Since the poignant pandemic of 2020, daily Bible reading has decreased. According to a report by the State of the Bible — an organization that delves into American citizens’ relationships with God, Christianity and Scripture — between 2019 and 2020, the percentage of those who read their Bible every day dropped from 14% to 9%.
“[Declined Bible reading] has to do with the Church having a different cultural role. Daily Bible reading is like exercise. You have to be pretty committed to it to make it happen. It’s hard to get into and access at a certain level, but also, it’s not a culturally prized skill and practice… We do live in a culture that has about a ten-second attention span and our phones are not helping that process. And [Americans are] looking for an easy answer and a quick fix. I think the Bible is actually a rich thing that gives life, but also a thing that does take a bit of work. But it’s also a thing that challenges us. The Bible is a thing you have to learn its rhythms and dictions and how it talks. But it doesn’t give quick fixes,” Covenant College Professor of Biblical Studies Jeff Dryden said.
Through issues such as isolation due to COVID-19 to the diminishing health of American Churches, numerous professing Christians have walked away from their faith and no longer follow God the way they used to. A portion of this problem stems from those who claim they follow the same faith their mothers do, which, according to the State of the Bible 2023 report, constitutes 77% of respondents. Americans who grow up in a Christian household may simply attend Church because of their parents’ examples. Yet, when it comes time to individualize and personalize their faith, various Christians do not know where to start.
In 2023, only 39% of the population reported reading their Bible three or more times per year, with only 24% recounting using their Bibles at least once a week outside of a Church service. As the American population decreasingly reads their Bibles, a plethora of issues serve as to why. As Biblical Leadership reports, citizens do not read their Bibles on their own due to their opinion that the Bible remains long, complex, boring or not reputable. However, the heart of this issue lies in that various Americans do not know how to read the text.
Overall, a lack of contextual study behind the Scriptures or misunderstanding of the different translations can lead Bible readers to not fully understand what the book says, raising concerns such as mistranslation or contradiction.
“There are cultural gaps [in the Bible]. We tend to think of cultural gaps as specific practices that don’t make sense to us, but it’s more [so that] the style of storytelling is very different in the Bible. It makes a ton of sense from where it comes from. But to us, it doesn’t make a ton of sense and it just seems kind of weird. The historical narratives in the Bible are insanely dense, like very compressed. And when you get used to that kind of storytelling, you start to realize these guys are really good storytellers. But it doesn’t really fit for us. If you read any modern novel, it’s all internal psychology. You have unlimited access to everyone’s internal psychology, you’re in their brains, and you know exactly what they’re thinking and feeling all the time. That never happens in the Bible,” Dryden said.
History
Scholars believe the first original Biblical manuscripts, which include the Pentateuch — also known as the Torah, the first five books of the modern-day Bible — date back to 1400 B.C. Genesis, the beginning book, attributes authorship to Moses after the Israelites’ exodus from Egypt, however, experts claim the entirety of the Torah met its final draft around 400 B.C. Moses originally wrote these books in Hebrew, the language of the Israelites, however, after the exile, Aramaic ruled as the common language of the region. Jewish society began to write elements of the rest of the Old Testament — the first half of the Bible — in this language, such as the prophecy books of Ezra and Daniel. Additionally, scholars translated books originally written in Hebrew to Aramaic, called the Aramaic Targums, or Aramaic translations, so the Jewish people who did not understand the initial language could listen to Torah readings in the Synagogue.
Into the start of the New Testament, or the second half of the Bible, Greek dominated modern Eur-Asia as the lingua franca, thus, these writings — such as the Gospels and Epistles to the early churches — exhibited a different language than the Old Testament. These Christians accepted the Septuagint, a Greek translation of the Old Testament Hebrew books.
Almost 250 years later in 382 A.D., Pope Damasus requested St. Jerome, a Biblical intellectual, to translate the Greek New Testament into Latin so European religious officials could read and understand it. St. Jerome began by transcribing the Gospels, yet he later found dissatisfaction with the Septuagint, translating the entirety of the Bible into the modern language, which he named the Vulgate. Minimal Bible translations took place in this time period, as the Roman Catholic Church primarily used St. Jerome’s Vulgate and discouraged any differing translations. Other popular copies included a minor number of languages based on the Vulgate, including John Wycliffe’s first English translation in the late 1300s and the Bible of Dresden — a manuscript copy translated into Czech.
Further down the history of the Church, as the Protestant Reformation took place in Europe — which constituted the first split from the Roman Catholic Church — Martin Luther translated the first German version of the entire Bible in 1522. This translation, which allowed Christians identifying as Protestants to comprehend the Bible, founded future translations in Europe. At the same time, William Tyndale produced the first English translation of the Bible directly from the Pentateuch and original manuscripts.
Since the invention of the printing press and the explosion of the Industrial Revolution, the amount of translations has soared dramatically. Numerous versions of the English Bible especially have increased rapidly, encompassing new translations even as recent as the Modern English Version (MEV) in 2014. With the plethora of translations and access the American Church possesses today, the circumstance begs the issue of how people can know whether a translation serves as accurate.
