Know Your English Bible Translations - An Overview

The previous post contains a more thorough exploration of the Bible as a whole, and it's historical accuracy and evidence. But, contained near the bottom of that post is the portion would which likely interest people the most.

So, in a first time move, allow me to copy/paste that section from my previous post, into it's own post, for easier viewing.

Definitions:
Formal Equivalency- refers to a Word-for-Word translation of the original manuscripts, and reflects the most accurate representation possible from the original texts. The drawbacks are minimal, usually being a more difficult reading when translated to English.

• These are best to have as our study Bible translations, and even our primary use Bibles. 
• Best Examples are English Standard Version (ESV), New American Standard Bible (NASB)

Dynamic Equivalency- referring more to a "thought for thought" translation that takes the original texts, and translates them accurately, but with a stronger emphasis on putting them in easy to read English.

• While we generally get near the original meaning, translator bias can sometimes slip into these as they seek to simplify the original words to make them more palatable to the reader
• This is also where we end up with translations that are more gender inclusive
• Best examples would be The New Living Translation (NLT) and the Good News Bible (GNB) translation
• The New International Version (NIV) is the most conservative Dynamic equivalent translation, and falls more in between Dynamic and Formal equivalency- with a leaning towards Dynamic. 

Paraphrase- Refers to a translation that has been put completely into colloquialisms and modern language, often losing the original meanings and words of the text.

• Examples- "The Message" and "The Living Bible" 
• Best for younger readers, but not good as study Bibles 

*Bible Translations Overview 

Formal Equivalency: (Highest degree of accuracy to the original manuscripts in spelling, grammar, and structure)


King James Version  (KJV) (1769 Revision)

• 12th grade reading level 
• Most widely printed and distributed Bible translation 

Pros

• Poetic beauty
• Formal equivalency (though limited based on the available manuscripts at the time)
• Best when closest to William Tyndale's translation into English
• "Virgin" for Isaiah 7:14 prophecy

Cons

• Word usage has changed so that some words mean different things now (example "gay" for happy)
• Erasmus edit was rushed and he used Latin to back translate to Greek resulting in much interpretation of the original intent of the texts
• Incorrect renderings throughout history due to rushed printing 
• Used defective manuscripts
• Translators did not have as good of a scholarly understanding of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek as today

The Revised Standard Version (RSV) (1952)

• Middle school reading level
• Revision of the 1901 American Standard Version
• Goal to preserve the good qualties of KJV, but more accurately reflect the meaning of original languages
• Rendered in readable English
• Kicked off the KJV only movement as many conservative Christians believed it to be too theologically liberal of a translation based on some passage translations like Isaiah 7:14 as "Young Woman" instead of "virgin"

Pros

• More accurate than KJV with better readability
• Acceptable for study Bible

Cons

• Used "Young Woman" in Isaiah 7:14 prophecy translation 
• Considered Theologically liberal
• Kicked off the KJV only movement 

The New American Standard Bible (NASB) (1971)

• 11th Grade reading level
• No Gender inclusive language (sticks to original language translations for masculine pronouns)
• True to the original Hebrew Aramaic, and Greek texts
• Understandable and grammatically correct 
• Goal was to produce a literal, but readable translation to bring reader as close as possible to reading of the original languages

Pros

• Highly Literal and great for Bible study
• Excellent cross reference system
• Old Testament quotes in the New Testament are in capital letters to distinguish from NT writers quotes.
• Use of "Virgin" in Isaiah 7:14 prophecy with footnote indicating "or maiden"

Cons

• Harder to read than a dynamic translation
• Not as suitable for public or pulpit use
• Greek perfect tense is translated often same as English perfect tense, but different meaning 
• Considered "wooden" and not in contemporary English.

The English Standard Version  (ESV) (2001)

• Eighth Grade Reading level 
• Revision of the RSV using most currently available ancient manuscripts 
• Gender inclusive only when author intended a group of men and women to be translated, otherwise maintains masculine when original languages use masculine
• Goal was to translate the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek with greatest possible accuracy
• Maintain the writing style of the Biblical authors (i.e. Paul's logic, John's simplicity, etc...)
• As literal as possible while maintaining clarity 

Pros

• Word-for-word and theologically conservative makes it an ideal study Bible
• Highly accurate and readable (as accurate as NASB, and as readable as NIV) 
• Maintains theological terms like "justification", "propitiation", "God-breathed", etc...
• Textual footnotes and section headings
• Bible translation of choice for well known pastors and theologians
• Use of "Virgin" in Isaiah 7:14 prophecy 
• Most theological conservative revision of the RSV

Cons

• Literal but opportunities still for some improvement according to a handful of scholars

New King James Version (NKJV) (1982) - Trends towards Formal equivalence word for word w/some exception

• 8th Grade reading level
• No gender inclusive language
• Goal was to maintain literal approach to translation except where idiom of original languages cannot be translated to English tongue 
• A continuation of efforts of earlier translations on the "Authorized version of the scriptures"

Pros

• Great option for those who prefer the elegance and beauty of KJV in modern language 
• Maintains cadence and style of KJV 
• Acceptable for Bible study
• Footnotes alert reader to alternate readings in critical text based on the most recently discovered old manuscripts 
• Use of "Virgin" in Isaiah 7:14 prophecy 
• Translators held firmly to inspiration (God breathed) and inerrancy of scripture

Cons

• Based primarily on the Textus Receptus (1550 Edition) manuscripts which are not as accurate as the most recently discovered manuscripts, and were based on relatively few available manuscripts at the time it was written
• 2000 instances of incorrect translation- though none change meaning of crucial passages
• Not as accurate as other word-for-word translations like NASB 

Middle of the Road Equivalence (Mix of Formal and dynamic with leanings towards dynamic)

New International Version (NIV) (1978, 1984)- Leans towards dynamic

• 7th grade reading level
• No gender inclusive language 
• Goal was to produce an accurate and readable translation between formal and dynamic equivalence- seeking balance of beauty, clarity, and dignity 

Pros

• Extremely readable with good clarity and literary quality
• Succeeded in being a true "middle of the road" equivalency, and is the most conservative of the dynamic equivalency spectrum 
• Suitable for devotion, study, and public reading
• Translated directly from the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek manuscripts instead of revising a prior translation
• Use of "Virgin" in Isaiah 7:14 prophecy (though footnote offers "young woman" as other possible translation
• Majority of its translators subscribed to the infallibility of Bible as God's word in written form

Cons

• Use of "Lord Almighty" instead of "Lord of Hosts" loses some of the original language meaning
• Middle of the road, but still leans towards dynamic equivalency, so not as good for study as Formal translations
• conjunctions left out blurring some continuity 

The New Revised Standard Edition (1989)

• Formal equivalence with dynamic portions 
• 8th to 10th grade reading level
• Sensitive to Gender Inclusive language (more so than TNIV)
• Used latest manuscript discoveries like Dead Sea Scrolls (which were unknown at time or original RSV translation)
• Sought to be ecumenical and cross church line divisions to appease as many as possible
• First English Translation to exclusively use gender inclusive language for generic masculine terms in Greek/Hebrew

Pros

• Easier to read and more accurate than RSV
• Essentially Formal equivalence makes it acceptable for Bible study 

Cons

• Renders Isaiah 7:14 prophecy as "Young woman"
• Many scholars believe gender inclusive language departs from literal text or subtly changes meanings 
• Gender inclusive language can take verses which intend to convey intimacy with an Individual, and make it more group oriented (Ex: John 14:23)
• Changes 1 Timothy 3:2 from "husband of one wife" to "married only once" eliminating the need for an elder to be male 

The Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)-2004

• 7th-8th grade reading level
• Moderate Gender Inclusive language- only changes if necessary to context
• More literal than NIV, but less than ESV and NASB
• Retains some theological words and provides word studies in back of Bible with meanings
• Nouns and pronouns referring to deity are capitalized
• OT citations in the NT are boldface
• Translation team used most up to date modern critical Greek texts, but reference Textus Receptus and majority text in footnotes
• Inerrancy of scripture affirmed by the 100 scholars and proofreaders 
• Designed for Bible readers of a protestant, conservative, evangelical nature 

Pros

• Achieves balance between Formal and dynamic equivalency
• Great for Serious Bible study
• Accurate translation, clear style, excellent footnotes and cross references
• Only gender inclusive when contexts demands- maintains original masculine translations otherwise
• Renders Isaiah 7:14 prophecy as "virgin"

Cons

• Slightly "wooden" or "awkward" in style
• Not suitable for public reading
• Some complex words used in place of simple (Ex: "Deluge" instead of "Flood")

New English Translation (NET Bible)- 2005

• Originated as a completely free Internet based Bible 
• Beta tested for public review 
• Team of 25 scholars who were experts in Biblical languages and taught either Hebrew or Greek exegesis at seminaries
• No direct denomination association 
• Goals was to consistently translate passage within their grammatical, historical, and theological contexts

Pros

• Readable and accurate 
• 60,000 + translator notes from scholarly research 

Cons

• Not fully formal or fully dynamic makes it hard to place on spectrum- true middle of the road
• Translator notes may be too technical for those without Hebrew or Greek language knowledge
• Exegetical notes are not a substitute for comprehensive exegetical study
• printed version's font is too small for older eyes 
• "Young woman" translation of Isaiah 7:14

Dynamic Equivalence (Thought for Thought Translation)

Good News Translation (GNT) 1976 A.K.A. Good News Bible

• 6th grade reading level
• Moderate use of Gender inclusive language 
• Goal to be natural, clear, simple, and unambiguous common language rendering

Pros

• Easy to read
• Good for first time Bible readers or readers who speak English as second language 

Cons

• Though for Thought not as suitable for Bible study
• Limited vocabulary reduces some elegance
• Too much interpretation by translators including some paraphrasing 
• "Young Woman" in the Isaiah 7:14 prophecy and Luke 1:27 is NOT best translation
• Acts 20:28 in this version undermines Jesus deity according to conservative scholars
• Added the Apocrypha for Roman Catholics as a compromise 
• Primary translator did NOT believe in the inerrancy and infallibility of Bible 

New Century Version (NCV) 1992 Revision

• 5th-6th grade reading level
• Revision of English Version for the Deaf (EVD) which was simplest reading of any translation (3rd grade level)
• International Children's version is based on same, but without gender inclusive language 

Pros

• Makes Bible understandable, particularly for young people, people with low reading skills, or people who speak English as a second language 
• Among the easiest translations to read 
• Renders Isaiah 7:14 as "Virgin" with footnote indicating "young woman" as alternate

Cons

• Dynamic equivalence and greatly simplified language makes it unsuitable for detailed Bible study
• Some detraction from beauty and elegance (Ex: Genesis 1:1 renders sky instead of "heavens and earth")
• Lack of theological words
• Gender inclusive 

New Living Translation (NLT) (1996/2004)

• 2004 revision of the 1996 version was substantial
• 6th Grade Reading level
• Moderate use of gender inclusive language 
• Goal to have the same impact on readers as the original audience 
• Goal to render the message of original texts into clear, contemporary English

Pros

• Understandable and exciting to read "accurate and idiomatically powerful"
• Vast improvement over The Living Bible (LB-1971 Paraphrase) on which it was based 
• Appropriate for young readers or those who speak English as 2nd language 
• Appropriate in context for study, though it is dynamic equivalence 
• Isaiah 7:14 uses "Virgin" -though includes footnote for "Young woman" 

Cons

• Dynamic equivalency is not as good for Bible study
• Gender inclusive 
• Simplified theological terms 

New International Readers Version (NIrV) (1998 Revision)

• 3rd grade reading level
• Goals were readability, understandability, compatibility with NIV, reliability, and trustworthiness
• Cross referenced with quotes from other places in Bible
• Expectation that once a reader's reading level is sufficient, they will "graduate" onto more advanced translations 
• Scholars used original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, but also NIV translation when possible 

Pros

• Appropriate for children, adults with low reading skills, or readers who speak English as 2nd language 
• 3rd grade reading level puts it at grasp for millions of readers
• Isaiah 7:14 prophecy as "virgin" 

Cons

• Overall simplicity makes it inadequate as a study Bible
• Not sufficient as reading level improves- expectation is to graduate to NIV or other more advanced translations 

Paraphrase 
Putting the Bible into modern language, often using the author or translator's own words to translate passages

The Living Bible (TLB) 1971

• 4th Grade reading level
• Paraphrase of the American Standard Version (1901)
• Goal to put basic message of the Bible into modern language that could be understood by typical reader
• Created by Kenneth N. Taylor, founder of Tyndale house Publishers
• Never intended to be used as the reader's only source of Biblical knowledge or as the primary text of scholars 
• Revision beginning in 1980s eventually became the New Living Translation (NLT) in 1996

Pros

• Best selling American book in 1972/73
• Uses "Virgin" for Isaiah 7:14 prophecy- though with footnote for "Young woman" as alternate

Cons

• Too much personal opinion put into what the Bible says when paraphrasing- an author bias is unavoidable
• Not sufficient for study, or to be used as primary Bible translation 

The Message (2002)

• 4th-5th grade reading level
• Goal to convert the tone, rhythm, and ideas of Bible into the way people think and speak now
• One translator- Eugene Peterson, but team of evangelical consultants to review accuracy

Pros

• Interesting to read and makes Bible come alive with western idioms and figures of speech
• Beneficial for someone reading scriptures with fresh eyes
• Helps modern readers grasp something of impact scriptures may have had to original audience
• Good for those with deficient reading skills, or who speak English as second language 
• "Virgin" for Isaiah 7:14 prophecy

Cons

• Significant interpretation by Peterson makes it hard to know where Biblical text ends and commentary begins
• Style chosen over communicating the original content
• Some renderings strip the scripture of its 1st century Jewish context by rendering into Western language phrasings
• Goes Beyond Dynamic Equivalence
• not enough specificity
• Generalities used over specifics (Ex: 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 mentions "general sin" instead of the specific list of sins that Paul provides)
• Not ideal for Bible study, though interesting for a fresh addition to a study Bible 

OTHER Translations 

The Amplified Bible (AMP)  1965

• Formal equivalence with additions for clarity
• 11th Grade reading level 
• Goal to provide insights from original Hebrew and Greek for English readers who do not know Hebrew and Greek
• Compiled by Frances E. Stewart and based on 1901 ASV with references to original languages
• Not intended to replace translations but to supplement them 

Pros

• Essentially a commentary on the original languages of Biblical text
• Acknowledges no single word or phrase can capture exact Hebrew/Greek meaning
• Helpful tool to supplement primary Bible 
• Isaiah 7:14 as Virgin with a footnote supporting "virgin" as the best translation of that passage

Cons

• Text is harder to follow with added notes
• Reads awkward out loud
• Adding to text could lead reader to pick and choose "favorite" not most "accurate" rendering of words and meaning 

