« Back to Issue 39

Editorial

By Paul Beasley-Murray.

What Bible shall we use?

Over the last 50 years a revolution has taken place in the British churches. Fifty years ago the vast majority of churches used the Authorised Version of the Bible (better known in other parts of the world as the ‘King James Bible’) in their worship. Today you can still hear the Authorised Version in Oxbridge chapels and cathedrals, but almost without exception, local churches have opted instead for modern translations.

Of the range of modern translations available, most Protestants have gone for American translations of the Bible.  Sadly the New English Bible given to me at my ordination - and now, in its updated form, known as the Revised English Bible - never proved popular, not least because you need an ‘A’ level in English to understand some of its language. What for instance, does the phrase ‘the effulgence of his glory’ (Hebrews 1.3) mean to the ordinary worshipper? As a result, the vast majority of British churches have adopted either the New Revised Standard Version, the New International Version, the Good News Bible, and most recently The Message - all American in origin (although the first three are also available in ‘Anglicized’ editions).

The New Revised Standard Version is the most accurate in translation and is used in British universities. I like it, not least because it retains the cadences of the Authorised Version, and I use it for personal study. But not only is it a little wooden, it is also full of terminology and phraseology which would not be readily understood by the majority of churchgoers.

The New International Version is a favourite amongst evangelicals because it was translated by evangelicals - as if non-evangelicals could not be trusted with Bible translation! In fact it succumbs to some of the prejudices of North American evangelicals. For example, in Romans 16.7, the NIV refuses to accept that ‘Junia’, a woman, was an apostle, and instead goes for the less well attested reading of ‘Junias’, and in all kinds of ways is a good deal less accurate than then NRSV, and, what is more, no more accessible to the general public.

The version I like best is the Good News Bible.  This was the brain-child of an American Baptist missionary, who wanted to produce an English Bible for people whose first language is not English. Adopting the linguistic principle of ‘dynamic equivalence’, it uses standard, everyday English.  Looked down upon by scholars, it is, in my opinion, the most intelligible of all English Bibles for general use. For that reason it is the version that my church uses in public worship. 

The latest best-selling Bible is The Message by Eugene Peterson, an American Presbyterian from an evangelical tradition. More of a paraphrase than a literal translation, it presents problems to some British evangelical leaders whose views on biblical inspiration mean they would prefer a more literal version. Indeed, I have to confess that my own initial response was less than welcoming. But the fact is that people in the pews love the freshness. As a result, I have to put away some of my academic prejudices, and take a broader view. For what’s the point of a Bible translation if it doesn’t communicate?

At a time when increasing numbers of people are unaware of the claims of the Christian faith, I believe that ministers and other church leaders should concentrate on making the ‘good news’ accessible to people today - and if this means going ‘down-market’ in the scholarship stakes, so what? Going ‘down-market’ is surely what the incarnation is all about!

What’s your favourite translation? Why not write in to our forum pages on this website and tell us why?

Meanwhile in this edition of Ministry Today, you’ll find lots to stimulate your interest. This edition is going on line 10 days after the murder of the Revd Paul Bennett at Trecynon, South Wales, and we’re grateful to our Editor, Alun Brookfield (also a parish priest in the Church in Wales) for a reflection on what Paul’s death means for all of us ministers in terms of our security.

Alun also reflects on the difficulty of training lay ministers, worship leaders, etc. to a generally recognised level of competence. In his Diocese in Wales, they’ve begun to explore something not dissimilar to an NVQ approach in which one identifies a set of core competencies, along with ways of gathering evidence that those competencies have been achieved, then provide the means to achieve them.