Ethics,Decoloniality,and Evangelicalism in the First Nations Version New Testament

Evangelism

At the heart of Wildman’s translation efforts is the invitation: “We’d love you to take a look at this Jesus, who has meant so much to us as Native people. We’ve found that he doesn’t want to strip our culture from us. He wants to fulfill the values of our culture in new ways” (Wildman 2022d). Rain Ministries, the parent organization for the FNV project, was founded in 2002 by Wildman and his wife with a similarly evangelistic commitment in its mission statement: “to encourage Indigenous Peoples to realize and fulfill the destiny the Creator has given them through his Son Jesus Christ and to partner with them in developing culturally significant ways to express their worship of Creator and to make him known to others” (FNV: First Nations Version—Rain Ministries 2025a; emphasis added).

This same motivation led Wildman to employ a dynamic-equivalence style of translation, which favors making the text understandable to readers. The preface of the FNV NT states, “The FNV takes into consideration contextual word choices, idiomatic expressions, and modifications in paragraph and sentence structure that clarify and facilitate understanding of the Scriptures” (First Nations Version 2021, ix). It is not a “word-for-word” translation of the Greek text but rather a “thought-for-thought” translation which attempts to convey the same meaning of the original but with adjustments necessary to communicate in a different language and cultural context (First Nations Version 2021, ix).

An internal document prepared by publisher InterVarsity Press answering frequently asked questions explains one instance of the FNV NT’s translation of concepts rather than the lexical equivalent of the source text:

FNV’s rendering of the return of the prodigal son in Luke 15.22 has the father saying, “Go! Find my best regalia and put it on him. Give him a headdress of feathers for his head and new moccasins for his feet!” While “regalia,” “headdress,” and “moccasins” are not direct translations of Luke’s Greek words for “robe,” “ring,” and “sandals,” they do nevertheless communicate the great honor given to the younger son upon his return.

The translators’ desire to make the translation understandable to Native readers can also be found in their addition of cultural background information, set apart using italic typeface. Following Mark 5.26, for example, an explanation of Jewish purity laws highlights the severity of a bleeding woman’s plight: “Under tribal law this woman would be considered unclean and even the things she touched would be unclean also, isolating her from friends and family.”

The FNV NT’s dynamic-equivalence translation style sometimes narrows the range of meaning contained in the source text, with ideological and ethical repercussions. In Mark 1.1, εὐαγγελίου is rendered “good story,” whereas NIV uses “good news” and KJV “gospel.” For some Native North American readers, the word “gospel” denotes a message associated with what one translator characterizes as “Bible thumpers,” colonial missionaries, and cultural genocide, explaining, “We’ve got to be able to sidestep people’s bad connotations from bad mission work. A lot of folks might freeze if I tell them, ‘Oh, I have a gospel.’” The phrase “good news” has fewer negative connotations, though it, too, is used by Christian missionaries. The FNV NT rendering of “good story” aimed to avoid those associations while simultaneously reflecting an Indigenous epistemological perspective which understands wisdom to be contained in and transmitted through narratives rather than through facts.

Biblicism

The FNV NT translators also hold a high view of Scripture, which resulted in their valuing fidelity to the text and loyalty to source text authors. As noted in the publication, “Our priority has been to maintain the accuracy of the translation and its faithfulness to the intended meaning of the biblical writers within a First Nations context” (First Nations Version 2021, ix).

The FNV NT translators identify the writers of the New Testament texts as first-century Christians working under the inspiration of the spirit of God, to whom they felt accountable. Members of the twelve-person translation council, who informed the translation’s style, methods, and key biblical terms renderings, reported being intimidated by the weight of responsibility they bore to do their work well. Unlike other translation projects, when translating the Bible, “you have to work within boundary lines that have been set by the Creator already, and those who were inspired to write this sacred text” (Wildman 2021d).

In regards to Nord’s criteria for loyalty to the original author of the text, Downie (2014) notes that Matt 28.18-20 licenses Bible translations intended for teaching and discipleship. The FNV NT translators thus demonstrated loyalty in that their evangelistic skopos aligned with the communicative intent of Jesus’s command to “go and make disciples of all nations … teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you” (NIV).

