{"id":39972,"date":"2013-08-20T19:43:00","date_gmt":"2013-08-21T00:43:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/?p=39972"},"modified":"2026-10-11T18:53:46","modified_gmt":"2026-10-11T23:53:46","slug":"what-do-you-think-of-the-easy-to-read-version","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/what-do-you-think-of-the-easy-to-read-version\/","title":{"rendered":"What do you think of the Easy to Read Version?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n\n\t

Question:<\/h2>\n

What about the Easy-to-Read Version?<\/p>\n\t

Answer:<\/h2>\n

Baker Publishing House first published the English Version for the Deaf (ERD) in 1978. American Sign Language, used by the deaf in the United States, does not follow the same grammar rules as English. Thus, English is a second language for many deaf people. The ERD was an attempt to provide a written Bible that was more comprehensible to a deaf person trying to read English.<\/p>\n

The English Version for the Deaf was translated mostly by Ervin Bishop and financed by the World Bible Translating Center, now called Bible League International. The text frequently mentions a translation team, but it is hard to pin down who the team was.<\/p>\n

“The\u00a0Easy-to-Read Version<\/em>\u00a0owes its major credit to Ervin Bishop, who also serves as vice-president of the World Bible Translation Center. For the original\u00a0English Version for the Deaf<\/em>\u00a0project, he worked closely with Benton Dibrell, a deaf-language specialist. The first draft was revised after receiving suggestions from other scholars who served as consultants. Among those who examined the text and offered their suggestions were Dr. Harvey Floyd, head of the Department of Biblical Languages at David Lipscomb University, and Dr. Everett Ferguson, professor of Greek and Church History at Abilene Christian University. For the 1991 revision, comments were solicited from a Translation Review Committee consisting of scholars from various church backgrounds, including Harold W. Hoehner, Virtus E. Gideon, Bruce M. Metzger, Neil R. Lightfoot and Stanley M. Horton.” [Easy to Read Version, BibleSoft.com<\/a>].<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

From this, it seems this was basically a one-person translation, later improved with suggestions from several noted scholars.<\/p>\n

From this base work came a second version called the\u00a0Easy to Read Version<\/em> (ERV), published in 1980 by Baker Publishing House but geared to speakers of English. Interestingly, Sweet Publishing revised\u00a0the same base text and published the\u00a0International Children’s Version\u00a0<\/em>in 1986 and another version, the New Century Version,<\/em> in 1987. They followed this with a special edition called\u00a0The Everyday Bible<\/em>\u00a0in 1988. The\u00a0New Century Version<\/em>\u00a0underwent another major revision in 1991 and was acquired by Thomas Nelson Publishing. The\u00a0Easy to Read Version<\/em> also underwent a major revision in 1991. The text was heavily revised, using more words and more complex English grammar.<\/p>\n

The current versions, copyrighted in 2006, are based on updated source material. The versions’ goals were expanded to target non-literate audiences where the spoken word is easier to understand.<\/p>\n

For the Old Testament, it is based on the\u00a0Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia<\/em>\u00a0(1984), though portions were based on the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Greek Septuagint translation. The New Testament\u00a0is based on the United Bible Societies’\u00a0Greek New Testament<\/em> (third edition, 1975;\u00a0fourth revised edition, 1993) and the Nestle-Aland\u00a0Novum Testamentum Graece<\/em> (twenty-seventh edition, 1993). Again, the translators deviated from the base text because they thought they had better wording. This is not unusual; most translations do this.<\/p>\n

The translation style is dynamic equivalence, or functional equivalence. Ervin Bishop is a strong proponent of this style. The text is translated phrase by phrase. The original wording is generally followed, but where the phrasing is different between cultures, such as through the use of idioms, the dynamic equivalent translation will substitute a more modern way of phrasing the idea. This style of translation is sometimes called thought-for-thought.<\/p>\n

This thought-for-thought style of translation is easy to see in “Peter said to them, “Change your hearts and lives and be baptized, each one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ. Then God will forgive your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.<\/em>\u00a0This promise is for you. It is also for your children and for the people who are far away. It is for everyone the Lord our God calls to himself<\/em>” (Acts 2:38-39 ERV). Notice that the single Greek word\u00a0metanoesate<\/em>\u00a0is translated as a phrase because the translators thought the word “repent” would not be easily understood. But also notice that other words are added. The original Greek says,\u00a0eis aphesian hamartion\u00a0<\/em>(for remission of sins), but the ERV adds “God” to the text. While the concept isn’t biblically wrong, it still isn’t what the text said.<\/p>\n

Sometimes, when simplifying the text, words are dropped. “Through Christ, God gave me the special work of an apostle – to lead people of all nations to believe and obey him. I do all this to honor Christ<\/em>” (Romans 1:5 ERV).\u00a0“Gave me the special work of an apostle” is supposedly translating\u00a0elabomen charin kai apostolen<\/em>\u00a0(we received grace and apostleship). Compare this to “Through Him we have received grace and apostleship for obedience to the faith among all nations for His name<\/em>” (Romans 1:5). This passage leaves out the receiving of grace entirely. It also changes “we,” which includes more than just Paul, to only Paul. What Christ did for his name’s sake becomes something Paul personally does to honor Christ.<\/p>\n

Returning to Acts 2, we find “The believers spent their time listening to the teaching of the apostles. They shared everything with each other. They ate together and prayed together<\/em>” (Acts 2:42 ERV). The NKJV translates this as: “And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in prayers<\/em>” (Acts 2:42). “Continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine” implies much more time spent listening to their teachings; it also includes the idea of living by those teachings. “Fellowship” is much more than sharing material things. “Breaking of bread” refers to a meal, but in this context, it refers to the Lord’s Supper (Acts 2:47 refers to common meals). “Continued steadfastly … in prayers” includes praying with other Christians and being devoted to private prayer.<\/p>\n

I’m citing these to show that, in simplifying the text, the translators lost much of the implied meaning in the phrases or added new implications that are not correct. Words are added and sometimes subtracted, giving the reader the wrong impression. This would not be a good version to use for a deep discussion of God’s teaching. It might be useful if someone wanted to use it as a children’s version.<\/p>\n

Sources:<\/p>\n