Forever Life

March 3, 2010

“For you are a mist that appears for a little time and then vanishes… All flesh is like grass and all its glory like the flower of grass. The grass withers, and the flower falls…” These are biblical metaphors for the brevity of life. Our physical life is fragile. Death has no minimum age requirement, but this isn’t the entire story.

Two different eternities stretch out before us depending on our choices in life.

He will render to each one according to his works: to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; but for those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury. (Romans 2:6–8, ESV)

We must understand the “patience in well-doing” of the previous passage as pointing to faith in Jesus (Romans 3:21-31). Jesus makes all the difference.

Jesus is also our reason for believing in life after death. We have several lines of evidence that converge: the Old Testament prophecies and the eyewitness testimony of the gospels. The alternate explanations – growth of legend, hallucinations, stolen body, wrong tomb, and Jesus merely swooning on the cross and not dying – fail to convince even many skeptics. As someone has observed, we need something the size and shape of the resurrection to explain the dramatic transformation of the disciples and the conversions of James and Paul.

So we have someone who can speak authoritatively about life after death – Jesus, the Risen One. We have two different eternities stretching out before us depending on our choice about Jesus.

Jesus used a number of images to describe hell – “outer darkness, unquenchable fire, weeping, and gnashing of teeth.” Whatever surface contradiction is contained in these words is resolved in human experience excluded from God. Even in the worst moments of this life, there are snatches of beauty and glimpses of goodness. To be excluded from God is truly death.

A marriage banquet of the Lamb, a glorious Jerusalem, and an exalted Garden of Eden with Trees of Life aplenty are the images of eternal life with God. Love, goodness, and beauty are God’s gifts and tokens of his presence. If two eternities stretch out before us, give me that which can truly be called forever life.


Life Is Fragile

February 18, 2010

A time existed as innocent children when we knew nothing of death. It never occurred to us that animals died, or worse, that we die. It intrudes on us at the first sight of a dead animal, and we ask our parents our first questions about death.

Awareness of death may come at the death of a family member. The childlike questions of why don’t they get out of that suitcase are met with adults straining to give an answer – to find just the right words.

If death came to the aged and infirm only, death might be easier to explain. Yet, a grim reality exists: life is fragile. It is fragile to all of us regardless of age or station in life. Youth may be the time of life when we feel invincible, but such feelings are mistaken. I’ve been to funerals of children and the elderly and those in between. Death knows of no minimum age requirement.

If death came only after a very long life, death might be easier to explain. Although I’ve known ninety year olds who still wanted more of the gift of time, somehow, we take comfort when the deceased has had a long and full life, but it doesn’t always happen that way.

None of us can say to God, you owe me so many years. Even the 70 or 80 years found in Psalm 90 are but round numbers not guarantees. That means each day of life is a gift from God. I’m not trying to be morbid reflecting on the frailty of life. I simply want to be aware that each moment is precious. Each moment is a gift.

The gift of life also has purpose. God grants me this wonderful gift so that I might know him and glorify him. We each have an expiration date. Usually we don’t know when it will be. We are not like gallons of milk with it printed on our sides. That gives urgency to spiritual things.

The end of the matter; all has been heard. Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man. For God will bring every deed into judgment, with every secret thing, whether good or evil. (Ecclesiastes 12:13–14, ESV)

The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent, because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead.” (Acts 17:30–31, ESV)

Life is a gift. Life has purpose. Life is fragile.


Encourage One Another

February 13, 2010

The Christian life can be compared to a journey with obstacles and trials. The goal is to finish the journey in faith. The danger is always present that we will stop along the way and maybe even choose a different direction for life – a direction that leads away from God. That means the Christian needs encouragement to persevere and live a life worthy of his calling. It is in the context of our need to persevere that Hebrews gives its command to encourage one another.

And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near. Hebrews 10:24–25, ESV

Translators attempting to give us a smooth English sentence can on occasion loose an important idea. The above translation of verse 24 is all too common.

 …and let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds,…Hebrews 10:24, NASB

 And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds. Hebrews 10:24, NIV

 The problem with the above translations is that the actual object of “let us consider” in Greek is “one another” as in the NKJV.

 And let us consider one another in order to stir up love and good works… Hebrews 10:24, NKJV

The command to encourage then has one another as its focus. It is first of all selfless, and it is at this point also countercultural. We live in an age of the consumer mentality: what do I get out of it? We never get the worship assembly right if we begin with ourselves. We must always begin with God and the need of others.

A Korean parable about a visit to heaven and hell gives insight to this difference of perspective.

The visitor peeped in at the door of hell and saw an enormous banquet hall. In it were a number of long tables with bowls of rice and delicacies on them, well-flavored, smelling delicious, and inviting. The guests were sitting hungrily, opposite one another, each with a plate of food.

The guests all had chopsticks to use, but these were so long that, however hard they tried, not a grain of rice could they get into their mouths. This was their torment; this was their hell. “I’ve seen it, that’s more than enough for me,” said the visitor. Departing hell, he entered into heaven.

Inside, he saw the same banquet hall, the same tables, the same food, and the same long chopsticks. But the guests were joyful. All were smiling and laughing. Each one, having put the food onto his chopsticks, held it out to the mouth of his companion opposite, and so they managed to eat their fill. Joy, love, and fulfillment were found in heaven.

Following Jesus often involves paradoxes: losing our life to save it, the last shall be first, and greatness comes by humility. This is but one more. To be encouraged, we must encourage one another.


Under the Knife

February 4, 2010

The tabloid press has recently reported on beautiful people who have gone under the knife to be more beautiful. They went under the knife of cosmetic surgery pursuing a vision of outer perfection. Although such surgery seems extreme, all of us would willingly consent to surgery when our life or health is at stake. None of us like it, but we are willing to go under the knife.

But there is a surgery more important than the ones to enhance outward beauty or repair physical health. This surgeon wields more than a scalpel. He wields a sword.

Let us therefore strive to enter that rest, so that no one may fall by the same sort of disobedience. 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. And no creature is hidden from his sight, but all are naked and exposed to the eyes of him to whom we must give account. Hebrews 4:11–13, ESV

The message about the sword is bracketed by some important ideas. We are to strive to enter the rest which is heaven itself, and we are warned that this rest can be missed by disobedience. At the end, we are told that everything about us is exposed to God before whom we must give account. God has already seen all our spiritual x-rays, CAT scans, and MRIs. There is nothing about us that he doesn’t already know. We shouldn’t play games or think we can hide. Faking it leads to disaster even if others buy our sham.

The point of sword is that it pierces. The sword of the word can pierce all the way to our thoughts and intentions. God has always wanted our hearts (Deuteronomy 6:5). God has always wanted his law written on our hearts (Jeremiah 31:33). This is surgery to make us more beautiful on the inside. This is surgery to correct our failing spiritual health. Without it, we will spiritually die. The surgeon wants us more obedient, more holy. The word’s penetration into our heart is to make us more like the one we are following – Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith (Hebrews 12:2).

Hebrews reveals all too clearly that there have been others who have heard the word and responded with hardened hearts (3:7-8). We have a spiritual surgeon who wants to penetrate all the way to thoughts and intentions. He wants to make us more beautiful on the inside. He wants to make us more like Him. Are we willing to go under the knife?


A Bad Trade

January 28, 2010

Steve Jobs and Apple have been in the news: the announcement of the iPad, good quarterly earnings, and a stock price over $200 a share. But when Apple Computer began in 1976 it was a simple partnership with Steve Wozniak (45%), Steve Jobs (45%), and Ronald Wayne (10%).

Apple had released the Apple I, but the partners still kept their day jobs. They weren’t making that much money yet. Wozniak did design work in his apartment. Jobs worked out of his bedroom in his parent’s house, and the Apple I was put together in the garage of the Job’s home. It was in these early days of the business that Wayne wanted out. He sold his 10% stake in Apple Computers to Jobs and Wozniak for a whopping $800. Industry analysts calculate that if he had held on to this 10%, it would have been worth $1.5 billion dollars. Yes, that’s billion with a “B.” It turned out to be a very bad trade. 