Additionally, translators expressed a particular attentiveness to the divine spirit of the source text, with whom they perceived having a dynamic, personal connection. When one translator’s mother, a residential school survivor, characterized the Bible as “just letters and numbers on paper to me,” the translator recalled, “her words feeling like somebody was stabbing me in the heart because I had grown to have this precious relationship with the Scriptures.” While working on the FNV NT this relationship imbued her with a strong commitment to “Scriptural integrity,” and she described her translation choices as being guided by the question, “Does this bring the person closer to what the Scripture is supposed to say, or does it take them farther away?”

Translators employed a grammatical-historical exegetical method and relied on a cadre of translation reviewers to pursue accuracy in their work. During his early years in contextualized Native ministry, under the mentorship of Richard Twiss, Wildman had learned the importance of ensuring one understands the meaning of a Scripture passage correctly, in the context in which it was written, before attempting to share it with others (Wildman 2021e). Wildman described the art of navigating competing loyalties and values in Bible translation this way:

First of all, you have to hold the highest regard for Scripture—the highest regard. But at the same time, you have to hold a high regard for culture. And you have to find how to balance those two things. Because if you only consider the literal words from the Greek and not culture, then you’re probably not going to communicate within another culture the way you should. Or, if you focus too much on culture, then you can lose the meaning of the Scripture. And you can lose the message in there. So you navigate that road with those two things on your banks: sacred text and culture. (Wildman 2021d)

In practice, Wildman would read a passage of Scripture several times in several different English translations. If he saw significant differences in interpretation, he would do further research in Logos Bible software to find the uses of the Greek lemma in question or the perspectives of different commentaries. Eventually, Wildman discovered the UBS Translator’s Handbook series and relied almost exclusively on it for summaries of significant interpretations of a verse, linguistic insights, sociohistorical background information, and suggestions for translation into different languages and cultures. Throughout the process, he also drew on prior scholarship from Indigenous theologians and dialogue with other First Nations people to inform his renderings.

Wildman then shared completed translation drafts with translation council members and other reviewers of Native North American background, who were given instructions to “compare the draft to a favorite Bible, ​verse by verse, as it is read through” to ensure accuracy. After Wildman adjusted the translation based on reviewers’ feedback, a translation consultant from OneBook would also check the work and offer comments with an eye toward exegetical accuracy, clarity, and naturalness.

Evangelical institutions

Ideology in translation is not only reflected in textual choices, but also in partnerships and processes. Similarly, evangelicalism in North America has as much to do with social networks as it does with personal beliefs. Wildman laments an “‘out of sight, out of mind’ mentality” that marginalizes Native Americans in Christian circles, the result of government policies of assimilation and displacement (Wildman 2022c). Yet he sees in 1 Cor 12 an affirmation that God has given Native Americans unique gifts for building up the Church, and he believes that the FNV NT is one such contribution. Thus, to increase the legitimacy of the FNV NT within a complex internecine landscape, Wildman entered two key partnerships: the first with Canadian Bible translation organization OneBook and the second with publisher InterVarsity Press.

As trusted authorities in the Bible translation movement, OneBook could give both Wildman and the public confidence in the quality of his translation. Under their agreement, FNV NT translators retained full control over the text but received direct funding and technical expertise from OneBook. ⁵ The FNV NT preface draws on the political capital of its translation consultant, describing him as: “the former head of Wycliffe Canada and founder of OneBook Canada, with over fifty years of biblical translation experience with indigenous cultures” (First Nations Version 2021, xi). Cognizant of Wildman’s desire to reach a wider audience—and impressed by the careful exegesis and thoughtful renderings he found in a verse-by-verse review of the text—it was the OneBook consultant who insisted that the FNV NT qualified as a dynamic-equivalence translation and should not be described using the more ideologically-charged term “paraphrase” (Wildman, personal interview, October 17, 2024).

Wildman connected with InterVarsity Press (IVP), whose origins lie in the modern evangelical movement, when its sister ministry Native InterVarsity began using drafts of the FNV NT in student Bible studies. The editorial philosophy voiced by IVP’s associate editorial director for trade books, “to help give voice to underrepresented voices and perspectives” (personal interview) aligned well with Wildman’s own vision. Internal publicity materials prepared by IVP reflect this commitment to diversity in stating that existing English Bible translations “may have missed some things in Scripture because of white Western lenses such as individualism or rational conceptuality.” Wildman has publicly praised the publishing team for giving the FNV NT a platform to contribute to the Church without altering the content of its message (Wildman 2021d).