Today's New International Version (TNIV)

• Middle of the road translation leaning dynamic
• Designed for 18 to 34 year old readers 
• "Gender accurate" not inclusive means it renders male when obviously male, and renders other when more than males presents (i.e. Brothers and sisters in Christ)
• Despite controversy surrounding it's gender inclusive language, there are more Gender inclusive versions that exist such as The New Revised Standard Version (NRSV), New Living Translation (NLT), and Catholic New Jerusalem Bible
• Goal was to engage 18 to 34 year olds leaving the church with a more modern translation which still reflected Biblical scholarship, clarity, and gender accuracy

Pros

• Maintains and improves readability of NIV, and more accurate in terms of intended meanings
• Easier for modern English readers to understand
• "Virgin" for Isaiah 7:14 prophecy 

Cons

• Largely criticized and condemned, though perhaps unnecessarily considering other version are more gender inclusive than this one 
• Some different meanings communicated in verses (ex Psalm 26:3)
• Gender accuracy relating to verses about an individual (ex Psalm 1:1), can lose meaning when group terms are used 
• Substitutes "Messiah" for "Christ" in many instances (can affect meaning in certain places)
• "Saints" rendered as "God's People or "believers" (not necessarily most accurate rendering every time)

*Reference: The Complete Guide to Bible Translations by  Ron Rhodes is the primary resource for this overview

Bible Study Time

I've been researching Bible translations, and looking at the various translations and the Bible's history.

I'm convinced, even if I were not a Christian, that we have ample evidence of the historical validity of the Bible. And, beyond that, as God-breathed scripture.

Does some of it come from proof texting the Bible itself? Yes. But, we would do so by judging the textual and historical accuracy first, so that we can be sure what we have are the words of the original authors.

 Unlike the proverbial game of telephone pushed by skeptics, there are no major variances that would affect foundational Christian doctrine. This tells me a few things.

1) Christians can be confident that what we have is truly the Word of God. Brought about as the Holy Spirit used men and their personal writing styles, to speak His truth to mankind.

2) We can historically verify beyond a reasonable doubt that the words of Christ and the apostles; as well as, God's prophets, are accurate.

3) We can only ignore this accountability to God from His word to us by actively suppressing it.

4) No one is exempt from this truth. Our conscience and the world around speaks to a creator, and the Bible reveals everything we need to know about His requirements, and also His desire for fellowship with His creation.

I'll highlight a few key points regarding the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament), and the New Testament writings. The information comes from a number of sources including the Apologetics Sermon Series (Parts 3 and 4) by Mike Fabarez , "The Complete Guide to Bible translations" by Ron Rhodes, and many articles from the Reformation Study Bible.
***See Resources at bottom of the page for more references and further study.***


Bible Highlights/Facts

• The discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls confirmed that the Hebrew Scriptures from the Masoretic Texts- which at best were dated around 800 AD - were not only accurate to an extremely high degree; but also, gave us original manuscripts that could be dated even before Christ's time. 
• We have over 5700 manuscripts of the New Testament writings and fragments, so that textual criticism can be performed to verify the original author's words within a high degree of accuracy. 
• Textual variations can be attributed primarily to errors which involve sentence arrangement, spelling, and other minor issues which affect no major doctrine or foundational truth of Christianity 
• New Testament writings were in use and circulation by the early church within the first 60-70 years after Jesus death, during the lifetime of most apostles who walked with Him, and many of the eyewitnesses who had seen Him resurrected. 
• Early church fathers writing in the century after the apostles quoted and referenced all of the NT writings we have now as "canon" so that one could compile our New Testament from their writing references alone
• Books like those in the Catholic Apocrypha were never accepted by Jewish people as scripture, and were only admitted into canon by the Catholic Church during the reformation as a way to combat the reformation, and defend their non-Biblical doctrines like purgatory and prayers for the dead
• The "Lost Gospels" (ex: Gospel of Thomas), were never circulated or quoted by the early church, but came about much later through Gnostic groups, and others condemned by early Christian majority as heretical.
• The Da Vinci code- which is a FICTIONAL book, did much harm in confusing both non-christians and Christians about our NT canon and what we have. Constantine did not put our NT books into canon, they were canonical long before his time. 
• The Council of Nicea was not called to discuss canon, but to resolve disagreements arising from within the Church of Alexandria over the nature of the Son in his relationship to the Father, primarily brought about by the heretical doctrines of Arius and "Arianism"
• Fun Fact- Saint Nicholas, on whom we based Santa Claus, was at this council, and rumor has it Arius frustrated him so much with his anti-Biblical teachings, that St. Nick slapped him. 

Thoughts:

Given the history of the scriptures, and the original Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic manuscripts in our possession (Which can be viewed at a number of places in the world), it's a wonder so many still believe the Bible came about by a game of telephone. 

The Masorites who meticulously copied the original Hebrew Scriptures dedicated their lives to the process, and followed an extremely strict set of guidelines to ensure accuracy to the original documents. The fact that our more recent finding of the Dead Sea Scrolls- which now date our manuscripts to pre-Christ- follow very closely the Masoretic texts is further confirmation that we have an accurate Old Testament. And, the first full scroll discovery in the Dead Sea scrolls was the book of Isaiah, which contains the primary prophecies about Christ. 

Though the New Testament has more variations as a whole in text, the fact that we have more manuscripts for New Testament documents that we can date as far back as the 200s AD, gives scholars a great deal of insight into the original author's intended words and meanings. No other ancient document has as many manuscripts available, or can be dated as early as our Biblical writings.

Again, the primary reason for any discourse which would deny the historical validity of the Bible comes more from an unwillingness to accept the tenants of Christianity as a whole, than any actual scholarly disagreement.  Enough Christian and non-Christian scholars have confirmed the accuracy to accept it as true. 

How do we know the translations we have in English are accurate to the original languages? 

While it's true we have a huge variety of translations available to us now, we can look at the history of the English Bible to see that what we have now (in terms of the more word-for-word translation) is extremely accurate to the original languages. The best modern examples being the English Standard Bible (ESV), and the New American Standard Bible (NASB). 

Let's consider a bit of the English Bible history, per a timeline taken from the sources mentioned above, and then compare and contrast some of the available translations we have available. 

