The Crucial Issue in Bible Translation

Why the flurry of Bible translation in recent years? As Amos said long ago, “Does a lion roar in the forest when there is no prey for him?” Gradually the Christian public became aware of a cause-and-effect relation: The Bible just wasn’t being read, and one of the main reasons for this neglect was that to hosts of readers it failed to communicate. Its vocabulary was a mixture of archaisms and what many thought of as jargon. Its syntax was poor, judged by modern standards. Many of its figures of speech were lost on the modern reader. Its idioms were those of a past age. It did not attract. Much of it was not understood.

So the crusade started, and the Revised Standard Version appeared. Unprecedented sales promotion helped to make it a publishing success from the start. It met some of the problems, at least partially. But it was still the King James Version in modern dress. Like the King James, it remained within the stylistic tradition of the 1534 Tyndale New Testament. It was, as it professed to be, only a revision. Its score on communication was up 10 per cent, 20 per cent, or more above the King James, but the score was still far too low.

Evangelicals criticized the RSV on other grounds but failed to mention the communication problem. The observation on this point made by William A. Smalley in the October, 1965, issue of the Bible Translator probably came as a surprise to those who read it, but the sample evidence he cited was convincing. Smalley quoted Second Corinthians 6:11–13 as found in the RSV, the Authorized Version (King James), the New English Bible, and the Phillips translation, and then said about the first two: “It seems incredible that anyone would want to return to these versions after using Phillips and the NEB, except for those who know the language of the AV better than they know the contemporary language around them.”

Smalley was right. The RSV was not a translation to end all translations. It was only a beginning. Phillips, the New English Bible, the revised Scofield Bible, the New American Standard New Testament, the Beck and Williams translations, the Today’s English Version, Taylor’s Bible paraphrases, and the forthcoming The Holy Bible: A Contemporary Translation (ACT) have all been efforts to fill the need for a Scripture translation that communicates.

Christians are going to have to make up their minds. Most of them were reared on Scripture as expressed in Tyndale or modified Tyndale language. They memorized verses from the Authorized Version. Four centuries of religious and theological literature employed AV words and phrases, as did four centuries of English hymnody. Christians used Tyndale modes of expression when they prayed. Their Bible concordances and dictionaries reflected the same tradition. Large numbers are still well satisfied with the familiar vocabulary and style of expression. So why should they switch to a modern version of the Bible?

What the choice boils down to is whether to hold on to something that gives personal satisfaction or to look outside self to the need of the Church and the world. The Christian who is willing to adopt this broader perspective soon sees just where the issue lies.

An increasingly great proportion of our population is made up of youth. And youth’s rebellion against “the establishment” extends to the Bible in archaic language. Many children from evangelical homes share this attitude. It may not show up until the child is away at school or out on his own, but when it does appear, it is often accompanied by a repudiation of almost everything the Church stands for. How the hearts of Christian parents bleed when they see this happen.

It would be unfair to charge this unfortunate situation solely to the use of a Bible in outmoded language, but it would also be unrealistic to affirm that the use of such a Bible is unrelated to the conclusion on the part of our youth that Christianity is irrelevant in our day.

A recent experiment in a suburban high school near Boston showed that almost no one in the group tested read the Bible regularly, though some attended church faithfully each week. When these students were asked to read portions of the new ACT version (not yet published), these were some of the responses recorded:

“This is not as hard to read as the Bible.”

“I thought this new translation was very good. I understand all of it. I find it much more interesting and faster than the regular Bible. More on my level of understanding.”

“I think that this is very good and I like it. It is easy to understand, yet it doesn’t seem childish. I think that many others older and younger will enjoy this. It keeps you in a steady pace instead of always stopping to figure out.”

“I think this is much easier to read and understand. You get a lot more out of it than you get out of the Bible.”

It is almost a foregone conclusion that unless Christian families and churches use the Scriptures in modern English form, more and more of our young people are going to be strangers to the Gospel. This just must not happen! And if the mature Christian is at all concerned, he will get his head out of the sand, face the issue, and decide to do everything he can to encourage the children and young people in our churches to read God’s Word, understand it, like it, and come to know Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour through its message.

Furthermore, the Christian is under orders from his Lord to evangelize beyond the borders of the Church, and here the problem becomes even more acute. Here the claim of lack of relevance is an open one. The unchurched are “turned off” when they hear what they regard as jargon. They want nothing to do with religious documents that are obviously archaic.

A missionary in the Philippines recently wrote: “It bothers me when I realize how many Filipinos buy the KJV. It is a problem enough for them to be learning common English and then to have to wade through three-century-old English! However, they buy the KJV because there are so many different sizes and bindings to choose from and some are quite cheap.” They need the advice that Billy Graham and other discerning evangelists give to converts: “Get a copy of the New Testament in modern English.”

If we hope to introduce men to the Gospel through the printed page of Scripture, we must be sure that page is written in the language men speak and understand, the language of our day. The translation we use must of course be faithful to the original and have other values, such as good style; yet these values are not enough if it does not also have that of being clearly understandable. The question is not “What do I prefer?” but “How can we reach people for Christ?”

If you care about the youth of the Church and men who are unchurched and strangers to the way of salvation, you will cast your vote for a translation that will communicate. Your decision will help to determine how the Church of Jesus Christ fares in the critical days ahead.

Have something to add about this? See something we missed? Share your feedback here.