Guest Post: From Eugene P to the CEB

 Pocket-Zippered Eco-Leather CEB with my rosary by
artisan FloraYoonJewelry in Seoul, S.Korea via Etsy

Thank you to my friend Owen for providing this reflective post about his journey to the CEB.  The origins of this post go back to a recent post I did on the CEB Study Bible.  

Inserting myself into the conversation with David and Timothy, (and what I am going to say is all old news for Tim as we've chatted loads) I am also very much in the space you mention, David, regarding both the Common English Bible and your approach in purpose with the bible. 

Your list for going forward/looking back later in life is spot on. I'm a few years off 60, well away from the 80 years old you mention looking forward-to/back-from but, time is moving faster even at my age and I can say with certainty that the things you mention as important are those that matter most and yes, few of the other things we may have once imagined as so vital to the Christian are of little important.

Per translations, variations, paraphrases et cetera and each in their many editions and iterations; I've read all the major ones both sides of the Tiber. I've read and studied them as a lay person, as an ordained minister, as a clergy-convert to Catholicism, as a ''once-again-theology-student'' in a formal setting, and finally as returned to "just" a lay person.  

For all the study and comparisons both in hallowed-halls and as lived-experience I am in a place where I seek to expend precious energy actually living the Word, to the best of my ability, enabled by grace overendless mop-head (a term of semi-endearment) styled pouring over minutia, nit picking and parsing, proof-texting and proving who is right or most right. God bless them for whom that is a helpful thing. Really, God bless'em good. If any of that equates with being a better disciple of Christ, a better fellow human, please have at it. It is no longer me if it ever really was me. Not a few of my comments in the archive of this blog I would presently find embarrassing were I to look them up - nothing bad per se, just wow, did I once think that way? I did.

In the late 90s, then as a Protestant minister, I was introduced to Eugene Peterson [EP] (regrettably not in person) and to his then portions of the bible as they were rolled out. It was beyond refreshing. Then in 2002 I bought my first complete The Message Bible [MSG]. Bam. Wow. Alive. Real poetry. Talk about your read-think-pray-live!

However, I was in circles where for many the MSG was in disfavour and in as much taken up with "the fear of man"---that people pleasing monster borne of valuing myself via the eyes of others rather than investing in enough silence to hear my own voice, an inner wisdom as well as to truly trust God in that inner voice---because of nonsense like that, I put that wonderful MSG bible away.

Still later, having taken the deep-dive risk of losing my livelihood in order to enter the Roman Catholic Church, I strove and I do mean strove to be whatever I thought others said was the best way to be Catholic. It was a genuine conversion quickly coloured by the expectations and opinions of others. In some respects I had merely changed silos and in regard to bible translations specifically I found the "dialogue" over right and wrong, good and bad, worthy and dross to be far more vitriolic. And once again I found EP and his MSG held in question by those whom I sought to emulate in the name of being a good Catholic. Sad, I know.

Later on still, with much personal work done and say, with accepted vocational changes, I happened on news of the release of The Message Catholic/Ecumenical [MSGCE] (I blame ;-) Tim and his blog for that news) and I picked up a copy and wondered why-the-blank I had let go of the MSG in those intervening years. Well, I knew why, as I've just said, it as more that I in letting go the nonsense I was amazed to have re-discovered such a helpful bible.

Personal growth, becoming more genuinely open, seeking God again in my own terms and with false affections fading, the timing was right. The MSG was a bible-balm.

Last year during Lent I decided one of the things I would "give up" was the endless bible translation version and edition comparison. The beginning of the end of premium and of perfect bible was at hand. I immersed myself into just one bible, reading only that one the whole of Lent. I chose the MSGCE. It was transformative. So much so that Lent ended and I continued on in the Message-only or very nearly only. Was I worried that it was a paraphrase? No. I have decades of formal and informal training behind me and I got loads of approved-translation NRSV in our Canadian liturgy and not unimportantly I was coming to a more deeply holistic understanding of being Catholic. That change has been, I pray, irreversible; what’s been seen cannot be unseen and never more did that old hymn resonate, “no turning back”.

Reading-thinking-praying-living the MSG was the best bible-experience I'd had to date with most genuine impact in my life; that’s 37 years of bible, reading, praying, preaching, teaching, attempts at living fully.