English Bible History Outline 

• 384 - Jerome does first full Latin translation
• 405 - Jerome completes new edition which becomes the “Latin Vulgate” 
• 730 - Bede translates Gospel of John into Old English
• 990 - All 4 gospels translated into Old English
• 1180- Peter Waldo commissions translation of Bible from Latin to French
• 1229- Council of Toulouse- Roman Catholic Church bans Bibles in vernacular languages to combat Gnostic heresy from the Albinges group This ban has the effect of also giving Roman Catholic church full control of Bible, and no access to lay persons 
• 1382-95- Wycliff Bible is complete translation of the Latin Vulgate into English by John Wycliffe. Wycliffe argues for Bible alone as sole authority in church over councils or the Pope
• 1384-Wycliffe dies of natural causes, but the Roman Cadtholic church dug up his bones and burned them (1482) to identify him as a heretic (per their estimation)
• Creation of Printing press, the Greek New Testament, and the Reformation set the stage for William Tyndale
• 1526- William Tyndale translates New Testament into English from original languages
• 1534- Martin Luther translates the Bible into German using the original languages (Hebrew, Aramaic,  Greek)
• Tyndale translated more than half of Hebrew OT into English during his life, but was not able to complete it. Roman Catholic persecution of Reformers and translations of Bible that common people could access is active during this time, and ultimately leads to Tyndale’s martyrdom 
• 1535-“Coverdale Bible” by Miles Coverdale
• 1537-John Rogers using Psuedonym of Thomas Matthew publishes “Matthews Bible” version.
• Coverdale's work and Rogers “Matthews Bible” edition were primarily a completion of Tyndale’s work 
• 1539 -“The Great Bible” published by Henry VIII largely based on Tyndale’s translation (ironically because he did not support Tyndale’s views)
• 1560- “The Geneva Bible” directed by William Whittington -First Bible with Study notes and verse divisions This was Primarily Calvinist in notes and focus as John Calvin and colleagues worked directly on it. It was the main Bible translation used by Shakespeare, John Milton, and the Puritans. It was also the first Bible to make it to New England coming across on Mayflower. Its Printing was  discontinued around 1644
• 1611- King James Version published after being commissioned by King James I 
-King James I did not like the “Calvinist” notes in the Geneva Bible and wanted a new translation. This has been one of the most popular versions even to this day. It is considered the most beautiful and poetic translation (Though there are issues with its overall accuracy in manuscript usages compared to other versions today). 
• Printing errors resulted in some odd Editions of the KJV over the years.“The “He” Bible  substituted “he” for “she” in Ruth 3:15. The “Wicked Bible” left out the word “not” in Exodus 20:14 which then read “thou shalt commit adultery” 
• 1885- English Revised Version completed using large team of scholars from multiple denominations. This was a revision of the King James, and is the primary text the modern King James versions are taken from (rather than the 1611 version)
• 1901- American Standard Version revises English Revised Version slightly, and was most accurate translation to English from the original languages to date at that time.
• 1952- The Revised Standard Version revises American Standard Version, but is considered “theologically liberal” and not accepted by more conservative Christians. This also led in part to the "King James Only" movement, which continues (unfortunately) to this day. 
• 1971- The New American Standard Bible becomes most accurate translation to date from the original languages, and Bible of choice for those who did not like the RSV
• 1971- RSV updated 
• 1973- New International Version- Dynamic Equivalence- Very popular even today - not literal word for word - more thought for thought- middle of the road. It is considered the most conservative of the "dynamic equivalence" (Thought-for-thought) translations. 
• 1982- New King James Version revises King James Version, but uses Textus Receptus manuscripts, which do not reflect most up to date documents we have of the original languages at this time. Study notes do indicate newer manuscript info when applicable though 
• 2001- English Standard Version - major revision by large team of scholars. It is a Word for Word translations and uses most up to date manuscripts of original texts. It is considered as accurate as NASB, but more readable - less "wooden" in the language and phrasings. It's the Bible of choice for prominent pastors and theologians today.- revised again in 2007, 2011

I made a short  online survey regarding the Bible translations that people use, and found that many do not know which version they use. Or, for those who did know which translation, many would not be sure how accurate or inaccurate it is to the original texts. Yet, the majority also expressed that they would want their Bible translation to be as faithful as possible to the original texts. 

Using Ron Rhodes book as a guide, I created a spreadsheet of the major translations, and the pros and cons of each translation. From there, I add bits of research taken from the Reformation Study Bible articles to further discuss the validity of the Bible as well.

First, though, we need to visit a couple of important definitions:

Formal Equivalency- refers to a Word-for-Word translation of the original manuscripts, and reflects the most accurate representation possible from the original texts. The drawbacks are minimal, usually being a more difficult reading when translated to English.

• These are best to have as our study Bible translations, and even our primary use Bibles. 
• Best Examples are English Standard Version (ESV), New American Standard Bible (NASB)

Dynamic Equivalency- referring more to a "thought for thought" translation that takes the original texts, and translates them accurately, but with a stronger emphasis on putting them in easy to read English.

• While we generally get near the original meaning, translator bias can sometimes slip into these as they seek to simplify the original words to make them more palatable to the reader
• This is also where we end up with translations that are more gender inclusive
• Best examples would be The New Living Translation (NLT) and the Good News Bible (GNB) translation
• The New International Version (NIV) is the most conservative Dynamic equivalent translation, and falls more in between Dynamic and Formal equivalency- with a leaning towards Dynamic. 

Paraphrase- Refers to a translation that has been put completely into colloquialisms and modern language, often losing the original meanings and words of the text.

• Examples- "The Message" and "The Living Bible" 
• Best for younger readers, but not good as study Bibles 

Let's take a look at some of the more prominent Formal, Dynamic, and Middle of the Road Translations, and some pros and cons of each.

A couple of focuses emerged from Ron's book, and I tend to be in agreement with his view on them. I've included description of each with the translations mentioned.

The most accurate translations will use "virgin" for Isaiah 7:14, and be non-gender inclusive (despite what some will say culturally to that).

1) Isaiah 7:14 should be rendered with the word "Virgin" though many translations use "young woman"
-Research into the manuscripts used to translate this verse originally lean more towards the "virgin" rendering, even though the Hebrew word "alma" used means "young woman" at face value.
-This is the prophecy referred to in Luke's Gospel that Jesus would be born of a virgin, so for a Christian to stand on the essential doctrine of the Virgin birth, the rendering of "virgin" here is a key point.

2) Gender inclusive language. Ultimately, it's more accurate to the original texts to use the masculine language where it was used. And, in reference to God, it is always to be masculine. Though God the Father is described as spirit, when He came to earth as the son, it was in male form.

-Some formal equivalent versions like the ESV will use terms like "brothers and sisters in Christ" when the context indicates that a group of believers is present. I find these acceptable in the approach as they still remain faithful to the context of the original texts.

-However, some translations "abuse" this inclusivity to make nearly every masculine reference a generic one, which is not only unfaithful to the original manuscripts, but also takes away meaning in passages that are meant for individuals, not groups (NRSV being the worst culprit here).



Formal Equivalency: (Highest degree of accuracy to the original manuscripts in spelling, grammar, and structure)


King James Version  (KJV) (1769 Revision)

• 12th grade reading level 
• Most widely printed and distributed Bible translation 

Pros

• Poetic beauty
• Formal equivalency (though limited based on the available manuscripts at the time)
• Best when closest to William Tyndale's translation into English
• "Virgin" for Isaiah 7:14 prophecy

Cons

• Word usage has changed so that some words mean different things now (example "gay" for happy)
• Erasmus edit was rushed and he used Latin to back translate to Greek resulting in much interpretation of the original intent of the texts
• Incorrect renderings throughout history due to rushed printing 
• Used defective manuscripts
• Translators did not have as good of a scholarly understanding of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek as today

The Revised Standard Version (RSV) (1952)

• Middle school reading level
• Revision of the 1901 American Standard Version
• Goal to preserve the good qualties of KJV, but more accurately reflect the meaning of original languages
• Rendered in readable English
• Kicked off the KJV only movement as many conservative Christians believed it to be too theologically liberal of a translation based on some passage translations like Isaiah 7:14 as "Young Woman" instead of "virgin"

Pros

• More accurate than KJV with better readability
• Acceptable for study Bible

Cons

• Uses "Young Woman" in Isaiah 7:14 prophecy translation 
• Considered Theologically liberal
• Kicked off the KJV only movement 

The New American Standard Bible (NASB) (1971)

• 11th Grade reading level
• No Gender inclusive language (sticks to original language translations for masculine pronouns)
• True to the original Hebrew Aramaic, and Greek texts
• Understandable and grammatically correct 
• Goal was to produce a literal, but readable translation to bring reader as close as possible to reading of the original languages

Pros

• Highly Literal and great for Bible study
• Excellent cross reference system
• Old Testament quotes in the New Testament are in capital letters to distinguish from NT writers quotes.
• Use of "Virgin" in Isaiah 7:14 prophecy with footnote indicating "or maiden"

Cons

• Harder to read than a dynamic translation
• Not as suitable for public or pulpit use
• Greek perfect tense is translated often same as English perfect tense, but different meaning 
• Considered "wooden" and not in contemporary English.

