These are some initial thoughts and impressions on physically using the Kindle:

• The vertical line cursor and wheel button are quite intuitive. The shiny reflective cursor is very visible unless viewed obliquely.
• The keypad is where it needs to be, but feels awkward if I try to use it with one hand. The functionality is much better with two hands holding the Kindle, but that means I have to take it out of its protective case.
• Speaking of the case, the factory included one is almost impossible to use for reading as you have to keep one hand gripping both the case and the Kindle to keep the latter from falling out. Eventually I’ll spring for a third-party upgrade.
• Love having the Back button for browser-like navigation (not page navigation) - would really like to see a Forward button too.
• Popular books are generally $9.99 or less, though academic titles are considerably more, e.g. Witherington’s “The Problem with Evangelical Theology” is $19.22. Even so, $10 feels expensive for a few hundred Kb of data; even worse, a pulp paperback like some of the new Star Wars stuff is $7.99 paperback/$6.39 Kindle. I’ve gotten really used to buying used books from Amazon et al. for pennies on the original dollar - paying the premium price makes me think twice.
• Through the experimental “Basic Web” feature, I can enter my blog’s URL and access current content and links, including comments. I can even post comments!

Of course, the real value is in interacting with content. As I mentioned above, I’ve downloaded several samples, including HCSB, NLT, TNIV, NASB, KJV and NET translations of the Bible. I think it’s important not to make the Kindle be something that it’s not - i.e. dedicated electronic Bible software. The Kindle is first and foremost for reading. For example, the Search feature allows you to look up words in the text, but searching for “Genesis 17″ will give you results in the Table of Contents index, not the actual chapter in the book.

The following are some brief impressions of the translations that I’ve looked at so far:

• NASB (Lockman) — If you want a paragraph-formatted NASB, this is the one! Great TOC aligned to the right with the selection cursor/wheel. A right-aligned TOC is a great way to see if the publisher is “in tune” with the way the Kindle works. Like most of the editions considered here, you have to know where you are in your reading, as the Bible book and chapter are not provided in the header info.
• HCSB (Holman) — TOC is right aligned, with multiple book options on each line. This allows more TOC content to be shown on each Kindle “page”, but also means you have to drill down an extra layer in picking the chapter and verse to read. The HCSB sample unfortunately does not include any actual scripture content, just the TOC details.
• NLT (Tyndale) — The TOC is left aligned, meaning that the entries are physically separated from the selection cursor, forcing me to more-or-less guesstimate which item I’m selecting. A nice feature of the NLT, however, is that I only have to make one selection in the TOC to get to the text - selecting a book takes me to Chapter 1, verse 1, with a mini TOC at the top for other chapters.
• TNIV (Zondervan) — The TOC is center aligned, which is a compromise of sorts, I guess, but doesn’t make much sense to me. The TNIV has single book entries (compare to the HCSB) and a lot of white space in the TOC, which means that you have page through several pages of content if you’re looking for something later in the book. And you have to select Book, Chapter *and* Verse before getting to the content itself - that’s three levels of menu selecting before being able to read.
• NET (Biblical Studies Press) — The TOC of the NET Bible is not premarked - that means that you either have to page forward from the beginning every time or make your own bookmark on the appropriate page.  Like the NLT, the TOC is left-aligned, which makes it very difficult to be confident on what you’re selecting.  Whereas they were maddening in a print edition, the NET’s use of “1:1″ for “chapter:verse” within the text body is very appreciated in this electronic edition as chapter numbers are not given in the header info (or in any other translation edition I looked at). None of the NET’s footnotes are included - this is a text only edition.
• KJV (Diana Mecum) — This edition of the KJV text features a center aligned TOC with the same type of selection system as the NLT (selecting a book takes you to 1:1, with a mini TOC at the top of the page). Verse-by-verse text formatting with the NET-style “1:1″ numbering ensures that you always know where you are. I am interested in this one because I wonder if the new electronic format will allow me to move beyond any internal hangups regarding the “old language” - the presentation is very readable.

All that said, I wonder if the Kindle would shine more with some of the daily reading Bibles, like the One Year Bible or the new 24/7 Chronological Bible from Tyndale. The latter doesn’t appear to be available for Kindle yet, so I’ve sent a note to Tyndale wondering when/if they plan to make an electronic version available. I’d also be interested in an electronic version of a daily devotional like Oswald Chambers’ My Utmost for His Highest, which is also not available yet for Kindle.

