Do we use bible translation shibboleths?
Wayne Leman at Better Bibles Blog has an interesting post that is profound and challenging. He states: “I have noticed that one of the marks of religious solidarity is often what version of the Bible is used. In some churches it is a requirement that only the King James Version be used. In others it is the NASB. It appears that there is a recent movement toward using the ESV as a mark of group solidarity and doctrinal purity. I suspect that there is a reaction among some to use the TNIV as a mark of group identity…. We often create shibboleths which are "keys to the kingdom", social doors through which applicants must pass in order to be fully accepted within the group or church. He also asked:
“What are some Bible version shibboleths you are aware of? Which ones are used in your faith community? Which ones do you yourself tend to use? What are the advantages and disadvantages of using Bible translation shibboleths for group identity?”
I found this dificult to answer because it challenged me and made me reflect more deeply. In part, I responded:
“I fully agree that these exists when they really shouldn't. The disadvantage is that they discriminate against others who are outside the circle of insiders. Personally, I try not to use them and would discourage others from accepting shibboleths as a group identity.”
Do you think using or encouraging bible translation shibboleths is right or wrong?
9 comments:
At our church it is pretty much a free for all. The Senior Pastor will preach out the ESV on Sunday mornings, our other Pastor on Wed nights, will preach out of the NLT or NKJ. When I preach or teach, I am now using the HCSB (with references to other translations as well).
We do not have any set rule on which bible should be brought to church. I see people with NIV's, ESV, NKJV, NASB, NLT, and me and another person use the HCSB ;-)
It's a good question, Kevin. I spent some time last summer exploring the concept of a "common Bible" and came to the conclusion that Christianity is just too fragmented in matters of doctrine and theology to ever settle on one text.
However, I think we do see some unity on a local level when churches decided on what translation to provide as a pew Bible. Even if the congregation is "a free for all" as Robert said, the option of unity is given.
I've struggled with this a little, since in my case it would mean carrying the NIV, or perhaps the TNIV is close enough. I strongly prefer other translations, but perhaps sometimes corporate unity is more an ideal to be striven for than the fragmentation of individual choice.
@Robert: is there a corporate benefit to the diversity of translation in your congregation? Not such that each individual worshiper is comfortable with their translation, but a tangible benefit to the church body as a whole. Just curious...
Robert, I like the diversity of translations because when I hear passages read from different translations it gives me a broader understanding. In bible studies, I often ask other people with different translations to read out loud from their’s just to hear the difference. Some churches prefer everyone to use the same translation for the sake of unity but I personally don’t agree with that. This is why acceptance of various translations is a good thing in my mind.
ElShaddai, yes, we are very fragmented but that’s okay because the kingdom of God is not homogenous. It seems too idealistic to think that we should all have one standard translation. It would stifle the church rather than add life to it if we were to have just one ecumenical translation. I wouldn’t like to see us all with the same views anyway.
Kevin,
For years I used the NASB, but grew tired of dealing with its numerous inconsistencies and awkwardness. But it's our pew bible. I hope I can change that in a few years.
I've looked into both the NET and the HCSB, with either one as a replacement, but quite a few still use the NIV and I've now been preaching from the TNIV.
At one time I used the NIV but I had to shelf it because of mistraslations, but the TNIV has corrected most of them, in my opinion.
Regarding that ecumenical Bible, there will never be such an animal. Even in the times of Jesus and the early Christians, there was no such. And the Patristic period and subsequent years offer no few considerations.
I feel your frustration, Elshaddai.
TC, the NET bible is a really good translation. I've never heard anyone considering the NET bible as a possible pew bible because not many in wider Christian circles even know about it. I'm just curious why you would?
Do you think using or encouraging bible translation shibboleths is right or wrong?
As an outsider looking in, there is one major disadvantage that no one has mentioned...
Being fixated on one point gives the appearance of worshipping an agenda, which then (as far as I'm concerned) places that group in the same level-of-risk as a cult.
The one thing I've learned in my (very) limited experience with churches is that a wolf in sheep's clothing is initially indistinguishable from the other sheep. I would rather study the Bible on my own than risk associating with a flock under the influence of a wolf.
Which is sad because I'd really like to be in a church. It is the same with the translation(s) since I am not yet familiar with the driving force(s) behind their creation. So that, I think, is a major disadvantage of having shibboleths - it scares people like me away.
Valerie
Kevin,
You said it: "The NET Bible is a really good translation."
Valerie, thanks for making your point and I wish I could have responded to you sooner. I also don’t see shibboleths as a good thing. I agree with your suggestion that there is a danger. If we become too attached to one bible translation, we might become kind of inbred. It only produces ignorance. There are very few denominations that only stick to one translations. You mentioned “cult”. I only know of one group that advocates only their own translation, the Jehovah’s Witnesses, which I would consider a cult. Of course, they teach that only their translation, the New World Translation, is accurate. I have never been to any church that encourages the use of one translation to the exclusion of others.
On another note, I would suggest that attending bible studies is always a good thing. There are likely many good churches (wherever you live). But one would have to try different churches to see which one suits you. I have learned that there is never a perfect church so I just stay where I am right now.
I think a "cult" can use any translation and spin it for their own purposes. The church I am thinking of only uses the KJV for Old and New Testament studies. Which is probably why I'm so gun-shy. ;)
Thanks for responding. I've been enjoying your comparison series.
Valerie
Post a Comment