A couple of weeks ago I asked my Facebook friends which English translation of the Bible they preferred. I was reexamining my primary translation choice, as I do from time to time, and was honestly curious to see what other Christians I know used. It was interesting to see the diversity among just the people I know.
This whole question got me thinking about what I value in a Bible translation. I admit that I am a bit different than the average Bible reader simply because studying the Bible is a big part of my life's work. The average person, based on my limited survey, tends to seek a balance between translation accuracy and ease of readability. This is why, to no one's surprise, the NIV was by far the most preferred translation put forward. The NIV does a pretty good job of interpreting and making readable the original languages without devolving into a paraphrase.
I too look for accuracy with enough readability to, you know, actually read it. In my search for a new main translation the NASB immediately jumped out as a front runner due to its extreme commitment to accuracy. The problem here was that it is often so committed to being accurate that it can be downright clunky and hard to read. If it were just for my own, personal use then NASB would probably be the way I'd go. The problem is I teach and read publicly from the Bible multiple times a week and I want something extremely accurate that isn't too hard to read.
Another issue I have is that of gender inclusive language. I'm all for it when it is appropriate. For example, Paul throughout his letters is addressing the whole church. Is it really so bad to have it read "brothers and sisters" instead of just "brothers?" I'd say no because the understood usage of the time of the word Paul used was that of all gathered. People often throw a fit about people giving into the "woke" movement for adding these sorts of things, but they really are accurate to the original text.
This is why I have ended up with the NKJV as my choice of Bible translation. It is quite accurate but retains that poetic quality of the KJV without being bogged down with archaic language that no one understands anymore. It also uses inclusive terms like "brethren" in places where the entirety of Christian community is being addressed. I also dug into the manuscript traditions of modern translations (not fun) and I have a newfound respect for the manuscripts behind the NKJV and KJV.
So I will be primarily be quoting from the NKJV from now on and not the ESV. ESV is still a great translation, I just have moved to the NKJV now. Hope you've enjoyed my thoughts.
Comments
Post a Comment