As you may or may not know, I used the NASB almost exclusively for 20 years, until just 4-5 years ago. I also had a NEB from college, which led to the REB, but by and large I was toeing the “literal is best” line. Ironically the first crack in that position was the ESV - implicitly marketed as “a more readable NASB”, I used it for a year or so before continuing to search for “more readable”. I already had the REB in my hands, but spent a year or two comparing it to the TNIV, HCSB and NLT (which my wife uses regularly) before deciding to stick with what I knew.

Coming into this year then, I had resolved to keep using the REB as my primary translation, augmented with the HCSB and TNIV as secondary resources when appropriate. For example, my church uses the NIV as its pew and pulpit translation, so the TNIV comes with me on Sundays more often than not, though it is not my regular private translation. The HCSB more-or-less replaced the NASB and ESV as my preferred “formal” translation, though I still refer to the NASB regularly. For the most part, these are the three translations that I used in 2008, though certainly the blogging world’s spike in interest with the NLT led to increased use there as well.

I do also have to say that I’ve referenced the NEB more this year as well. Whether it’s just checking what has changed in the REB or reading the NEB for its own pleasure, I have definitely given the older translation more visibility in my personal reading and writing here on the blog.

It was at this point in my original draft of this post that I began to speculate on my similar 2009 translation usage: NEB/REB, HCSB, TNIV, etc. etc. However, for Christmas my wife gave me a new gadget “toy”: Amazon’s Kindle e-book reader. I’ve been a hesitant technology adopter in the past, so this normally would be a stretch, but after playing with it for a few hours now, I can see this being very useful, especially on my bus commute to work. I normally have my backpack stuffed with 2-3 books and a Bible for reading, but this would/could replace all of that!

My dilemma is that the REB is not available electronically, so my primary time for reading - if given to the Kindle - would require a different translation choice. The TNIV probably makes the most sense, but I’ve been thinking about the KJV too - having it as a reading resource might finally push me over the edge and “open” it more regularly. In all likelihood, I’ll have multiple translations downloaded - now it’s just a matter of sorting through the reviews and trying to determine which Kindle edition of each translation is the one to get.

As for print Bibles in 2009, I will say that I’m going to make a better effort to use the NJPSV/Jewish Study Bible as a regular reference point for Old Testament studies. Perhaps the NLT or Lattimore as an additional New Testament translation reference. I did end up with a full edition of The Message and I plan to possibly look at The Voice as well, though I suspect those will not be primary translations.

In the meantime - any recommendations on Kindle editions?

• What Makes a Bible Translation Authoritative? My Top Five

After a good discussion with several links worth checking out, Peter comes to the conclusion that “the only Bible translation that is in the top five in terms of sales and also in the top three in terms of historical objective excellence is the KJV. I suppose this should come as no surprise, but it should confirm what most already suspect.” The NASB, NIV, NLT and NKJV round out his top five.

Peter used CBA sales to determine the “popularity authority” rankings and, ironically, subjectively leans toward scoring formal translations higher in the “objective excellence” category. I wonder if it would be better to establish some criteria for scoring translations against what they pruport to be, e.g. formal or median or functional. That is, a formal translation like the ESV or NASB could potentially get the same “objective excellence” score as a functional translation like the NLT if both were judged against relative criteria.

I’ve been reading the first few chapters of Fee and Strauss’ “How to Choose a Translation For All It’s Worth” with a nodding smile on my face, given the general endorsement of functional, idiomatic translation as their preferred approach to the Bible (and translation in general).

In addition to the standard Formal-to-Functional spectrum of translations, Fee and Strauss discuss the polarity of original meaning vs. contemporary relevance. Most Bibles place greater emphasis on original meaning as a means of conveying semantic accuracy, but all make accommodations for contemporary relevance, if only to convert ancient units of measure to modern equivalents, e.g. miles instead of the Greek stadia.

Some recent translations make even more accommodation to achieve contemporary relevance. The NLT is built on the premise of “the truth made clear” in an effort to communicate the message of the Bible clearly and naturally. Marketing language from Zondervan emphasizes the contemporary relevance of the TNIV:

[The TNIV has] the up-to-date language of today for readability. This rendition of Scripture provides a new choice for those who desire a contemporary [...] translation.

[...] a new translation that speaks the timeless truth of God’s Word in the language of today.

