Ever since I got the Mosaic Bible two years ago, I have been a big fan of the NLT. However, the recently released Common English Bible has made me betray my beloved NLT and use the CEB primarily.
A lot has been written about the benefits of the CEB (and its downsides). Much of this has been written by scholars with much more education on the topic of translation than I have, so I'll direct toward those. However, what I can say is that it is quite useful. What I loved about the NLT was that it was easy to read while maintaining what I considered appropriate fidelity to the original texts. The CEB takes this a step further, really making the language accessible to people. While it is easy to read, it is also quite easy to listen to. It has been the primary translation used in our church for the last few months, and it has been quite appropriate for lectionary readings both as a group or individually.
Besides its pragmatic benefits, I like a lot of the philosophy behind the CEB. The fact that it was first released digitally (and free through YouVersion) shows that the publishers are really trying to interact with modern culture and also are not necessarily as focused on making a profit.
I like how it was developed interdenominationally and with laity through reading focus groups of people who approached it not only theologically but practically. Those who follow translations know that a very literally accurate translation may be quite unreadable to the modern English speaker...
The aspect of the CEB I appreciate the most is its break with using particular words all the time. As has been discussed elsewhere in the blogosphere and academia, language can lose meaning over time as we become numb to the power of particular words, especially religious words. Sometimes changing the word makes us pay attention to the passage and the meaning again. The CEB does this, not without controversy. However, I have found it to be helpful to re-engage the text and really explore what the Scriptures actually mean rather than what I assume them to mean based on preconceived notions of certain language.
If you haven't explored the CEB yet, I highly recommend you do. The physical Bibles themselves are pretty cheap, although again, it can be found for free digitally in some markets.
Disclosure of Material Connection: I received this book free from the publisher.
I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have
expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the
Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”
Showing posts with label Language. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Language. Show all posts
Monday, October 24, 2011
Sunday, June 19, 2011
Revising Christian Language @christianaudio @caReviewers @FrankViola @TBBMediaGroup @audrajennings
There has been a lot of talk in Protestant Christianity lately about continued reformation. And many people and sects of course argue that they are being true to the apostolic church (assuming there was a monolithic idea of such an organization). The more progressive people often attack the conservative evangelicals on being too narrow with their definition of the Gospel. In contrast, fundamentalists criticize liberals as being unbiblical and therefore heretical.
Frank Viola recently released his newest book, Revise Us Again, exploring ideas of what a modern revision of the Church would look like. While no one book can really tackle all of the ways we need to be continually reformed, Viola does a nice job of not really getting into the endless debated details. Not that those issues are not important.
However, as a psychologist, I have come to value the role of the process of communication. Content is was is being said, while process refers to not just how things are being said, but the emotional aspects involved in the conversation. Usually, the process is really what is at stake when there is conflict, not the content itself.
Viola spends more time examining the process of current Christian dialogue. He nicely notes that people have different communication styles that either allow two sides to communicate effectively or to not understand one another at all. The goal, of course, would be to notice one's own style and that of the person with whom they are communicating and then attempt to adjust the style in order to effectively engage one another.
Some of the problem I see is that what he simply calls communication styles are more than just a style. I think they actually reflect paradigms or world views that are expressed in different language. I'm planning on writing another blog post specifically exploring these points in his book. Nevertheless, I found the three styles he presented (charismatic, quoter, and pragmatist) quite compelling and accurate depictions of how various groups communicate.
Ultimately, Viola does a good job of providing logical and biblical evidence for a reasonable faith, both in doctrine and practice. While at times simplistic, it is also written in a way that makes it accessible to a very wide audience.
Disclosure of Material Connection: I received this book free from the publisher. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Questions?
Got a question, struggle, or doubt you'd like to see addressed here? Contact me, and I'll try to discuss it (and may even help you get an answer).