Unsurprisingly, I had no desire to move away from EP's MSGCE. I was invited to twice give a continuous-live-no-breaks-reading of the Gospel of Mark from the MSGCE in our parish. It was very favourably received.

So, right, I had no interest in getting another bible, another translation. Then, serendipity happened and along came the Common English Bible. Like this: I was listening to a recent podcast of a sermon by a local former-denominational-peer-minister acquaintance of mine as I was interested in the inner-city work his folks are engaged in and, what was that? That was the sound of a familiar passage in a translation I could identify and, as noted, I know pretty much all of them, pretty well. I replayed the portion of the podcast and wrote the words down, then plugged them into Google Search and ta-da!, there those words were on biblegateway.com as some bible version I did not know at all. I read on, then on and on and then went looking for a good used copy on-line.

I did not think anything would move me from the MSGCE as my primary bible. But the CEB has done so (sorrEy, Tim!). Granted, the MSG is the only bible that has made me laugh out loud or hoot with enjoyment/surprise and I do still love it so. Meanwhile, the CEB has become my bible of prayer, of daily reading and reflection and when I choose so, of study. It is quickly becoming the one that comes to mind during the day in relation to this or that happening or thought. So yes, my primary translation is the CEB with the MSG as a beloved companion. 

It's like the CEB found me rather than the other way round. (As an aside, EP himself discourages one from reading his MSG as ones primary bible.)

Per the CEB:

- I appreciate its scholarship which is up to date and while no translation is wholly unaffected this one resonates.

- I appreciate its broad ecumenical translator base (more Catholics than the now Catholic-lauded ESV et.al except perhaps the originally all-Catholic JB-family (?) ) and the inclusion of a greater proportion of woman in that mix (indeed, one third among the Catholics ).

- I appreciate that it is a wholly new translation, not a redo or a redo of a redo despite the claims of late of publishers of many a translation I need not name for readers of this blog.

- I highly value a number of perhaps at first jarring translation choices it makes. One reflection and with the publishers intentions considered these choices ring true and are refreshing as Christianity grows. (Yes, I am purposefully choosing to not note those citations because, as noted above, I'm no longer interested in debate and any reader here can or has found plenteous opinion expounding posts elsewhere.)

- I appreciate the CEB's conversational tone without its becoming colloquial and without the loss including classic-Judeo-Christian-historic connections and terms (a thing the good EP often avoids in the MSG. I understand his reasoning and have missed those helpful connections so for me, here is another plus in the CEB). 

- I value the CEBs non-sectarian tone both in the translation itself and in the notes of the Study edition.

It's readiness to make certain bold yet informed choices while still incorporating classic Christian-theological terms all in a manner that is eminently readable and listen-able is, I think, remarkable.

It surprised me how quickly I made the choice to read the CEB as primary (now, CEB plural as I confess have the hardback study with full Catholic and Eastern church "apocryphal" books and the pocket-zipper, though Protestant canon only). Tim jokingly predicted that outcome. Haven't bothered myself with comparing the CEB 2011 with later iterations. Was tempted to pine as of old once I knew there were those changes and even wrote the publisher to inquire after a comparison list but then ended up just as happy to have received no reply because for me, why loose the gained-ground of embracing a read-to-live what is to hand approach (I mean, really, how far off can the changes and corrections be)?  As it now turns out (see comments in the originating post) both editions I have are the most recent iterations of the translation). Good enough, very-good enough.

Once upon a time, a long, long time, I wanted the right bible, the right perfect bible, the right perfect premium bible. To use words such as obsession and addiction in that context are not a stretch. And now?

Read-to-really-live. That's how I see it. If that's this or that translation for you (the 'royal you' here :) ) please, please read-think-pray and live fully. Please, just go live it. But wait, is this or that translation officially approved? Please do read Second Vatican Council, Dei Verbum. 

Well, didn't this comment become that post!

Thus endeth the Lesson. Or, perhaps, so Life begins.

First Look: CEB Study Bible w/Apocrypha

More and more I have felt the desire to explore translations that I had previously avoided.  One of those translations is the Common English Bible.  The CEB was produced under the sponsorship of a number of mainline Protestant denominations, most notably the Disciples of Christ, the Presbyterian Church U.S.A., the Episcopal Church, the United Church of Christ, and the United Methodist Church.  The scholars who worked on this translation included other Christian denominations, including a number of Roman Catholic biblical scholars.  

The CEB committee's stated goals were to "to make the Bible accessible to a broad range of people; it’s written at a comfortable level for over half of all English readers. As the translators did their work, reading specialists working with seventy-seven reading groups from more than a dozen denominations review the texts to ensure a smooth and natural reading experience. Easy readability can enhance church worship and participation, and personal Bible study. It also encourages children and youth to discover the Bible for themselves, perhaps for the very first time."  All of these are very important goals which I think are so very necessary in the times we live in.  

Recently, I received a hardbound copy of the CEB Study Bible w/ Apocrypha to review.  I am really enjoying exploring this translation, since it is meant to read very differently than the more formal translations.  And I am not just looking at the standard go-to verses that we all typically look up first thing, instead I am trying to read much larger chunks of text.  I hope to report back to you on what I have discovered at a future date.  

The CEB Study Bible w/ Apocrypha is beautifully made.  Its presented in a single column format, with loads of cross-references.  In addition, there are full-color illustrations, photos, and a page-layout that makes it far more attractive than pretty much every Catholic Study Bible on the market.  (Yeah, no surprise there!)  The spine is sewn and there are no glossy inserts anywhere to be found.  

Here are some photos, which will give you a little flavor of what this study bible has to offer.

I want to thank the CEB folks for providing me a copy to review

CEB Catholic Edition?

I got this email from reader Marc, who was happy to share this with you.

I recently contacted the Common English Bible (CEB) team through their website to commend them for their translation and to inquire about whether they plan to pursue an imprimatur. They sent me the following response, which they permitted me to share with your blog community: 

"Thank you for your kind email. I'm so glad to hear that you are enjoying the CEB. We do not have any plans at the moment to create a printed Catholic edition, in part because we have not had any success even starting the process for the imprimatur. We will continue to look for opportunities to get official approval, but it seems highly unlikely that that will happen any time soon. The focus for the Church is, understandably, on the NAB for the time being."

Coming Soon: CEB Study Bible

Due out later this year, the CEB Study Bible will come in a number of different cover options including hardcover, deco-tone, and leather.  It will be available with and without the Apocrypha (Deuterocanonicals).   

Having looked at a few of the sample pages, the single-column page format looks great and should assist with the overall readability of the volume. You can view a sample of the CEB Study Bible here, which includes the entire Gospel of Mark.

The CEB Study Bible combines the reliability and readability one expects of the Common English Bible translation with notes and other resources to help readers grow in their understanding of and engagement with the Bible. Each biblical book has an introduction that provides an overview of the book and other details like authorship and theme. Extensive study notes throughout the Bible provide information for the reader to understand the text within the larger historical and literary framework of the Bible and give important parallel and background verses. Unique to The CEB Study Bible are 210 sidebar articles for topics that require more discussion than the format of a study note allows. Concordance; 21 full-color maps from National Geographic; five articles from contributing scholars; and other additional in-text maps, charts, and pictures are included. Full color throughout. 

The CEB Study Bible is due out in October

My New Saint John's Bible Print and John 1:14

In honor of my newly framed Giclée print of the Saint John's Bible illumination for John 1:14, The Word Made Flesh by Donald Jackson, I thought I would list how this verse is translated in a number of prominent English versions.  Of course, most fascinating to me, at least, is how each version translates the Greek word σκηνόω.  I prefer what the NABRE and NRSV have done which get closest to the idea that God "pitched his tent/tabernacle" among us.


"And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we saw his glory, the glory as it were of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth." -Douay-Rheims

"And the Word was made flesh, and came to dwell among us; and we had sight of his glory, glory such as belongs to the Father’s only-begotten Son, full of grace and truth." -Knox

"And the Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us, and we saw his glory, the glory as of the Father’s only Son, full of grace and truth." -NABRE

"And the Word became flesh and lived among us, and we have seen his glory, the glory as of a father’s only son, full of grace and truth." -NRSV

"And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth; we have beheld his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father." -RSV-CE

"The Word became flesh and made his home among. We have seen his glory, glory like that of a father’s only son, full of grace and truth." -CEB

"The Word became flesh and blood, and moved into the neighborhood. We saw the glory with our own eyes, the one-of-a-kind glory, like Father, like Son, Generous inside and out, true from start to finish." -The Message

Free E-Book CEB!

