Lost in Translation

I regularly encounter something disturbing in the college classes I teach and in the church at large.  What I encounter is a terrible misunderstanding of Bible translations and how to properly evaluate and use them.

The problem in part is due to the fact that there are so many English translations of the Bible.  We are blessed to have scholars and publishers in the English-speaking world that seriously study the original languages of the Bible and stive to produce quality translations.  The resulting variety of translations leaves readers without the problem of being stuck with a poor translation and no other options. 

But the plethora of translations has a negative effect as well, which can be seen in how Bible translations are marketed.  Some are touted as being great for children or new believers, some are promoted for devotional reading, some for precise study, others for not sounding "traditional," which, apparently, is a bad thing.  This all leads many folks to the idea that all translations are equally valid, trustworthy and dependable, and that ultimately the customer knows best, regardless of whether or not the customer knows anything at all about the principles of translation and the issues involved in it.  So the question for most church folks becomes not, "what translation will give me an accurate understanding of the Bible," but rather, "which one do you like the best?"  The first question has to do with accuracy the second with preference in style.  Embedded within the last question is often a desire to avoid the hard work required of Bible reading by choosing a translation that is "easy" to read.  This is desired because if studying the Bible requires serious mental effort than it is no fun and therefore a waste of time.  In other words, the thought is, "I'll listen as long as it is easy to.  Difficult things that require mental discipline are just not worth my time, even if it is God speaking."  Yet in other words, "God's Word better come to me on my terms or I'll ignore it."  Such thinking is spiritual suicide and the height of arrogance.

My students play out the implications of thinking all translations are equally valid in their papers all the time.  They may consult the Bible for some point, and keep sifting through translations until they find one that conveys the meaning they want it to convey with no question as to whether the translation is misleading.  Like little Derridas and Foucaults, the meaning is in the reader, not the text, unless one finds a text that says what you want it to say.  "I like how this one says it...," writes one student.  But what if "this one" is not true to the original language? 

Into this mess comes the English Standard Version, the latest attempt to create a new "standard" Bible translations for English readers.  The publication and promotion of the ESV has taken head-on the notion that all translations are equally valid and in particular that the dynamic equivalancy theory of translation is a good thing. The ESV is an essentially literal translation of the Bible, meaning is strives for word-for-word accuracy to the original Hebrew and Greek.   This translation philosophy opposes the dynamic equivalency theory, which translates "thought-for-thought" instead of word-for-word.  The New International Version and The New Living Translation are both examples of dynamic equivalency. [Leland Ryken argues for an essentially literal tranlslation of the Bible in his booklet listed in my ESV box on this blog]

What must pastors and educators do?  First, we must challenge the notion that every translation is of equal value and is trustworthy.  Second, pastors especially must learn about and consider the implications for the differing translation theories commonly used and steer congregants away for the worst examples of Bible translation.  Third, we must review our understanding of biblical inspiration and consider what translation theory best meshes with it. 

God must be heard.  Let's do our best to help people hear him.