“Broadly speaking, one may say that in the case of the modern versions, the problem is a shaky sense of English and in the case of the King James Version, a shaky sense of Hebrew.”
-Robert Alter, “Introduction,” The Five Books of Moses
When church members and other folks ask me what Bible translation I would recommend, I boil it down to 1) a decent translation into English 2) that you will actually read. Over the years, I’ve personally both enjoyed and had problems with the NIV, KJV, NKJV, NASB, New Jerusalem, RSV, NRSV, and ESV, and I’d endorse any of those but the KJV for a first-time reader. They are all (including the KJV) decent translations into English, and you may note I don’t place a single paraphrase on the list.
The latest translation I’m both enjoying and having problems with is the Common English Bible. It’s probably the main claimant to a replacement of the NRSV for mainline Protestant churches, and it’s very good, even though it smooths over textual difficulties from time to time (just as every pleasant-to-read English translation ever has). The CEB also makes some translation choices that follow trends in current scholarship but can be pretty jarring to those familiar with older translation conventions.
The big one, which the editors and translators defend in the “Preface”: Jesus’ familiar self-identification as “the Son of Man” is rendered “the Human One.” I mean, yes, that’s an accurate translation, and I recognize that “Man” is no longer gender-inclusive in modern English usage…but why not “Son of Humanity?” Why break that far from convention? There’s a reason that so many contemporary translations still follow conventions from the King James (and the Tyndale, from which the King James heavily borrowed): the King James is brilliant and beautiful English, and it will never be beaten in terms of influence.
But the reason I’m writing this post is that the Common English Bible is the first mainstream translation I’m aware of (unless you want to argue the NET Bible is mainstream) that embraces the “new” (or new?) reading of pistis Christou in Paul. It’s hard to find an online summary to describe the New Perspective on Paul controversy (as you can see on this food fight of a Wikipedia page), so I’ll show you instead.
These are various takes on Galatians 2:16, with the English translation of the Greek pistis Christou (in these cases, pisteos) rendered in bold…
King James Version
Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
New International Version
know that a person is not justified by the works of the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law, because by the works of the law no one will be justified.
New Revised Standard Version
yet we know that a person is justified not by the works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ. And we have come to believe in Christ Jesus, so that we might be justified by faith in Christ, and not by doing the works of the law, because no one will be justified by the works of the law.
English Standard Version
yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law,because by works of the law no one will be justified.
Common English Bible
However, we know that a person isn’t made righteous by the works of the Law but rather through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ. We ourselves believed in Christ Jesus so that we could be made righteous by the faithfulness of Christ and not by the works of the Law—because no one will be made righteous by the works of the Law.
If you’re unfamiliar with the debate, the reason it matters to people so much is that theological arguments turn on it. Very briefly, is the pistis (faith, faithfulness) from the human’s side or Jesus’ side? If it’s on the human’s side, then how does it not become just another kind of work to earn God’s acceptance? If it’s on God’s side, then how does human will, choice, assent, or cooperation come into it? The “new” scholarship says it’s on Jesus’ side, which makes much better sense of Paul, who has experienced and believes that it’s grace all the way down.
And you’ll note that alongside the Common English Bible, the other translation reflecting this “new” reading is…the KJV.