But I know of a worse trade, a worse exchange. Listen to the words of Jesus:

Then Jesus told his disciples, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.  For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what shall a man give in return for his soul? For the Son of Man is going to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay each person according to what he has done.  Matthew 16:24–27, ESV

The whole world is a grand thing to have – wealth beyond imagining. But the soul is worth more. One dictionary defines the soul “as the seat and center of life that transcends the earthly.”1 It is my spiritual life, and it is life in the age to come.

Ronald Wayne made a bad trade selling 10% of Apple for $800, but we can sympathize with the mistake. He didn’t know the future. He didn’t know what was ahead. He didn’t know what he was trading.

There is the striking difference with Jesus’ invitation. Jesus has made clear what is at stake. Jesus’ claims need to be seriously evaluated, because what is at stake is everything near and dear to us, our very soul. Don’t make a bad trade.

1Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., & Bauer, W. (2000). A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature (3rd ed.) (1099). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.


A Criticism of Functional Equivalence

September 24, 2009

Functional equivalence in Bible translation attempts to elicit the same meaning of the original in language forms that are natural to the receptor language. Formal equivalence attempts to be as literal (word for word) as possible. A great emphasis in functional equivalence occurred in Bible translation for third world countries. In some cases, these languages had no written alphabet, dictionary, or grammar. Translators were undertaking a tremendous task.

From these third world experiences, functional equivalence procedures began to be applied to translations in English. The past half century has seen greater use of functional equivalent methods, but the approach is not without critics.

Leland Ryken in his book, The Word of God in English,* points out a number of fallacies to this approach. One fallacy strikes at the heart of translation issues. It is the fallacy that all translating is interpretation.

Ryken notes a failure to distinguish linguistic interpretation from thematic interpretation. By linguistic interpretation, Ryken means the choice between what word best translates the original term. Translators may have to choose between wilderness or desert to describe the area of Israel’s 40 years of wandering. They may choose between descendant or seed to render the Hebrew term zerah.

Word choices like this do involve interpretation, but functional equivalence frequently goes beyond this into what Ryken calls thematic interpretation of the meaning of the text. For example, note the following two versions of 2 Peter 1:20.

 

Formal Equivalent/ESV Functional Equivalent/NIV
knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation.

The NIV has given us an interpretation of this verse. It has specified the “someone” in the passage. This is a case where I think the interpretation is correct. However, someone could come along and say, “This is not what Peter said, and I don’t think it is what he meant.” We would have to resort to the more literal translation and make our case.

In addition, this raises the issue that translators may make the wrong thematic interpretation in various passages. Thematic interpretation gives rise to much greater variation in translations. It is a case of readers beware.

*The Word of God in English is available as a free PDF download at http://www.esv.org/translation/woge.


The Gender Neutral Language Controversy

September 10, 2009

The NIV has been in the news this past week. Plans are underway for a revision of the NIV to be published in 2011. The plans include the discontinuation of the TNIV, which was first published in 2002. The biggest battle over the TNIV, and the greatest concern over revision of the NIV involves gender neutral language.

To be honest, the Bible is not an egalitarian book. In other words, feminists will never be satisfied with the Bible as written. To illustrate, one only needs to look at the Inclusive Bible’s handling of Colossians 3:18-19: “You who are in committed relationships, be submissive to each other. This is your duty in Christ Jesus. Partners joined by God, love each other. Avoid any bitterness between you.” That is a rewrite of Paul and not a translation. The Bible affirms the equal value of males and females, but it does allow for differences in gender roles.

English usage has become more gender sensitive in recent decades, although usage has not solved all issues. The third person singular personal pronouns are still he or she.

Most modern translations (e.g., NKJV, NIV, and ESV) attempt to be somewhat gender neutral. When words like all, anyone, or everyone occur even thought they have masculine grammatical gender in Greek but there is no word for man in the text, they are rendered in a more gender neutral way – “all” instead of “all men.” The occurrence of man when it is understood generically of human beings is often translated persons or human beings instead of man.

