Trusting our instruments rather than our sight or instincts.

A few months ago I was watching a program called “Mayday,” which I believe is actually several other shows all rolled into one and branded for a Canadian audience. It is a show about disasters, and most notably, plane crashes. It sounds morbid, I admit, but I find it interesting (though I’ll admit that it has made my children inordinately afraid of flying. They are now convinced that every plane crashes). This particular episode was playing in the middle of the night at a time when I was awake with some variation of the stomach flu. So I sat and watched and let it take my mind of my illness.

On this night the show followed the story of a plane that had nearly crashed years before. The plane had been flying along just as it should and all appeared normal when suddenly it began to experience all kinds of strange problems. It gyrated across the sky, plummeting thousands of feet at a time and turning violently to one side. One and then two of the four engines stalled and failed, leaving the plane without the power it needed to maintain level flight. The pilot and copilot responded instinctually, doing their best to right the course of the aircraft. Meanwhile hundreds of passengers waited in abject terror, not knowing if they would live or die. The pilots fought valiantly and eventually found they were able to control the plane. Mysteriously, the engines started again and they were able again to provide sufficient power. The pilots directed the plane to a nearby airport and landed safely. Only a handful of passengers experienced serious injury though the plane sustained heavy damage from the immense loads placed on it during flight.

In the aftermath, investigators found that almost everything that had occurred had been the fault of the pilots. When the plane encountered some turbulence the plane’s flight manual told the pilots how to react. But they relied on instinct rather than the book. And then, when the plane began to experience further complications, they ignored the instruments that should have directed them to the source and solution of their problem. They swung the plane violently from side to side attempting to right it because they ignored the aircraft’s instrument that told them where the horizon was and how to keep the plane level. They ignored the instruments that told them that their engine problem was not as serious as they thought. Blinded by the stress of the situation, they ignored the manual and did things their own way. But for the hand of providence it could have cost them their lives and the lives of hundreds of passengers.

I often jot down little phrases or sentences, things I want to ponder and consider at another time. Not too long ago I wrote down the words “trusting the instruments (flying blind).” As I thought about those words I was reminded of this story from “Mayday.” Those pilots refused to trust their instruments, relying instead on their flawed understanding of the situation. Even though they thought they could see clearly out the front of the plane, they were in fact flying blind because they refused to heed the information conveyed to them by their instruments. In Polishing God’s Monuments Jim Andrews makes a similar connection, talking about a similar incident, but one that led to the plane crashing to earth.

What made this even a double calamity was the lethal convergence of two factors: bad weather and pilot error. The investigative report of the incident indicated the unfortunate pilot was flying in heavy fog. It went on to explain that when a pilot is flying in those conditions, it is vital that he rely solely on his instruments as opposed to flying “by the seat of his pants.” This is because without a visual point of reference, one’s senses can be easily fooled into thinking the plane is doing the exact opposite.

Though the pilot in this story was apparently quite experienced, he was notorious among his peers for having one fatal flaw: he tended to rely predominantly on the feel of the plane and his visual reference, rather than to trust the guidance of his instruments. In the report, his colleagues remarked that they could never understand why such a well-trained pilot was so disposed to this grievous error, though they warned that for new pilots, it’s not an easy skill to master.

Neither is it an easy spiritual lesson to learn.

We are prone to this same foolishness in our spiritual lives. Rather than trusting in our “instruments,” in the revealed Word of God, we so often trust in our instincts and our internal guidance. Rather than relying on what is given to guide us and what is far more trustworthy, we rely on things that are always changing, always imperfect. As Andrews says, there is a difference “between walking by faith and walking by feelings—trusting our instruments rather than our sight or instincts. In the fog of life our feelings will mock our faith and fairly scream at us that God has walked out on us, but our instruments will always reassure us that he is still there, walking right beside us.”

This is not to say that our feelings are useless or that we should never heed them. God gave us feeling and emotion for a reason and they often serve as useful guides to what is happening in our hearts. It often seems that those who place the greatest emphasis on revealed truth are those who place the least emphasis on feelings. This should not be so. But we must always realize that only one of these is a standard; only one is firm and unchanging; only one is perfect.

It is good to have the revealed Word available to us. It is this Word that provides the unchanging standard, the instruments that can reassure us, even when the fog is heavy, when the engines have stopped and when we don’t know whether we’re going up or down.

I was thinking this morning about one of my favorite passages of Scripture. While the story is well known, the part of it that appeals to me is often just passed over. It is in Acts 9 and involves just two people, the disciple Ananias and Saul. Saul, notorious for persecuting Christians, has departed Jerusalem after obtaining a letter granting him authority to arrest any Christians he can find in Damascus. He is to bring these believers to Jerusalem for trial before the puppet court of the Sanhedrin. But lo and behold, while on the road to Damascus he has a dramatic, life-changing conversion experience. Out of a shining light Jesus calls to him and said “Saul, why are you persecuting me?” Saul is struck blind. Jesus commands Saul to go to Damascus and wait to be told what he must do. He is led to the city by those who are traveling with him and he waits for three days and nights without any food or water. What these days are like we can only imagine. They must be filled with pain, remorse and repentance. They must be filled with great confusion and despair.

As Saul sits and waits, the scene fades momentarily and now we are introduced to Ananias (not to be confused with Ananias the High Priest or Ananias husband of Sapphira who lied to the Holy Spirit) who is called “a disciple at Damascus.” The Lord appears to Ananias in a vision and tells him “Arise and go to the street called Straight and inquire at the house of Judas for one called Saul of Tarsus, for behold, he is praying. And in a vision he has seen a man named Ananias coming in and putting his hand on him, so that he might receive his sight.” God tells this disciple to run an errand on His behalf.

I have always loved Ananias’ response. Somehow he forgets his place and attempts to give God a bit of a newsflash. I can just picture Him stammering a bit as he takes it upon himself to remind God of just who this Saul guy is. I like to think that he began the sentence with uncertainty and confusion, and perhaps with with the words “Ummm…God….?” He says “Lord, I have heard from many about this man, how much harm he has done to Your saints in Jerusalem. And here he has authority from the chief priests to bind all who call on Your name.” Ananias had not only heard of how Saul had been systematically destroying the church in Jerusalem, hunting down men and women and turning them over to the authorities, but also knew that he was on the march to Damascus, ready to destroy that church as well. Paul’s hatred for Christ and His followers was common knowledge. We can well imagine that Ananias and the other believers were terrified as they awaited Saul and his cohort, for they knew their lives might be lost for the sake of Christ. They must have awaited his arrival at the city with great dread. And now here God asks Ananias to go and confront the ringleader of the persecutors. Ananias takes the opportunity to remind God of Saul’s credentials. After all, he has done “harm to Your saints in Jerusalem” and is now ready to “bind all who call on Your name” in Damascus.

