
Transcription of Carl Trueman’s address on the Geneva Bible given on
3/12/03 at Union University
The Geneva Bible was produced in 1560 by a group of
English exiles in Geneva. It became the most popular English bible
translation in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries prior to the
production of the Authorized Version. The Bishop’s Bible, which was
the next most popular translation of the bible in the sixteenth
century, was printed in twenty-two editions. The Geneva Bible was
printed in over one hundred and eighty editions. So you can see that
the Geneva Bible was a phenomenally successful publishing sensation
for its day. The great Bishop Westcot, historian of biblical texts
and of biblical translations, said this about the Geneva Bible, “from
the time of its first appearance, the Geneva Bible became the
household Bible of the English speaking nations.” So if ever there
was a bible produced which spoke to the hearts of ordinary men and
women, boys and girls, it was without doubt the Geneva translation of
the bible.
Why was Bible translation was so important
in the sixteenth century? Why did it become so crucial at this
particular point in time? The theological answer to that I think lies
in Exodus chapter three. The reformers, these great men and women of
the sixteenth century, discerned that the God of Scripture was above
all a God of words. The thing that distinguished the way
Yahweh revealed himself was that he was a God who spoke. We
read in the psalms about the idols, that they are made and they have
hands but they do not touch, they have noses but they do not smell,
they have mouths but they do not speak. For the sixteenth century
reformers, the God of the Bible was a God of words and that
made God’s words singularly important. The Reformation as a whole can
be characterized as a movement of words - written words and spoken
words, but a movement of words whatever.
The Reformation comes at a very fortuitous
moment in time – in the wake, the brief aftermath of the invention of
the printing press. Words were becoming cheap and readily available.
Literacy rates were slowly but surely rising in Europe. And given
these cultural shifts, the Reformation was the movement of the moment,
a movement that placed printed and spoken words at the very center of
its program. We see this in church architecture. If you have the
privilege of going to Europe and visiting some of the Medieval
cathedrals in Europe, you will notice that, as you walk through the
door, the architecture draws your eyes to the far end of the
cathedral. Why are your eyes drawn to the far end of the cathedral?
Because that is were the mass takes place. That is where God comes
down and meets his people, according to Medieval theology, in the
elements of the mass. It is the most important element of Medieval
Catholic piety. And therefore architecture reflects that.
If you go into a Reformation cathedral,
however, such as St. Charles cathedral in Edinburough, where are your
eyes drawn as you walk through the door? They are drawn, not to the
far end, but to the very center. And what is at the center of St.
Charles cathedral? It is not an altar, because the mass is not the
most important thing that goes on in St. Charles cathedral in
Edinburough. What stands at the center is a pulpit with a lectern.
Because it is the reading of God’s word and the preaching of God’s
word that, for the Reformation Protestants, marks the central act of
public Christian piety. The sacraments are there in the Reformation.
The Reformation splits over debates about the sacraments. But first
and foremost, the Reformation is a movement about words. Why
is it a movement about words? Because God is a God who speaks.
He reveals Himself primarily through speech. He performs great signs
as well but he then explains those signs through words. And
Reformation faith is a faith built upon God’s promise. And promises
require words.
So the Reformation places the God who speaks
and places the words God speaks right at the center of its reforming
program. And this lead of course, in the Reformation, to a great need
for vernacular Scriptures - Scriptures that were written in a language
that people could understand. Not that most people could read. But
so that when the priest or the minister was in church and opened the
Bible and read the Bible, what he read was spoken in words that the
ordinary people in the pews could understand. This is the trajectory
in which the Geneva Bible should be slotted. It is part and parcel,
yes, of the wider cultural shift in Europe towards words, towards
literature, towards words spoken and words written. But it is also a
part of the theological dynamic of the Reformation that places God’s
words as God spoke them at the heart of Christian piety.
English Bible translation has something of a
controversial history. In the late fourteenth and early fifteenth
century a man named John Wycliffe and then his followers had arranged
for the translation of the Latin translation of the bible, the
Vulgate, into English. It was a long and a costly process.
Everything had to be copied out by hand in those days. There were no
printing presses. These bibles had circulated in underground
movements, and had become very closely associated with political
radicalism and theological heresy. This had meant that the Catholic
Church in England was not well disposed towards bible translation.
Bible translation spelled social unrest and heresy. Therefore, though
Germany has a reasonable German translation of the bible from the
middle of the fifteenth century, England has no translation of the
bible, even at the beginning of the sixteenth century.
A man named William Tyndale, in the 1520’s
and 1530’s, devoted his life to translating large portions of the
scripture into English on the continent. He was ultimately hunted
down and executed by the authorities in what is now modern-day
Belgium. It is a sign of how dangerous and risky bible translation
was. Tyndale spent most of his adult life on the run. He was the
sixteenth century equivalent of a subversive or a terrorist as far as
the English authorities were concerned. He was pursued by secret
agents across the Low Countries and finally betrayed and executed in
1536. But the vision that Tyndale had for bible translation continued
after he had died and was picked up by men both in England and, more
importantly, on the continent. And it was those men who led to the
production of the Geneva Bible.