Romans 3:9

“for I have already charged that all men, both Jews and Greeks, are under the power of sin” RSV

 For we have previously charged both Jews and Greeks that they are all under sin. NKJV

 We have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under sin. NIV

 Matthew 5:15

Nor do men light a lamp and put it under a bushel, but on a stand, and it gives light to all in the house. RSV

Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. NIV

But the question arises; can we go too far in the pursuit of gender neutral language? That has been at the heart of the controversy over the TNIV, and it will be one of the issues in the NIV revision. I think it is possible to go too far. Two areas have been of principle concern. First, we should not remove reference to males in historical passages when those references are present. Some translations have. Notice the following examples:

 Acts 1:21

Therefore it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus went in and out among us  NIV   (TNIV)

Therefore it is necessary to choose one of those who had been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus went in and out among us.  NIVI  

 1 Timothy 3:2

the husband of one wife  RSV

married only once  NRSV

The second concern has to do with the third person singular pronoun. The TNIV and the NRSV substitute third person plural pronouns for third person singular pronouns. In other words, they change “he” to “they.” Problems arise especially in the Old Testament. We can obscure Messianic references doing that. For example:

He keeps all his bones; not one of them is broken. Psalm 34:20, ESV

he protects all their bones, not one of them will be broken. Psalm 34:20, TNIV

This is an important issue. How does your translation handle gender language? The preface of some translations will tell you. Comparison with other translations may be helpful.


Aren’t These Translations Dangerous?

September 3, 2009

When I was a teenager, someone at my home congregation made available some copies of Good News for Modern Man. I read the New Testament all the way through for the first time in this little paperback. I’m sure that in other congregations there may have been tracts warning of the errors of this modern version and recommending people stay away from it. This leads to a legitimate question. Aren’t these translations dangerous? 

My experience as a Bible reader suggests that we can over blow the dangers. I was in a greater danger from not reading the Bible. Bible illiteracy is the great danger of our society. (And by the way, the publication of many different translations has not stemmed that tide.) If I hadn’t found something easier to read, I might have given up or simply have failed to grow in faith. That little paperback led to a growth in my devotional life.  I was strengthened by milk for stronger food.

I think several factors militate against the flaws in some translations. I was not reading the Bible in isolation. I had mature Christian people around me. These people were more knowledgeable that I was, and I could ask questions. In other words, my church family helped guide my reading.

I was also aware of multiple translations. I wasn’t just relying on Good News for Modern Man alone. At that point, I had a King James Version to compare with, and it wasn’t too long that I also had a Revised Standard Version and a New American Standard Bible. In other words, I was aware that I was reading a translation. I’ve learned over the years that no translation is perfect because translating is a human activity. That is why the final court of appeal in religious discussion is the Bible in the original languages. But I’m extremely grateful for access to the Bible in my native language.

One further fact needs to be noted. The Bible is an amazingly resilient collection of books. Most of our teachings are not based on one passage alone. Even when a translation throws us a loop with a questionable translation, other passages may keep us from going the wrong direction. The Bible is its own best interpreter.

The functional equivalent translation (meaning for meaning) is designed for easy access to the beginner and the person with few reference books to consult. My own pilgrimage suggests that those translations are not necessarily harmful and may be helpful. But I think their proper use is as a stepping stone. Careful Bible study in English is best done with a formal equivalent (more literal) translation (e.g., NASB, NKJV, and ESV). If you have only been reading a meaning for meaning translation, I would encourage you to try a more literal translation especially in careful study.


Translators Are Traitors

August 28, 2009

The title is an Italian proverb. It’s a reminder that translating from one language to another often evokes strong feelings. Strong feelings are especially involved when the translation is the Bible. One story from church history illustrates this. When Jerome’s Latin Vulgate was read in one North African church for the first time, a riot ensued. Of course, the Vulgate went on to become a standard translation for more than a millennia and is still used today.