Ananias showed weakness here. He did not have unwavering trust in God. As a matter of fact, he reminds me of me! I suspect I would have said the same thing to God just in case He had somehow forgotten a little detail. After all, this Saul guy was dangerous! Didn’t God know that? I’ve often wondered if missionaries don’t react in the same way when they feel their hearts stirred for a particular nation or people. “Um…God…don’t you know that that country is closed to missionaries? Don’t you know that your people are persecuted in that nation? Don’t you know what could happen to me, to my family, if I go there? God?”

God knew all about Saul. He tells Ananias “Go, for he is a chosen vessel of mine to bear My name before Gentiles, kings and the children of Israel. For I will show him how many things he must suffer for My sake.” God knew exactly who Saul was and gave Ananias the assurance that He was still in control. As a matter of fact, providence dictated that He would use this man to do incredible things for His kingdom. Saul, the chief of sinners, the persecutor of the church, was God’s chosen means of bringing the gospel to great and small, Jew and Gentile alike.

Ananias is obedient. He appears before Saul and has the great honor of laying his hands on this broken man in the name of the Holy Spirit. At that moment Saul’s blindness is ended. As a symbol of the end of his spiritual blindness he is baptized, probably by the hand of Ananias himself. We then read that “Saul spent some days with the disciples at Damascus.” Whether at that point Saul was the student or the teacher we do not know. Perhaps he sat and learned at the feet of Ananias. The Bible doesn’t tell us.

At this point Ananias fades from the story and we hear of him no more. His role in the drama of Acts is small, yet significant. We see a man who wavered when he heard God’s voice, yet despite his initial hesitation he was faithful and obedient. While at first he thought he might have to correct God, in the end he submitted himself and his very life to God’s call. God then used this man to further His purposes in launching the career of the most influential of the apostles. Ananias’ small act of obedience led to a great harvest for the kingdom.

And this is the lesson of Ananias that I have applied to my life. Small acts of obedience that are premised on the Word of God, even when they seem contrary to reason, and even when they seem to challenge what seems so plain, can have great significance. Our perspective is so small, so limited. God’s perspective is wide, taking in all of history in a single glance. We need to rely on Him, on His Word, on His voice, trusting that He will not lead us astray.

A few nights ago, in our time of family worship, we read Exodus 6, a chapter that serves as a prelude of sorts to the plagues which are about to befall Egypt. The chapter begins with God telling Moses that He will soon deliver the Israelites from their centuries of slavery. “Now you shall see what I will do to Pharaoh; for with a strong hand he will send them out, and with a strong hand he will drive them out of his land.” God then explains this promise, telling Moses how He would deliver the people. He prefaces His explanation with a simple phrase: “God spoke to Moses and said to him, ‘I am the Lord.’” That phrase, “I am the Lord,” is repeated several times in the first nine verses of the chapter.

This is a passage often pointed to by people who feel they have discovered contradictions in Scripture, for when God says, “I am the Lord,” he also says, “I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as God Almighty, but by my name the Lord I did not make myself known to them.” Yet, according to the Bible, God had used that name with the Patriarchs. By saying that He did not make Himself known by it, it seems that He is saying they were not able to see or understand the fullness of the name. But now, by delivering the Israelites, God will make Himself known as Lord. This name, Lord, is the “Tetragrammaton” which is translated into English as either Yahweh or Jehovah. Keil and Delitzsch explain this as follows. “[God] was about to reveal Himself to Israel as Jehovah, as the absolute Being working with unbounded freedom in the performance of His promises.” By revealing Himself as Jehovah, God would reveal something about Himself, namely, that He is a promise-keeping God.

Of all the uses of this phrase in the first few verses of Exodus 6, the one that most caught my attention was the final one. After all of His promises to the people, promises to bring them out from under the yoke of slavery, to exact judgment against the Egyptians, and to bring them into the promised land, God finishes with a small but powerful sentence: “I am the Lord.” As I read it, I paused briefly as I thought it was a peculiar phrase to use. Why, after making so many promises, would God simply state His identity? But as I pondered this, it became clear. I was reminded of some words found in the hymn “How Firm A Foundation” where the hymn-writer, John Rippon, asked simply, “What more can He say than to you He hath said?”

That is a good question. In this passage, what more could God have said? Why did He not say more? The reason is simple: God could not say more. There is nothing more that God could say to prove that He would fulfill His promises. He could not swear by anything, for what is there that is greater than Himself? He could not append the words, “I promise” to the end of His statement, for these would be meaningless compared to the greatness of His name. In saying “I am the Lord,” God gave the Israelites all the assurance they could have and all the assurance they ought to have needed. For when God reveals Himself as Jehovah, He is not merely revealing a name, but also His character. The character of God is inseparable from His name. God is Jehovah not only in name, but also in deed.

What more could God say than “I am the Lord?” Nothing. God is Jehovah, the promise-keeping God. We can have confidence that God’s character and His name can never be separated. This was true for the Israelites and it is true for us today.

Eat This Book: A Conversation in the Art of Spiritual Reading is the second of a five-part series of books being written by Eugene Peterson who is best known as the translator of The Message. This series of books comes in the twilight years of Peterson’s career as author, pastor and translator, and it allows him to reflect on his many years of ministry. It is a rather strange and wandering book in which Peterson meanders through a wide variety of topics having to do with the theme of Scripture. At heart, though, the book is an attempt to convince the reader of the importance of reading Scripture in order to promote life change. Peterson feels this is best done through the ancient practice of lectio divina. In many respects, then, this book is a beginner’s guide to that practice. The book also contains a great deal of information about Peterson’s philosophy of Bible translation and it is to this topic that I will turn my attention today.

In a section entitled “Caveat Lector” (or “let the reader beware”), Peterson shows concern with the response that the Scriptures are to evoke in us. “The words printed on the pages of my Bible give witness to the living and active revelation of the God of creation and salvation, the God of love who became the Word made flesh in Jesus, and I had better not forget it. If in my Bible reading I lose touch with this livingness, if I fail to listen to this living Jesus, submit to this sovereignty, and respond to this love, I become arrogant in my knowing and impersonal in my behavior. An enormous amount of damage is done in the name of Christian living by bad Bible reading” (page 82). This shows, I think, that Peterson is genuinely concerned with how Christians read the Bible. He realizes that, when read with an impure heart or out of poor motives, the Bible can be used to cause all manner of harm. Great damage has been done by those who know the words of the Bible best. Satan himself knows and quotes the Bible. But is the problem with the Bible or with the reader?