Contextualization

The FNV NT translators’ affirmation of Indigenous perspectives is demonstrated in their efforts to contextualize much of the source text, incorporating Native settings and material culture into the translation and bridging similarities between their traditional practices and those of the first-century Greco-Roman world.

At 1 Cor 11.5-6, the FNV NT adds an explanation relating Paul’s concern over women’s head coverings to “some of our Native cultures in which women are not permitted to sit at the drum with men or to dance in the circle without wearing a shawl. It would bring shame to her and her husband or to the sacred family.” Luke 1.52 uses war practices from Plains tribes to convey how God humbles the mighty and lifts up the humble: “He counts coup with arrogant warrior chiefs but puts a headdress of honor on the ones with humble hearts.” A footnote explains the culturally specific practice of “touching an enemy with a coup stick as an act of courage during battle, to show he could have killed him but chose to spare him instead” and subsequently marking a notch on the stick to count each victory. An allusion to the forced displacement of Native Americans can be found in the beatitudes of Matt 5.4: “Creator’s blessing rests on the ones who walk a trail of tears, for he will wipe the tears from their eyes and comfort them.” For some, the Trail of Tears is a painful part of their personal family history, and the translation choice reflects the translators’ desire to connect Native readers with Jesus’ teachings.

Indigenous naming practices

Because of their cultural significance, the way proper names are translated is an indicator of the “ideological and pragmatic positioning of a translated text” (Tymoczko 2014, 242) . In Native American societies, people may be bestowed a new name at a ceremony later in life, which is then proclaimed in all four cardinal directions as an identification of the recipient’s purpose (Wildman 2021c). Wildman sees names performing a similar function throughout the biblical narrative and thus chose to translate the meaning of each person and place name in the New Testament, rather than transliterate them, as a way of indirectly affirming the value God places on Native identities.

Wildman researched the Greek and/or Hebrew form of each name to identify components of meaning to use in translating them. For example, Ἰακώβ is rendered Heel Grabber, because Gen 25.26 indicates that he was born grasping his twin brother’s heel. Ἱεροσόλυµα is Sacred Village of Peace from the traditional interpretation of its Hebrew counterpart as “city of peace.” Μαρία the mother of Jesus is Bitter Tears, because the name’s Hebrew counterpart is derived from a word meaning “bitterness.” Based on community feedback and testing, the published FNV NT also includes familiar English names in smaller print in parentheses for ease of reference, for example: Stands on the Rock (Peter).

The FNV NT’s rendering of Ἰησοῦς as “Creator Sets Free,” which Wildman has used in FNV products since 2013, reflects his own theology and interpretation of Scripture. According to Wildman, he derived this translation from the Greek name’s Hebrew counterpart, יֵשׁוּעַ. The first half refers to the name of God and is rendered “Creator,” a common term Indigenous peoples use to refer to the supreme being and giver of life. The second half derives from a verb the FNV NT glossary defines as meaning “to rescue, deliver, save, or simply set free” (First Nations Version 2021, 477). Wildman’s choice to use “sets free” resonates with the freedom he sees proclaimed in New Testament descriptions of salvation as release from “being in bondage and oppression, whether it’s physical, spiritual, or emotional” (Wildman, personal interview, October 17, 2024). In contrast, he eschewed rendering the verb “saves” out of concern that “being saved” is often narrowly interpreted to mean “the way you get to heaven when you die” and can evoke negative images of a burning lake of fire intended to coerce heathens into converting to Christianity—quite the opposite of freedom (Wildman, personal interview, October 17, 2024).

Native epistemology and pedagogy

One distinctive of the FNV NT is that translators used linguistic “overcoding” (Tymoczko 2014, 243) to “present, in writing, the cadence and feel of an oral storyteller” (First Nations Version 2021, x). As the FNV NT preface notes, “Many of our Native tribes still resonate with the cultural and linguistic thought patterns found in their original tongues” (ix). Using a storytelling style draws a parallel between the wisdom contained in the Scriptures and that which is preserved and transmitted through storytelling by experienced elders in Native societies (see Archibald 2008; Woodley 2022b, 44–45).

