A new Bible translation that reads like a story

Connect With Us

Facebook    Twitter    Youtube    RSS
T
follow us > TheVoiceBible
... loading ...
Get email updates from the blog:

Blog

English or Biblish?

David Capes
By David Capes
June 21, 2012

I remember a conversation I had with a friend years ago.  He was lamenting the fact that modern Bible translations like the New King James Version and the New American Standard Version had dropped words like “Thee,” “Thou,” “Thine,” “art” (as in the Lord’s prayer: “Our Father, who art in heaven . . . “) and “hast.”  These words were typical of the 16th and 17th centuries but have long since fallen out of use with most English-speaking people. The only time people may have heard or used them was “in church.”  For my friend, the Bible was not the Bible if it didn’t sound . . . well “Biblish.” 

(I’m grateful to Mark Strauss and Gordon Fee for bringing this word to my attention in their excellent book, How to Choose a Translation for All Its Worth [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2007]).  Modern translations, he felt, had left behind the formal language of heaven (God’s language) preferring instead the mundane language of “this world.” The translation he loved sounded more “spiritual” to him than the newer ones, so he was against them, pure and simple.  Like many people, my friend had a deep emotional connection with the King James Version of the Bible based on all the years he spent in church and Sunday School.  

As a seminary graduate and a recently minted PhD in New Testament, I tried to explain to him all the complexities of Bible translation. I talked about translation theory, the ins-and-outs of determining word meaning, the difference between functional and formal equivalence. I defended the need for newer translations.  But it didn’t matter.  His mind was made up.

The basic concern we had as a translation team on The Voice was to render Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic sentences (our source languages) into meaningful, natural English (our target language).  In other words, the goal of any English translation must be English not Biblish.  As Strauss and Fee note: “Biblish results when the translator simply replaces Hebrew or Greek words with English ones, without sufficient concern for natural or idiomatic English” (p. 21).   Translation is not about exchanging this Greek word for that English word or this Hebrew word for that English word.  Translation is not that easy. It involves knowing both the source and target languages well enough to be able to move back-and-forth between them.  It entails an understanding of culture—then and now—and recognizing how language is one of the key vehicles of culture.  Translation, I have come to understand, is not a science; it is an art. 

I’m not sure what my friend would think about The Voice. I haven’t seen him in years.  I hope he would have mellowed a bit and would appreciate what we have tried to do.  In the last year I have met a number of people who prefer the KJV but now read regularly from The Voice.  But, if I’m honest, I’d be disappointed to learn that my friend had lost his deep, emotional connection with the KJV.  The KJV is a great, historic translation, even if it is no longer in our language.   

So, how do you see it?  Do you prefer English or Biblish?


David Capes lives in Texas and is the Thomas Nelson Research Professor at Houston Baptist University. He earned his Bachelor's Degree in Religion at Mercer University in Atlanta, his Master's in Divinity and his doctorate in New Testament at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Texas. He is the author of numerous publications and is one of the top scholars and writers for The Voice.

Comments

Jaco Mentz said...
June 21, 2012
I found your letter interesting to read. My biggest consern is, I'm looking for the oldest Bible that I can understand. The best one wil be the one that wrote down the words as it came out of Jesus's mouth and I can understand it. I'm vrom South Africa and speaking ^afrikaans^. So even english can be dificult for me some times.
Arthur said...
June 21, 2012
I love the new translations like "the Voice" and the New living Bible. If we still spoke to each other in Old English there would be no need for these, but not many people would understand you if you suddenly started speaking to them in "King James". We have to become relevant to the people of our time.
In South Africa there is a trend to mix languages and so I suppose one day there will be a need for a bible that does this for these people. Secretly I hope this will never happen.

God bless you guys, you've done a great job with the Voice.
Sharon Knowlton said...
June 21, 2012
English!
Michael Watson said...
June 21, 2012
Grew up with the KJV so sometimes I like reading it just to get that feel that I'm reading something old. I really liked the NIV and started using it, but once I found the Voice, my whole Bible world changed. It has given me a whole new love for what I am reading. I just received the Voice Bible last week. One of my favorite times of the day is when I sit down and read from it. Thank you very much.
Sean said...
June 21, 2012
Dr. Capes,

This is a timely post for me. As a teacher at a Christian high school, there is always a little debate regarding what translation to recommend for students. I have frequently been trying to incorporate The Voice into my lectures because, as you point out, English is the goal. As a student of Anglo-Saxon poetry, I've examined this from different angles and always been perplexed by the fact that people love updated movies and works of literature, but not Scripture. So to answer your question, I prefer English.

