Evening Thoughts on Scripture

Could it be that the more we know about Jesus the less we know him?

While not a KJV-only guy in any sense, I'm not convinced the Bible-publishing explosion of our day is a net good. The mind-boggling variety of translations, paraphrases, and specialty Bibles is...waaay over the top, the most egregious being the ones with a slick mag-cover look. If you don't believe me peruse the Bible section at Books-a-Million or in the CBD sales paper.

The late radio extraordinaire, Paul Harvey, once said "if the devil wanted to reduce the power of the Bible he wouldn't have to destroy it, just dilute it." Reminds me of the Neil Postman line that with the extreme over-publishing of our day, "truth will be lost in a sea of irrelevance".

In light of those considerations, I loved it when I ran across this from the late, inimitable Malcolm Muggeridge in his book Jesus: The Man Who Lives.

"Meaning is often the enemy of truth, and in re-translating more exactly the words of the Gospels what they say so splendidly can easily be lost. [It may well be] that the more we knew about Jesus the less we knew him, and the more precisely his words were translated the less we understood or heeded them."

This, I think, critiques modernity and its love of all things exact. Of course we need accurate translations and of course the KJV is not the autographs in English form. I love the Message, JB Phillips, NLT, RSV, NASB, NKJV. They are all very helpful...and bewildering, too. But in a very real sense, I want my old Bible back. It simply is the mother tongue of English Scripture, and amazingly integral to the Anglo/American culture.

It is easy enough to observe that multiple translations have deeply wounded trans-generational Biblical literacy and memory. Multiple translations to choose from and which will you memorize? Which is used in the pulpit, at school, for personal devotions, at Bible club, youth group, summer camp? Several translations means the phraseology of that understanding gets fractured and never really settles into a collective awareness.

For the scholars, it is different -- they relish it all, understandably. The vast majority of us, though, need to be able to share the same words together. And when we can't, it is much easier to give up that Bible thing altogether. The Scriptures have lost their punch because we are not sure what the punch exactly is anymore -- it is lost in dilution: study notes, celebrity testimonials, glossy covers, 11 possible translations, and on and on.

I gladly repent of negative criticism -- this is not that. I ruminate for love of thoughts expressed, a happy love for God, and a desire to 'lean' into discussions that matter. In the end, for me, Paul Harvey's folksy observation proves true. Had I only one Bible, I would value it more. As I have way-too-many, not as much. Economics 101: High supply, low value.

That said, Muggeridge's further comments have spurred me on to read the Gospels again...and again. I want to hear the message clearly, worship Jesus more truly, follow Him more faithfully. And I honor those who labored through the centuries to pass along the scriptures with integrity. Truly they reveal the Word of life, full of grace and truth. And, as Muggeridge says, if the Gospels have survived their most recent commentators [and varied translations?] "then surely they must be considered immortal."

Indeed, immortal they are and tonight I gladly worship the One of whom they speak.