The English Standard Version  (ESV) (2001)

• Eighth Grade Reading level 
• Revision of the RSV using most currently available ancient manuscripts 
• Gender inclusive only when author intended a group of men and women to be translated, otherwise maintains masculine when original languages use masculine
• Goal was to translate the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek with greatest possible accuracy
• Maintain the writing style of the Biblical authors (i.e. Paul's logic, John's simplicity, etc...)
• As literal as possible while maintaining clarity 

Pros

• Word-for-word and theologically conservative makes it an ideal study Bible
• Highly accurate and readable (as accurate as NASB, and as readable as NIV) 
• Maintains theological terms like "justification", "propitiation", "God-breathed", etc...
• Textual footnotes and section headings
• Bible translation of choice for well known pastors and theologians
• Use of "Virgin" in Isaiah 7:14 prophecy 
• Most theological conservative revision of the RSV

Cons

• Literal but opportunities still for some improvement according to a handful of scholars

New King James Version (NKJV) (1982) - Trends towards Formal equivalence word for word w/some exception

• 8th Grade reading level
• No gender inclusive language
• Goal was to maintain literal approach to translation except where idiom of original languages cannot be translated to English tongue 
• A continuation of efforts of earlier translations on the "Authorized version of the scriptures"

Pros

• Great option for those who prefer the elegance and beauty of KJV in modern language 
• Maintains cadence and style of KJV 
• Acceptable for Bible study
• Footnotes alert reader to alternate readings in critical text based on the most recently discovered old manuscripts 
• Use of "Virgin" in Isaiah 7:14 prophecy 
• Translators held firmly to inspiration (God breathed) and inerrancy of scripture

Cons

• Based primarily on the Textus Receptus (1550 Edition) manuscripts which are not as accurate as the most recently discovered manuscripts, and were based on relatively few available manuscripts at the time it was written
• 2000 instances of incorrect translation- though none change meaning of crucial passages
• Not as accurate as other word-for-word translations like NASB 

Middle of the Road Equivalence (Mix of Formal and dynamic with leanings towards dynamic)

New International Version (NIV) (1978, 1984)- Leans towards dynamic

• 7th grade reading level
• No gender inclusive language 
• Goal was to produce an accurate and readable translation between formal and dynamic equivalence- seeking balance of beauty, clarity, and dignity 

Pros

• Extremely readable with good clarity and literary quality
• Succeeded in being a true "middle of the road" equivalency, and is the most conservative of the dynamic equivalency spectrum 
• Suitable for devotion, study, and public reading
• Translated directly from the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek manuscripts instead of revising a prior translation
• Use of "Virgin" in Isaiah 7:14 prophecy (though footnote offers "young woman" as other possible translation
• Majority of its translators subscribed to the infallibility of Bible as God's word in written form

Cons

• Use of "Lord Almighty" instead of "Lord of Hosts" loses some of the original language meaning
• Middle of the road, but still leans towards dynamic equivalency, so not as good for study as Formal translations
• conjunctions left out blurring some continuity 

The New Revised Standard Edition (1989)

• Formal equivalence with dynamic portions 
• 8th to 10th grade reading level
• Sensitive to Gender Inclusive language (more so than TNIV)
• Used latest manuscript discoveries like Dead Sea Scrolls (which were unknown at time or original RSV translation)
• Sought to be ecumenical and cross church line divisions to appease as many as possible
• First English Translation to exclusively use gender inclusive language for generic masculine terms in Greek/Hebrew

Pros

• Easier to read and more accurate than RSV
• Essentially Formal equivalence makes it acceptable for Bible study 

Cons

• Renders Isaiah 7:14 prophecy as "Young woman"
• Many scholars believe gender inclusive language departs from literal text or subtly changes meanings 
• Gender inclusive language can take verses which intend to convey intimacy with an Individual, and make it more group oriented (Ex: John 14:23)
• Changes 1 Timothy 3:2 from "husband of one wife" to "married only once" eliminating the need for an elder to be male 

The Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)-2004

• 7th-8th grade reading level
• Moderate Gender Inclusive language- only changes if necessary to context
• More literal than NIV, but less than ESV and NASB
• Retains some theological words and provides word studies in back of Bible with meanings
• Nouns and pronouns referring to deity are capitalized
• OT citations in the NT are boldface
• Translation team used most up to date modern critical Greek texts, but reference Textus Receptus and majority text in footnotes
• Inerrancy of scripture affirmed by the 100 scholars and proofreaders 
• Designed for Bible readers of a protestant, conservative, evangelical nature 

Pros

• Achieves balance between Formal and dynamic equivalency
• Great for Serious Bible study
• Accurate translation, clear style, excellent footnotes and cross references
• Only gender inclusive when contexts demands- maintains original masculine translations otherwise
• Renders Isaiah 7:14 prophecy as "virgin"

Cons

• Slightly "wooden" or "awkward" in style
• Not suitable for public reading
• Some complex words used in place of simple (Ex: "Deluge" instead of "Flood")

New English Translation (NET Bible)- 2005

• Originated as a completely free Internet based Bible 
• Beta tested for public review 
• Team of 25 scholars who were experts in Biblical languages and taught either Hebrew or Greek exegesis at seminaries
• No direct denomination association 
• Goals was to consistently translate passage within their grammatical, historical, and theological contexts

Pros

• Readable and accurate 
• 60,000 + translator notes from scholarly research 

Cons

• Not fully formal or fully dynamic makes it hard to place on spectrum- true middle of the road
• Translator notes may be too technical for those without Hebrew or Greek language knowledge
• Exegetical notes are not a substitute for comprehensive exegetical study
• printed version's font is too small for older eyes 
• "Young woman" translation of Isaiah 7:14

Dynamic Equivalence (Thought for Thought Translation)

Good News Translation (GNT) 1976 A.K.A. Good News Bible

• 6th grade reading level
• Moderate use of Gender inclusive language 
• Goal to be natural, clear, simple, and unambiguous common language rendering

Pros

• Easy to read
• Good for first time Bible readers or readers who speak English as second language 

Cons

• Though for Thought not as suitable for Bible study
• Limited vocabulary reduces some elegance
• Too much interpretation by translators including some paraphrasing 
• "Young Woman" in the Isaiah 7:14 prophecy and Luke 1:27 is NOT best translation
• Acts 20:28 in this version undermines Jesus deity according to conservative scholars
• Added the Apocrypha for Roman Catholics as a compromise 
• Primary translator did NOT believe in the inerrancy and infallibility of Bible 

New Century Version (NCV) 1992 Revision

• 5th-6th grade reading level
• Revision of English Version for the Deaf (EVD) which was simplest reading of any translation (3rd grade level)
• International Children's version is based on same, but without gender inclusive language 

Pros

• Makes Bible understandable, particularly for young people, people with low reading skills, or people who speak English as a second language 
• Among the easiest translations to read 
• Renders Isaiah 7:14 as "Virgin" with footnote indicating "young woman" as alternate

