Professor wants all to read one Bible

indystar/religion news service ^ | 012404 | Douglas Todd

[InvisibleChurch]

VANCOUVER, British Columbia -- An American academic wants to see a Bible translation, put together by scores of conservative scholars, become the one Bible everyone uses.

Alan Jacobs, an English professor at Wheaton College near Chicago, said the new English Standard Version Bible, whose translation was overseen by Vancouver's J.I. Packer, is the only one with the potential to become the universal Bible of all English-speaking Christians.

[InvisibleChurch]

next up: the uni-wafer

[cpforlife.org]

Professor wants all to read one Bible

Navarre

[LS]

I, for one, think God can bring the true word out of a little competition. Jesus never had any problem with other so-called "prophets" competing against Him, because He knew His message was the right one.

The more translations, the better.

[johniegrad]

There are lumpers and there are splitters.

[joesnuffy]

Beware of the ones who would have you be of one purse...
the same could be said of those who would have you be of one verse....

[Knute]

The ESV is a very good word for word translation, versus a dynamic equivalent or a paraphrase. We are using it in our church. BUT, the "one Bible for all" smacks of the legalism of the King James only group. Most people I associate with are utilizing several translations for their personal study. I regularly refer to 7. (English Standard Version, King James Version, New King James Version, New International Version, New Living Translation, Amplified Bible and The Message)
I disagree totally with Professor Jacobs determination to make it the "exclusive" English one size fits all Bible

[codder too]

The more translations the better..

TRANSLATION is the key word here. Paraphrased versions can, and do, go way off track.

One size fits all though ?? Bad idea....

[TheGeezer]

I use different versions of the bible as well, but I find that "squishy" translations may be transliterations that express the agenda of the translator rather than the truth of the bible.

The words of the bible were written in hugely diverse times and cultural settings. Spinning verses to convey a perceived relevance to unique modern contexts can easily mislead, rather than clarify, biblical teachings. The understanding of scripture must not be divorced from its original context.

Regards.

[ClearCase_guy]

Ironic. The Geneva Bible was unpopular with the English Monarchy, because it seemed to diminish the earthly authority of Kings. So, James I ordered a new translation of the Bible, and decreed that everyone must read that new translation.

The Puritans held on to their Geneva Bible and eventually arose in revolt and killed King Charles I. The Puritans eventually faded and the King James Bible once again assumed its place as "the" Bible -- for some of the people.

Now we have a new effort to get everyone to read one Bible. Didn't work before. Won't work now.I'd say getting people to read ANY Bible would be a more worthwhile effort.

[rdb3]

That's nice, but I'll stick with my KJV.

[LS]

Oh, I agree, some really suck. Our church uses "the Message" frequently, and it is horrible. Flat wrong in its "translation" some times.

[apackof2]

You can read 8 different Bibles with out a ounce of revelation without the Holy Spirit

[IronJack]

Sure. Of course, to be PC, this "Bible" would have to have all gender-specific references removed, all condemnations of homosexuality excised, and a few additions to the words of Christ (to encourage cooperation with taxing authorities, for example).

Don't the Scriptures warn of men rewriting the Word of God in the end times?

[Gorjus]

I regularly refer to 7.

You left one study option out - but it's not a translation. There are resources where even the ignorant (like me) can find word by word explanations of the original text. There are words or phrases where the very best possible translation into English still doesn't capture the original, because the vocabulary and structure of English doesn't match the Greek (or Hebrew). An example is the three distinct words in Greek (agape, philios, eros) for which English only has one (love). Unless you look at the original, you may miss part of the message.

But for real study, your basic point is what I think is correct: Look at more than one translation (and in my case, the original) and try to understand, not just memorize the words.

[Ronly Bonly Jones]

If they use Roman scholars and carry out the work in southern California, they could call it

(all together now)

The "ORANGE CATHOLIC BIBLE"!!!!!

Thank you, thank you, I'll be here all week....

[4himinct]

http://rzuvich.freeservers.com/kjbible.htm

The Jews in the O.T. never had a "different version".....they would rather kill themselves than tamper with God's Word to make it "more readable". They simply learned God's Word. Even small children can understand the Authorized Version.......

If narrowness is the basis for truth, then read the Quran for all God cares.

His, (The ONE God of the ONE Bible)
Bob Z.

[dpa5923]

I hate to be a jerk, but your tag line has a misspelling. "to" should be "too". I'm not sure if that is meant to be a joke but I thought it ironic because you are talking being smart.

[shiva]

I have the PARALLEL BIBLE. Four translations all across two pages at once. I use it quite a bit but my King James is the one worn out, written on, highlighted, and battered.

[sonrise57]

One of the motivations of the translation committee of the ESV is the tendency of modern tranlations toward gender neutrality. The NIV had the potentional to be the next "universal" English translation until Zondervan decided to revise the NIV and eliminate as many gender specific references as possible.

I like the ESV because it follows in the tradition of The KJV-RSV-ESV. It is the modern translation that is most closly related to the KJV lineage other the NKJV which is for the most part the KJV with the Thees and Thous removed. When our church has a permanent facility the ESV will be our pew bible.