Stephen Jackson on The Sola Panel is dead; long live the Sola Panel!
Sam Freney on The Sola Panel is dead; long live the Sola Panel!
Marty Foord on The Sola Panel is dead; long live the Sola Panel!
Dianne Howard on The Sola Panel is dead; long live the Sola Panel!
Mike Bull on Daniel 2-7, Harry Potter and Narnia
The Sola Panel is dead; long live the Sola Panel! by Tony Payne (4 comments). Regular Sola Panel readers will no doubt have detected a little slowness and quietness over the past six weeks or so. … more
Kids’ culture watch spot: Facing fear by Gordon Cheng (3 comments). By popular demand (two people asked), here is my next script for a culture watch spot I did with the kids … more
Daniel 2-7, Harry Potter and Narnia by Gordon Cheng (1 comment). It's a Sunday as I write this, and I'm speaking on Daniel 2 and 7 later this morning at a friend's … more
A constituent on same-sex marriage by Sandy Grant (34 comments). Last year, the Australian Parliament agreed that its Members of Parliament (MPs) should seek the … more
A tribute to John Stott by Sandy Grant (2 comments). Friends, I'm not ashamed to say I shed a tear when I opened up my computer on Thursday morning to read … more
Talkin’ ’bout my generation (part 3): On giants’ shoulders by Scott Newling (26 comments). This is the third post in this series; you can read part one, and more
Bible reading with kids by Sandy Grant (0 comments). I was asked for recommendations for resources that would encourage parents to read the Bible with their kids, especially … more
Talkin’ ’bout my generation (part 2): Stepping aside (not out) so others can step up (not in) by Scott Newling (3 comments). This is the second post in this series; you can read the first post, Unassuming … more
One more sip of the coffee by Tony Payne (8 comments). Sandy Grant is a man of integrity. Back in the early days of Sola Panel, I wrote a post … more
Talkin’ ’bout my generation (part 1): Unassuming generations by Scott Newling (30 comments). There is a model of ‘intergenerational theological decline’ that has been doing the rounds of late, and perhaps you … more
Paul is one of the Staff Editors at Matthias Media. He is married to Cathy and has three fantastic kids. He loves student ministry, reading, writing music and playing the saxophone, and is looking forward to meeting Jesus face to face.
I liked this observation in the notes:
“Jonah’s rescue from death provides an analogy for the resurrection of Christ… The repentance
of the Ninevites anticipates the wide-scale repentance of Gentiles in the messianic era.”
But not this one: “Humor, as Jonah’s behavior is not only ignominious but also ridiculous.”
When the prophets (like Elijah, Elisha and Jonah) were sent to Gentiles, it was to provoke Israel to jealousy because they would not listen to these prophets. Jonah understood his ministry meant condemnation would come upon his own people.
James B. Jordan said, “I don’t think Jonah was some loyal nationalistic prophet. Jonah was in there every day complaining, criticising, prophesying, and denouncing the kingdom of northern Israel. It won’t do to say that Jonah didn’t want to take the Gospel to another nation. No, Jonah has something more profound in mind. Jonah was thinking about Deuteronomy 32:21. He didn’t want to take the Gospel to the Gentiles, because to do so was to bring about a curse on the Israelites.”
Paul was a more faithful Jonah, understanding this curse but obeying it nonetheless (Rom. 9:3; Acts 28:28)
The notes look good though. I’ll be buying one.
Just wanted to let you know that Dr. Futato’s name is misspelled (‘Furtato’).
Otherwise, great blog, thanks!
<i>Just wanted to let you know that Dr. Futato’s name is misspelled (’Furtato’).</i>
Thanks Joe, problem fixed now.
I was going to say that you say Futato and I say Furtato, but having been subject to many mis-spellings myself over the years
I shall refrain.
Thanks for ‘refraining’, Gordo.
Ooh! Ouch! I felt the sting of those ‘scare’ quotes, Ian.
Dear Gordon,
If anyone has ever attempted translation work, it is always apparent that identical translation, word for word, phrase for phrase, concept for concept is just not possible. Imagine two intersecting circles with area of commonality, but not quite reaching total alignment.
This is hard for many in a mono-language culture to understand, but any one translation inevitably cannot reproduce an exact facsimile of the original.
My approach is always to use several translations from different approaches to build a sense of the original intent of the writer. Any one translation is just that - a single translation among many attempts.