Peterson further voices this concern in a metaphor. “The Christian community is as concerned with how we read the Bible as that we read it. It is not sufficient to place a Bible in a person’s hands with the command, ‘Read it.’ That is as foolish as putting a set of car keys in an adolescent’s hands, giving him a Honda, and saying, ‘Drive it.’ And just as dangerous. The danger is that in having our hands on a piece of technology, we will use it ignorantly, endangering our lives and the lives of those around us; or that, intoxicated with the power that the technology gives us, we will use it ruthlessly and violently” (page 81). I do not feel that this is a fair parallel. I know of people, and you probably do as well, who have been simply handed a Bible and been told to read it. They read and were changed. They read and were saved. There is a vast difference between an adolescent who takes the wheel of a car and a man or woman who is given a Bible. While I appreciate Peterson’s concern, what he fails to take into account is the fact that the Holy Spirit works through Scripture as the primary means of changing lives. The metaphor that compares a Bible to a car and an adolescent to a reader is simply not fair or accurate. It gives far too little credit to the work of the Holy Spirit.

It is possible that Peterson feels that the Scriptures are somehow a little bit deficient? That they are not the best way that God could have revealed Himself to us? “There is a sense in which the Scriptures are the word of God dehydrated, with all the originating context removed—living voices, city sounds, camels carrying spices from Seba and gold from Ophir snoring down in the bazaar, fragrance from lentil stew simmering in the kitchen—all now reduced to marks on thin onion-skin paper” (page 88). While this is true, at least to some extent, what Peterson fails to mention is that this is exactly how God intended to give us the Scriptures. God never refers to His Word as “dehydrated” or in any way deficient. Yes, we need to invest time and effort in knowing, studying and understanding them, but we do so knowing that the Scriptures, exactly as they are, are just what God desired that we have. Any fault we perceive in them is a fault within us.

In these three quotations, three of a number I could have referred to, I think we see an important piece of the puzzle that led to The Message. Eugene Peterson feels that the equation of person plus Bible can lead to all manner of hurt and pain and destruction. This is, in many cases, true. Yet it seems, as we will see, that Peterson’s solution is to change the Bible rather than to focus on the people. The Bible is good and perfect and true. It is the people who cause the trouble.

In a chapter entitled “God’s Secretaries,” Peterson examines Nehemiah 8 where the Israelites, having just rediscovered the Scriptures, stand before Ezra as he reads them to the assembly. And as he reads, select Levites “give the sense” of the passages. “‘Gave the sense,’” he says, “did more than merely provide dictionary equivalents to the words that were being read that day. The Levites’ interpretive translation work engaged the lives, the hearts and souls, not just the minds, of the people: at first they wept and then they rejoiced ‘because they had understood the words that were declared to them’ (Neh. 8:9-12). This is the intended end of true translation, to bring about the kind of understanding that involves the whole person in tears and laughter, heart and soul, in what is written, what is said” (page 125). It is interesting and helpful, I think, to compare Peterson’s philosophy of translation to that of the English Standard Version. In the preface to the ESV we read, “The ESV is an ‘essentially literal’ translation that seeks as far as possible to capture the precise wording of the original text and the personal style of each Bible writer. As such, its emphasis is on ‘word-for-word’ correspondence, at the same time taking into account differences of grammar, syntax, and idiom between current literary English and the original languages. Thus it seeks to be transparent to the original text, letting the reader see as directly as possible the structure and meaning of the original.” Note the difference. The ESV seeks, in so far as possible, to bring the original text before the reader. Peterson seeks to bring about the understanding and response of the original reader. The ESV values words while Peterson values response.

We continue with words found almost at the end of the book. Peterson has continued to discuss The Message. He now sets his sights on essentially literal translations, suggesting why he feels they are less useful than a more dynamic translation. “Translation is a complex activity that takes place between a polarity of two questions. The question asked from one pole is, ‘What did she mean?’ ‘What did he say?’ answered strictly on its own terms yields a literal translation. Find the German word equivalent to the English word and that’s it. ‘What did she mean?’ requires an imagination, often a poetic imagination, that brings the ‘world’ of the German text into the ‘world’ of American English…” He quotes Sebastian Brock: “In the case of free translation, it could be said that the original reader is forced to go to the original; or, to put it another way, in the first it is the reader who is stationary, but in the second it is the original” (page 169).

His distaste for literal translation soon becomes more apparent. “In my work as a pastor and writer, teacher and preacher, I began to gather observations and witnesses on the nature of translation, noticing how unsatisfactory ‘literal’ turns out to be and how conveniently it serves as a cover for avoiding the obvious intent of words spoken or written” (page 170). And again, “Preference for the literal has a long life. But I have come to believe that it is an unthinking preference…The language [in a literal translation] is lobotomized—the very quality that gives language its genius, its capacity to reveal what we otherwise would not know, is excised. Extreme literalism insists on forcing each work into a fixed immovable position, all the sentences strapped in a straightjacket” (page 171).

And then, finally, we see exactly what Peterson presented in The Message and why he did so. “[T]he most important question is not ‘What does it say?’ but ‘What does it mean and how can I live it?’ I wanted to gather a company of people together who read personally, not impersonally, who learned to read the Bible in order to live their true selves, not just get information that they could use to raise their standard of living” (page 176).

I found it an interesting and worthwhile pursuit to piece together this information and to try to understand what lies behind The Message (and behind other dynamic or paraphrastic translations). What it led me to see is that this type of translation relies on a particular class of person—the rare person who can both interpret and translate the Bible. Peterson believes that the Bible should already be interpreted before it is read, so that interpretation and translation are one and the same. The reader is then left in a position whereby once he reads the Bible, he can immediately respond correctly to it. Peterson sees himself and other translators as standing in the role of the Levites of Nehemiah 8, giving the sense of the Scriptures in order to evoke the right response.

This philosophy differs substantially from the more literal translations, where emphasis is placed primarily on words, not meaning. With a literal translation we are given, in as much as is possible, access to the original words of Scripture. It is then up to the individual Christian, not a particular class of “translator-interpreters”, to interpret Scripture and to apply it to our lives.

The problems with Peterson’s approach are numerous, but are too varied to discuss in this article. Perhaps I can discuss them at another time, though I have written about Bible translation enough times that it may not be necessary.

Every March I read Proverbs. I’m not sure how this tradition came about, but I always look forward to it. Over the past few days I have been finishing up the book, reading those meaty chapters near the end. I was struck by the constant, ongoing, application to my own life. I began to think of all the applications I could make towards blogging, both as a person who publishes a blog and as one who reads and participates in other blogs as a commenter. As I sat and pondered these things, I began to feel a since of deja vu, and it didn’t take me too long to realize that I had had these same thoughts last year. And, as I tend to do, I had written down many of them. It turns out that many of the verses I pulled out from this year’s reading were among the verses that had struck me last year. I love it when that happens!

So I am returning to this list of wisdom from Solomon, and adding to it what I have learned this past year. Here is the wisdom of Solomon as it might apply to something as simple as blogging.

Think before posting.

“Do you see a man who is hasty in his words? There is more hope for a fool than for him (29:20).” How many arguments would be avoided and how many relationships saved if people were only a little less hasty with their words? Before posting an article or before replying to one, it is always (always!) a good idea to re-read what you have written and consider if your words accurately express your feelings and if expressing such feelings is necessary and edifying. Remember also that online communication, because it is not face-to-face, and the recipient cannot see facial expression and bodily expression, can often cause confusion. Sarcasm is often lost and adding a little emoticon smiley face does not necessarily mean that a person will understand your intent. And while I’m on the topic, a spell-check doesn’t hurt either.

