Andy Naselli

Thoughts on Theology

Andy Naselli

The NET Bible

by

The NET Bible (New English Translation) is one of my favorite English translation for at least three reasons:

  1. It is generally accurate. The NET Bible Team consists of first-class evangelical scholars (mostly professors teaching at and/or trained by Dallas Theological Seminary).
  2. It is generally readable. Its translation philosophy is similar to the NIV (i.e., dynamic or functional equivalence).
  3. It is generally explanatory. Its notes include translations based on formal equivalence, giving the reader the best of both worlds. It includes nearly 61,000 footnotes. That’s an average of almost two notes for every verse in the Bible! These notes explain the translation on three levels: (1) textual critical notes (“tc”), which interact with significant textual variants; (2) translator’s notes (“tn”), which explain the translation or give a more rigidly literal alternative to the translation; and (3) study notes (“sn”), which are similar to (but generally more technical than) what you’d find in a conservative study Bible.

Here’s a block quotation from the “Preface to the NET Bible First Edition” (under the section entitled “What is unique and distinctive about the NET Bible?”):

  • “First, the NET Bible includes extensive notes with the translation, notes created by the original translators as they worked through the issues and options concerning the translation of the original language texts of the Bible. These notes operate on more than one level – a technical level for pastors, teachers, and students of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek who are interested in the grammatical, syntactical, and text-critical details of the translation, and a more popular level comparable to current study Bibles offering explanatory details of interest to lay Bible students. In electronic format the length of these notes, a considerable problem with conventional printed Bibles, is no longer a major limitation.
  • “Second, within the more technical notes the translation team has taken the opportunity to explain and give the rationale for the translation of a particular phrase or verse.
  • “Third, the translators and editors used the notes to show major interpretive options and/or textual options for difficult or disputed passages, so that the English reader knows at a glance what the alternatives are.
  • “Fourth, the translators and editors used the notes to give a translation that was formally equivalent, while placing a somewhat more functionally equivalent translation in the text itself to promote better readability and understandability. The longstanding tension between these two different approaches to Bible translation has thus been fundamentally solved.
  • “Finally, the use of electronic media gives the translators and editors of the NET Bible the possibility of continually updating and improving the translation and notes. The translation itself will be updated in five-year increments, while the notes will undergo a continual process of expansion and refinement.”

See also:

I’ve enjoyed consulting the NET Bible countless times over the past seven years or so, both OT and NT (especially while taking Hebrew and Greek exegesis courses). I don’t always agree with the translation or the notes, but I’m almost always better off for consulting them. One of my next projects (this summer maybe?) is to read straight through the GNT and NET Bible NT simultaneously. Hats off to those involved with the production of the NET Bible!

Update on 3/31/2017: In my latest attempt to explain how to interpret and apply the Bible, I include a chapter on Bible translation (pp. 50–81).

Bruce Metzger (1914-2007)

by

Bruce Metzger (cf. here and here) passed away on 13 February 2007. Although evangelicals do not agree with Metzger on some key areas, I am profoundly grateful for his work in textual criticism. Few are as gifted as he was.

Tributes:

News stories:

Theological Satire

by

Using the technique of satire is one of the most effective ways of making a point. It can be outlandishly funny, but it can also be infuriating and offensive. It’s almost always controversial. While people’s take on satire differs, I tend to enjoy it (especially when I agree with the point being made!).

This week I stumbled across a blog devoted to theological satire: “tominthebox news network.” While I don’t agree with everything there, I must say that I can’t remember the last time I laughed harder. It’s quite witty.

MacArthur on the Emerging Church

by

Today we received this CD in the mail: “What’s So Dangerous About the Emerging Church?” Phil Johnson interviews John MacArthur for a solid hour in layman language. (You can purchase it here as a CD for $6 or an MP3 for $3.) Jenni and I listened to it this evening and thoroughly enjoyed it. If you listen to it, keep in mind that his target audience is laymen—not scholars on epistemology. Overall, we found the interview to be refreshingly bold, even shockingly so. It’s definitely the same MacArthur you watch on Larry King. He is unashamedly outspoken for the truth.

Atonement: Four Views

by

I’m taking a Ph.D. seminar with Dr. Graham Cole at TEDS this semester: “Historical Theology: The Atonement.” (BTW, Dr. Cole is currently working on a book on the atonement that will be part of D. A. Carson‘s New Studies in Biblical Theology series; it probably won’t be finished until around 2010.) Consequently, I’m doing a fair bit of reading on the atonement. Last Thursday I enjoyed reading one of the latest contributions on the subject:

Beilby, James and Paul R. Eddy, eds. The Nature of the Atonement: Four Views. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2006.

The four views defended are:

  1. Christus victor: Greg Boyd
  2. Penal substitution: Tom Schreiner
  3. Healing: Bruce Reichenbach
  4. Kaleidoscopic: Joel Green

The thesis of the first three essays is that their view is the primary facet of the atonement–not that it is the only facet. Green argues that no facet should be primary.

Bottom line: Schreiner cleans house. First class. Well done. Highly recommended.

Point of interest: Boyd’s response to Schreiner involves a five-page comparison and contrast of his view with Schreiner’s as it lines up with C. S. Lewis‘ depiction of Aslan’s death in The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe (pp. 100-105). Boyd lists two “profound” differences between Schreiner’s view and his/Lewis’ view.

  1. “First and most fundamentally, Lewis believes that self-sacrificial love is a ‘deeper magic’ than the law, while Schreiner, so far as I can see, does not” (p. 102).
  2. “Because of their differing views on ‘deep magic,’ Lewis and Schreiner provide very different answers to the question, Who demanded that the deep magic of the law be satisfied with ‘a kill’? For Schreiner, it is God. For Lewis (and most advocates of the Christus Victor view) it is the devil. Here is where the rubber meets the road in terms of the difference between these two views . . .” (p. 103).

For years I have been baffled by the number of people who have no problem with using Aslan’s death as an illustration (without qualification) of Christ’s atonement. Although it is wonderfully illustrative for some aspects of Christ’s atonement, it is fundamentally flawed by placing too much authority and initiative in the hands of Satan (i.e., the white witch).

For more on problems with the Christus Victor view (which often includes some form of the ransom-to-Satan theory), see explanations and refutations in standards systematic theologies. Wayne Grudem‘s Systematic Theology is a good place to start (p. 581 et al.).

Update:

  1. See this Reformation 21 review.
  2. Master Scripture Index for New Studies in Biblical Theology

The Apologetics of Francis Schaeffer

by

Over the Christmas break, I had a one-week window to do some pleasure reading while in Greenville. One of the books I read was this one:

Bryan A. Follis, Truth with Love: The Apologetics of Francis Schaeffer. Wheaton: Crossway, 2006.

It was an enjoyable, edifying read, and it prompted me to spend about six hours watching Schaeffer’s How Should We Then Live? one morning/afternoon that week.

For more info, see the following: