Not What You Think: Most Popular Bible Translation?

Not What You Think: Most Popular Bible Translation?

NIV vs. KJV: Surveys and searches suggest the translation that most Americans are reading is actually not the bookstore bestseller.

Excerpts from Christiaity Today — read more at http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2014/march/most-popular-and-fastest-growing-bible-translation-niv-kjv.html?utm_source=ctweekly-html&utm_medium=Newsletter&utm_term=13563403&utm_content=255150180&utm_campaign=2013

Sarah Eekhoff Zylstra        [ posted 3/13/2014 11:17AM ]The Most Popular and Fastest Growing Bible Translation Isn't What You Think It Is

When Americans reach for their Bibles, more than half of them pick up a King James Version (KJV), according to a new study advised by respected historian Mark Noll. The 55 percent who read the KJV easily outnumber the 19 percent who read the New International Version (NIV). And the percentages drop into the single digits for competitors such as the New Revised Standard Version, New America Bible, and the Living Bible.

So concludes “The Bible in American Life,” a lengthy report by the Center for the Study of Religion and American Culture at Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI). Funded by the Lilly Foundation, researchers asked questions on what David Briggs of the ARDA, which first reported the results, calls “two of the most highly respected data sources for American religion”—the General Social Survey and the National Congregations Study.

The numbers are surprising, given the strong sales of NIV translations in bookstores. The NIV has topped the CBA’s bestselling Bible translation list for decades, and continued to sell robustly in 2013. The high numbers of KJV readers confirm the findings of last year’s American Bible Society (ABS) State of the Bible report. On behalf of ABS, Barna Group found that 52 percent of Americans read the King James or the New King James Version, compared with 11 percent who read the NIV.

The KJV also received almost 45 percent of the Bible translation-related searches on Google, compared with almost 24 percent for the NIV, according to Bible Gateway’s Stephen Smith.  In fact, searches for the KJV seem to be rising distinctly since 2005, while most other English translations are staying flat or are declining, according to Smith’s Google research.

Smith, whose research on how technology is shaping Bible use is profiled in this month’s CT cover story, blended data from Google Trends and the Google Keyword Tool to see how English Bible translations compare in search terms. Bible translation searches may not necessarily be an indicator of Bible translation usage—a Bible Gateway study earlier this year found dramatic differences between the cities most likely to search for Bible verses and the American Bible Society’s list of top “Bible-minded” cities.

Nevertheless, other studies also indicate that the KJV remains the translation powerhouse. A 2011 Lifeway study, for example, found that 62 percent of Americans—and 82 percent of Americans who regularly read the Bible—own a copy of the KJV.

“Although the bookstores are now crowded with alternative versions, and although several different translations are now widely used in church services and for preaching, the large presence of the KJV testifies to the extraordinary power of this one classic English text,” Noll commented in the IUPUI report. “It also raises most interesting questions about the role of religious and linguistic tradition in the makeup of contemporary American culture.”

READ MORE AT http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2014/march/most-popular-and-fastest-growing-bible-translation-niv-kjv.html?utm_source=ctweekly-html&utm_medium=Newsletter&utm_term=13563403&utm_content=255150180&utm_campaign=2013

CT has reported on ABS’s State of the Bible reports, including how the Bible gained 6 million new antagonists in 2013.

Footnote 23 — How To Think About the Death of An Atheist

Footnote 23 – Douglas Wilson, “How To Think About the Death of An Atheist: An Opponent Reflects Upon the Death of a Famous Atheist” (Christianity Today, December 16, 2011)

This excerpt comes from an online Christianity Today article by Douglas Wilson, reflecting upon his relationship with Christopher Hitchens.  The two formed a relationship during the course of Hitchens’ promotional book tour for “God Is Not Great.”

Wilson’s article reminds us that Christ died for atheists as well, and we should not allow strong feelings of antipathy for their beliefs to deter us from seeing them as fallen human beings, as we all are, and praying that the good news of God’s grace might move them to repentance and salvation. Observing the frequent hypocrisy and self-righteousness apparent in the lives of many “Christians” may help explain the virulent anti-Christian rhetoric which seems to abound these days.

My memory of this article was triggered by a request from a friend that we who claim to follow the Messiah should pray fervently, specifically, and by name for another well-known atheist, Richard Dawkins, whose recent bizarre comments about child sexual abuse are easily explained as a perfectly logical consequence of atheistic assumptions.  Still, such abhorrent views do not excuse Christians from our duty to speak with grace and truth.

Excerpts of Douglas Wilson’s article, originally posted 12/16/2011, are reproduced below. Read more of Wilson’s reflections at http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2011/decemberweb-only/christopher-hitchens-obituary.html?paging=off

Christopher Hitchens was a celebrity intellectual, and, as such, the basic outlines of his life are generally well known… I came to know Christopher during the promotion tour for his atheist encyclical, God Is Not Great. True to form, Christopher did not want to write a book attacking God and his minions only to have the release be a wine and cheese party in Manhattan with a bunch of fellow unbelievers, where they could all laugh knowingly about the rubes and cornpones down in the Bible Belt. So he told his publicist that he wanted to debate with any and all comers, and in the course of promoting his book, he did exactly that. I believe his book tour began in Arkansas, and the range of his debate partners included Al Sharpton, Dinesh D’Souza, and numerous others.

In response to this general defiance he delivered to the armies of Israel, my agent Aaron Rench contacted Christianity Today to see if they would be willing to host a written exchange. They were, and when Christopher was contacted, he quickly agreed as well. That online exchange attracted some attention, and the debate was made into a small book (Is Christianity Good for the World?). The short promotion tour for the release of the book was a series of debates that Christopher and I held in New York, Philadelphia, and Washington, which were filmed for the documentary Collision.

As a result of all this, we were thrown together in a number of situations. One time we shared a panel in Dallas, and I told the crowd there that if Christopher and I were not careful, we were in danger of becoming friends. During the time we spent together, he never said an unkind thing to me—except on stage, up in front of everybody. After doing this, he didn’t wink at me, but he might as well have.

So we got on well with each other, because each of us knew where the other one stood. Eugene Genovese, before he became a believer, once commented on the tendency that some have to try to garner respect by giving away portions, big or small, of what they profess to believe. “If other religions offer equally valid ways to salvation and if Christianity itself may be understood solely as a code of morals and ethics, then we may as well all become Buddhists or, better, atheists. I intend no offense, but it takes one to know one. And when I read much Protestant theology and religious history today, I have the warm feeling that I am in the company of fellow unbelievers” (The Southern Front, pp. 9–10).

….Unbelievers can smell accommodation, and when someone like Christopher meets someone who actually believes all the articles in the Creed, including that part about Jesus coming back from the dead, it delights him. Here is someone actually willing to defend what is being attacked. Militant atheists are often exasperated with opponents whose strategy appears to be “surrender slowly.”

G. K. Chesterton once pointed to the salutary effect that the great agnostics had on him—that effect being that of “arousing doubts deeper than their own.” Christopher was an heir of the Enlightenment tradition, and would have felt right at home in the 18th-century salons of Paris. He wanted to carry on the grand tradition of doubting what had been inherited from Christendom, and to take great delight in doubting it. This worked well, or appeared to, for a time.

But skepticism is a universal solvent, and once applied, it does not stop just because Christendom is gone. “I think, therefore I am. I think.” We pulled out the stopper of faith, and the bathwater of reason appeared undisturbed for a time. But modernism slowly receded and now postmodernism is circling the drain. Our intelligentsia needs to figure out how to do more than sit in an empty tub and reminisce about the days when Voltaire knew how to keep the water hot.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Read more at http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2011/decemberweb-only/christopher-hitchens-obituary.html?paging=off

Hymn Voted Out of Hymnal for Using the Phrase “Wrath of God”

Hymn Voted Out of Hymnal for Using the Phrase “Wrath of God”

‘Wrath of God’ Keeps Popular Worship Song Out of 10,000-Plus Churches

‘In Christ Alone’ blocked from new PCUSA hymnal over atonement language.
Abby Stocker  —  posted 8/1/2013 12:27PM
Excerpts follow — read more at http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2013/august/wrath-of-god-in-christ-alone-blocked-pcusa-hymnal.html
The “wrath of God” has kept one of today’s most-popular worship songs from being sung in many Presbyterian churches.

A Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) committee desired to add “In Christ Alone” to the denomination’s new hymnal, Glory to God, set to be released this fall. But it firstrequested permission to avoid theological controversy by altering the modern hymn’s lyrics from “Till on that cross as Jesus died/the wrath of God was satisfied” to “Till on that cross as Jesus died/the love of God was magnified.”

However, authors Keith Getty and Stuart Townend rejected the proposal. So the committee voted six to nine to bar the hymn.

“The song has been removed from our contents list, with deep regret over losing its otherwise poignant and powerful witness,” committee chair Mary Louise Bringle told The Christian Century. The “view that the cross is primarily about God’s need to assuage God’s anger” would have a negative impact on worshippers’ education, according to Bringle.

….

In a widely-circulated response to the PCUSA that the Gettys called “spot on” on their Facebook page, Timothy George argued that although debating doctrine through hymns is not a new phenomenon, failing to recognize God’s capacity for wrath can effectively trivialize God’s power. “God’s love is not sentimental; it is holy. It is tender, but not squishy,” he wrote. “It involves not only compassion, kindness, and mercy beyond measure … but also indignation against injustice and unremitting opposition to all that is evil.”

Russell Moore observed in the Washington Post that singing about doctrines such as God’s wrath serves as a direct reminder of God’s mercy to Christians.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Read more at http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2013/august/wrath-of-god-in-christ-alone-blocked-pcusa-hymnal.html

What Does Preaching Do To Your Brain? — Christianity Today Online

What Does Preaching Do To Your Brain? — Christianity Today Online

What Does Preaching Do to Your Brain?

Richard Cox explores the findings of neuroscience on how we hear sermons.
William Struthers       [ posted 7/15/2013 8:39 AM ]
Rewiring Your Preaching: How the Brain Processes Sermons
OUR RATING:  4 Stars - Excellent
BOOK TITLE:  Rewiring Your Preaching: How the Brain Processes Sermons
AUTHOR:  Richard H. Cox
PUBLISHER:  IVP Books
RELEASE DATE:  December 6, 2012
PAGES: 182

When I first picked up Rewiring Your Preaching: How the Brain Processes Sermons(InterVarsity Press), by Richard H. Cox, I was a drawn immediately to its title. In today’s day and age, where virtually every scholarly endeavor attempts to pour its topic into the new wineskin of neuroscience, my concern was that this book would fall short of the title’s claim. The premise that preaching is somehow fundamentally different from all other forms of oral communication is one that the majority of people might find curious. But it could certainly resonate with many people of faith. Could it be that there is something “sacred” about active preaching? Does the brain have a unique area or cortical region that helps it make sense of religious teaching? Is it possible that pastors could use the findings of neuroscience to somehow alter their preaching and, in doing so, get the people in the pews to grasp the theological truths they are trying to communicate?

The brain scientist in me instinctively pushed back, and I found myself approaching Cox’s thesis with an element of doubt. As I read through the book, however, I gained an appreciation for what the author was trying to do, the integrative process he was engaged in, the limitations of the scientific claims being made, and the eagerness of publishers to take the brain angle.

The author is a well-known and highly regarded academic and clergyman. He brings a unique perspective to this material and a refreshing sensibility. At times the text is an awkward combination of medicine and psychology, and at other times an insightful fusion of neuroscience and theology. As a result I found myself being pushed and pulled through the different chapters.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Read more: http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2013/july-web-only/neuroscience-what-does-preaching-do-to-your-brain.html?utm_source=ctweekly-html&utm_medium=Newsletter&utm_term=12912131&utm_content=193524605&utm_campaign=2013