What I am getting at is that a simple “Read it and see what the bible actually says, and steer away from margin notes” is treading in difficult territory. To read christian scripture, we need all the help we can get, because neither the ESV, NIV, NRSV, KJB etc completely and unbiasedly reproduces the original intent of the writer.
Question - when translating the NT into say an aboriginal language, what should be the approach? Go back to the Greek and start from scratch, or do a translation from a ‘reliable’ english version? If you go with the Greek, how do you cross the cultural divide of languages which are totally alien, and similar translatable concepts do not exist? If you go with the english, then which english translation and its bias do you choose? I hope this example helps to unpack the translation problem, and the need to read Christian scripture with eyes wide open.
Regards,
Stephen Jackson
The ESV Reformation Study Bible [which includes notes by some prominent Australian evangelicals, and was organised by R C Sproul] contains helpful theological notes, but also gives some useful background. This new one will have to be pretty good to equal or surpass it.
The NIV Archaeological Study Bible [emanating from Gordon-Conwell] is also well worth reading through. It has a little theology, but mainly gives background information.
No matter how good the ESV is [and it is good], it seems to me that the most important thing is to read several different translations, and to include in your arsenal translations of different types.
Prompted by one of our church’s elders, I have read through both of the above and also the TNIV, Good News Bible [Australian edition] and New Living Translation, 2nd edition, over the past few years.
Each one of these has been a great blessing. The New Jerusalem Bible is a useful one to read for comparison, partly because the translators did not attempt to stay in the tradition of Tyndale, the KJV, and the RSV as the NIV and ESV translators have chosen to do.
It’s been over a year now that I adopted an ESV pew Bible (Navy Blue) for my personal studies and to preach from precisely beause of the absence of study notes and commentary. It forces me to wrestle with the text. At least this is what I do through my initial sermon prep. It is only after most of the work is done that i consult Bible study tools whether they are commentaries, dictionaries, lexical aids etc. It has really been a blessing. I am going to purchase the ESV study bible though.
Andrew Reid says you should put your study Bible on a high shelf, where you can’t easily reach for it.
It is good to read an unadorned text, but we do also need to consult the work done by our brothers and sisters over the centuries, so that we don’t think we have just discovered something brilliant completely independently, and/or also completely miss what the text is saying.
And often, just when we think we are not being influenced by others, our reading is really the product of what we have been previously taught, whether or not we are currently reinforcing this by using helps in our study of God’s Word.
We recently studied Romans 11 in our Bible study group, and I found that three reputable conservative scholars had three different takes on what Paul means by “And so all Israel shall be saved.”
I don’t think I could have come to a conclusion on the passage, or even been aware of the possibilities, without their help.
At the moment I’m dipping into Tom Schreiner’s terrific NT Theology. He says that he firstly read the NT through several times and took notes, then made three drafts before he even consulted others, though he admit that his views have already been shaped by what he had previously studied and heard.
I prefer the ESV Reformation Study Bible (published by Liognier Ministries) - the notes are briefer and more exegetical IMHO. The Reformation Study Bible also avoids chasing after every little theological and historical tangent, which seems to be the bane of most study Bibles.
Gordon, I wasn’t sure where to ask you this, but here seems to be the place since here you expressed your misgivings about study Bibles in general (while being cautiously optimistic about the new ESV Study Bible).
What do you think of Al Mohler’s comments on how to get the most out of a study bible…
Don’t know if this will bump up this discussion or not.
I just received a puzzling comment on this thread, but don’t see it here. I could it understand it being removed, as I couldn’t understand what the poster was trying to say. [Wonder if he could?]
But I would like to say that now I have read through Obadiah, Philemon, Joel, Jude, Ruth, Ephesians, Jonah. Song of Songs, John’s letters, Genesis, Luke, Nahum, the Thessalonian epistles, Lamentations and Job in the ESV Study Bible, this study Bible is wonderful!
I highly recommend its use, following Al Mohler’s advice cited by Sandy above.
It was worth reading the Bible itself through first, though, as it makes the study notes much easier to understand!
Commenting rules
If you would like your comment to be considered for publication, please observe the following rules:
Failure to adhere to these rules will result in your comment being quietly deleted.
If you want to give us feedback but don't want your comments to appear on the blog, DON'T use the form below. Instead, please send us an email or click on the button below.
Your Comment
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.