Translations – So Many - So Choices (8.1)

A quick Google of the phrase, “Christian, bible, translation” and you find out that in modern time there has been many bible’s translation into English. What are we to do with all of these versions of the bible?

Which is the “best” ESV, NIV, NASB, NAACP? (the last one was a joke not a bible) Are their differences between translations of the Bible and can we have confidence what we are reading today conveys the meaning of the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts of we have of the bible.

A. The Spectrum of Translations

For started I will let Driskoll (or is it Driscoll) anyway MARKwill help us out with some background on the english bible.

The Old Testament was originally written in Hebrew (with a few passages in Aramaic) and the New Testament was written in Greek. While a knowledge of these languages can be helpful, modern translations of the Bible into English contain all that is needed to read, understand, study, and teach the full depth of God’s word. At this point it is good to note this post it is not about answering the question, “what is the best translation?” it is about “helping you understand the process of translation so you may skillfully use the translations you have.

There is a spectrum of English translations that largely fall between two methods of translation--Literal and Dynamic-Equivalent. While it needs to be noted that most major modern translations are not the result of a single translator but were compiled via large committees of scholars and contain few significant differences between the translations.

 i. The Two Schools of Translation

1. Literal interpretations method focus’ on a word for word style. It seeks to translate the Bible as closely to the original text as possible—thus its label as Literal. Translations from this method include the New American Standard Bible, the English Standard Version, and the Authorized (King James) Version.
2. Dynamic-equivalent translations attempt to translate idea-for-idea, rather than word-for-word, so that the passages articulate the message of a text in more readable English format. Dynamic-equivalent translations include the New International Version, New Living Translation, and the New English Version. In addition to the text itself, dynamic-equivalent translators consider the meaning of idiomatic expressions, the original author’s culture, and the nuances of the original languages to construct their translations.

ii. The point is to be wise and skillful in picking the translations for the context it will be used in. For example, I often give new disciples and teens the CEV (its English is on a middle school reading level and I cut my teeth on it – so it is helpful for people just needing to get the basics and may not be good readers. Today I read the EVS but I enjoy the Message (a loose paraphrase) for devotional reads. Each are helpful in their own way.

iii. Both methods have advantages and challenges

• Advantages of Literal Translations: Allows reader to get very close to the original Hebrew and Greek in form and meaning.
• Challenges with Literal Translations: Passages can be somewhat difficult to read due to differences in sentence structure and word order between English and the original languages,

For Example:

Literal: Genesis 4.1: “Now Adam knew Eve is wife, and she conceived and bore Cain” (ESV)

Dynamic-Equivalent: “Now Adam slept with his wife, Eve, and she became pregnant. When the time came, she gave birth to Cain” (NLT)

• Advantages of Dynamic-Equivalent Translations: Can provide a more “readable” translations that may encourage reading and study, as well as comprehension
• Challenges of Dynamic-Equivalent Translations: Occasionally, textual content is added or lost for readability, include linking words (particularly in Paul’s letters),

 Some Good point on paraphrasing (Extreme Dynamic-Equivalent) from John Piper.