Why is the Geneva Bible called the Geneva
Bible? Simply because it was produced in Geneva. It was put together
by a group of exiles led by a man named William Wittingham who were
committed to translating the Greek and the Hebrew text of the
scriptures into the vernacular English. Its controversial history is
associated with the fact that it is a product of exile. Why are
Wittingham and his colleagues in exile on the continent? Because
there is a Catholic monarch in England who is determined to suppress
English bible translations. So, it was a production of exile and of
protest.
It is also controversial because it embodies
a certain vision of what reform is. We tend to think often in
evangelical circles of reformation as involving a move from believing
in justification by our own works to believing in justification by
faith. That was the great insight of Martin Luther. It was not that
you worked for your salvation. It was that Christ worked for your
salvation and you received what Christ had done by faith. That is one
model of reformation, but there were other ways in which the reformers
understood reformation. And William Wittingham and the group in
Geneva responsible for the production of the Geneva Bible saw
themselves in a slightly different light. They saw the essence of
reformation as the move from idolatrous worship to pure worship, as a
move from idolatry to Christianity. And so the Geneva Bible was
produced not simply to affirm Protestant commitment to justification
by faith, but also to generate a reform of the church that saw purity
of worship placed at the very center. What did purity of worship
involve for these men? It involved a bringing of everything that was
done in the gathering of the saints under the critical gaze of the
scriptures.
One obvious thing that they felt had to go
was the mass – the idea that Christ came down and was formed in the
elements and then someway re-sacrificed or reapplied. His sacrifice
being reapplied in the mass was considered to be wrong. But other
things had to go too. There had been a great struggle in English
Protestantism over the level of state control of worship. To what
extent could the government tell you how you should worship God?
We’re moving to what is often called the regulative principle of
worship, which is talked about today in terms of how it stops you from
doing all those things you want to do in church. And it has been
abused that way. But in the sixteenth century, the development of the
so-called regulative principle of worship has much more to do with
controlling how much the government could interfere in what went on in
church. And Wittingham and his colleagues who produced the Geneva
Bible took the view that nobody has the right to come into your church
and tell you to worship in any way that the bible does not explicitly
demand you to worship God. Nobody has the right to come into your
church and make you wear something that the bible does not require you
to wear. Nobody has the right to come into your church and make you
sing, or say something that the bible does not require you to sing or
say. And it was this that made the Geneva Bible so controversial.
The Geneva Bible contained not only the
plain text of the Bible translated. It was much more akin to the
Scofield Reference Bible. What you have in the Geneva Bible is the
translation of the text and then you have a series of notes put in the
margins and introductions to books, telling you, broadly speaking, how
you should interpret the text that is laid before you. But the
Protestants were very confident that the scripture provided its own
interpretation. But they were not so confident that everybody had the
ability to interpret scripture in accordance with the scripture’s own
interpretation. So the Geneva Bible is a kind of half-way heresy, if
you like, between what the Pope claims to be doing in Rome and what
the Anabaptists were doing in terms of just placing out the plain text
of scripture. The Geneva Bible contains notes and introductions. And
in these notes and introductions, what is put forward is a radically
Puritan view of worship, the idea that nothing can be imposed on you
in your worship that is not required by the word of God. And it was
this that made the Geneva Bible so controversial.
For the next hundred years or so, it is the
best selling bible. But it is also a bible that is periodically
banned by the authorities. The copy of the Geneva Bible housed in
Union University’s Ryan Center for Biblical Studies
contains an original frontace piece in it. Many Geneva Bibles have
facsimile frontace pieces in them. Why do they have facsimile
frontace pieces in them? Because soldiers in the sixteenth and
seventeenth century were, generally speaking, illiterate. When they
broke into your house to find out if you have subversive Puritan
literature, they weren’t capable of reading it. But they were capable
of identifying the pictures that were on the frontace piece. So when
you owned, as a Puritan, a copy of the Geneva Bible, what you would do
is rip the frontace piece out. So that when your house was dawn
raided by the authorities and they pulled what looked like a Geneva
Bible off the shelf and opened the front cover, there was no frontace
piece. How does the illiterate soldier tell whether this is the
Geneva Bible or some other legitimate piece of work? He can’t. So he
slots it back on the shelf and allows you to go about your business.
So the Geneva Bible then is highly controversial because of its
emphasis upon purity of doctrine and worship and because of its use of
these marginal notes.
The notes, I think, are the secret to its
popularity. As the Scofield Bible, for good or for ill, has proved
without doubt to be one of the most popular bible translation editions
of recent memory, so the Geneva Bible was popular in its day because
it didn’t just provide people with the biblical text. It provided
them with explanations even of the most difficult passages. Why would
that have been popular? I think, again, the shift from medieval
Catholicism to Protestant theology gives us the clue. We tend to
think of Catholicism becoming Protestantism purely in terms of
doctrinal changes. In fact what Protestantism did was place a huge
amount of responsibility on the individual that had never been there
before. You’re a medieval Catholic. You go to church. You take
mass. You go to confession. Essentially the church does it all for
you. What does the Reformation do? It takes that all away from you.