From the folks at the CEB:

Starting today -- for two days only -- the full Common English Bible and Common English Bible with Apocrypha will be available for free on your Kindle and Nook. 


 If you haven't had the chance yet, now is the perfect time to find out what makes the Common English Bible so special and share God's Word with your friends and family.


For more info on CEB, you can go here.

Weigel on Bible Babel

George Weigel is well-known in Catholic circles, most notably for his magisterial biography on the life of Blessed John Paul II, Witness to Hope.  He is the Distinguished Senior Fellow of the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington DC and is a frequent speaker and commentator on NBC News.  Recently, he wrote a column for the Denver Catholic Register, which can be read via Crisis Magazine.    The article is a mixed bag, some of which I agree while other parts I do not.  Mr. Weigel relies on an earlier essay by Baylor University's David Lyle Jeffrey entitled "Our Babel of Bibles" which can be read here from the March/April edition of Touchstone.   Give time to both articles!  I will just be focusing, in this post, on the Weigel piece. 

Weigel's argument consists of decrying the lack of Biblical literacy among Catholics since Vatican II, even though this was one of the Council's main objectives.  At first, the main reason for this, he argues, is the promotion of the historical-critical method in both the parish and the academy.  As he says, "the historical-critical method of biblical study has taught two generations of Catholics that the Bible is too complicated for ordinary people to understand."  I tend to agree that for many years since the 60's too much emphasis, particularly by pastors, has been focused only on the historical-critical analysis of the text, to the neglect of principles of interpretation as set forth in CCC 112-114.  Yet, it must be pointed out that, as Pope Benedict wrote in the preface to Jesus of Nazareth, the historical-critical method is an "indispensable tool" for studying the Bible.  Without a doubt, there have been excesses in how the historical-critical method has been utilized, as the Pope has mentioned on numerous occasion.  However, it remains an important tool for scripture study, even with its limitations.  The Church supports its use and the historical-critical method will not be going away any time soon.

Next up on Weigel's list is the New American Bible, which he refers to as "the pedestrian translation to which U.S. Catholic are subjected in the liturgy."  For a moment, I though I was reading an article by the late Fr. Richard John Neuhaus.  We have had plenty of discussions about the NAB/NABRE on this blog, so I am not going to rehash my views about it.  As I mentioned last year, I think the NABRE is a considerable improvement over the previous edition which allows it to stack up well against the RSV-CE in many ways.  I wonder if he is even aware of the recent NABRE update, particularly with the improvements to the Psalter?

For the remainder of the article, Weigel follows very closely to Jeffrey's essay.  He points out, and rightly so in my opinion, the proliferation of "niche" Bibles that are being published each year, like HarperOne's Green Bible or the Woman Thou Art Loosed edition.  I might also point out the CS Lewis Bible, the American Patriot's Bible, or Joel Osteen's Hope for Today Bible.   While I would agree that these are not necessary and my even be self-serving or simply money-making ventures, how am I to respond to some similar Catholic Bibles like the upcoming Saints Devotional Bible, the New Catholic Answers Bible, or even the CSSI Study Bible RSV-CE?  There are certainly extremes, like the American Patriot's Bible, but is having various "niche" Bibles that focus on the Church Fathers or the Saints or Apologetics a bad thing?  What about Youth Bibles? 

Weigel, then, takes aim at the lack of traditional language found in many modern Bibles, most notably the Common English Bible.  However, his complaint against the translation philosophy of the CEB, which avoids traditional terminology and classical English sentence structure as found in the KJV (or RSV), is actually represented in the NABRE, which he had previously panned earlier in the article.  Just take a look at his example of Psalm 122:1 in the NABRE and the sacral vocabulary he promotes, both of which are typically found in the NABRE.  Now, I am not saying the NABRE is identical to the RSV in this, but it is much closer to the RSV than the CEB.

Finally, Weigel concludes by writing: "My suggestion is to get yourself the Ignatius Press edition of the Revised Standard Version, and read it over and over again until its language works its way into the crevices of your mind and the texture of your prayer.  Maybe, some day, we can hear that translation at Mass."  A couple of thoughts immediately pop into my mind.  First, yes!  We need to read good versions of the Scriptures over and over again, so, I completely agree with him there.  However, is the RSV-CE the only acceptable version for Catholics?  Second, is Weigel aware of the RSV-2CE?  Third, does sacral language mean using archaic English? Fourth, what are the benefits of memorizing the Holy Scriptures from a translation which will never likely be heard at a majority of English-speaking Catholic Masses?  Remember, the NAB is not likely to change in the USA anytime soon, the NRSV is approved in Canada, and the ESV is being prepared for many of the remaining English-speaking countries. 