Wildman read texts by Native elders like Black Elk and Chief Seattle, in English translation, to adopt the beauty and simplicity of their speech style. Just as Native storytellers “would draw from history, from tradition, from experience” and “use words that were meaningful currently to the listeners” while ensuring “that that essence—the meaning of that story—is unchanged” (Wildman 2022a), the FNV NT occasionally inserts narrative exposition, marked by italics, between verses. For example, at Mark 5.30 the emotion and significance of the healing of the bleeding woman is heightened by the added statement, “Fear gripped the heart of this woman, for she had not announced herself as unclean, and even worse, she had touched a spiritual leader. The crowd might turn against her or even have her stoned to death. So she remained silent and said nothing.” Wildman considers the FNV NT’s storytelling style to have biblical precedence in the four gospels, whose authors sometimes give identical accounts and other times reorder events or emphasize details “in different but complementary ways to fit the purpose of their telling” (Wildman 2022a).

Aware of the potential pitfalls of adopting an elder storytelling register, the translators made a conscious “effort to refrain from a stereotypical or culturally degrading simplicity” (x). Whether they succeeded or not is open to debate. Some First Nations scholars have critiqued the language of the FNV NT as being potentially harmful and “deepen[ing] racial stereotypes” (Brokenleg 2025). Even those who personally view it favorably recognize that others in the community may find the elder register too reminiscent of a “Hollywood Indian” caricature (Hoklotubbe in Longhurst 2024). As one strategy to preempt such concerns, translators employed an extensive community testing process. Years before he committed to translating the entire New Testament, Wildman and his wife recorded a panorama of biblical stories in the FNV style called The Great Story from the Sacred Book. It was awarded Best Spoken Word Album at the 2009 Native American Music Awards, which Wildman interpreted as confirmation that the language of the FNV was acceptable to the broader, non-Christian Native American public. For the New Testament, Wildman produced the first draft of each book, and a minimum of four readers—including translation council members and additional First Nations reviewers representing a diversity of ages, genders, tribes, geographies, and denominational traditions—provided feedback, which was then incorporated into the translation. ⁷ Additionally “about [three] hundred draft versions of Luke were printed and distributed to Native churches, leaders and many others both in Canada and the United States, asking for review and feedback” (First Nations Version 2021, xii). ⁸ Wildman estimates that 5–10% of responses were negative, mostly taking issue with the translation’s skopos. Concerning the perception of non-Native readers, however, it is perhaps unavoidable that those whose shared cognitive environment with FNV NT translators is small may misinterpret the text, just as some in the target audience have historically misinterpreted English Bible translations.

English language policy

The FNV NT describes its unique version of English as the translators’ attempt to present “the traditional heart language” of English-speaking Native North Americans (First Nations Version 2021, ix). As a result of government policies, particularly residential schooling, today “over 90 percent of First Nations people do not speak their tribal language” (x). One translator recounted the decision his grandmother made to not teach her children their language as a brutally pragmatic one: “She said, ‘People’s kids who speak Indian, they don’t make it. And I wanted my kids to make it.’”

Widespread use of English has also facilitated exchanges of traditions and teachings, and greater political cooperation, between Nations. Translators “hope that the colonial language that was forced upon us can now serve our people in a good way, by presenting Creator Sets Free (Jesus) in a more culturally relevant context” (First Nations Version 2021, x). While the FNV NT arose to meet practical ministry needs, as an English language translation made by and for Native peoples it represents an act of resistance against assimilationist forces.

The English wording of the FNV NT has, however, been criticized by some for failing to represent all First Nations in North America. Indigenous scholars increasingly ground their research in specific locations, recognizing that while Nations may share broad similarities, the place on which each community is situated gives rise to a unique culture, history, and worldview—which by extension makes a truly “pan-Native” language impossible (Kovach 2021, 38; Tuck and McKenzie 2015). As one example of cultural specificity in the FNV NT, Shari Russell (Saulteaux), ordained Officer in the Salvation Army and director of NAIITS: An Indigenous Learning Community, cites the four gospels’ description of Jesus’ triumphal entry riding a donkey over “buffalo robes” (italics in original distinguish translator additions from the text of Scripture) (Longhurst 2024). Buffalo live on the Plains and would be foreign to caribou-centered cultures in the subarctic or fishing communities on the coasts.

