Bible Translation Debate

Issues

Most Korean Protestant worship uses the New Korean Revised Version (Gaeyeok Gaejeong), published by the Korean Bible Society in 1998. Other translations render the text in contemporary Korean, including the New Korean Standard Version of 1993, its revision, the Revised New Korean Standard Version (2001), and, more recently, the Saehangeul Bible. The debate centers on three main issues. The first is which translation approach should serve as the standard for worship. Formal equivalence, which renders the words and sentence structure of the original as closely as possible, is set against dynamic equivalence, which renders the meaning in natural Korean. The second is whether replacing a long-used text benefits the community. The third is which manuscripts of the original should be regarded as the basis for translation.

The Case for Retaining the Established Translation

This position emphasizes that the Gaeyeok (Revised) family of translations follows the form of the original texts with relative fidelity. It also notes that this translation has served for generations as the foundation for Scripture memorization, responsive readings, and the language of preaching. Proponents hold that frequent changes of translation would undermine commonly memorized verses and shared public reading, and that the text could drift toward the translators' interpretations. In support they cite 2 Timothy 3:16 ("All scripture is given by inspiration of God") and Matthew 5:18 ("one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law"). Most denominations, including conservative Presbyterian bodies, use the New Korean Revised Version as their worship text.

Separately, some independent churches in the Baptist tradition maintain that only the King James Bible and its Korean translation should be used. The King James Bible is based on the Textus Receptus, the Greek New Testament text edited during the Reformation era. These churches cite Revelation 22:18-19 in support.

The Case for Also Using Modern-Language Translations

This position stresses that Scripture was written and transmitted from the beginning in the everyday language of its hearers. It holds that the archaic diction and difficult Sino-Korean vocabulary of the New Korean Revised Version pose barriers for new believers and the next generation. Proponents therefore argue that a translation that conveys meaning clearly is in fact more faithful to the original. They cite the following passages:

• Nehemiah 8:8: the book of the law was read and its sense given, so that the people understood.
• 1 Corinthians 14:9: an emphasis on "words easy to be understood."
• Acts 2:6-8: people heard the gospel, each in his own language.

The Korean Bible Society published the Revised New Korean Standard Version and the Saehangeul Bible with this aim. Some churches also use the Revised New Korean Standard Version and other translations in young adult ministries, Sunday schools, and Bible studies. The Anglican Church of Korea is reported to have used the Common Translation, produced jointly with the Catholic Church, in its liturgy.

The Situation in the Korean Church

Within the history of Korean Bible translation, the New Korean Revised Version is a revision of the earlier Korean Revised Version (Gaeyeok Hangeul). After its publication, the major denominations adopted it for worship one after another. When the New Korean Standard Version was released, some conservative denominations criticized its translation approach and its interpretation of certain verses. The Common Translation did not gain wide use within Protestantism, partly because it renders the name of God as Haneunim. There has also been debate over who should undertake translation; for example, the Korea Bible Association, independent of the Korean Bible Society, published the Barun Bible. The Saehangeul Bible is reported to have been published in stages, with the New Testament and Psalms appearing in 2021 and the complete Bible in 2024. Whether it will become established as a worship text remains to be seen.

Points for Further Consideration

• How to balance the unity provided by a single common worship text with the understanding gained by reading and comparing multiple translations
• That formal and dynamic equivalence are matters of degree, and that every translation involves some measure of the translators' interpretation
• Whether the choice of translation is a matter of doctrinal orthodoxy or of pastoral and educational judgment