Why are there so many Bible translations, and how do I choose one?

David Roach | March 22, 2012 | Q&A On The Bible

The multitude of Bible translations on the market can seem overwhelming. But there are good reasons for having so many versions of Scripture available.

Perhaps the most important reason is that different translators have different translations philosophies. Some believe that it is best for an English Bible to reflect the sentence structure, style, and expressions of the original Greek and Hebrew—a word-for-word translation. Popular word-for-word translations include the Revised Standard Version, the English Standard Version, and New American Standard Bible. On the other hand, some translators believe that it is unnecessary to maintain the sentence structure and style of the original Greek and Hebrew. In fact, they think original structure and style can obscure the meaning at times. So they attempt to give the meaning of the original text using modern idioms and sentence structures—a thought-for-thought translation. Some of the popular thought-for-thought translations are the New Living Translation and The Message.

Between word-for-word and thought-for-thought translations are those that attempt a combination of the two philosophies, translating word for word where possible but using modern phrasing where the original is confusing or antiquated. In this family of translations are the New International Version and the Holman Christian Standard Bible.

Another reason for different Bible translations is to reach different audiences. For example, the Good News Bible was intended for people whose first language is not English, and the Living Bible was intended for children originally.

Also, different translations rely on different Greek and Hebrew texts. Most of the recent translations use Greek and Hebrew texts that combine the best readings from many early manuscripts. Others, like the King James Version and New King James Version, translate the entire Bible from one Greek and Hebrew text known as the Textus Receptus.

So how do you select the right translation for you? It depends on what style of language you prefer and how you intend to use a particular Bible. Here are a few recommendations:

Do you want traditional poetic language? Try the King James Version.

Are you planning to do in-depth studies of individual words? A word-for-word translation like the English Standard Version or New American Standard Bible is likely your best bet.

Are you going to be discussing the Bible in a group with varying denominational backgrounds? The Revised Standard Version and New Revised Standard Version are both widely accepted among many Christian groups.

Do you need something that is easy to read aloud in a worship service, without excessively long sentences? The New International Version would be a good choice.

Are you going to read large sections of Scripture in a single sitting and want a modern-English paraphrase? The New Living Translation might be just right for you.

Remember that there isn’t just one correct Bible translation. God has blessed modern English readers with many good options to suit different purposes. So don’t be intimidated by the variety.

The Bible, Culture, and Care for the Poor

C. Ben Mitchell | March 19, 2012 | The Bible + Life

Charity and care for the poor are nearly synonymous with the tradition on which the West is built. In ancient Israel, God commanded that the corners of the fields remain unharvested so that the poor would have food (Leviticus. 19:9). And the story of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:30-37) is a defining image of charity. Likewise, the apostle Paul enjoined followers of Christ to do honest work, not only for their own well-being, but “so that he may have something to share with anyone in need” (Ephesians 4:28). The early Christians were so committed to this charitable ethic that even non-canonical documents underscored it. For instance, The Didache, an early Christian guide book said: “Give to everyone who asks thee, and do not refuse”; and the Shepherd of Hermas called on believers to “Give simply to all without asking doubtfully to whom thou givest, but give to all.”

Interestingly, today, 68.4% of all religious-based non-governmental organizations are either
Christian (57.4%) or Jewish (11%). Where the legacy of the biblical tradition is weakest, so
is charitable giving. In his recent survey of the data, Who Really Cares: America’s Charity
Divide, Syracuse University professor Arthur C. Brooks maintains that:

There is so little private charity in Europe that it is difficult to find information on the subject—so irrelevant is it that few researchers have even bothered to investigate . . . Specifically, no Western European population comes remotely close [to] the United States in per capita private charity. The closest nation, Spain, has average giving that is less than half that of the United States. Per person, Americans give three and a half times as much as the French, seven times as much as the Germans, and fourteen times as much as the Italians.

Some Europeans argue that their high taxes pay for what Americans cover with private funds. Brooks points out, however, that

One technical problem arises with this argument: The average tax burden in all European countries is not higher than it is in the United States. A British family, for instance, relinquishes an average of 10.8 percent of its household income to the government in income taxes. This is lower than what an average American family pays—11.3 percent.

This data should not be an occasion for American triumphalism, but a solemn warning about what ignorance of the Bible and the erosion of the Judeo-Christian tradition may mean for the world’s poor.

St. Patrick’s Day: Not Just About Green Beer

C. Ben Mitchell | March 16, 2012 | The Bible + Culture

A stained glass image of Saint Patrick inside the Cathedral of Christ the Light, Oakland, CA.