Bible translation methods
“Some translations are going to try to match the word order and the syntax of the Greek, which will make them feel a little bit stilted in English. It’ll make them feel awkward in some ways, but you’ll get more of the actual word order. It doesn’t just read from subject, verb or object. In Greek, they can mess that up, like the verb can come first and the subject can come at the end. It’s much more flexible in word ordering. So even that is somewhat of a not perfect translational idea, but [formal equivalence Bible translations] do try to stick much closer to the word order and literal translation. So that would be like the [New American Standard Bible (NASB)]. The NASB is an older translation that is sort of more conservative in its approach to scripture, which by that I just mean your theology does affect how you translate text sometimes,” Toccoa Falls College Associate Professor of Theology and Scripture Dr. Seth Heringer said.
In regards to English translations of the Bible, each version falls within a spectrum of two varying approaches. The first end of the continuum, called Dynamic Equivalence, aims to produce a copy of the Bible that provides a thought-for-thought alternative. These translations do not necessarily serve as direct to the original language, but they modify the syntax and grammar to fit modern English sentence structure, ultimately conveying the ideas of the author but not their exact words. Contrarily, the other main method comprises Literal, or Formal Equivalence. These variations demonstrate a word-for-word technique to reference the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts, typically without extensive regard to sentence structure.
Due to these two ends serving as extremities, translations usually do not follow either technique definitively, but add elements from both to differing degrees. The English Standard Version (ESV), for example, leans toward Formal Equivalence, yet still incorporates modified syntax to provide understanding to the reader. On the other hand, translations such as The Message (MSG) still translate the words used in the original texts but rely on identifying the central themes or ideas expressed by the initial authors.
The difference in these techniques constitutes confusion in the American Church today, as various debates arise regarding the differing words or themes expressed in the different translations. For numerous Christians, especially those new in the faith, the question arises of how to choose the correct translation rather than one that incorrectly interprets or translates the Greek and Hebrew manuscripts, such as the Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB).
“I read ESV because I like how it’s more in-depth. The sentences are a little longer to read but I feel like it’s easier to understand. The ideas aren’t broken up into a lot of sentences,” magnet junior Nadia Guthrie said.
Choosing a Bible translation
Especially for a Christian interested in learning more about the Bible or one new to the faith, various resources recommend reading a Dynamic Equivalence translation such as the New International Version (NIV), as these copies provide easier readability for the complex content. However, other scholars, such as The Chara Project suggest trying out various translations until the reader finds one they understand clearly. By researching the types of translation methods behind popular versions, inquisitors can find the distinction in transcription methods they hold curiosity for.
An accurate way to study the Bible and account for these different translations may involve reading multiple versions at once while also looking for commonalities found between the Dynamic and Formal Equivalence techniques. For example, reading an MSG or NIV Bible while simultaneously studying an ESV or Christian Standard Bible (CSB) can aid the reader in understanding the central ideas expressed in the passage from a dynamically equivalent version while still comprehending the original language and structure provided by a literal translation.
Additionally, using study tools such as Blue Letter Bible (BLB) or the Enduring Word commentary can assist curious Bible readers in their endeavors. By providing insight into the original Greek and Hebrew words used in a specific text, BLB offers a variety of tools that display the word’s part of speech, other uses in the Bible, etymological roots and extensive data to deepen the understanding of the user. On the other hand, commentaries such as Enduring Word detail scholars’ specific information about a passage, involving cross-references or historical context.
While no Bible translation proves purely literal, the difference in translations and techniques does not detract from the Bible’s authenticity as a historical document. The dynamic history encompassing multiple languages and periods simply points to the Bible’s rich background for Christians and can benefit individuals in grasping the reasons behind each different translation. Though understanding the Bible remains vital to the faith, each Christian requires a different level of comprehension in their study, and the variety of options in translations provides numerous ways to achieve comprehension. Clubs around NC such as Collective Hope Club (CHC) and Fellowship of Christian Athletes (FCA) aim to aid students in their journeys with faith by building a community of Christian students, allowing those who do know how to read their Bibles to learn from peers. These clubs foster friendships between peers with similar beliefs and help teenagers learn to personalize their faith; as the overall American population decreases in Bible reading, young believers at NC can supplement their relationship with Scripture by attending the Christian-minded organizations that aim to help students open their Bibles and study the long-acclaimed words.
“I would say the way that FCA helps students grow in their faith and knowledge of the Bible is by allowing other students to be able to share their perspectives of life and then also share those Bible verses that are meaningful to them, but I think it’s a little more impactful when we allow students to take control. That’s why FCA is a student-led organization, I just kind of help chaperone it if you will. But the young women who lead it and the young men who lead it, I think, are the ones who are really trying to press people to grow in their faith by challenging them to share their life stories. I can remember how Nadia Guthrie and Cooper Negron got out there and shared their testimonies in front of 700 people at Fields of Faith. They just delivered these incredibly powerful testimonies to young people that were around them and I think that one way is by allowing the students just to share about who they are, and what they have in their lives and their testimony and showing how powerful that testimony can be,” NC football huddle leader David Bortolazzo said.