Your thoughts?

HT: Reader Tim

Bible Review: CEB Thinline w/Apocrypha

I received a surprisingly wonderful edition of the CEB w/Apocrypha in the mail last week. It is the DecoTone CEB Thinline Bible w/Apocrypha. I say "surprising" because it is a review copy, and I figured that I would receive a hardback or paperback edition. But this is not the case. I am going to focus this review on the numerous features of this thinline edition of the CEB. If you want more info on the CEB itself, we have discussed it on a number of occasions and you can read those comments here or you can just check out the translation's website.

This edition of the CEB is a true thinline Bible. While it is similar in width to the HarperOne NRSV thinlines, its dimensions are a very portable 5 3/8" x 8 3/8",without being compact. At times, I have felt the NRSV thinline was a bit too big. But even with its smaller size, the CEB Thinline has a 9-point type, which makes it fairly easy on eyes.

Of all its features, the one thing that really stands out is the feel of this Bible. It is a very soft synthetic leather, known as DecoTone. It is probably similar to the Italian Duo-Tone or imitation leather that is now being used more often in many Bibles. This truly has a great feel to it. While it is both supple and flexible, it also lays open flat on a table or in your lap. Recently, I have found myself preferring the very soft, synthetic leather covers over the standard leather, both bonded and genuine. The only question is durability and how long it will hold up to continued use. At this point, I am not sure.

Some other nice features include the Deuterocanonicals being in their own section, but divided and labeled by which ones belong to which Church's canon. In addition, while there are no cross-references in the Old Testament, all Old Testament reference in the New Testament are noted at the bottom of the page. This is a definite advantage over the NRSV thinlines. Also, there are 8 full-color National Geographic maps in the appendix.

All in all, a very nice and useful thinline Bible. It is simple, but well executed.


**Thank you to B&B Media Group for the review copy**

New Arrivals

New arrivals indeed! One of them is a bit of a letdown, the other is surprisingly nice. Reviews to come.

Common English Bible Compared

The Common English Bible newsletter came out yesterday with the below comparison. I added the NAB.

(Reader Victor alerted me to the fact that you can get the Kindle version of the CEB w/ Apocrypha now. Thank you Victor.)

Common English Bible Acts 4:32-33
32 The community of believers was one in heart and mind. None of them would say, “This is mine!” about any of their possessions, but held everything in common. 33 The apostles continued to bear powerful witness to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and an abundance of grace was at work among them all.

New American Bible
32 The community of believers was of one heart and mind, and no one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they had everything in common. 33 With great power the apostles bore witness to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and great favor was accorded them all.
 
New International Version (2011) Acts 4:32-33
32 All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had. 33 With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And God’s grace was so powerfully at work in them all.
 
New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) Acts 4:32-33
Now the whole group of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one claimed private ownership of any possessions, but everything they owned was held in common. 33With great power the apostles gave their testimony to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and great grace was upon them all.
 
King James Version (KJV) Acts 4:32-33
32And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common.  33And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all

Common English Bible is Complete

The Common English Bible committee has completed its work. The first full editions will be available later this year. For more information, go here.

CEB Scripture Comparison: Romans 3:25

The Common English Bible New Testament was released last year. This ecumenical translation, which includes some Catholics, intends to provide a fresh rendering of the Scriptures which are "accurate, refreshing, and accessible." We have had a few discussions about some of the different renderings, most notably "the Human One" for "Son of Man", but that has been pretty much it. I recently received an email from the CEB site, listing a unique comparison from Romans, which I am going to present to you below for your thoughts:

Scripture Comparisons
Romans 3:25

Common English Bible (CEB)
25 Through his faithfulness, God displayed Jesus as the place of sacrifice where mercy is found by means of his blood. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness in passing over sins that happened before,

New International Version, ©2010 (NIV)
25 God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished—

New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)
25 whom God put forward as a sacrifice of atonement by his blood, effective through faith. He did this to show his righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over the sins previously committed;

King James Version (KJV)
25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;

New American Bible (NABRE)
25 Whom God set forth as an expiation, through faith, by his blood, to prove his righteousness because of the forgiveness of sins previously committed,

CEB: The Beatitudes

Continuing with our periodic look at the new Common English Bible, we now turn to the Beatitudes found in Matthew 5.