It places the bible in your hands and says, to an extent, you have to
go away and do it for yourself now. That, I think, would create
tensions and issues within the church population that makes something
like the Geneva Bible highly desirable. As you strip away all of the
pastoral aids that the medieval church has developed for doing its
job, you place into people’s hands a bible with explanatory notes that
facilitates and enables people to go away and do it for themselves.
Do not underestimate the power of having
notes placed on the same page as the text of the bible. Why is Geneva
so popular? Why is Scofield so popular? It is not just the notes. I
think if you took all the notes out and published them in a separate
volume, they would not have proved so popular. But having the words
on the same page as the words of scripture endows them with a peculiar
authority and power. My aside recommendation would be, if you use a
bible with extensive marginal notes and introductory notes, put it to
one side and buy yourself a bible without those notes because then
you’ll never be tempted to blur the distinction between the two. So
the Geneva Bible is a product of the Reformation emphasis upon words,
a product of English exiles, a bible that pushes forward a particular
vision of reform focusing upon purity of worship and purity of
doctrine, and a bible that caters to the need created by the
Reformation for individuals to take responsibility for their own
salvation.
What challenges does it raise for us today?
I think twofold. First and most significant in many ways, I said the
Reformation is a product of a change to a literary culture. It is
quite clear that the culture in which we live is moving away from the
power of words and back towards the power of image. Perhaps the
moment at which this became obvious was the famous televised debate
between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon in 1960 where those who saw
the debate on the television thought that John F. Kennedy had won.
Those who heard the debate on the radio thought that Richard Nixon had
won. Why? Simply this: primarily visually based media and primarily
literary based media do not provide us with two examples of the same
phenomenon. They are, in fact, two different phenomena and it is very
difficult to convey the same message on the radio as on the
television. If you had watched the television in 1960, you would have
seen a cool, tanned John F. Kennedy debating an ill, haggard looking
Richard Nixon. You would have been swayed by the pictorial image. If
you listened on the radio, your mind would have been much more focused
on the quality of argument and debate.
How does that affect us today? It affects
us today for this very simple reason I think: if those who spent their
time translating the Geneva Bible and their colleagues were correct,
then we as Christians have to deal with a God who is a God of words, a
God who does reveal himself through signs, but explains those signs
through words. Christianity, in other words, is an ineradicably
literary or verbal culture phenomenon. The challenge for today is
how to communicate the message of Christianity in a culture that is no
longer so hung up on words but more concerned about image and
aesthetics. Perhaps some of the most dangerous times for evangelical
Christianity lie not in the direct attacks on the authority of
scripture that are launched by higher critical scholars, but in the
great cultural shifts that take place that are moving us away from a
culture that exalts words and speech to a culture that exalts image
and aesthetics.
A second point to make about the Geneva
Bible is that we should not allow ourselves to be deceived on the
issue of scriptural perspicuity.
One of the things the Geneva Bible translators probably got wrong was
printing marginal notes on the same page as the biblical text.
However, scriptural perspicuity does not mean that scripture is always
easy to understand in all places at all times. That is not what the
reformers said. That is so often what one hears from popular
evangelical and fundamentalist preachers today. But that is not the
case. We have Peter’s own authority to say that in the letters of
Paul there are many things that are difficult to understand [2 Peter
3:15-16]. The translators of the Geneva Bible realized that it was
not enough simply to translate the bible. There was also a need for
people who were able to understand and interpret the bible correctly.
The church needs such people.
So a final lesson from the Geneva Bible is
this: Many believers are possibly thinking about going into Christian
ministry. I would suggest if you feel called that way, do so. But
make sure that you get the best theological education you can.
Because the words that you handle in the scriptural text are not only
holy words but they are often technically difficult and complicated
words. One should think seriously about Christian ministry but also
think very seriously about getting trained properly for the Christian
ministry because the scriptures are sufficient. They are
perspicuous. My nine and my seven-year-old sons can read the gospel
of John and I think savingly know what is going on there. They could
also spend a lifetime studying that gospel and never plumb the depths
that are there. The need of the church today is for articulate people
who understand the scriptures and are able to make it relevant to this
day and this generation. And I want to urge you all today to consider
whether the Lord is calling you to that kind of task.
Closing prayer: O Lord God, we do praise
You, that you are a God who speaks. You are a God of words. You are
not silent. You are not one of these gods who has a mouth but does
not speak. You are One who has spoken and revealed himself supremely
in your Son the Lord Jesus Christ. And Lord, as we look to Christ,
the Word incarnate, we see your grace and your love extended towards
the world. We praise you for him, Lord. And we ask, O Lord, that you
would be searching our own hearts. And you would be calling us to
those ministries, those callings that you have set out for us. And
Lord that you would be giving us the humility, the commitment, and the
gifts necessary to fulfill those tasks to Your glory. We pray these
things in Jesus name. Amen.
HOME |