One night in fifth-century Wales, everyone in Calpurnius’ house was in bed asleep—everyone except Patrick, who sat on the edge of his bed. His head was swirling with the dream that had stirred him from a sound slumber. In the dream, a man he had known in Ireland handed Patrick a letter. Accepting it, Patrick read the title, “The Voice of the Irish,” and simultaneously heard voices crying out, “Holy boy, we beg you to come and walk among us once more.” Moved to tears, Patrick was unable to read further. Upon awakening, he realized he had received a mandate from the Lord: He was to return to Ireland, where he had once been enslaved, and bring Christianity to the people.

Little is known about this man now called Saint Patrick. He was born near the end of the fourth century in Wales and grew up in a wealthy, nominally Christian family. But when he was sixteen, raiders pillaged his town and took him captive to Ireland. There, Patrick became a slave to a Druid high priest named Milchu,who made Patrick a shepherd. During this period of isolation and brutality, Patrick came to know the Lord. He wrote of his experience:

“[T]here the Lord opened my mind to an awareness of my unbelief, in order that . . . I might . . . turn with all my heart to the Lord my God . . . And [the Lord] watched over me . . . and he protected me, and consoled me as a father would his son.”

After six years of enslavement, Patrick dreamed that God told him about a ship waiting to take him to freedom. He escaped that very night, traveling over 200 miles to reach the Irish coast, from where a ship, indeed, brought him back to his native Britain.

Patrick had changed. He was now twenty-two years old, fluent in Irish and toughened by trying experiences. At home, he felt restless and made plans to enter the ministry. He traveled to Auxerre, France, where he studied under Saint Germain for some fifteen years. Saint Germain believed in Patrick’s vision and helped him to his appointment as the second bishop to Ireland. It was a fortuitous appointment, for Patrick’s understanding of the Irish culture and language made him adept at winning converts, and he soon developed a following.

Still, the going was tough. Patrick was evangelizing people who warred for a living and whose native religion, Druidism, required human sacrifice. The Druid religious leaders were not at all tolerant of Christianity, and though Patrick converted many of them, others arrested and kidnapped him a number of times. The churches and schools he established were under constant threat of raids and enslavement, but they prospered nonetheless.

Through it all, Patrick remained steadfast: “[D]aily I expect to be murdered or betrayed or reduced to slavery if the occasion arises. But I fear nothing.” The persecution was real, but by God’s grace and after every reversal, Patrick escaped and returned to his evangelical mission.

Of the thousands taken captive by the Irish, the vast majority remained in captivity, living out their days in bitterness and travail. Others gained their freedom within Ireland but conformed to their captors’ culture. A handful managed to escape to their native lands but continued in a pagan lifestyle. And then there was Patrick, one of thousands, who, in the darkness of captivity, turned to God and set his heart on reaching Ireland for Christ. As Catholic journalist Anita McSorley writes,

“It doesn’t take a scholar to recognize how [Patrick] was able to do this. [He] was so certain that he had been specifically called by God to do exactly what he did . . . In this certainty, Patrick finds his strength . . . to overcome every obstacle . . .”

And that strength was sufficient. When he died, he had traversed the entire terrain of Ireland and preached the gospel with great effect, as he was happy to recall:

“So, [that is] how in Ireland, where they never had any knowledge of God but, always, until now, cherished idols and unclean things, they are lately become a people of the Lord, and are called children of God . . .”

Q: If God knows everything, and Jesus is God, why did He choose Judas as one of His disciples if He knew he would betray Him?

Mark Coppenger | March 12, 2012 | Q&A On The Bible

It was precisely because Jesus knew that Judas would betray him that He chose him as a disciple. For us to be saved, it was essential that Jesus die for our sins on the cross — and Judas’ treachery would lead to that event.

As popular as Jesus was, the authorities knew that it could be disastrous to seize Him with a lot of people around, people who could rush to His aid. They needed to know when and where He would be relatively alone, and Judas was just the man to give them this insider information.

As awful as the crucifixion was, this central event in history was wonderful in its effect. Indeed, that’s why we call the day on which it occurred, “Good Friday.” And though it seemed to signal a breakdown in Jesus’ ministry, when the world turned on Him despite His life-giving teaching and healing, it came right on schedule according to a plan put in place from the very founding of the world. Throughout human history, Jesus was to be the sacrificial lamb, who would die for the sins of His people (Revelation 13:8).

Judas treachery came as no surprise to Jesus. The Bible teaches that the Lord knew what was in the hearts of all men, including Judas (John 2:24-25), who was the perfect traitor, whom Jesus would even call “a devil” (John 6:70). His character was deeply flawed. For one thing, he was a thief, who helped himself to the disciples’ living funds (John 12:4-6). For another, he was ambitious to a fault, and was frustrated when the Lord didn’t capitalize on opportunities to enlarge His earthly influence (John 14:22). Furthermore, he took no care to guard his heart, so Satan could “enter him” at will (John 13:27).