Below is how the CEB translates this famous passage into English:

Now when Jesus saw the crowds, he went up a mountain. He sat down and his disciples came to him. He taught them, saying: “Happy are people who are downcast, because the kingdom of heaven is theirs. Happy are people who grieve, because they will be made glad. Happy are people who are humble, because they will inherit the earth. Happy are people who are hungry and thirsty for righteousness, because they will be fed until they are full. Happy are people who show mercy, because they will receive mercy. Happy are people who have pure hearts, because they will see God. Happy are people who make peace, because they will be called God’s children. Happy are people whose lives are harassed because they are righteous, because the kingdom of heaven is theirs. Happy are you when people insult you and harass you and speak all kinds of bad and false things about you, all because of me. Be full of joy and be glad, because you have a great reward in heaven. For, in the same way, people harassed the prophets who came before you." - Matthew 5:1-11 (CEB)

Some thoughts:

1) The decision to go with "happy" over "blessed" is not as jarring as it once was since there are a number of modern translations that do this. For the CEB's rationale in doing this, you can go here.

2) Verse three and five each have unique ways of translating the more traditional renderings of "poor in spirit" and "meek". Instead they go with "downcast" and "humble" in hopes of making them understandable to the modern ear. Hmm..... Changing "meek" for "humble" maybe, but I am not sure that "downcast" accurately captures "poor in spirit." I might have to do some more thinking on this one.

CEB: The Human One

Probably one of the most obvious and risky translation decisions the Common English Bible committee went with was translating ben adam (Hebrew) or ho huios tou anthropou (Greek) as "the Human One" throughout the Old and New Testament. I certainly give them credit for taking this risk, but does it work?

Here is a long quote from the CEB blog about why they made this decision. It is worth taking a look at:

ben adam (Hebrew) or ho huios tou anthropou (Greek) is translated as "human being" (rather than "son of man") except in cases of vocative address, where we render "Human" (instead of "Son of Man" [KJV] or "Mortal" [NRSV], e.g. Ezek 2:1). For the NT phrase, ho huios tou anthropou (e.g., Matt 9:6) we render "you will know that the Human One has authority on earth to forgive sins."

At the exegetical and linguistic level, the Semitic idiom, ben adam, occurs frequently in the Old Testament. (A linguistic analogy is bene yisrael, which means Israelites.) Biblical scholars, in a rare example of consensus, are certain that the Semitic idiom ben adam translates as "human being" or "human" in natural English. If we were creating a literal translation, which we inherit from the Septuagint Greek translation of the Semitic idiom, or more precisely from the KJV tradition for English readers, we would probably render "son of human." But we aim to avoid "biblish" where possible and translate such Hebrew or Greek constructions into a natural English idiom. In English we don't say or write "I was speaking with sons of Ben" or "I called children of Ben." Instead, in the target language we write, "I spoke to Ben's children."

The Aramaic equivalent to ben adam in Daniel 7:13 is bar enosh. The book of Daniel anticipates that the Messiah will be "like a human being." This text is the probable source (along with 1 Esdras) for the messianic expectation that is rendered in the New Testament title for Jesus huios to anthropou, which meant to Jewish readers in the first century that Jesus is a human being, just as they expected about the Messiah.

Darrell L. Bock writes, "The key to this title and Jesus' use of it is the imagery of Dan. 7:13-14, where the term is not a title but a description of a figure who rides the clouds and receives authority directly from God in heaven. The Old Testament background to the title does not emerge immediately in Jesus' ministry, but is connected to remarks made to the disciples at the Olivet discourse and Jesus' reply at his examination by the Jewish leadership. The title is appropriate because of its unique fusion of human and divine elements. A 'son of man' is simply an expression that describes a human being. In contrast to the strange beasts of Dan. 7, this is a figure who is normal, except for the authority he receives. In riding the clouds, this man is doing something otherwise left only to the description of divinity in the Old Testament (Exod. 14:20; 34:5; Num. 10:34; Ps. 104:3; Isa. 19:1). In addition, the title was in Aramaic an indirect way to refer to oneself, making it a less harsh way to make a significant claim. Despite its indirectness, the nature of Jesus' consistent use of the term makes it clear that he was referring to himself, not someone else" (Jesus according to Scripture: Restoring the Portrait from the Gospels ,602-03).