Avoid the foolish.

“Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest you be like him yourself (26:4).” There are times when it is best to leave a foolish person to his own devices rather than to try to change him. Sometimes it is best just to leave him alone rather than providing him more ammunition to work with. There are some bloggers and some commenters that are simply not worth responding to. When you tangle with them, you are more likely to fall into foolishness than they are to grow in wisdom.

Help the foolish.

“Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own eyes (26:5).” Here it is - undeniable proof that the Bible contradicts itself! Are we to answer a fool according to his folly or not? Evidently this “contradiction” is deliberate and is in the Bible to show that there is no absolute law in this situation. There are times when folly must be exposed, either if the fool is one you believe is honestly seeking after wisdom, or if his folly will damage others. If a fool is impacting others, drawing them into his foolishness, he must be exposed for the sake of the church’s health. It takes wisdom and discernment (and sometimes outside counsel) to know when a person is one with whom you should communicate or one you should leave to his own devices.

Know when to walk away.

“If a wise man has an argument with a fool, the fool only rages and laughs, and there is no quiet (29:9).” There are times when you need to walk away instead of carrying on an argument. Foolish people have no real desire to learn or to be wise. Instead, they only seek opportunities to loudly proclaim the folly. Walk away so you can have peace. It is not worth having to deal with a prescription for high blood pressure based on ongoing arguments with a complete fool.

Watch what you read.

“Like one who binds the stone in the sling is one who gives honor to a fool (26:8).” Be careful whose words you read and whose wisdom you trust. Foolish men may seem wise, but they will still lead others astray. If you give honor to a foolish man by reading and heeding his words, you are as foolish as a person who binds his stone in a sling, rendering the sling useless and leaving himself defenseless. If you are uncertain about whether a particular site is worth reading on an ongoing basis, it may be worth seeking the counsel of another Christian or two.

Be humble.

“Let another praise you, and not your own mouth; a stranger and not your own lips (27:2).” “One’s pride will bring him low, but he who is lowly in spirit will obtain honor (29:23).” Let others praise you. If you never receive praise from anyone, especially from those who are wise, it may be a good time to examine your heart and examine if you are walking in the ways of wisdom. Those who are humble and lowly in spirit will receive honor while the arrogant will be brought low. If you are a blogger, this may mean re-examining the list of endorsements and words of praise you’ve posted on the main page of your site.

Avoid the arrogant.

“Do you see a man who is wise in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him (26:12).” Just as we must be humble, we should be careful not to be too close to those who are foolishly arrogant. There is more hope for a fool than a man who is both foolish and arrogant. Seek to learn from people who display a wise and humble heart.

Mind your own business.

“Whoever meddles in a quarrel not his own is like one who takes a passing dog by the ears (26:17).” If you have ever grabbed a dog by the ears you know it will inevitably bring trouble. Grabbing a strange dog by the ears will bring even more trouble. Stay out of other people’s fights rather than wading into them as if they are your own. Avoid quarrels that are not your business and will only expose you to trouble and to foolishness. After all, it is the prudent who “sees danger and hides himself, but the simple [who] go on and suffer for it” (27:12).

Don’t be a troublemaker.

“Whoever digs a pit will fall into it, and a stone will come back on him who starts it rolling (26:27).” Those who exist only to bring trouble to others will pay a price. And unfortunately, on the Internet there are many of these people. Don’t be one! Seek to edify others and to bring glory to God, whether you publish a blog of your own or whether you prefer to comment on other peoples’ sites.

Examine why you write.

“A continual dripping on a rainy day and a quarrelsome wife are alike (27:14).” The proverb speaks of a quarrelsome wife, but it could as easily apply to anyone. If you are writing merely to be quarrelsome or because you enjoy an argument, perhaps it is best to find something else to do. There is already enough negativity in the world and on the Internet. If you find yourself continually depressed by what you write, it may be best to find a more uplifting hobby. “Like cold water to a thirsty soul, so is good news from a far country.” Just as bad news can push a person down, so joyful words can uplift.

Be careful what you teach.

“Whoever misleads the upright into an evil way will fall into his own pit, and the blameless will have a godly inheritance (28:10).” Those who choose to teach others accept a grave responsibility, for if they mislead others, they must expect that there will be consequences. So be careful that what you write and what you teach is in accordance with Scripture. Continaully pray for God’s wisdom.

Be a friend.

“Faithful are the wounds of a friend; profuse are the kisses of an enemy” (27:6). When a person you know and trust expresses something that goes against Scripture, humbly but firmly correct that person. Do so in a spirit of love, peace and patience.

Meditate upon what you write.

“As in water face reflects face, so the heart of man reflects the man” (27:19). It is a good practice to review what you write on a weekly or monthly basis. What you write is likely an accurate reflection of your heart. If your words are filled with anger and bitterness, the same may be true of your heart. If your words are seasoned, measured and joyful, so is your heart.

Walk with the Lord.

“Whoever trusts in his own mind is a fool, but he who walks in wisdom will be delivered (28:26).” And here is the key to everything else. Trust in the Lord rather than in yourself. Walk with the Lord and in the ways of wisdom taught in the pages of the Bible. Be a wise man or woman of the Word, rather than a fool who trusts in his own wisdom (or lack thereof).

European history makes for a fascinating study. Understanding the intricacies of nations, borders and rulers could easily be a life-long pursuit. The history of the continent is filled with claims, and counterclaims as one person sought to prove himself the legitimate heir to a kingdom over another. There are many who sought to claim thrones and kingdoms and these claims had to be settled through lengthy and detailed examination. Generations, kingdoms, marriages, and thrones had to be examined to understand who has the rightful claim to a throne.

I found a similar concept of “claiming” in the Gospels a few days ago. I will be honest with you and admit it was one of the most terrifying passages of Scripture I have ever read. I remember as a child I found Revelation to be a dark and scary book. Visions of beasts and persecution, wrath and disaster gave my imagination much fodder to create terrifying scenarios that played out in my mind as I tried to sleep. But I can’t call to mind anything that has struck my heart with such a pure terror as this verse I read.

It comes as Jesus is preparing to leave His disciples for the last time. They are in the upper room together celebrating the last Passover and the first Lord’s Supper. Jesus is giving his disciples their final instructions, telling them that all He has taught them is about to be fulfilled. He is gentle with them, knowing that they are blinded to the reality of what is about to happen. He is kind to promise that He will send His Spirit to indwell and guide and teach them. And then He tells them that it is time to leave.