Cons

• Dynamic equivalence and greatly simplified language makes it unsuitable for detailed Bible study
• Some detraction from beauty and elegance (Ex: Genesis 1:1 renders sky instead of "heavens and earth")
• Lack of theological words
• Gender inclusive 

New Living Translation (NLT) (1996/2004)

• 2004 revision of the 1996 version was substantial
• 6th Grade Reading level
• Moderate use of gender inclusive language 
• Goal to have the same impact on readers as the original audience 
• Goal to render the message of original texts into clear, contemporary English

Pros

• Understandable and exciting to read "accurate and idiomatically powerful"
• Vast improvement over The Living Bible (LB-1971 Paraphrase) on which it was based 
• Appropriate for young readers or those who speak English as 2nd language 
• Appropriate in context for study, though it is dynamic equivalence 
• Isaiah 7:14 uses "Virgin" -though includes footnote for "Young woman" 

Cons

• Dynamic equivalency is not as good for Bible study
• Gender inclusive 
• Simplified theological terms 

New International Readers Version (NIrV) (1998 Revision)

• 3rd grade reading level
• Goals were readability, understandability, compatibility with NIV, reliability, and trustworthiness
• Cross referenced with quotes from other places in Bible
• Expectation that once a reader's reading level is sufficient, they will "graduate" onto more advanced translations 
• Scholars used original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, but also NIV translation when possible 

Pros

• Appropriate for children, adults with low reading skills, or readers who speak English as 2nd language 
• 3rd grade reading level puts it at grasp for millions of readers
• Isaiah 7:14 prophecy as "virgin" 

Cons

• Overall simplicity makes it inadequate as a study Bible
• Not sufficient as reading level improves- expectation is to graduate to NIV or other more advanced translations 

Paraphrase - Putting the Bible into modern language, often using the author or translator's own words to translate passages

The Living Bible (TLB) 1971

• 4th Grade reading level
• Paraphrase of the American Standard Version (1901)
• Goal to put basic message of the Bible into modern language that could be understood by typical reader
• Created by Kenneth N. Taylor, founder of Tyndale house Publishers
• Never intended to be used as the reader's only source of Biblical knowledge or as the primary text of scholars 
• Revision beginning in 1980s eventually became the New Living Translation (NLT) in 1996

Pros

• Best selling American book in 1972/73
• Uses "Virgin" for Isaiah 7:14 prophecy- though with footnote for "Young woman" as alternate

Cons

• Too much personal opinion put into what the Bible says when paraphrasing- an author bias is unavoidable
• Not sufficient for study, or to be used as primary Bible translation 

The Message (2002)

• 4th-5th grade reading level
• Goal to convert the tone, rhythm, and ideas of Bible into the way people think and speak now
• One translator- Eugene Peterson, but team of evangelical consultants to review accuracy

Pros

• Interesting to read and makes Bible come alive with western idioms and figures of speech
• Beneficial for someone reading scriptures with fresh eyes
• Helps modern readers grasp something of impact scriptures may have had to original audience
• Good for those with deficient reading skills, or who speak English as second language 
• "Virgin" for Isaiah 7:14 prophecy

Cons

• Significant interpretation by Peterson makes it hard to know where Biblical text ends and commentary begins
• Style chosen over communicating the original content
• Some renderings strip the scripture of its 1st century Jewish context by rendering into Western language phrasings
• Goes Beyond Dynamic Equivalence
• not enough specificity
• Generalities used over specifics (Ex: 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 mentions "general sin" instead of the specific list of sins that Paul provides)
• Not ideal for Bible study, though interesting for a fresh addition to a study Bible 

OTHER Translations 

The Amplified Bible (AMP)  1965

• Formal equivalence with additions for clarity
• 11th Grade reading level 
• Goal to provide insights from original Hebrew and Greek for English readers who do not know Hebrew and Greek
• Compiled by Frances E. Stewart and based on 1901 ASV with references to original languages
• Not intended to replace translations but to supplement them 

Pros

• Essentially a commentary on the original languages of Biblical text
• Acknowledges no single word or phrase can capture exact Hebrew/Greek meaning
• Helpful tool to supplement primary Bible 
• Isaiah 7:14 as Virgin with a footnote supporting "virgin" as the best translation of that passage

Cons

• Text is harder to follow with added notes
• Reads awkward out loud
• Adding to text could lead reader to pick and choose "favorite" not most "accurate" rendering of words and meaning 

Today's New International Version (TNIV)

• Middle of the road translation leaning dynamic
• Designed for 18 to 34 year old readers 
• "Gender accurate" not inclusive means it renders male when obviously male, and renders other when more than males presents (i.e. Brothers and sisters in Christ)
• Despite controversy surrounding it's gender inclusive language, there are more Gender inclusive versions that exist such as The New Revised Standard Version (NRSV), New Living Translation (NLT), and Catholic New Jerusalem Bible
• Goal was to engage 18 to 34 year olds leaving the church with a more modern translation which still reflected Biblical scholarship, clarity, and gender accuracy

Pros

• Maintains and improves readability of NIV, and more accurate in terms of intended meanings
• Easier for modern English readers to understand
• "Virgin" for Isaiah 7:14 prophecy 

Cons

• Largely criticized and condemned 
• Some different meanings communicated in verses (ex Psalm 26:3)
• Gender accuracy relating to verses about an individual (ex Psalm 1:1), can lose meaning when group terms are used 
• Substitutes "Messiah" for "Christ" in many instances (can affect meaning in certain places)
• "Saints" rendered as "God's People or "believers" (not necessarily most accurate rendering every time)

 In 1978 the International Council on biblical Inerrancy produced the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy. Here is the short statement from that (as taken from The Inerrancy of Holy Scripture appendix article by Mark Ross in the Reformation Study Bible 

1. God, who is Himself Truth and speaks truth only, has inspired Holy Scripture in order thereby to reveal Himself to lost mankind through Jesus Christ as Creator and Lord, Redeemer and Judge, Holy Scripture is God's witness to Himself.

2. Holy scripture, being God's own Word, written by men prepared and superintended by His Spirit, is of infallible divine authority in all matters upon which it touches: it is to be believed, as God's instruction, in all that it affirms: obeyed, as God's commands, in all that it requires; embraced, as God's pledge in all that it promises.

3. The Holy Spirit, Scripture's divine Author, both authenticates it to us by His inward witness and opens our minds to understand its meaning.

4. Being wholly and verbally God given, Scripture is without error or fault in all its teaching, no less in what it states about God's acts in creation, about the events of world history, and about its own literary origins under God, than in its witness to God's savings grace in individual lives.

5. The authority of Scripture is inescapably impaired if this total divine inerrancy is in any way limited or disregarded, or made relative to a view of truth contrary to the Bible's own; and such lapses bring loss to both the individual and the Church. 

This was hardly the first time a confession of inerrancy of scripture was maintained. 

The Belgic Confession of 1561 says "We confess that this Word of God was not sent, nor delivered by the will of man, but that holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Ghost"

The Second Helvetic Confession of 1566, written by Heinrich Bullinger states, "We believe and confess the canonical Scriptures of the holy prophets and apostles of both Testaments to be the true Word of God, and to have sufficient authority of themselves, not of men. For God himself spoke to the fathers, prophets, apostles, and still speaks to us through the Holy Scriptures"

The Westminster Confession of 1647 declares, "The authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believe, and obeyed, depends not upon the testimony of any man, or Church; but wholly upon God (who is truth itself) the author therof: and therefore it is to be received, because it is the Word of God" (1.4)

The Evangelical Theological Society in 1949 stated, "The Bible alone, and the Bible in its entirety, is the Word of God written and is therefore inerrant in the autographs."

