The Bible I Use in Church

Posted by Jeremy on Jul 14, 2010 in From the Pastor | View Comments

For the past few weeks I’ve been encouraging (some might say “guilting”) our community to bring their Bibles on Sunday. There are several reasons why I think that bringing a personal Bible to church is a worthwhile practice, but one of the main reasons is accountability. I am not infallible as a preacher, but the Bible is; as a result, my words carry no authority except that which is built on whatever is contained in the text. My opinions carry no special value; God’s opinions are of infinite value.

By bringing your Bibles to church you are able to hold the preacher accountable because you are able to determine for yourself whether or not what he is saying is in line with what the text is plainly teaching. This is what the Bereans were commended for in Acts 17:11. If the Apostles were pleased that their listeners were examining the Scriptures to test the validity of what they were saying, how much more pleased should we be when our community is looking to the Scripture to examine the truth of what is being preached! While there is some value in projecting the words on the screen, it can’t replace your personal Bible–after all, whose to say the projected words haven’t been tampered with? Although it is highly unlikely, the only way to be absolutely certain is to bring your own text. And of course, in so doing, you will have increased your familiarity with the Bible which is likely to lead to a growing relationship with Christ.

In encouraging our community to bring their Bibles, however, I forgot about one minor hitch. Most of the people in our community are using the New International Version (NIV) translation of the Bible, and I have been preaching from the English Standard Version (ESV). Early on I was making special note that my translation might sound different, but in the past few weeks I’ve taken that for granted. Consequently, as people have brought their Bibles, they’ve found it to be more distracting since what I am reading and what is on the screen is different from what they are seeing in the Bible on their lap! (Ironically, this only reinforces the point I’ve made above: without having a Bible, they didn’t even know there was a discrepancy!)

With that in mind, I wanted to address the question of why I use the ESV instead of the NIV. After all, the NIV is a good translation, I own several NIV Bibles, and the Bibles that we hand out on Sunday’s are NIV’s (for now). Wouldn’t it be easier to stick with the known?

In short, yes. It would be easier to stick with the known. The NIV is a great translation that I grew up on and have enjoyed without any reservation for more than two decades. I’m hesitant to say anything that would diminish it’s value, and I certainly wouldn’t be so bold as to say that the ESV is a better translation. Having said that, I think that there are at least two reasons why the ESV is a better fit for our community.

The first reason is the translation technique. The NIV uses what’s referred to as a “dynamic equivalence” translation method. In essence, it is a “thought-for-thought” translation that takes a phrase or sentence from the original language and translates the meaning of the phrase into readable English. The readability of the NIV is what has made it so popular, and it’s relatively conservative translation is what makes it good. It doesn’t go so far as a paraphrase (like The Message), but isn’t as literal as the second type of translation method, called “formal equivalence” (or “literal”). This type of translation is more accurate because it is translating word-for-word; the sacrifice is in the readability (as in the KJV).

The ESV attempts to close this gap between readability and accuracy. It is in the tradition of the “formal equivalence” translation technique and calls itself “essentially literal”. In many cases, you won’t notice much difference between the NIV and the ESV, but sometimes the differences are quite pronounced. Most of the time, it doesn’t change the meaning of a given passage, but it does alter the thrust or the impact. One example of this is Romans 8:36:

ESV – For your sake we are being killed all the day long
NIV – For your sake we face death all day long

It’s a subtle difference, but there is a different type of impact between being “in the face of danger” and actually “being killed”. Especially for a Roman Christian who literally had brothers and sisters being killed all day long. It wasn’t just dangerous to be a Christian; for most people it literally came at the pain of death.

The second reason I prefer the ESV is that it is more true to a reformed theological perspective. This is not to say that the text has been forced into this perspective, but rather that translating more closely word-for-word will yield this perspective in the translation. (The study notes, on the other hand, are pretty clearly from a reformed theological position.) One example of this is in Romans 12:1. Paul has just gotten done highlighting God’s work in salvation and then he turns to the recipients of that salvation in Romans 12.

ESV – I appeal to you, therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice…
NIV – Therefore, I urge you brothers, in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices…

Again, the difference is subtle, but the emphasis in the ESV is on God’s work in salvation, and the emphasis in the NIV is on our response. The ESV equates the presentation of our bodies with the mercies of God; it’s the only possible outcome of what God has done. In essence, If God has bestowed these mercies of salvation on you, then all that you can do is present your bodies in a worthy manner. There isn’t an alternative. God has so powerfully transformed you that the only outcome is your sacrificial life as a worshiper. The NIV, on the other hand, takes a slightly different tone; the emphasis is on the person who has received the mercies, as if they are now looking back on what God has done and in response they are urged to offer their bodies sacrificially. In other words, now that we’ve considered what God has done (in view of it), isn’t it the right response to offer our bodies this way? Both of these translations (and emphasis) are true. But what I want people to remember is that they are worshipers not because they decided to respond to God in a certain way (although they are responsible to do that) but because God has so powerfully recreated them that the only response is to be a worshiper.

As I’ve come to appreciate the differences between the ESV and the NIV, I’ve come to believe that the ESV is a more beneficial translation for our community, and at some point I hope that all of us begin to make the transition over to it as our standard translation. If you’d like more information on the ESV, you can read more about it at http://www.esv.org. Additionally, they have a page of comparison passages at http://www.esv.org/about/compare.verses.

In the meantime, at least you’ll know why the words in your Bible might not match the words on the screen!