“I will no longer talk much with you, for the ruler of this world is coming. He has no claim on me…” Jesus knew that Satan was about to unleash his full fury upon Him. And far, far worse, He knew that Satan’s wrath was nothing compared to the wrath of God that He would soon have to face. Satan, the ruler of this world, was coming. He was going to drag Jesus, like a helpless, hopeless lamb, through the streets, through the courts, and to the cross where He would be tortured and nailed and pierced in utter agony. Satan was going to do his worst. But Satan would not accomplish what he had hoped. Satan would accomplish the very opposite of what he had intended. By inciting the masses to drag Jesus to that tree, Satan would make sure his own doom and ensure the salvation of multitudes of God’s people. Satan could do nothing to Jesus beyond the physical, for he had no claim on Jesus. He had no claim on the Son of God.

The Bible calls Satan the accuser and that is exactly what he is. In Revelation 12 we read of a voice that cries out, “Now the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God and the authority of his Christ have come, for the accuser of our brothers has been thrown down, who accuses them day and night before our God.” Satan delights in accusing God’s children of our sin. He whispers in our ears and in our hearts that we are unloving, unworthy and unfathomably sinful. He tells us that we are his. He has a claim on us. Satan, the ruler of this world, has a claim on my soul and on yours.

But he had no claim on Jesus. Satan could not whisper in Jesus’ ear that He was unloving or unworthy or sinful. He could not remind Jesus of sins He had committed, people he had shunned or offenses against God. He could not remind Jesus of impure motives or impure thoughts. Satan was powerless to accuse Jesus. He had no claim against Him. In John 8:46 Jesus asked the Pharisees a rhetorical question after they accused Him of being in league with Satan. “Which one of you convicts me of sin?,” he asked them. And none of them could answer. Satan is likewise unable to convict Jesus of sin. He has no claim.

But not so with us. Satan has a legitimate claim to my soul and yours. Satan can recount endless lists of offenses against God. You and I have committed grevious offenses against God. We have done so joyfully, willingly, deliberately. We have done so as a show of our rebellion against God. We have enjoyed being sinful. We have enjoyed giving Satan a claim on our souls. In a time of judgment there is no doubt that Satan can produce a list of offenses more than sufficient to prove his claim on us. It is a legitimate claim. He has ruled us and we have allowed ourselves to be ruled by him.

Terror fills my soul as I ponder Satan’s claim on my soul. My heart feels like ice. Satan, the accuser, the evil one, wants my soul as his own possession. He has a claim on it. He has a claim on you. How can you not fear as you read those words?

But praise be to God, there is more. When Satan flung Jesus upon that cross, he was unwittingly bringing about his own destruction. When Jesus’ time on the cross was complete, He cried out, “It is finished!” It was a cry of triumph - a cry whose fullest meaning we can never know. It was a cry that pierced history - it divided the history of humanity. It was the greatest, purest, most meaningful utterance the world can know. In His death Christ took our sin upon Himself. He took the accusations of Satan and bore them on our behalf. As God turned His back on Jesus, while at the same time pouring out His wrath upon Him, Jesus atoned for our sins. He entered a claim of His own in the lives of His children. My sin became His and His righteousness became mine.

The accuser has lost his claim. When Satan accuses me now I am able to know, to believe, to trust and to affirm that his claim is null and void. I am clothed in Christ’s righteousness. My sin has been removed. My guilt has been taken away. I have been redeemed. And, as the climber in triumph leaves a flag at the peak of a mountain, Jesus Christ has sent His Spirit to live within me and to mark me as His own possession.

Satan may still accuse me. He may still seek to convince me that I am his. But he has lost his claim. Jesus has washed me with His blood. He has set His Spirit within me. Jesus Christ has claimed me as His own. The terror fades as love and praise well up within my heart. Tears fall from my eyes as I know and believe that I have been claimed by God Himself.

Every believer carries a measure of the guilt for Jesus’ death. If it were not for our willful disobedience to God’s perfect Law, we would have no need of a Savior. We acknowledge in song that it was our hands that drove the spikes into His’ and sometimes speak about driving the nails into Jesus’ hands every time we sin. We speak figuratively, of course, knowing that although we were not present at the time of His death, we bear the guilt of providing the need for His death.

In the Bible we are given a brief glimpse of a man who was present while Jesus was nailed to the tree. This man was a Roman centurion, a commander over 100 soldiers of the Roman army. We know little about the man except that he was probably a hardened solider and commanded a detachment of what were most likely Syrian-born soldiers. He had, in all likelihood, presided over the crucifixion of hundreds or even thousands of men and must have become hardened to the agony these men endured.

It is likely that this man was present from the time Jesus was brought before Pilate right until the Lord’s body was lowered from the cross and given to Joseph of Arimathea. He may even have been present with the detachment of soldiers that aided in Jesus’ arrest the night before His crucifixion. This man would have accompanied Jesus from the time the Jewish leaders brought him to the Praetorium. He would have ordered his men to beat Him, caring little for who He was, knowing Him only to be another in a long line of people he was commanded to execute. He would have been nearby when his men dressed Jesus in a robe, pressed a crown of thorns onto His head and walked Him to Golgotha. He would have given the order to proceed with the crucifixion.

The centurion is mentioned in three of the four gospel accounts. He is mentioned not for his cruelty, ruthlessness or ability as a soldier. He is mentioned for something far more important, for a marvelous transformation that occurred immediately after the death of one of his prisoners.

Having seen so many crucifixions, the centurion knew what to expect from prisoners. Most people who were sentenced to be crucified were criminals, brigands, thieves and murderers. He had heard countless men scream in agony while being whipped and plead for their lives before Pilate. From their crosses he had heard them shout curses to men below and blasphemies to God above. The behavior of the thieves on either side of Jesus was all too common, as they mocked and ridiculed Jesus as he hung between them.

Perhaps it was during this time that the centurion began to notice that there was something different about Jesus. Where most men cursed and swore, Jesus, as His hands were nailed to the wood, cried out for God to forgive those who were causing His suffering. Or maybe He noticed the tender mercy in Jesus’ voice when He spoke to the penitent thief beside Him, promising that the same day he would be with Jesus in paradise. Perhaps he was amazed that during such suffering Jesus could look down at His mother and ensure that her future was secure by telling John to take care of her. Certainly the three hours of darkness that accompanied Jesus’ suffering would have marked this as an execution unlike any other.

We can only guess when the centurion began to realize that perhaps, just perhaps, Jesus was exactly who He claimed to be. What we do know is exactly when He knew with full certainty.

Just before He died, Jesus cried out “It is finished.” Immediately after that He said “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit.” At that very moment Jesus died. At that same moment a violent earthquake shook the land with such ferocity that rocks were split. Matthew tells us “when the centurion and those with him, who were guarding Jesus, saw the earthquake and the things that had happened, they feared greatly, saying, “Truly this was the Son of God!” Luke expands on this saying “when the centurion saw what had happened, he glorified God, saying, “Certainly this was a righteous Man!”

And just like that, the man who presided over Jesus’ execution, the man who ordered the nails to be driven into His hands and feet, became the first person to become a believer after Jesus’ death.

