Version, Part 1

What version of the Bible do you read?

My church has NRSV's in the pews.  I have these on my shelf:

• New Revised Standard Version
• New International Version
• The Message
• King James Version
• New King James Version
• New American Standard Bible
• Today's New International Version
• parts of The Voice
• Jewish Publication Society (OT)
• Revised Standard Version
• Common English Bible (NT)

I've preached from five of those versions and the rest I use for reference and study.  I ask the question because there is great debate in some circles over the authority of scripture based on the translation.

The cornerstone of fundamentalist belief is that the only Bible is the King James 1611 Version.  It's also referred to as the Authorized Version because translation was authorized and commissioned by King James of England.

I would have to question that "logic" since there are canonical versions much older than the KJV.  The Masoretic Text and the Latin Vulgate being the two primary versions.  And, of course, there is also the Septuagint that goes back to the time of the Ptolemy II.  Secondarily, the KJV bears thousands of translation errors.  While most of them are minor, our ability to translate ancient copies of scripture has improved many times over since the 17th Century.  To demonize another translation of scripture because it's not the KJV 1611 is simply irrational and if that's your take on the matter, you should consider just how ridiculous you sound.

A new translation has just been released.  The Common English Bible is the newest translation on the market.  In fact, it's so new, only the New Testament is available for purchase right now. 

It's not a revision of an existing translation, but an all-new translation geared to be more contemporary and more accessible.  Translation was an ecumenical effort, primary among Baptist, Methodist, Episcopalian, Lutheran, and Presbyterian scholars.  It's supposed to be simple enough for a fifth grader to read easily and still be a true translation, as opposed to a paraphrase like The Message.

But I have concerns.  I'm not sure if those concerns are valid or not, but there they are. 

Some of the translation decisions bewilder me.  Take, for instance, Matthew 5:1-11 - the Beatitudes.  I'm preaching from these right now and many of us know them by heart.  Each of the eight beatitudes begins with "Blessed are..."

The CEB translates these verses to begin with "Happy are..."  Technically speaking, that translation is accurate.  The original greek word is "makarios".  It means happy or fortunate and in a religious context, it means blessed.  I can't tell if it's just my own bias, but despite the fact that one greek word covers all these english words, there is a difference in english between "happy" and "blessed."  Happy means "delighted, pleased, or glad, as over a particular thing."  Blessed means "divinely or supremely favored."  I guess in a technical way, they mean the same, but the connotation for each is different for most of us.

Over and over, this translation makes the decision to be different, apparently so that it can simply stand out from other translations.  While there is merit to creating a new, contemporary version that will be applicable and engaging to modern readers, I suspect that I'm going to spend more time explaining the differences in the translations to people than I've ever had to with the versions we already have.

I personally know some of the people on the editorial board for this new translation.  One of them was the OT professor that I learned an immense amount from and is one of the worlds foremost experts on the prophets.  I'm still concerned about the usefulness of this version and, if it does survive in print, what kind of challenges it will present.

What version do you study from?  If you're a preacher, what version do you preach from?  What's your reasoning?

Tomorrow, I plan on posting on things to look for when shopping for a new Bible.