Confessions of a Bible Translation Geek

I love Bible translations. It has only been in the past few years that I've stopped my quest to own every single English translation that arrives on the scene—much to the delight of my wife! I've studied various translations for years and I find it a fascinating subject. 

    I myself have utilized several translations in my ministry. (Primarily the NASB, ESV, CSB, NKJV). I have migrated most of my ministry over to the NKJV, because I prefer the Byzantine textual tradition. I really like the way the CSB reads and I like the NASB's transparency to the underlying Hebrew and Greek. We are abundantly blessed to have so many excellent translations, including several that I did not mention here. 

    But enough is enough. We do not need more translations into English, at least not at this point. (I might make an exception for a translation based on the Majority Text that has the backing of a major Bible publisher, but I digress). While language does change, it does change every year to the point that we need a new translation every few months! We also don't need more and more editions of the Bibles we have. Why not spend our efforts and resources doing three things?

    First, why not content ourselves with updating the current translations every decade or so as they need it? These changes can be minor and shouldn't necessarily make the translation feel completely different to its readers. 

    Second, why not spend our money and effort at getting Scripture into the hands of those who do not have a translation in their language? We can support organizations like Wycliffe and perhaps even see if we can get directly involved somehow. 

    Finally, why not insist our pastors and teachers dive deeper into Hebrew and Greek? I'm certainly not perfect in this regard, but I think it's an admirable goal. We as pastors don't have to be experts in the languages, but we should be making an effort to improve our skills so that we are "correctly teaching the word of truth" (2 Tim 2:15 CSB). I'm auditing a class on Advanced Greek Grammar with David Alan Black at the moment and it's really driving this home to me, including showing me how very much I still have to learn! There are many resources out there that can help us persevere in language study. 

    Brothers and sisters, let us long to see God's Word in the hands of all people in their own language. Let's divert resources from making more English translations to making more for those who need it. 

soli Deo gloria  

How Do We Read the Song of Solomon?

First off, let me say that this post is not going to give you a brief commentary nor an introduction to the book of Song of Solomon (Song of Songs). There are plenty of resources that will do that, but that's not my purpose here. I just want to suggest a way in which we need balance as we approach the Song. There are two extremes that people make when reading/teaching the Song that I think need to be avoided. 

    The first extreme is to read the book allegorically, as picturing the love of God and his people. This approach was common throughout the Middle Ages, but it also found its representatives among the Puritans and similar theologians. While this approach is not as common today, it can still be found in some circles, including some rigidly reformed groups. 

    The problem with the allegorical approach is that it requires some remarkable exegetical gymnastics. There is no way to take a normal, straightforward reading of the book and make it fit an allegorical understanding. It is my suspicion that the allegorical approach arose and finds adherents for at least 4 reasons. First, throughout church history some Christians have had an unfortunate view of sex, namely, that it was something sort of unholy and that engaging in it, while perhaps necessary, was an unfortunate evil. Second, certain strands of Christian thought have applied allegory to all of Scripture, so it was not a leap to apply it to the Song. Third, some wonder why a book devoted to sexual love would find a place in Scripture. I suspect this reason loops into the first at some point. 

    The final reason for the allegorical method is that Scripture pictures the relationship between God and his picture with husband/wife imagery. This reason actually has some validity to it. Scripture often uses such imagery (e.g. Jeremiah 31, Ephesians 5, the book of Hosea). I do not deny that the Song might reinforce this imagery. It should be natural for us as believers, when we reflect on marriage and marital love, to remember how marriage is meant to picture Christ and the church. But I do not think this meaning is primary to the Song. Rather, it could be an application of it.* 

    The other extreme is to literalize the Song. Some in recent years have taken the Song's highly poetic imagery and have attempted to find explicit references to sexual acts therein. Brothers and sisters, the Song is sensual, but it is not pornographic. The Song is not the Kama Sutra of the Bible! It is not designed to give you sexual techniques or positions. Otherwise, the language would hardly be as poetic and often obscure as it is. I've heard it said, "The Song of Solomon is rated R." No, it is not. (If any book is rated R, it's Judges!)

    Sex within marriage between a man and a woman is a beautiful gift of God and we should never be ashamed of it. But when it comes to Scripture, let's not indulge in speculation for the sake of titillation. 

    If we avoid either of these extremes, I believe we will be more faithful to the Word of God. After all, isn't that our goal?

soli Deo gloria 

*I realize that some of our application of this book will depend on how we understand exactly how many characters there are and the background for the book. For more details, see the commentaries or a solid Old Testament introduction.