We tested this translation with hundreds of readers. Several found the change jarring. One leader responded, "For me, at an emotional level it feels contrived. Unlike an onomatopoeia it feels empty and sterile; it is not a phrase that draws me into wanting to discover or explore or experience the meaning (and Person) that it represents. At a cognitive level it seems to cut off any sense of divinity to Jesus. I realize the Christology of Jesus is a challenging idea, but to call him the Human One seems to deny the possibility that he is the Son of God and God the Son."

The response of this reader mirrors what we heard in reading groups. We asked, "What do you think "son of man" means for Jesus? Many responded that "Jesus is divine." This confusion is similar to stating, "At a cognitive level [Human One] seems to cut off any sense of divinity to Jesus." The feedback is very clear evidence that many English speaking Christians confuse the meaning of two literal titles that are applied to their knowledge of Jesus: "son of man" is confused with the meaning of "son of God." Indeed, at a cognitive level many of us have a view of Jesus that is so transcendent that the incarnation is temporary, perhaps only while Jesus was a baby. In reading Matthew we see that the phrase "Son of God" or rather "God's Son" (as a title) is used frequently in the CEB translation. The CEB also refers to God as Father, accurately. So we have no agenda in the New Testament translation to deny the fully human and fully divine nature of Jesus, then and now. There is a preference in the CEB for clear English. Human One will become less of a surprise over time, but admittedly it is surprising to encounter it the first time if you memorized the KJV version. The act of reading a new translation makes you think about assumptions.

Couple points I would like to start this discussion out with:

1) Yes, it is tough to see how changing an important Christological word like "Son of Man" can be justified. That title has been used the lexicon of theological discussion for 2000 years.

2) I do appreciate the fact that they will be translating it consistently throughout the Old and New Testament. One of my big beefs with the NRSV is that it is inconsistent in how it translates this title from both Old to New Testament, but also withing the New Testament itself (see Hebrews 2). The fact that the NRSV does contain the textual notes indicating this change does remedy this to some degree however.

3) This change is certainly jarring when you first come upon it.

Common English Bible: Genesis

The Common English Bible is a new translation in the works that seeks to provide a new rendition of the Bible in English at a 7th grade reading level. It is meant to provide an option for those churches currently using the NRSV (11th grade reading level), but would rather have something more "plain spoken". While being sponsored by mostly mainline Protestant churches, it does have a few Catholic Biblical scholars involved in the project. When completed, this new translation will also include the Deuterocanonical books. So far, they have released their edition of the Gospel According to Matthew, but you can now download their translation of Genesis. (Look under free downloads.)

Update: Theophrastus reminds me that you can pre-order a free copy of the CEB New Testament here. I believe it will be released sometime in the Fall.

Common English Bible

The Common English Bible is a new translation in the works that seeks to provide a new rendition of the Bible in English at a 7th grade reading level. It is meant to provide an option for those churches currently using the NRSV (11th grade reading level), but would rather have something more "plain spoken". The committee who is currently working on this project have four stated goals:
1 )Clarity of language, as in "plain speaking", 2)A reliable, genuine, and credible power to transform lives, 3) An emotional expectation to find the love of God, 4) A rational expectation to find the knowledge of God.

While being sponsored by mostly mainline Protestant churches, it does have a fair amount of Catholic participation as well. When completed, this new translation will also include the Deuterocanonical books.

The CEB translation team has just released its version of the Gospel according to Matthew. It is available here as a .pdf file.

One thing that immediately grabs your attention is the use of "the Human One" instead of "the Son of Man". While I laud their apparent desire for consistency, assuming that they will translate the same phrase in Daniel and Ezekiel as "the Human One", I don't think this is a good move overall. The term "Son of Man" has been a major part of theological and scriptural discourse for the past 2000 years. This is one area where my moderate position on the use of inclusive language begins to make me fell a bit uncomfortable.

Of course, I am somewhat uncomfortable with labeling any translation "good" or "bad", and certainly not one that hasn't even been fully published. I think it is great that the CEB team has released a portion of their new Bible, so that we can look over it and point out things we like and dislike about it. I look forward to any future releases they decide to provide, particularly in regards to Paul's letters.