Global Awakening

As President of Global Awakening Theological Seminary, I have recently been asked by a number of students, teaching assistants, and professors to share my thoughts on The Passion Translation. Although we have prohibited its use as a source for research and academic papers, I had previously left individuals free to use whatever Bible translation they found helpful in their personal devotional lives.

Since then, I have taken the time to examine more carefully the history, methodology, and underlying textual claims of The Passion Translation (TPT). What I have learned has led me to a clear and sober conclusion: I cannot recommend the current edition of TPT for public teaching, private study, or personal devotional reading.

For years, I regarded it as a paraphrase, assuming its title—The Passion Translation— was largely marketing language; however, the publisher does not present TPT merely as devotional literature. It calls it an accurate and faithful translation, compares it with respected translations such as the NIV and NLT, and says it can be used as a person’s “primary text” for serious Bible study. Those claims require earnest scrutiny that, in my judgment, they cannot withstand.

The issue is not whether some of its language is beautiful, emotionally moving, or spiritually encouraging. The issue is whether the words presented as Scripture faithfully represent the words found in the biblical text. In too many places, they do not.

Psalm 81:10 provides a particularly striking example. The ESV reads: “I am the LORD your God, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt. Open your mouth wide, and I will fill it.” In context, God is reminding Israel of His deliverance and inviting His people to trust Him as the One who provides and satisfies.

TPT, however, renders the central thought: “Open your mouth with a mighty decree…. The words that you speak, so shall it be!” The Hebrew contains no “mighty decree,” no promise that God will fulfill the words we speak, and no statement that what we declare will become reality. God’s invitation to receive from His provision has been transformed into a teaching about the creative power of human declarations. Whatever one believes about decrees as a broader theological practice, that doctrine is not present in Psalm 81:10. This is not simply a vivid paraphrase; it is a theological addition that materially changes the meaning of the verse.

This illustrates a danger that confronts every Christian tradition, including our own: instead of allowing Scripture to form and correct our theology, we can begin importing our preferred theology into Scripture. We may sincerely believe that a doctrine is biblical, but that does not give us permission to place it into passages where the biblical author did not express it. Our theology must be derived from the whole counsel of Scripture, not inserted into individual verses through creative translation. When interpretation is embedded directly into the biblical text and presented as translation, readers can no longer distinguish between what God inspired and what the translator believes the passage should mean. Scripture must remain the authority that judges our theology; our theology must never become the authority that rewrites Scripture.

Of course, every translation involves interpretation. Every translation must sometimes supply words that English grammar requires. I applaud the desire behind The Passion Translation to reveal the heart of the Father and communicate His words with emotional resonance. Faithfulness to Scripture does not require flattening its poetry or muting its passion. As a continuationist, I would welcome a translation that brings that perspective to interpretive questions where the original language and context plausibly support such a reading. Reformed and other evangelical commitments have likewise shaped translation choices in particular passages, sometimes resulting in renderings I find strained. But the same standard must apply to all of us: our theological convictions must remain accountable to the text. There is a difference between choosing a defensible meaning of the original words and adding ideas those words do not convey.

My concern with TPT is not its desire to communicate the Father’s heart or its charismatic perspective. It is that, in too many places, its pursuit of those aims goes beyond what the underlying text can reasonably support. I recognize that some people have encountered God while reading TPT. I do not deny those encounters. God has spoken to people through imperfect sermons, songs, books, and even the words of those who did not know they were speaking for Him. His grace in using something does not establish that thing’s reliability. The fruit of an encounter may be real while the source itself remains unsafe.

I want to make clear, however, that my concern is not an accusation about motive. I have known Brian Simmons personally for many years, and through my interactions with him I have seen what I believe to be a genuine love for Jesus, a sincere devotion to His Bride, and a real desire to help people encounter God through Scripture. Nothing in this statement is intended to deny those qualities, assassinate his character, or judge the sincerity of his faith and calling. I am also deliberately not addressing the separate public allegations concerning plagiarism. My concern here is narrower: the published text and the methodology used to produce it. Additionally, I know Brian is working with his publisher to redress many of the issues in an upcoming edition that I believe will be released in 2028/29. I believe he wants this to be cleaned up and corrected where needed. This is much needed and appreciated. My concerns and admonition above apply to the currently available edition(s), not to a future revision I have not seen.

One sobering lesson to learn in all this is that genuine love for Jesus, sincere intentions, extensive ministry experience, and a strong sense of divine calling do not make any of us immune from error. Well-meaning, God fearing believers can unintentionally mishandle Scripture, particularly when working beyond the boundaries of their training and expertise.

Bible translation is one of the clearest examples of why we need the whole Body of Christ. No one person possesses every necessary gift. The languages, history, theology, manuscript evidence, literary forms, and cultural world of Scripture require scholars to question one another, correct one another, and guard against individual blind spots. This is not unbelief. It is humility. 

Paul explains that Christ gave apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers to equip His people and bring the Body into maturity, “so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine” (Ephesians 4:11–14). Education is not opposed to spiritual fire. At its best, theological education helps give that fire a well-built fireplace: biblical depth, historical rootedness, intellectual honesty, and the maturity to handle the Word of truth faithfully and humbly.

If God has placed in you a desire to understand, teach, translate, or defend Scripture, pursue that calling diligently. Learn the languages. Study Church history. Submit your ideas to wise teachers. Allow the wider Body of Christ to sharpen and correct you. Whether through Global Awakening Theological Seminary or another academically serious, Spirit-filled institution, become equipped to carry both the power of the Spirit and the weight of the Word.

The Church does not need to choose between spiritual passion and theological precision. We need believers filled with the Spirit, grounded in Scripture, rooted in the Great Tradition, and humble enough to be corrected. Passion is precious. But when we are handling the Word of God, passion must remain accountable to truth.

With deep gratitude for the generations of faithful scholars, translators, and teachers whose careful labor has served the Church and helped us rightly handle the Word of truth,

Dr. Randy Clark