Many of us can remember a time when most people would have been reading from the same translation – the King James Version (although Roman Catholics at that time would have been reading the Douay-Rheims). Now different translations are the norm.

I want us to be Bible readers, but I also want us to be wise students as we deal with the situation of multiple translations. Accuracy is important. It does matter to me whether I’m reading God’s word or the faulty opinion of a translator. The final court of appeal in translation issues is the Bible in the original languages, which is why I study Greek and Hebrew. I realize that not everyone has the time or inclination for that, but many helps exist in English to go back to the original. It is not an impossible task.

Having read the Bible in multiple translations, the good news is that translations agree more than they disagree. You don’t have the impression that you are reading different books. Where they disagree, often they are bringing out different possible nuances in words. Noting differences and studying them can lead to fruitful discoveries.

Two different approaches to translating are used, and it is important to know which approach was used in the Bible you are reading. They are formal equivalence and functional (or dynamic) equivalence. Formal equivalence attempts to be a literal as possible. It attempts to match as closely as possible the forms of the original (word for word, verb for verb, noun for noun, etc.) with the forms of the receptor language (the language of the translation, which in our case is English). Functional equivalence attempts to elicit the same meaning of the original in language forms that are natural to the receptor language.

The extreme end of formal equivalence is found in an interlinear. The English gloss under the original language in an interlinear is extremely difficult to read except for checking a word. Formal equivalence translations can be difficult to read so that we fail to get a meaning or we get the wrong meaning because the language is unnatural to us. The extreme end of functional equivalence is unduly free. Unduly free means that the translator misrepresents the original. I think some paraphrases definitely fall into the category of unduly free. All functional equivalent translations may have places where they have been unduly free. It is important to know what kind of translation you are reading. If it is formal equivalence, you may find some phrases that are harder to understand than normal English. If it is functional equivalence, you may have something that is not faithful to the original.

 What is the English Bible reader to do? I hope to sort some of this out in a series of articles. What should you do now? Keep reading the Bible, and read the preface of the translation you are using. Find out what approach the translators are using.


In the House of Mourning

August 17, 2009

Ecclesiastes has a counterintuitive proverb:

 It is better to go to the house of mourning than to go to the house of feasting, for this is the end of all mankind, and the living will lay it to heart. Ecclesiastes 7:2, ESV

Obviously, it would be more fun to go to the house of feasting, and Ecclesiastes is not opposed to enjoyment. In fact, enjoyment is a gift of God (3:13). Yet, the house of mourning teaches us the brevity of life. Death may come suddenly, or it may be expected with the decline of aging or the wasting away from disease. But unless the Lord returns first, we will all die.

It doesn’t matter whether you are a celebrity or ordinary, wealthy or poor, wise or foolish. Death is a reality of life. The speaker of Ecclesiastes struggles looking at life under the sun. I suspect “under the sun” may suggest life from merely this world’s point of view. From that vantage point, we hear him lament:

Then I said in my heart, “What happens to the fool will happen to me also. Why then have I been so very wise?” And I said in my heart that this also is vanity. For of the wise as of the fool there is no enduring remembrance, seeing that in the days to come all will have been long forgotten. How the wise dies just like the fool! So I hated life, because what is done under the sun was grievous to me, for all is vanity and a striving after wind.Ecclesiastes 2:15-17, ESV

Although there are frustrations with life under the sun, life in this physical world, Ecclesiastes points us beyond it to a relationship with God. The final chapter encourages, “Remember also your Creator in the days of your youth…” (12:1, ESV). Especially remember God before the decline of aging sets in. Ecclesiastes paints a vivid picture of aging with imagery from village life. Or at least remember God “before the silver cord is snapped, or the golden bowl is broken” – in other words, before death.

The reason for this command is that there is a purpose to life.

The end of the matter; all has been heard. Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man. For God will bring every deed into judgment, with every secret thing, whether good or evil.Ecclesiastes 12:13-14, ESV

 What is the lesson that we should learn in the house of mourning? Prepare for death by living life to the glory of God. Don’t miss the whole purpose of life.