Photo by Aaron Burden on Unsplash
Recently I addressed a room of church leaders, teams of men and women who are engaged in the privilege of caring for local churches around the UK and further afield.
As an aside I broached a subject which I guessed might touch nerves: that of Bible translation. I suggest (and suggested) that the version of the Bible we choose to use
can reveal things about us, or perhaps merely reveal that we haven't thought through the unintended consequences.
More specifically I pointed out that the use of the ESV (English Standard Version) in preaching, and specifically when quoting certain passages, can be ‘unhelpful’. (I select the ESV as this is the translation common in my circles. I could equally seize on the baffling ongoing use of the archaic KJV.)
I said something like: “why would you want to use a Bible translation which makes more than half of your church members think that you don’t care about them?”. Now I’m not the first person to go in strong and hyperbolic to make a point, although I’m sure it upset some people whose reason for using the ESV is:
The English Standard Version (ESV) is an essentially literal translation of the Bible in contemporary English. Created by a team of more than 100 leading evangelical scholars and pastors, the ESV Bible emphasizes word-for-word accuracy, literary excellence, and depth of meaning. (source: ESV.org)
Sounds excellent.
And I’m not really against the ESV.
I more wanted to invite thoughtfulness in preaching and teaching.
For example, I’m unlikely to quote the Bible translation I use for study (mostly the NRSVUE) when I’m preaching; generally choosing the NIVUK because the sentences are easier for people to follow, and the language more contemporary.
When it comes to the ESV, it’s a question of representation.
When the NIV committee made revisions in 2011 which changed language such as the exclusive brothers to the inclusive brothers and sisters in letters addressed to churches (see here for more on this); and the archaic ‘man’ in Genesis 1:26 to ‘mankind’*, the ESV committee responded with a translation which maintained the andro-centric choices in these cases.
Now there were accusations slung around at the time about the ESV being a direct response from conservatives to counter the gender-inclusive NIV2011, and a google search will lead you down a rabbit hole about that spat if you’re interested.
My challenge to a friend recently concerned 2 Timothy 2:2. He used the ESV translation in teaching. It says this:
and what you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.
The NIV puts it like this:
And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable people who will also be qualified to teach others.
That’s because the word which was translated as men in the ESV is anthropos which means people. If we believe, as the Apostle seemed to, that men and women can (and should) teach others the gospel truth passed on from Paul to Timothy, then why would you choose to use the ESV for this verse in preaching and teaching?
(To be clear I’m not suggesting malice here at all; we can all do things like this out of habit or our own particular cultural blind spots. I've had painful moments after preaching when I've realised just how white and western my stories or examples were, rendering them utterly unrelatable for a large contingent of my hearers.)
But importantly, I want to advocate for Bible translations which don’t unnecessarily exclude women (who I would guess constitute the majority of people listening to sermons in your churches). Just as I would want to advocate for translations which don’t alienate those who don’t have a lot of history with the Bible, never mind any theological education. (I’m talking about preaching here not study, where the use of multiple translations is helpful.)
So I throw this out there as an invitation to be thoughtful in our preaching, and alert to the unintended consequences of our choices, whether that’s in Bible translations, or the kind of jokes we tell, or the culturally narrow examples we use in our sermons.
*Mankind is little better in my view. The NRSVUE has humans.
Comments