Defenders of the Bible's full infallibility began to use the word inerrancy in order to distinguish this position from the revisionist position which had emerged which limited the Bible's infallibility to matters of religious faith and practice, butt allowed for it to contain errors in matters of history or science. 

Resources for Further Study

The Bible in Church History. Stephen J. Nichos. Reformation Study Bible. 2015. Reformation Trust Publishing.

Canonicity. W. Robert Godfrey. Reformation Study Bible. 2015. Reformation Trust Publishing.

Hermeneutics. Robert W. Yarbrough. Reformation Study Bible. 2015. Reformation Trust Publishing.

The Inerrancy of Holy Scripture. Mark Ross. Reformation Study Bible. 2015. Reformation Trust Publishing.

Interpreting Scripture By Scripture. Michael S. Horton. Reformation Study Bible. 2015. Reformation Trust Publishing.

New Testament Textual Criticism. Michael J. Kruger. Reformation Study Bible. 2015. Reformation Trust Publishing.

Old Testament Textual Criticism. T. Desmond Alexander. Reformation Study Bible. 2015. Reformation Trust Publishing.

The Complete Guide to Bible Translations. Ron Rhodes. 2009. Harvest House Publishers.

Is The Bible True (Part 3)? Mike Fabarez. Apologetics Series. September 19, 2019. https://www.compasschurch.org/sermons-compass-night/

Is the Bible God's Word (Part 4)?. Mike Fabarez. Apologetics Series. September 26, 2019. https://www.compasschurch.org/sermons-compass-night/

The ESV and the English Bible Legacy. Leland Ryken. 2011. Crossway Publishing.

Don't Forget Our Helper

"But I am the Lord your God from the land of Egypt; you know no God but me, and besides me there is no savior. It was I who knew you (intimate fellowship) in the wilderness, in the land of drought; but when they had grazed, they became full, they were filled, and their heart was lifted up; therefore they forgot me ...

... So, I am to them like a lion …and there I will devour them like a lion ...

... He destroys you, O Israel, for you are against me, against your helper" (Hosea 13:4-9).

————————————————————————

God calls on His people to lean on Him again, as they did once in the wilderness. To come back to Him.

He asks this in love, and because when His people follow His commands, He is with them, He protects them. He reminds them of their intimate fellowship in the wilderness. How He took care of them, but also how they rebelled from that care when they were satisfied enough to feel they could begin relying on themselves again. 

Yet, a warning from Hosea, that great evils would befall them without God. Not because of God, as some would suggest when trying to paint a portrait of a distant or mean god, but because they did not rely on God, and only on themselves.

Historically, Israel knew God would fight for them when they were in fellowship with Him. And, they knew when they weren’t, their enemies would be against them.

Yet, as he says in verse 6, “when they had grazed they became full, they were filled, and their heart was lifted up; therefore they forgot Me.” 

They are treating God as a lion, something to devour them, when He only wanted them to turn back to Him. The imagery is not God saying He is going to tear them open or devour them, he’s saying that they are treating Him as though He would. They are misunderstanding what it means to be in fellowship with God’s commands. And, therefore, they are bringing suffering upon themselves. Not from God, but from the enemies around them, whether it be other nations, fellow countrymen, or Satan manipulating these forces. 

In verse 9, “He (Israel’s enemy) destroys you, O Israel, for you are against me, against your helper”

The Helper in the new Testament is spoken of regarding the Holy Spirit. The helper is there to help us to have fellowship with God, and Israel has forgotten, or have resisted the guidance of God’s Holy Spirit to the point of conflict with Him. Since Hosea is speaking on behalf of God, we can rightly associate this helper as potentially referring to him as well in the immediate context, though the bigger picture of Holy Spirit as our ultimately helper with God, is visible here, even years before Christ ascended and left us the Spirit. 

The predictive prophecy here, speaking from God via Hosea the prophet, is letting Israel know that an enemy is coming. God will stand and defend them if they repent, turn back to Him. 

Yet we know from history they did not, and the Northern Kingdom fell to Assyria. 

Had they turned back, heeded the prophet’s call, such a fate may not have befallen them, for God fights for His people, as proven time and again with Israel. 

Yet, time and again, they rebelled.

I sometimes wonder why we don't have everything we want, or why we often feel like maybe we don't have enough of something. Perhaps not having enough, or hardship, is a means of keeping us reliant on God. As he said, in times of fullness, Israel forgot him. When we are fully satisfied with everything around us, we are prone to forgetting God. It is why we pray most often when in distress, yet find everyday conversational prayer with God difficult. He is our rescue from the storm, but when the storm has passed, we go back to helping ourselves. 

What if we relied on God in the midst of and out of the storm? Would he not fight for us, be our champion and helper? Of course He would. And we would not only be a great witness of what he did for us, but also would experience His multitude of blessings, knowing that no matter which way the wind blows, we would not forget our helper. 

"'Yet even now,” declares the Lord,

'return to me with all your heart, with fasting, with weeping, and with mourning;

and rend your hearts and not your garments.'

Return to the Lord your God,

for he is gracious and merciful,

slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love;

nand he relents over disaster.

Who knows whether he will not turn and relent,

and leave a blessing behind him,

a grain offering and a drink offering

for the Lord your God?" (Joel 2:12).

Kanye Goes to Church

As I write, I'm playing the new Kanye album, "Jesus is King". In all honesty, I've never listened to his other albums. But, perhaps that's a good thing. I go in with a fresh mind. And, lyrically, it's certainly a Christian album.

I've only been reading positive reviews from Christians, and articles about Kanye coming to Christ, but my understanding is there is a lot of judgment and venom directed at him from believers going on as well.

I think that some of it is envy, or simply a distaste for his musical style. We're not used to people of wealth and fame truly coming to Christ. Yet, that may be the exact point of it.

Generation Z and late term Millennials are far from God. They need big influence and well known people to tell them about Jesus. They aren't listening to the traditional preachers and churches. And, while I'm certain Kanye has a lot of growth ahead, there's nothing to say he can't be used even in his state as a new believer.

I scoffed initially reading news about his church services, and figured it was publicity stunt or just another way for him to get attention. But, it appears now, it was genuine. And, he has had some pastors with good theological credentials around him. So, we can hope that he is discipled and grows in the faith quickly to speak God's truth to a generation in need.

This same thing seemed to happen when Justin Bieber also began going to church, and talking about Christ. Christians were the first to judge him. The first to doubt his faith.

"If they only see the wrongs, never listen to the songs
Just to listen is a fight, but you booked me for the fight
It's so hard to get along if they only see the slight
From the love of religion
What have you been hearin' from the Christians?
They'll be the first one to judge me
Make it seem like nobody love me
I'm not tryna lead you to Visas
But if I try to lead you to Jesus
We get called halfway believers
Only halfway read Ephesians
Only if they knew what I knew, uh
I was never new 'til I knew of
True and living God, Yeshua
The true and living God
(Somebody pray for me)

Those are lines in Kanye's new song "Hands On" and they expresses the sentiment I expect he will get at first. He is speaking of Christians judging him, not the world. And, he asks for somebody to pray for him. What reason could a fellow believer have to not pray for Kanye? I don't believe there is one.