Yet, as readable as the NLT and TNIV are, they still keep the Bible’s time and culture at arms’ length, creating cultural foreignness as an essential means of retaining “accuracy”. The language may be “of today”, but the time and culture of the TNIV is not - it is of millenniums ago.

Should God’s Word be culturally isolated and passed on as a carefully preserved relic? Or should it be living and breathing and constantly reinventing itself to be relevant and applicable? Is the message in the words or in the meaning? If we translate to the meaning, shouldn’t we be translating within our own time and culture as receptors of the text? It is popular these days to laud the NLTse as an accurate functional translation (and it is), but I wonder why the more idiomatic First Edition still has so many devoted fans who refuse to “upgrade”. Is it because the language of the original, and the Living Bible before it, is closer to our own time and culture and speaks a “heart language” that the newer revision does not? Is the “heart language” of the Bible a theological treatise - or is it a vivid proclamation of the relationship between God and his people?

To this end, Eugene Peterson tried to “intentionally eliminate historical distance not only with reference to language but also with reference to time and culture.” (F&S, p.33) Fee and Strauss quote Matthew 23:27 from The Message:

You’re like manicured grave plots, grass clipped and the flowers bright, but six feet down it’s all rotting bones and worm-eaten flesh.

As you scramble for your preferred translation to see “what the text *really* says”, think about what you find. Chances are, there’s a reference to “whitewashed tombs”. Do you know what that means? I mean, RIGHT NOW, without thinking about it. This isn’t about theological nuance - it’s about your instinctive response to the English language. Personally, I know which one sounds foreign and which one sounds relevant…  and that’s why I say that the most significant - not the most formal, functional, accurate, readable, dynamic, literal, literary or idiomatic - the most significant version of the Bible available today is The Message.

And I don’t have a copy. For shame…

1. The Learning Bible (CEV)
2. Oxford Study Bible (REB)
3. New Oxford Annotated Bible (N/RSV)
4. Holy Spirit Encounter Bible (NLT1)
5. New Interpreter’s Study Bible (NRSV)
6. NLT Study Bible (NLTse)

Henry’s primary purpose was “making a recommendation to readers of the study guide who are generally expected to be serious lay Bible students, but not Biblical scholars.” He concludes his comparison:

Overall, while my personal study habits will not be altered by much, I will find time to consult this Bible [NLTSB], and I also expect to recommend it to quite a number of Bible students who are perhaps beyond the Learning Bible, but don’t really want to get into something like the Oxford Study Bible or the New Interpreter’s Bible. I will also recommend it to evangelicals who might find constant disagreement with their study Bible to be distracting. The NLT study Bible is a good addition to the Bible edition market.

1. Part 1 - introductory comments on the translations and the study Bible aesthetics, with the concluding comments focused on the relevancy of authorship.
2. Part 2 - a brief look at the tone of the introductions and study notes, concluding that both study bibles reflect the essential character of their translations: “the NLTSB notes are more dynamic and written in a clear, natural style (giving the sense). The ESVSB notes are more formal with a more academic tone (essentially literal).“
3. Part 3 - a look at the notes themselves, with the primary critiques being of the NLTSB’s speculative conclusions and the ESVSB’s tendency “to overly theologize the grammar of the original languages.”

I enjoyed reading the series and have added Biblia Hebraica as a “voice in the wilderness” to pay attention to - see my shortlist blogroll at right or click on the Links tab above for a more complete list of blogs I regularly read.

I was very curious to hear Gary’s thoughts on both the study Bible and the NLT text since he has been on a similar Bible translation search as me. Gary tends to lean more to the traditional translation flavors than I, but he gives the NLT a fair shake and promises to report on future use.

Be sure to check out the PDF link to read the introductory material from the ESV - as with all of these new study Bibles, there is a significant amount of background scholarship to be gleaned before you even get to the study notes - in this case, seven pages of material, including sections on author and title, date, theme and purpose, occasion and background, key themes, style, influence, history of salvation summary, literary features, and outline.

Not reproducing the introductions as part of a review makes excerpting the study notes a little like comparing fish out of water, but it’s still worth getting a feel for the different approaches. As can be seen below, the ESV Study Bible is much closer in tone, approach and length to the New Oxford Annotated (NRSV) and Oxford Study Bible (REB) that I previously compared the NLT to.

Ezekiel 1:1-3 - Comparison of NLT and ESV study Bibles