Keep it up.
Mrs Marge Arbaugh said...
June 21, 2012
I prefer the CEV to any other. The Voice is the one that comes closest to it. Can't wait till it hits store shelves and I see what the price is so I can save up for it. On a fixed income, wants wait for needs to be fulfilled.
Penny Farthing said...
June 26, 2012
Have you seen The Pacific Bible? A translation that removes all violence from the original text. An interesting concept: http://progressplanet.com/pacific-bible/
Goke Akingbade said...
June 27, 2012
I beleive that the more sure approach that we will be able to reach the unchurched to read the Bible is conveying it in a language that they are used to. So for me, it is English. I really like The Voice translation, especially the gospel accounts and the book of Acts. I also use the Common English Bible too.
God Bless you guys.
David Capes said...
June 28, 2012
Jaco, the oldest New Testament is written in Greek. But Jesus probably spoke Aramaic in most of his teachings. We don't have the original Aramaic, I don't believe. Jesus didn't use Thee, Ye, shalt, etc in his teaching. All those biblisch sounding words are translations from the original.
David Capes said...
June 28, 2012
Penny, I haven't seen the Pacific Bible. I'd be concerned about any edition which goes through and systematically removes images which we find disturbing. That is not translating; it is editing. Again, a translator's job is to faithfully render the text in front of them not create a text which did not exist before.

Regarding violence, the Bible is not a PG book. There are descriptions of war, rape, and other types of violence. They are not to be glorified or celebrated. They are to be understood as ultimately conquered through Jesus' atoning death (a terribly violent, merciless act of torture by a cruel regime) and resurrection.
Pastor Randy said...
July 6, 2012
I just discovered The Voice a week ago and have fallen in love with it. My favorite translation is the KJV, and my 2nd fav has been the NLT. The Voice holds that #2 spot now. This translation really "speaks" to me, which I know was your goal. As I was reading about Blind Bartimeus the 2nd day I had it I was moved to tears. It's a powerful translation. I preach regularly out of my KJV, but I am going to start incorporating The Voice in our Scripture readings and Bible studies and I am heartily reccomending it to our members. To the answer, I prefer both :)
Chad Whitley said...
July 21, 2012
Dr. Capes,

I just wanted to say "thank you" to you and to the rest of The Voice team; I've been reading through it over the last several weeks, and I like much of what I've seen so far.

I wonder if you might be willing to answer a question for me. I've just started reading through the book of Job, and in my reading of chapter seven, I read through a commentary block that explained to reference to Yam (the sea) and Tannin (the deep) in verse 12. I've understood those to be references to Canaanite legend, wherein Baal (the Canaanite god of fertility) defeated the two mythical monsters represented by Yam and Tannin. The note, however, does not make a distinction between Baal and Yahweh, implying (in my reading, at least) that the myth to which Job is referring is about Yahweh's defeat of Yam and Tannin.

The note does say that the myth originates in Ancient Near Eastern legends, but the lack of distinction between Baal and Yahweh seems problematic because it has the potential to confuse readers with regard to the circumstances of the creation account (as recorded in Genesis 1 and 2) and Yahweh's identity as the one true God.

Or am I reading too much into it? Could you help me to understand the content of the note?

Thanks again for all the hard work the team has done. I have enjoyed my reading, and will continue to work my way through The Voice!
Rita Palmer said...
July 31, 2012
As I made a comment on the Yahoo page where the article appeared introducing this new Bible, "The Voice," I said it is nearly impossible to get people to read Bibles or scripture in today's world. They can't understand it, and therefore won't read it.
We need an english Bible that puts God's words in clear understandable terms. Even a born again Christian has trouble understand scripture, unless they have studied theology. This book looks like the opening of new conversation and interest in something so wonderful, but ignored that it stands to make converts to Jesus. People also want what is new on the market and to be first in buying something that is controversial. If this Bible brings people to belief in Jesus Christ and His Gospel in Romans 10: 9-10, then it is a blessing to all who come for the word of the Lord. The Old Testament was written on stone, parchment and was hidden from the factions that would destroy it. Now I can see light coming to the world by this new understanding of God's Holy Word. Thank you!

Leave a Comment

Name
Email
Comment
 


< Back to the Blog