What an awesome, exciting testament this is to God’s divine grace! God was willing and eager to save one of those primarily responsible for the murder of His Son. A man who watched Jesus be scourged, who watched his soldiers mock and abuse Him and who probably enjoyed every minute of it, suddenly cries out in terror, realizing that He has killed an innocent man. His cry of terror is also an expression of faith as he confesses his new-found knowledge that Jesus was the Son of God.

I am certain that this story served as a great encouragement to many people in the early church. Though many of them carried the guilt for having killed the Lord, the realization that God could save even those who held the nails, would have proven that He is a God of love and forgiveness. It would have reassured them that, like this centurion, they could gain God’s favor through Jesus’ sacrifice.

This centurion’s miraculous conversion continues to serve as an encouragement today. Just as we share the centurion’s guilt for driving the nails into Jesus, so we can share the victory He won that day. As with this soldier who lived and died almost 2000 years ago, we need only have faith to believe that “truly this was the Son of God” and we, too, can be forgiven for the part we played in this terrible, unjust execution.

This morning I began to read the book of 1 Kings. Earler this year I had read through the Old Testament up to the end of 2 Samuel and, after spending some time in the New Testament, I decided to pick up where I had left off. As you know if you read this site on a regular basis, the topic of Bible translating has been much on my mind of late. As I read through the first three chapters of 1 Kings I found myself continually struck by the beauty of the language as it is translated in the English Standard Version. While I do not know how to read Hebrew, I often hear people speak of the poetic nature of the language which leads even the prose to have poetic qualities. It seems to me that the ESV does an admirable job of capturing that.

I have come to love those little literary devices, the metaphors and phrases used by the ancient writers and feel that they add so much to the reading of the text. Without a translation that accurately rendered these sayings we would lose so much of the flow and meaning of the text. I love language and the English language in particular. While I have always enjoyed using words and studying language, I found that my love of English was forged during the time I spent studying other languages, primarily those from which English is derived - Latin, Greek, and to some extent, French. I also studied linguistics and, of course, the English language itself. I came to love understanding how people use words to craft ideas. There is a good reason that people continue to study Shakespeare in high school despite increasingly antiquated language. Shakespeare was a master of the language, a master word crafter, and it benefits anyone to learn from his example. The same is true of Dickens or any other number of authors. What I learned is that words are important. Who would want to read a modern translation of Shakespeare? We would be left with nothing but a second-rate story. And author’s words are important. That may come as no great surprise and may even seem obvious, but the translators of dynamic equivalent translations would have to disagree, at least somewhat, as their translation philosophy proves that they feel ideas are more important than words.

As I read three chapters this morning I was struck by how much beauty there is in the prose of the Old Testament and I found myself profoundly thankful to have access to a translation that accurately renders the metaphors and phrases used by the original authors. Let me provide you with a few examples. I am going to use the ESV as my standard essentially-literal translation. I do this not necessary to indicate that it is superior to the others within the category, but simply because it is the translation I use for my devotional and study work.

Let’s begin with 1 Kings 2:2 where King David gives his final wishes to his son Solomon. The ESV renders this “I am about to go the way of all the earth. Be strong, and show yourself a man.” The other essentially literal translations agree with this translation as the NASB, KJV and NKJV are all very similar. There are two constructs here that I feel are essential to the text. “I am about to go the way of all the earth,” and “show yourself a man.” Let’s see how several other common translations render this particular verse:

• “I am about to go the way of all the earth,” he said. “So be strong, show yourself a man.” (NIV)
• “I am going where everyone on earth must someday go. Take courage and be a man.” (NLT)
• “My son, I will soon die, as everyone must. But I want you to be strong and brave.” (CEV)
• “I’m about to go the way of all the earth, but you—be strong; show what you’re made of!” (Message)

As we see, the NIV renders the verse in a way that is consistent with the original text. The NLT deviates a little bit, expanding the meaning of “the way of all the earth” to “where everyone on earth must someday go.” It also says, “be a man” rather than “show yourself a man.” The CEV further interprets the verse, removing any sort of literary device in both parts. The Message does a little better, maintaining the first half of the verse but removing the “show yourself a man.”

What is lost in the NLT and the CEV is the metaphor “the way of all the earth.” It is an important term, beautifully poetic, and surely one that is worth some time in meditation. There is a depth of meaning to that phrase that is clearly missing in words like “I will soon die, as everyone must.” Readers of the NLT and CEV have no access to this phrase and miss out on the wonderful opportunity to meditate upon it and learn from it.

Another example comes only one verse later. 1 Kings 2:3 continues David’s instruction to his son. David exhorts Solomon to follow God and “walk in His ways.” The ESV translates the verse as “…and keep the charge of the LORD your God, walking in his ways and keeping his statutes, his commandments, his rules, and his testimonies, as it is written in the Law of Moses, that you may prosper in all that you do and wherever you turn.” Let’s see how other translations render “walking in his ways.”

• …and observe what the LORD your God requires: Walk in his ways, and keep his decrees and commands, his laws and requirements, as written in the Law of Moses, so that you may prosper in all you do and wherever you go, (NIV)
• Observe the requirements of the LORD your God and follow all his ways. Keep each of the laws, commands, regulations, and stipulations written in the law of Moses so that you will be successful in all you do and wherever you go. (NLT)
• Do what the LORD your God commands and follow his teachings. Obey everything written in the Law of Moses. Then you will be a success, no matter what you do or where you go. (CEV)

The term “Walking in his ways” is a wonderful metaphor for living a life that honors God. We seek to emulate Him by following carefully in the footsteps of God. I am reminded of a song by the Smalltown Poets, “Call me Christian,” where they sing, “As a boy I’d put my steps / In my brother’s bigger tracks / To match his stride / And just like that I follow Jesus / Jesus is my guide.” That type of imagery is absent from the New Living Translation as well as the CEV. The Message is quite close and the NIV is, once again, accurate.

Moving along we come to 1 Kings 2:9. David asks Solomon to exact revenge against Shimei, a man who had cursed David. “Now therefore do not hold him guiltless, for you are a wise man. You will know what you ought to do to him, and you shall bring his gray head down with blood to Sheol.” The metaphorical phrase here is “bring his gray head down with blood to Sheol.” Again, this is a wonderfully descriptive phrase that has more meaning than simply “kill.” Yet several translations provide only this meaning.

• But now, do not consider him innocent. You are a man of wisdom; you will know what to do to him. Bring his gray head down to the grave in blood.” (NIV)
• But that oath does not make him innocent. You are a wise man, and you will know how to arrange a bloody death for him.” (NLT)
• Now you must punish him. He’s an old man, but you’re wise enough to know that you must have him killed. (CEV)
• But neither should you treat him as if nothing ever happened. You’re wise, you know how to handle these things. You’ll know what to do to make him pay before he dies.” (Message)

The NIV does a good job, only changing Sheol to grave. The NLT writes about a bloody death. This seems to miss the point for the verse is not primarily concerned with the mode of death, but with the reason for the death. The Message misses the mark altogether. Neither the NLT, the CEV or the Message see fit to render the word “grey” or “hoary” (as the King James renders it). Is that not a word God placed in the text? Is it not an important word? I do not understand why they would knowingly remove a word God saw fit to include.

