Thursday, July 10, 2008

The ZigZag Café

We will be convening here at the ZigZag café, Suisse, on Thursdays for conversation and dialogue.

I invite you to stop by every Thursday for the question of the day. Your thoughts and participation are most welcome. Pull up a stool, avec un café, un thé, ou un chocolat chaud, et un croissant, and join in here on Thursday at the ZZ café.

For today:

What translation of the Bible do you use and why?

6 comments:

Susan said...

I was recently given a parallel Bible which has Today's New International Version along side The Message. Prior to this I was using the New International Version. I personally like using a newer translation. I just find it easier to read and helpful if I'm talking to someone who is not so familiar with the Bible. I also like the Message as it puts a different slant on some things which I find quite interesting.

So do you serve un thé avec du lait at the ZZ café? and would you call it, un thé blanc? I know my American friends looked at me quite strangely when I asked for my tea that way!

Greg said...

Susan,
Thanks for your comment. I use the NRSV as I find if to be faithful to the Hebrew and Greek and to be sensitive to gender, without going over the top.

I like the Message for its contemporary punch that can sometimes capture a reader's attention in a new way.

Un thé avec du lait might be unusual for Americans, but you're right at home in the English tea scene. Since ZZ is a Swiss venture we're open to un thé avec du lait, un thé blanc.

Ryan said...

I read the ESV, since all the theologians I disagree with believe it to be the best.

Greg said...

Ryan,
Good idea to read against our biases. Those we disagree with can sometimes be our best teachers, although such a reading strategy may at some points fail to be illuminating.

ryan said...

Very true. It seems that the NRSV and the ESV are fairly similar. I suppose I was also tired of the NIV translation of my youth (perhaps language by nature gets tired after a time).
The NRSV sounds interesting – though I’m a little doubtful of the ability to redeem (or reverse) any gender related offenses by the neutering of language (assuming the NRSV attenuates the man-centric language). If so, isn’t this the route of infinite resignation – we will never get gender relations right in this age – so let’s negate them? On the other hand, how I loathe the language of the Complementarians -->shudder<--

Greg said...

Ryan,
Thanks for your comment. Seems to me there is an advantage in using several translations to try to keep, as much as is possible, the language fresh.

Hmm. I suppose that I wouldn't see it as getting it right on gender translation, but getting it better and that's worth an attempt for the sake of the text and its reader.