Not sure what I think of THIS version of the Bible. I'm on record as being against the NIV, and although I'm reading through the ESV this year, I still have my reservations. My belief is not every translation is appropriate, no matter what Warren and others say.I do appreciate that the intent of the authors of this version of the Word is to make it more readable to attract those that aren't currently immersed in daily reading. And if you click on one of the samples you get the gist of what they did -- transformed the Bible into literature. More readable, sure, but here's the thing: the Bible isn't literature. It is a love letter from God to us. It is the manual for understanding and getting through life successfully. It is the tome of all wisdom. But it is not, nor has it ever been bedside reading. This shouldn't be an option when you're looking for a quiet activity in the evening. It should never be "Do I read the Bible or John Grisham?"
Turns out I DO know what I think of this version. I'm going to go ahead and take the position that I'll never read it. I prefer my Bible to grow me, not entertain me.
2 comments:
As one of the people who helped create The Books of The Bible, I'd like to respond to your comments.
If we think of "literature" as "entertainment" (like a John Grisham novel), then I agree with you--the Bible isn't "literature" in that sense. Its purpose isn't to just entertain us with page-turning stories or beautiful poems.
But that's not the sense in which we understood "literature" as we worked on this edition. Rather, our question in the case of each biblical book was, "What kind of writing is this, and how can we show people that, so the Bible's message can be communicated as clearly as possible?" Various kinds of writing need to be read in different ways. A history is one thing; a letter is another; a poem is yet another; and they all need to be approached differently. The Bible contains many kinds of writing, and if we really want it to "grow us," we have to know what those are.
In your own post, you actually describe the Bible's purpose by using various kinds of "literature" as illustrations. You say, for example, that the Bible is a "love letter from God." A love letter is a particular kind of writing, and it should be approached in a specific way. It's not like another kind of letter, a junk-mail solicitation, which we skim quickly and make a quick decision about. Rather, we read a love letter slowly and cherish it all the way through, pondering our relationship with the one who sent it. That's certainly a great analogy to describe how we should read the Bible. But it only works because we all recognize that different kinds of writing need to be read in different ways.
That's exactly the premise we started with when we created The Books of The Bible. We took out the chapters and verses because they unfortunately make us think that the Bible contains only one kind of writing. We tend to think that all of its books are basically numbered lists of statements, like the rules posted near a hot tub, or the instructions for putting together a bicycle. And we read them that way. When we do, we miss the power of the Bible's actual literary forms to communicate God's truth in deeply transforming ways--ways that will truly grow us.
So I invite you to have another look at The Books of The Bible. See how its goal, in the case of each book, is to present it as the kind of writing it is, so that people can understand it, take it to heart, and be grown--not just entertained.
Points well-taken.
Post a Comment