In response, FNV NT translators say their work is meant to function alongside long-term efforts towards language revitalization in First Nations communities that could eventually support new, Indigenous-language translations of Scripture. One translator believes that “the First Nations Version will probably prompt some Indigenous people to say, ‘I really feel like it’s okay to begin to learn what my Native language is and how that works. I believe it’s okay to become more proud of my indigeneity.’ Whereas before it was always a sense of shame and condemnation within the white, Western Christian Church.” The translators’ attempt to use wording understandable to a broad cross-section of Native North American peoples was designed to catalyze the development of more culturally-specific expressions of Christianity in the future. According to Wildman, “We see [the FNV] as an in-between stop-gap, something that can be used [alongside] other language translations to help our Native people reconnect culturally, because language is embedded in culture. When you lose culture and language, it’s pretty devastating to understanding who you are as a person and where you belong in a society” (Wildman 2022e).

Colonial Christian teachings

To help their target audience better access the meaning of the source text, translators felt it was essential to decolonize key New Testament terms, removing Western colonial and theological biases from Scripture by choosing alternative translations free of such connotations.

For example, the FNV NT does not use the word “sin” to translate ἁµαρτία because Christian missionaries and educators have long equated “sin” with Native identity and culture. One translator explained, “At the boarding schools, my grandma and a lot of our elders were told that everything about us was a sin. Our hair was a sin, our languages were sin, [down] to every single little thing.” To avoid misunderstanding, FNV NT translators conducted a word study of ἁµαρτία and determined it means “‘to miss the mark’ or ‘to fail to do what is right’—in other words, not living in the ways Creator wants us to live” (First Nations Version 2021, 475). They decided the renderings “bad hearts,” “broken ways,” and/or “wrongdoings,” would most accurately convey that concept, depending on the context.

Another problematic term was βασιλεία τοῦ θεοῦ due to the imperialistic overtones present in its typical English translation, “kingdom of God.” Wildman wanted to distance the phrase from being associated with land seizures and broken treaties, which have tainted First Nations history. From his perspective, “Jesus actually gave us a totally new idea of what his kingdom would be about. He did use the word basileia which … could be translated Creator’s or God’s government, the way he governs, the way he watches over us, the way he guides us and leads us” (Wildman 2021e). The FNV NT translators settled on the rendering “Creator’s good road,” based on the scholarship of Osage theologian George Tinker (2004, 91–99). The “good way” or “red road” is a concept shared across many Native North American communities referring to “a way of life that seeks to live in harmony with the Great Spirit’s plan for all of creation,” similar to the Hebrew concept of shalom (First Nations Version 2021, 478; see Woodley 2012).

Given the atrocities committed against Native American peoples at the hands of the Church, translating ἐκκλησία posed another challenge. Wildman observes that the New Testament church is neither a building nor an institution, but rather a community of Jesus followers. God is “calling us out of the world to get together and to be about following Creator Sets Free and learning and communicating with each other about how we’re going to do that” (Wildman 2021e). Drawing on the basic social unit familiar to anyone in a collectivist society, the FNV NT renders ἐκκλησία “sacred family.”

Loyalty to readers

FNV NT translators largely satisfied Nord’s criteria for loyalty to readers by declaring the translation’s decolonial and evangelistic purposes in its front matter. Translators could also better anticipate the expectations of their readers by virtue of belonging to the same communities as their target audience.