Is it uncomfortable in some ways to see those who were completely of the world, come to Christ? It is. But, it should serve as a reminder that no matter how lost, not matter how dead in sin someone is, The Holy Spirit can still call them to faith and repentance in Christ. And, we were no better in our own sin before Christ's call, lest we forget.

If God needs to use Kanye or Bieber to reach the lost of our generation, who are we to question it? If God can convert Saul and other enemies of the faith to go on and do great things, why not the rich or famous of our time? We are a culture obsessed with celebrity, surely God is aware of this and can use celebrity as a means to further His kingdom.

And, what if we're wrong? What if it's a false conversion? Does that affect our ability to live daily for Christ? No, we are still accountable to God for our own lives, not the lives of others.

I'm praying for Kanye and Bieber, as the two I know specifically who have expressed Christ in recent times. I'm praying the conversion was real, and that they can bring people to Christ through their influence and music.

It's not about whether or not we like the particular music style. It's not about their past. If they are truly professing Christian faith, we need to support and encourage our new brothers in Christ.

Safety in Mexico

***This was originally written in 2016, to encourage mission teams who were declining trips to Mexico based on fears of safety. 

Since every year the same fears prevent more teams from going on Mission Trips to Mexico, it feels necessary to share now, and hopefully encourage churches to continue supporting Mexico through Manos Juntas Ministry (and others like Casas Por Cristo)

Begin original 2016 post here:

Mission teams from all over the US visit Mexico on trips throughout the year, and have no issues regarding safety. Many of these teams come from cities that are likely more dangerous than Rio Bravo, Mexico on any given day.

 If a trip is questionable simply because of safety, then allow me to offer some simple suggestions regarding the safety of your visit to help the community in Rio Bravo and its surrounding areas. First, a little background:

I met my wife on a mission trip through Manos Juntas with First United Methodist Church in Muskogee, OK, in July of 2006. Juliet Otero (now Byers) was the translator for our worksite. I was in college at the time, and had gone on the trip at the last minute to help as one of the sponsors for the youth. It turns out Juliet had been off work the week I was coming, and had been called in at the last minute for extra assistance. I’m not sure if she realized her reluctant agreement to come in on her week off would have such a long lasting effect on her life. 

We kept in touch after that week, and just under a year later, her fiancé visa was granted, and she came to the states to marry me. We were married July 7, 2007, nearly a year after first meeting her on the trip. 

Since that time, we’ve made over 20 trips across the border to visit family. I’ve probably spent a total of 150 days in Mexico. In all that time, and during all those visits, I have never felt that I was in any danger. And, there are a few reasons for that which I will outline here:


Don’t take unnecessary risks

Anyone visiting a new city or country should be aware of this line of thinking. Still, with the media blowing much of Mexico’s violence out of proportion, it can be easy to think the average traveler is at a higher risk than what the may actually be. I’m speaking of any unnecessary risk like going somewhere without the help of a guide. Or, going out alone at night. Most of the idea of this rule revolves around not doing things alone in an unfamiliar area.

Visiting Mexico is no different than visiting any other new location in the US for your first time. You should come knowing enough info about the area to be safe. You wouldn’t drive to Chicago for the first time without knowing at least a little bit about the best and worst parts of town. Similarly, you should only travel in Mexico to locations with which you can familiarize yourself.

In the case of missions work, you will always have people who are familiar with the area to guide. Do not venture out on your own, and do trust that those guiding you have lived there long enough to have your safety and best interests in mind.

For example, I’ve travelled to Rio Bravo enough that I know the layout of the town. I could get to my favorite taco stand, stop off at Manos Juntas headquarters and get back to Juliet’s house during daylight hours and not feel lost.

BUT, I don’t do that alone. No matter how comfortable I feel with the layout of the area, it would be an unnecessary risk to just go driving around on my own. I like to compare this to Paul’s saying in 1 Corinthians 10:23 when he states,


“I have the right to do anything, but not everything is beneficial…(NIV)."

Though Paul is not talking about visiting Mexico in this verse, the concept can be applied. Just because I technically could get around Mexico on my own, doesn’t mean I should go wandering around on my own. And really this should never really arise regarding teams as they would always have someone from Mexico with them when venturing to restaurants or shops. Still, it can be a good bit of advice to keep.

Know your points of contact

Again, this comes down to common sense. I have family in Mexico. I have my wife, her parents and siblings all within about a 10 minute radius of the border crossing. For me, I know my contacts, and I don’t venture down without my contacts knowing that I’m coming. There wouldn’t be a surprise visit from Chris, because that would be unwise. Even knowing the relative safety of Rio Bravo, I’m not going to venture down there without telling someone I’m coming.

Mission groups will not usually have this worry because the points of contact are laid out before them well before the trip. Everything is organized and coordinated so that a representative of Mexico is with the teams at all times. This amount of control ensures the safety of teams and individuals associating with the ministry. A doctor wanting to come down for a day or two to help with a medical clinic will not just drive to Mexico on their own, pull up at the clinic and say howdy. They will call/email ahead, schedule a time, make sure someone can meet them, and go from there. Knowing and having points of contact within the area you plan to visit ensures your safety to a high degree.

So, if you know your contact points, and you don’t take unnecessary  risks, you’ve essentially given yourself the greatest guarantee of safety that can be had. What else could be done?

Don’t draw unnecessary attention to yourself

I’m very aware when I am driving from the border to Juliet’s house in Mexico that I am out of place. It’s not an unsafe feeling, but more of an acknowledgment that I am the minority in this scenario. In some ways it is intriguing. Getting smiles and stares from the little kids when they see the “gringo” come through is enjoyable. On the other hand, one tends to be very aware of their minority status when visiting any foreign country.

So, what can we do to maintain safety when we already stand out? We can keep a low profile and not draw more attention than is necessary.

I’m fairly convinced the US visitors having problems with Mexico (be it the cartels or whatever) were probably drawing some sort of unnecessary attention to themselves. For example, when Juliet and I bought our new car, we wouldn’t have considered driving it to Mexico initially because we know that often the people in Mexico driving new cars are the types of people with whom we do not want to be associated.

When a mission team comes across, they are given instructions on how to behave during their stay so as not to draw more attention than is necessary. Everything else usually is common sense.

If you come to Mexico with your contacts lined up, and you don’t draw extra attention or take unnecessary  risks, then your stay will remain pleasant and completely safe. You are more safe in Mexico as part of a mission group than any other means of traveling to the country because the community is aware of these groups, and thinks on them very positively. You are providing for and meeting a need that stretches beyond the boundaries of just the neighborhood and individuals you meet. You are helping affect positive change in a community, and the community (it’s good and bad people) will recognize this.

We must also be careful from where we get our information, and in what context it is being presented. Though the border areas are often presented in a very negative light in the media, much of what we see here in the US is exaggerated specifically to make us fearful. That tends to be the goal of a lot of our news. Once one visits Mexico in the context of fulfilling God’s call to serve the community through missions, they typically realize there is no inherent danger in visiting Mexico. Manos Juntas  Mexico needs teams to move past the unwarranted fear, and step forward to help. So many people rely on the generous offerings of time and service to a community with many ongoing needs.

It is time to bring back the desire and the passion for helping our neighbors to the south. Let us walk in assurance of God’s protection on this blessed endeavor.

Ultimately, our worries about personal health and safety must be balanced with our necessity to do the will of God, and to fulfill His great commission.  I am confident when we are within the will of God, His protection surrounds us, and He will enable us to serve willingly, fruitfully and safely.