I think this is pressing the heart of many problems. Affirmation of the infallibility, inerrancy, and sufficiency of Scripture is viewed as the great cure-all. That’s irrelevant if the Scriptures are not also authoritative, both comprehensively and specifically. In other words, affirmation is not submission. But to dare say such is entirely inappropriate because it’s not nuanced, winsome, or amicable.
4 Likes
Exactly. Just as mental assent is not faith.
5 Likes
I agree with this and I think it has played out another way as well: Authority, infallibility, and inerrency are affirmed, but sufficiency is not.
“Yes, Scripture is the final authority, but it just doesn’t address [X], so we need to bring in another authority to address [X].”
3 Likes
This would be a big job, but with the reach of the internet and all of the crowd funding sites, etc, I think the patronage/funding system is already in place. Finding the faithful (willing and able!) men to do it would be the hardest part.
3 Likes
This kid did it! (I call him a kid because he’s my -younger- sister-in-law’s age and went to her high school).
I hate to say it, but if there’s ever been anything less promoting of Bible reading, it’s these high-cost multi-volume aesthetics-above-all-else Bibles. For them to call them “reader-friendly” and act as if they will promote greater Bible reading and knowledge is absurd.
The fact that he also paid people to revise the English text was an afterthought, and had nothing to do with how he managed to convince people to part with loads and loads of money. Watch the first 18 seconds of the original kickstarter video and you know all you need to about what is motivating people to give to this campaign. Not words. Not reading. Just beauty and aspiration.
Ask yourself this: If he had started out to produce a new translation that was…
- faithful to the text
- unencumbered by return on investment, copyright, and cost recoup concerns in order to promote true reading by making it freely available
Would he have raised the money?
Edited to add: Yes, I do see the point of and importance of typesetting for readability.
6 Likes
Would the World English Bible be of any use in making a starting point for a new translation? I ran across it a few months ago, but it is a translation that is explicitly copyright free. You can find it on Bible gateway amidst the other English translations. I think it would also be useful if you wanted to quote large sections of scripture without negotiating with a publisher.
For the New Testament, it has the Majority text readings which differs from the NU and TR though it includes those in the footnotes.
Here is the link. https://worldenglish.bible/
2 Likes
Though I’m a defender of aesthetics my main point was that people have successfully pulled off ambitious Bible publishing projects outside of Big Eva in the recent past.
I’ve heard The Bad Man From Moscow mention that he’d be very supportive of a crowdfunded translation/publishing project with all proceeds going to the diaconate of local churches. Sounds good but hard to practically pull off (with DW specifically there may be an immediate conflict over textual criticism issues).
5 Likes
Your highlight was exactly in the vein I was thinking. Regardless of what exactly that guy produced, the system is in place for money to flow for a project like this.
Of course you also mention one of the tough issues. Whatever person or group tackles something like this will make decisions that will immediately be issues for large swaths of people. Textual basis, translation basis (if there is one), theological history of translator(s), production materials, translation theory, even individual word choices. All of that and more will factor into whether or not someone decides to back a project like that.
I’m ready and willing to throw my (meager amount of) money at a project like that, but it would hinge on a number of things, and therein lies the risk. There’s many snares that could pop up and frustrate the project from the beginning. It would take a person or a group whose passion for the project overcomes all the snags to see it through (a hard thing for such a huge project).
1 Like
How much would we really need to start over?
What would it cost to purchase the rights to NASB95/NKJV/ESV and reform from there? We’re already talking millions.
Just reprint the ASV, it’s in the public domain.
You’ll have to give up 94 years of scholarship (presuming you read the NASB '95), but you’re still gaining almost 300 years on Ye Olde 1611.
2 Likes
But there’s something more needed. Some substantial things. Thus, the need for work.
Well looks like the Masters Seminary guys beat us to the punch. Feeling a bit mixed about it with Abner Chou on the Committee.
You may need to fast forward to about the 7 minute mark.
3 Likes
“Legacy Standard Bible.”
Will use “Yahweh” throughout OT.
Doulos will be “slave.”
I like both of those ideas, but I’m skeptical about Masters taking this on.
NT/Psalms/Proverbs by next March.
4 Likes
Full agreement on all three points from me. I told my dad years ago that I wish the OT just had “Yahweh” in English, and I was fascinated to find out he grew up with the Jerusalem Bible, which does this.
4 Likes
I think aside from the potential influence on biblical thinking such hermeneutics might wield, it should give us a pretty good insight into which things they are deviating from and perhaps draw some better lines of delineation.
1 Like
I was caught off guard last week by how very different the NASB2020 is in wording from the NASB1995. I suppose I was naively thinking that the new update meant a few word changes here and there; but it seems like much more of an overhaul.
One surprising particular change I stumbled across was in John 17:2. The NASB2020 reads, “You gave Him authority over all mankind.”
The NASB1995 translated the Greek word sarx as “flesh” (“You gave Him authority over all flesh”). KJV, ESV, CSB, and RSV all do the same—“flesh.” However, in the NASB2020 they’ve changed it to “mankind.” I see no reason for doing so, since the word sarx really means “flesh.” I found this decision particularly strange, since they seem to have actually imported a gender-specific term (“mankind”) that wasn’t there in the first place.
Has anyone noticed other similar changes which seem to depart from the plain Greek meaning?
7 Likes
A couple other examples in this post:
Just saw this. Modernized Geneva Bible (1560) from Canon Press:
3 Likes