over-translating.”

What John 3:16 does not say

"For God loved  the world in this way: He gave His One and Only  Son,  so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish but have eternal life." (John 3:16 HCSB)

"For this is the way God loved the world: He gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life." (John 3:16 New English Translation)

It does not say:
1. that everyone will be saved.
2. that all have the same opportunity to be saved.
3. that all could potentially be saved.
4. how anyone comes to believe.

All it says is that those who do believe will have eternal life.

The preeminence of Christ

“(3) We give thanks to God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, praying always for you, (4) since we heard of your faith in Christ Jesus and the love which you have for all the saints; (5) because of the hope laid up for you in heaven, of which you previously heard in the word of truth, the gospel (6) which has come to you, just as in all the world also it is constantly bearing fruit and increasing, even as it has been doing in you also since the day you heard of it and understood the grace of God in truth; (7) just as you learned it from Epaphras, our beloved fellow bond-servant, who is a faithful servant of Christ on our behalf, (8) and he also informed us of your love in the Spirit. (9) For this reason also, since the day we heard of it, we have not ceased to pray for you and to ask that you may be filled with the knowledge of His will in all spiritual wisdom and understanding, (10) so that you will walk in a manner worthy of the Lord, to please Him in all respects, bearing fruit in every good work and increasing in the knowledge of God; (11) strengthened with all power, according to His glorious might, for the attaining of all steadfastness and patience; joyously (12) giving thanks to the Father, who has qualified us to share in the inheritance of the saints in Light. (13) For He rescued us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son, (14) in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins. (15) He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. (16) For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities--all things have been created through Him and for Him. (17) He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together. (18) He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything. (19) For it was the Father's good pleasure for all the fullness to dwell in Him, (20) and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself, having made peace through the blood of His cross; through Him, I say, whether things on earth or things in heaven. (21) And although you were formerly alienated and hostile in mind, engaged in evil deeds, (22) yet He has now reconciled you in His fleshly body through death, in order to present you before Him holy and blameless and beyond reproach-- (23) if indeed you continue in the faith firmly established and steadfast, and not moved away from the hope of the gospel that you have heard, which was proclaimed in all creation under heaven, and of which I, Paul, was made a minister.” (Col 1:3-23 NASB)