One of the most beautiful and oft-repeated phrases in the Old Testament is found in 1 Kings 2:10. “Then David slept with his fathers and was buried in the city of David.” Several essentially literal translations render “slept” as “rested” but the meaning remains the same. The Bible Knowledge Commentary says of this verse, “The picturesque phrase rested with his fathers beautifully describes David’s death and suggests that his activity did not cease forever. Indeed, the bodies of all believers who die simply ‘rest’ until they are resurrected to live with God and serve Him eternally.” David entered a temporary rest as he, along with the rest of Creation, awaits the final consumation. Here is how other translations render that verse:

• Then David rested with his fathers and was buried in the City of David. (NIV)
• Then David died and was buried in the City of David. (NLT)
• David was king of Israel forty years. He ruled seven years from Hebron and thirty-three years from Jerusalem. Then he died and was buried in Jerusalem. (CEV - combines verses 10-11)
• Then David joined his ancestors. He was buried in the City of David. (Message)

The NIV remains consistent with the text. The NLT and CEV say simply that David died. The Message extends the verse by saying that David joined his ancestors, something that is a bit of a stretch but at least somewhat true to the meaning of the verse. The NLT and CEV do not allow their readers to see the beauty of “resting with his fathers.” Instead, David simply died. What a tragic loss! Readers of these translations will not see any hope beyond the grave. They will not know that David has gone to be with his fathers and that he is merely resting. Once more, are these not words that God deliberately placed in the text? Should readers not have access to them?

In 1 Kings 2:12 Solomon has assumed his father’s throne. In fact, according to an essentially literal translation, “Solomon sat on the throne of David his father, and his kingdom was firmly established.” While the meaning of the phrase “sat on the throne of David his father” is clear, meaning that Solomon succeeded his father as ruler, there is an interesting sense of continuity in the original words. Doing more than simply replacing his father, Solomon actually assumed his throne. This may seem a small distinction, but I feel it is important nevertheless. It is similar to verse 3 (above) where David exhorted solomon to walk in God’s ways. Now Solomon is sitting on his father’s throne. Let’s see how other translations have rendered this verse:

• So Solomon sat on the throne of his father David, and his rule was firmly established. (NIV)
• Solomon succeeded him as king, replacing his father, David, and he was firmly established on the throne. (NLT)
• His son Solomon became king and took control of David’s kingdom. (CEV)
• Solomon took over on the throne of his father David; he had a firm grip on the kingdom. (Message)

Once more the translations are varied with the NIV being most literal and the CEV straying furthest from the text. The NLT, CEV and Message see fit to explain the verse while the NIV, along with the essentially literal translations, leave the words as they are. Through reading a literal translation we can picture Solomon ascending his father’s throne and taking over his responsibilities. This imagery is foreign to the dynamic equivalent translations.

Conclusion

As I indicated earlier, I was grateful this morning that I have access to such a solid translation of Scripture. While I do not know Hebrew, I still have access to an accurate translation of the author’s original words, complete with the phrases, words and metaphors that set one author apart from another. I have access to the full meaning, or as close as I can come without access to the original language, of what was written so long ago. I simply can’t understand how anyone would be satisfied with anything less.

One of my long-time favorite shows on television is The Antiques Roadshow. It is a show that has been a staple on PBS for many years and on British television for longer than that. Recently they have even begun a Canadian version which I have not yet had opportunity to watch. The show affords people the opportunity to bring their antique possessions, whether furniture, paintings, toys or anything else, and have them appraised by some of the world’s foremost experts in antiquities. Every show the producers single out ten or fifteen items and show an expert providing a detailed description and valuation of the item. Each section closes with the expert telling the owner just what the item is worth. It is always fun to see eyes pop out or to see people jump up and down with excitement as they realize that they have in their possession an item worth tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars. Every episode the viewer has opportunity to see junk transformed to treasure.

I suppose my attraction to the show probably stems from my love for history (which I did, after all, spend my college-years studying). I often marvel at the knowledge the antique experts display as they describe the history of a piece of furniture, the man who made it, how much it cost 200 years ago and what it is worth today. I love to watch the expert’s excitement as they see items they know are rare and valuable. I stand in amazement not so much at what some of the items are worth but that people are actually willing to pay that price for some of them. After all, an item is only worth what someone will pay for it.

There is one episode that stands out in my mind, because it featured the most valuable item they have ever shown on The Antiques Roadshow (there was one item they appraised that was more valuable but the owner wished to remain anonymous). The story was wonderful.

An elderly gentleman from Tuscon, Arizona brought in an old blanket he had inherited several years before. He knew it was old and believed it had a little bit of value " perhaps a few hundred or even a couple of thousand dollars. After inheriting this blanket he threw it over the back of a rocking chair in his bedroom and had not often thought about it until presented with opportunity to take it to the Raodshow.

With the blanket hanging on a rack behind them, the expert appraiser told the old man that his heart had stopped when he first saw it. Watching the show I could see the excitement written all over the expert’s face and extending throughout his body, for he just could not stand still. He began to explain just what the blanket was. It was a Navajo chief’s blanket that had been woven in the 1840’s. Surviving in wonderful condition, it was one of the oldest intact Navajo weaves to survive to the twenty-first century, and certainly one of only a tiny handful to exist outside of museum collections. He showed the fine detail of the weaving and even showed where it had been torn and repaired shortly after it was first made. I could see the excitement in his eyes as he looked at something he knew was extremely valuable. He knew that sitting before him was more than a blanket " it was a rare national treasure of incredible value.

The appraiser seemed to have trouble even beginning to tell the audience just how important this blanket was. He left no doubt, though, when he told of its value. Because of its rarity and historical significance, he had no trouble assigning a value of somewhere between $350,000 and $500,000. Yes, this elderly gentleman had come to the show carrying a blanket worth almost a half million dollars. He simply could not believe what he was hearing. Choked up and with tears pouring from his eyes he asked to hear the amount again. I honestly thought he might just pass out then and there.

It is safe to say that the blanket the man had cavalierly carried in with him was cradled carefully in his arms as he walked out. In fact, he walked out of the building with security guards on either side of him, drove straight to a bank, and placed the blanket in a safety deposit box. What had been junk, a mere accent to an old rocking chair, had been immediately transformed to a precious treasure.

The blanket had not changed any " it was exactly the same blanket after the show as it had been an hour before while the man waited in line, yet something had changed. It was not the blanket, but the man who had changed. What he had seen as a blanket of no extraordinary value he now realized was an extremely rare and valuable national treasure. What he had in his arms was the envy of every Indian collector in the world and of the thousands of people watching the show. What he had overlooked before, he now loved and treasured.

