Office Bearers

GS 1968 ARTICLE 45

Regarding Revised Standard Version, Committee III presents: (See Supplement 2)

1.   Materials:

  • a. Overture of the Consistory of the Church at Burlington, Ont., to appoint a Committee with the mandate to study the desirability of corrections of the Revised Standard Version, and to contact the “Standard Bible Committee”, publisher of this translation, in order to bring our wishes to their attention; III,38;
  • b. Request of Rev. D. Delong, Edmonton, Alta, IV,3;
  • c. Request of Mr. H. Stassen, Willowdale, Ont., IV,11;
  • d. Letter of support for b. from the Church at Calgary, Alta, V,8.

2. Recommendations:

I. That from the several later versions of the Bible the Revised Standard Version be chosen.

Grounds:

  • a. The Revised Standard Version has the merit of not being a completely new, a “revolutionary” translation, but is meant as a “revision” of the King James Version. It “is not a new translation in the language of today. It is a revision which seeks to preserve all that is best in the English Bible as it has been known and used through the years”. (Preface R.S.V.)
  • b. It does not have the weakness of a strongly personal translation like others, e.g. Phillips.
  • c. Its English will for many years to come remain sufficiently modern to meet the needs expressed in the overture and requests mentioned above.
  • d. The editors of the Revised Standard Version are in the process of preparing an improved edition of the Revised Standard Version, which will be published in the near future.

ADOPTED

II. The Committee therefore advises Synod not to follow the suggestion of Mr. H. Stassen, to give “clear directions as to … other available modern translations of the Bible”, and to advise our Churches “to strongly advocate to its members the use of approved, modern language Bible versions”.

Grounds:

  • a. The Churches should, if at all possible, use only one translation, in order that it becomes possible for believers to learn part of God’s Word by heart.
  • b. It is not in the jurisdiction of this Synod to advise the Churches to give leadership in the evaluation and comparison of different modern trans­lations.

ADOPTED

III. Synod should not at this time “declare that with a view to the testing of the Revised Standard Version it is desirable that, besides the recommended King James Version also the Revised Standard Version be used in our Churches” (Rev. DeJong’s request, sub 3).

Grounds:

  • a. Synod does not have available any grounds to justify such a declaration;
  • b. An improved edition of the Revised Standard Version is planned; the Churches should await its publication.

ADOPTED

IV. That Synod decide to appoint a committee to study the question whether the Revised Standard Version can be recommended for use by the Churches.

The following mandate be given to such a committee:

  • 1. to study the Revised Standard Version as to faithfulness to the original text and “Schriftgelovig karakter” (Acts Synod 1954);
  • 2. to evaluate the criticism voiced against the Revised Standard Version;
  • 3. to contact the Standard Bible Committee which is preparing an improved edition of the Revised Standard Version and who welcomes all worthwhile contributions;
  • 4. to solicit any help that it needs from persons who are considered competent in this field;
  • 5. to report to the Churches at the proper time so that there is sufficient tin1e to study the results and to make proposals to Synod.

ADOPTED

V. The Committee finally recommends that:

  • 1. the results of Rev. DeJong’s study be passed on to the committee mentioned in recommendation IV;
  • 2. members of the Churches, especially the ministers, be requested to take part in testing the Revised Standard Version and to submit their re­ marks in time to the committee appointed (Rev. DeJong’s second request);
  • 3. Rev. D. DeJong and Mr. H. Stassen be informed of the decisions.

ADOPTED