We can only imagine Satan’s delight on finding such an evil and usable man in Jesus’ inner circle. He exploited Judas’s character for what he thought would be great gain, the execution of the Son of God, but he fell into a trap. Jesus’ death, and subsequent resurrection, broke Satan’s grip on countless souls, giving them eternal life. In a word, the devil’s use of Judas backfired.

Jesus did not turn Judas into a traitor; He selected him because He already had a traitorous character. And as a number of New Testament passages make clear, the particulars of his treachery were anticipated centuries in advance. For example, the prophet Zechariah spoke of someone’s throwing thirty pieces of silver to the potter (Zechariah 11:13). That’s precisely the amount Christ’s enemies paid Judas for his cooperation, and that same money was used to buy a burial place for Judas in a potter’s field, once he’d committed suicide in remorse for his horrible deed.

So did Jesus choose a traitor knowingly? Absolutely, from a long time back. He knew that Judas was precisely the sort of man who would push Him toward the cross. And so, in selecting him as a disciple, He helped arrange His own death – for our sake.

If you have a question about the Bible you would like us to answer, please e-mail us at: customer.support@biblemesh.com

How Much Church Is Enough?

David Roach | March 2, 2012 | The Bible + Life

How much church involvement does God really expect from Christians? It’s a relevant question for people who are busy with work and family commitments yet want to be faithful to their churches at the same time. After all, it can be tempting to skip small group Bible study, Sunday night services (if your church has them), and even the occasional Sunday morning. Thankfully, the Bible is not silent on this issue. It gives at least two principles to guide us.

First, don’t neglect to meet with other believers. Rather, encourage one another through the regular gatherings of your church (Hebrews 10:25). In contemporary parlance, this means not to neglect your church’s regular gatherings that are intended for all members. In most congregations, this includes worship services and a weekly time of small group Bible study—whether on Sunday mornings at the church or on a weeknight in someone’s home.

Of course, there will be occasions when members miss church gatherings for various reasons. And not every activity of the church is intended for every member. Still, the general rule holds: neglect of your church’s regular gatherings is disobedient to God. Your presence encourages others while your absences can drag them down. After all, don’t you feel less enthusiastic about your church when you make the effort to attend only to discover a sparse crowd because others decided it would be more convenient to stay home?

Second, use your spiritual gifts to serve the church. In Romans 12, Paul taught that a church is like a body and its members like organs. Each has a unique function, a spiritual gift God has bestowed for the good of the whole. Paul commanded us each to use our gifts in the church. So what has God gifted you to do? Teach Bible study? Visit shut-ins? Sing in a worship team? Repair the church building and grounds? Or something else? Whatever it is, God expects you to serve the church in addition to your regular attendance.

Admittedly, this may seem like a lot to ask. But God never requires anything that He doesn’t empower His children to accomplish. And just think of all the blessings church attendance brings: the enjoyment of God’s presence among His people (Matthew 18:20), the provision of spiritual nourishment and encouragement, and temporary shelter from the onslaughts of the world.

How the Bible Shaped Manners

David Roach | February 28, 2012 | The Bible + Culture

In 1922, Emily Post became a household name when her book, Etiquette, In Society, In Business, In Politics, and At Home, soared to the top of America’s bestseller list. Over the years, the work remained popular as her descendants updated it to fit changing times and social customs. Yet notably, some of the work’s foundational principles have not changed. In fact, they parallel an ancient source, the Bible. Indeed, Scripture has shaped manners in the West—a reality evident from even a cursory reading of Emily Post. Consider the following excerpts and some corresponding wisdom from the biblical book of Proverbs:

“Nearly all the faults or mistakes in conversation are caused by not thinking or by lack of consideration … The burden of thinking before speaking is our own.” (Proverbs 21:23, “Whoever keeps his mouth and his tongue keeps himself out of trouble.”)
“Conversation should not be about someone else, especially in a group, even a group of close friends.” (Proverbs 11:12, “Whoever belittles his neighbor lacks sense, but a man of understanding remains silent.”)
“There is a big difference between sharing the accomplishments of ourselves or our loved ones with close family members and extolling their virtues to anyone we happen to meet…even when bursting with pride, the good conversationalist does not go on and on about what a wonderful job he did, or how bright his son is.” (Proverbs 27:2, “Let another praise you, and not your own mouth; a stranger, and not your own lips.”)
“There are seldom regrets for what you have left unsaid. ‘Better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than open it and remove all doubt.’ Don’t pretend to know more than you do. No person of real intelligence hesitates to say, ‘I don’t know.’ People who talk too easily are likely to talk too much and at times imprudently.” (Proverbs 18:2, “A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion.”)

Of course, Emily Post’s book of etiquette covers many details not addressed by the Bible—the placement of knives, forks, and spoons for a dinner party, the use of titles in formal correspondence, and the seating of relatives at a wedding. But many of the basic principles are the same in that they are matters of thoughtfulness, amiability, and stewardship of our influence—all of which are issues of divine concern.