I remember a day, not too long ago, when I sat in my little office reading my Bible. Now I have had many Bibles in my lifetime and have been reading the Word with some degree of faithfulness since I was just a child. I am sure I have read the entire book several times through (except, probably, for some of those Minor Prophets!). On this particular morning I came across Hebrews 4 where I read the words “For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart.” I had read those words many times, had heard people preach about them and had read books which sought to exposit them. But that morning, as I read those words, something stirred in my soul. It was as if an appraiser had stood beside me and told me just exactly what it was I was holding in my hands. I began to look up other similar passages " Psalm 119, 2 Timothy 4 and more. As I looked back down at my Bible, it was as if the book had been transformed from a blanket draped casually over my chair to one that was a priceless treasure. The book was the same, but suddenly I had a deep appreciation for its value. Chills ran down my spine as I appreciated for the first time what a treasure I held before me.

The Bible has never been the same to me since that day. I have not been the same since that day. Rather than being just another book on a rather busy bookshelf, my Bible now stands out as a treasure. More than just words, the Bible is the very Word of God! More than ink on a page, the Bible is alive and active. It contains exactly what God wants me to know about Him and about myself. It is the awesome, amazing, living revelation of an awesome, amazing, powerful God to His created beings.

That day, as I stood in awe of the blessing I have in this book, I asked God to continue to impress its value on me and He has been faithful in doing so. I do not presume to have a full understanding of the Bible’s importance and value, but I do believe I know far more than I did before. My love and respect for the Word continue to grow. The more I learn of the Word, the more I praise God for bestowing this treasure upon me and the more I stand in awe of His wisdom for revealing Himself to us in this way.

Just as millions of people have dusted off their antiques and hauled them to stadiums or arenas around North America to have them appraised by the experts, I would encourage you to dust off your Bible and ask the Appraiser to impress on you its worth. If you approach Him humbly and with a thirst for wisdom, He will show you the incredible value of the treasure He has given you.

Note: I first posted an article similar to this a couple of years ago. Recent reflection on Scripture led me to rewrite it and post it again.

As you may well know if you spend much time around these parts, I read a lot. A whole lot. In my reading I have noticed a disturbing trend in the way authors use the Bible to prooftext their books. This concern has led me to write this article in which I will suggest some guidelines for the proper use of Scripture in Christian books.

Before we go any further, let’s establish the purpose of using the Bible in a book. The goal in prooftexting or quoting from the Bible is to accurately represent and interpret God’s Word. We do not use the Bible to prove what we want it to say. Rather, we turn to the Bible to learn from God Himself, and then share what we have learned with others. We must have our priorities straight.

Let’s review the different types of Bibles available to us. They fit into three broad categories.

Paraphrase (also known as Free Translation) - Paraphrases attempt to translate ideas and concepts from the original text but without being constrained by the original language and words. They also seek to contextualize the Bible to the contemporary culture, eliminating the historical distance between the time the Bible was written and the time in which it is read. This allows them to be easy to read as they do not need to conform to the sentence structures of the original languages. However, they are also less-literal in their translation. The most widely-read paraphrase is The Living Bible, though in recent days The Message has become exceedingly popular.

Dynamic Equivalence (also known as Thought for Thought) - Dynamic equivalency attempts to create a consistent historical distance between the text and the reader so that the text has the same impact on the contemporary reader as it did on the original reader or listener. Because the translation does not need to be constrained to the original language and sentence structures, the text can flow smoothly, allowing it to be easily readable. However, dynamic equivalence requires some degree of interpretation as the translator attempts to discern not only the words of the author but also the author's intent and meaning. The most popular dynamic equivalent translation is the New International Version.

Formal Equivalence (also known as Word for Word, Literal Translation or Essentially Literal) - Formal equivalence attempts to represent each word of the original language with a corresponding word in the English language. This allows the reader to know, as closely as possible, what God actually spoke through the authors of the Bible. The merit of this method is that it allows intimate access to the originally inspired words for those who do not speak the languages the Bible was written in. The downside is that it is possible for these translations to be awkwardly worded and follow difficult sentence structures. Examples are the New American Standard Bible and the English Standard Version.

The lines between these categories are sometimes blurred. For example, some would consider the New International Version to be a literal translation and others consider it closer to a paraphrase. There are other translations were parts are paraphrased and others are more literal.

Here are four guidelines for translating the Scripture. They are adapted from the writings of Leland Ryken which have had a profound influence on the way I understand the job of a translator.

1. We must never lose sight of the fact that it is God’s Word that is being translated. These are not the words of fallible men but of a Holy God who is giving these words to direct our lives.
2. The text must be translated as accurately and faithfully as possible from the original language to the receptor language.
3. The translation must be readable so that it adheres to rules of English vocabulary, syntax and grammar.
4. The translation must not seek to bring clarity to what is difficult in the original text. The interpretation must stay separate from the translation.

Based on this information I would like to propose the following as guidelines governing the use of Scripture in Christian books.

Use a default translation that is essentially literal.

Almost every Christian book has a notation a page or two from the front cover indicating what translation the author prefers to use. This will be the default translation throughout the book. The notation generally reads similar to this: “Unless otherwise indicated, Scripture quotations in this publication are from the [insert translation here]). Authors should ensure that their default translation is essentially literal - a translation that attempts to accurately represent the original languages. Some examples of this type of translation are ESV, NASB, NKJV, KJV, RSV. The NIV is a good choice as well.

Use translations that are familiar to readers

Quote the familiar before the remix. Sometimes it is more valuable to quote a passage that is well-known but is poorly translated and then explain why it is a poor translation rather than simply quoting an unfamiliar translation. This allows people to read the author’s explanation within a context they understand. Think of Jesus who often said, “You have heard it said that…” He gave people the context of what was familiar before telling them what was more accurate.

Use paraphrases sparingly

Only use a paraphrase or translation that is not essentially literal when the new translation is more faithful to the original language than the primary translation. Be attentive that we do not allow the Bible to say what we want it to say, but what it really says! When you do use a paraphrase, indicate within the text that this is a paraphrase and not a literal translation. Indicate that this is an interpretation, not a translation.

Check your work

Just because a particular author or commentator says one translation of a passage is accurate, does not necessarily make it so. Before providing a new spin on an old passage, ensure that your new interpretation is correct. As R.C. Sproul indicates, if you are the first person ever to interpret a passage in a particular sense, chances are that you are wrong. When in doubt, check with other commentaries or authorities on translation. There are many online commentaries that may have all the information you need.

Conclusion

We live at a time when we are privileged to have available to us more translations and study tools than at any other time in history. But as much as these can be a great blessing, they can also do great damage if used incorrectly. Use translations carefully, always remembering that we are dealing with the Holy Word of God. Seek the Spirit’s help in presenting the Word accurately, seeking to to mold our lives by the Word, and not making the Word conform to our flawed beliefs.