Tools, Part1: Which Translation of the Bible Should I Use?

-
(This article was originally written for my local newspaper.)

Our last Soli Deo Gloria article talked about the original languages of the Bible, and it promised a longer look at English translations.  This article will attempt to guide the reader toward a Bible translation that is just right for a given situation.  A book that gives us information on how to get to heaven and how to live our lives on Earth the way God wants us to is a book that should be translated carefully.

There are two basic approaches to Bible translation: formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence.  Formal equivalence attempts to translate each word in the original language by an English word whose meaning is very close.  This is a ‘word-for-word’ translation approach that places the importance on the meanings of each individual word. 

The dynamic equivalence approach attempts to translate the thoughts of the authors into English.  This ‘thought-for-thought’ approach attempts to understand the idea of the original author and express that idea in easy to understand terms.  This approach yields a Bible that is easy to understand, but the original author’s idea is interpreted by the method of translation.  The reader does not understand the words so much as the translator’s understanding of the words. 

Bible translations fall somewhere along a scale between these two approaches.  The New American Standard Bible and the English Standard Version follow a more formal equivalence approach.  The King James and New King James fall somewhere in the middle.  The New International Version and the New Living Translation lean toward the dynamic equivalence approach. 

The ‘paraphrase’ is ultimate expression of the dynamic equivalence approach.  A paraphrase translates ‘idea-for-idea’ in such a way as to make the translator’s idea of the meaning easy to understand.  Famous paraphrases include The Living Bible and The Message.

These paraphrases have limited use.  They can mislead someone because there are not very precise.  Some ideas are difficult to translate, and a more ‘word-for-word’ translation will yield slight differences in meaning that a paraphrase will completely ‘gloss over.’ 

My favorite Bible for everyday use is a large-print English Standard Version translation.  It gives me the strengths of a formal equivalence approach without being as difficult to read as an even more ‘word for word’ translation like the New American Standard Version.  I have a reliable text that is great for in-depth study.  I heartily recommend this translation for your use.

Whichever version you select, there are many other tools available to help us understand the meaning of the Bible.  Our next Soli Deo Gloria article will look at some of these tools.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Face of Terror

-
Osama Bin laden is dead. Since the rest of the internet is buzzing with opinions on that death, I thought I would weigh in. First, this is not the end of global terrorism. Like the Hydra of old, when one head is chopped off, two more take its place. We still need diligence in our fight against global terror. U. S. and allied Armed Forces still need our prayers. We still need a strong military and intelligence community. We have not yet cut off the Hydra’s immortal head. Second, the way to get to the ‘heart of the matter’ is with Christian missionary efforts. We must reach the people who make up those societies and population segments that produce terrorists . To tell a story I have told here before : Early in the twentieth century, Baptist evangelists preached through rural Mississippi and Alabama with such effectiveness that moonshiners could no longer sell their whiskey: All their customers were getting converted! In desperation, the whiskey sellers hired two men to murder on...
Read more

The Canons of Dort

-
I believe that the Canons of Dort are true. This is a statement that came out the Synod of Dort, held from 1618-1619. The Canons of Dort outline the system of theology known today as the “five points of Calvinism.” The problem I have with most “five-point Calvinists” is that the Canons of Dort contain much more than five points. Many explanations of the TULIP (total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace and the perseverance of the saints) are gross simplifications of the Canons of Dort. [This is especially true of explanations given by those who oppose Calvinism. It is easier to knock down a straw man than it is to knock down a real man, and so it is easier to criticize an oversimplified Calvinism that the more robust form.] Some of those who teach the “five points” leave out some of the quotes below: This death of God's Son is the only and entirely complete sacrifice and satisfaction for sins; it is of infinite value and worth, more than ...
Read more

Intelligent Design

-
The Intelligent Design (ID) movement makes much of the argument from irreducible complexity. Dr. Michael Behe has become famous for a simple example, the mousetrap. He points out that the mousetrap will not perform its function without all of its parts. The wooden base, the metal hammer, a spring, a catch and a metal bar to hold back the hammer are all necessary parts. One component by itself will not catch a mouse. Mainstream evolutionary science has a counter-argument. To paraphrase Dr. Kenneth Miller, if you disassemble the mousetrap, each component can serve as something useful on its own. If we take away the catch and metal bar, we have something left that can serve as a paper clip. The spring could make a simple two-section key chain. The wooden base makes a paperweight. Evolutionary processes like random mutation and natural selection can combine and retain the useful parts as the complicated evolves to perform the complex function. The useful parts are combined into the mousetr...
Read more