Wildman notes that the actions of those who brought the Bible to Indigenous peoples and later used it to justify emotional, spiritual, physical, and environmental harm against them have created an antipathy if not outright suspicion of Christianity within the community: “Native people, traditionally, we don’t just listen to the story; we evaluate the storyteller. And if the storyteller isn’t consistent with the story, then we don’t believe the story, or we look at the story differently” (Wildman 2021b). Hence the need for a new, grassroots translation made entirely “by Native people, for Native people” (Wildman 2022d). Wildman draws on biblical imagery to describe the need to displace white, Euro-American Bible translators:

When you take what I believe to be a very beautiful message from a very spiritual man—Creator Sets Free (Jesus)—and force it on people, you destroy the message. What we’ve seen is a message that has been warped, bent, twisted for political purposes. I think today we are reaping the results of what goes way back. You know, we have to get to the root to deal with the problem. People are trying to trim back the tree, but the roots are still embedded in the wrong things. What did John the Baptist ([Gift of] Goodwill) say? “The Creator is laying the axe to the root of the tree.” So I think it’s important that we get to the root. (Wildman 2022b)

The FNV website specifies that, while a OneBook consultant posed translation questions and offered exegetical advice, and InterVarsity Press provided copyediting services, final decisions regarding the text remained in the hands of Native translators.

Further strengthening the FNV NT translators’ loyalty to readers is their widespread distribution of early drafts and solicitation of input from community members throughout the development of the translation, as previously described. Prior to officially beginning work on the New Testament, Wildman traveled across North America preaching to Native audiences through Rain Ministries and reading Scripture passages in the FNV style, assessing their response and asking for suggestions on how the wording could be improved. FNV NT council members and reviewers praised Wildman’s collaborative working style and noted that he considered alternatives carefully. One translator recounted an instance in which disagreement arose over whether it was appropriate to translate ἄρτος as “fry bread.” Over a lengthy instant messaging thread, advocates for “fry bread” argued the specificity was more culturally-relevant to a Native audience. However, critics pointed out that fry bread only became a staple food for First Nations peoples during a time of genocide, when the government provided minimal rations like flour and water but no milk or eggs. In counterpoint, another reviewer noted Native American activist Mark Charles’s practice of serving fry bread at Communion on the basis that it “connect[s] our suffering to Jesus’s suffering” (Wildman, personal interview, October 17, 2024). After extended debate, Wildman decided to use “fry bread” in the context of the Eucharist (e.g., 1 Cor 11.23-26) and “bread” for the metaphor “bread of life” (John 6.35).

The communal discernment modeled in the FNV NT translation process reflects the translators’ collectivist orientation, a societal value which considers the needs of others and prioritizes what is best for the entire community. It stands in contrast to Western tendencies to individualize faith, which can lead to distorted interpretations of Scripture—texts which were originally written to, and meant to be interpreted in, community (Woodley 2022a, 83).

Lest the FNV NT be considered a soft form of colonialism, Wildman characterizes the publication as merely an offer of spiritual teaching to people who have traditionally been interested in learning from other cultures and who are highly attentive to the spirit world (Wildman 2022d). Translators hope that their work will increase Indigenous people’s agency by giving them fresh access to the biblical message and the freedom to respond, unlike past English translations which have been used to force their conversion. As Wildman puts it, “They can decide through the Scripture itself who this man Creator Sets Free is. Is he truly this wonderful medicine man who brought good medicine to all people on earth?” (Wildman 2022a).

A significant ethical weakness of the FNV NT is that it falls short in its loyalty to First Nations readers in Canada. The name of the translation, “First Nations Version,” adopts a term “mostly used in Canada for the original inhabitants of the land” (First Nations Version 2021, x). Wildman chose it because the more common moniker south of the border, “Native Americans,” excludes those farther north, whereas “First Nations” is increasing in popularity among Indigenous peoples worldwide and could give the FNV NT “a more open readership” (Wildman, personal interview, October 17, 2024). However, Wildman was unable to secure representation from a First Nations person in Canada for the translation council, although some did participate in the review process. This discrepancy is not made explicit to readers, as Nord would recommend, but instead betrays itself in the cultural specificity of the translated text, as in the “buffalo robes” example previously mentioned. In my work as a Bible translation consultant in Canada, I have found that the more remote and farther north or west the First Nations community, the less the FNV NT resonates. Some immediately associate its verbiage with “the South” or “Plains” Nations and—while respecting the efforts and perspective of the translators—feel it would have been more appropriate to identify the translation as such. Others are suspicious of the translators’ motives and wary of the text due to its perceived inauthenticity.