Quantcast

Comments about ‘Bible publishing 101: Christianity Today Q&A explains process’

Return to article »

Published: Friday, May 31 2013 1:50 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Craig Clark
Boulder, CO

With all the Bible translations into more contemporary English that have been published in the past century and a half, it takes a hard to please individual who is unable to find one to his liking.

sharrona
layton, UT

RE: Craig Clark, "Which translation is best?"

Christians who are serious about studying the Bible need at least two translations. He should have at least one dynamic equivalence translation and one formal equivalence translation . In fact, it would be good to have two dynamic equivalence translations--because in this type of translation, the translator is also the interpreter. If his interpretation is correct, it can only clarify the meaning of the text; if it is incorrect, then it only clarifies the interpretation of the translator! Daniel B. Wallace.

1.Literal translation. Attempts to keep the exact words and phrases of the original. It is faithful to the original text, but sometimes hard to understand. Examples: (KJV), (NASB).

2.Dynamic equivalent (thought for thought) translation and updates the writing style and grammar. Examples: (NIV),(REB).

3.Free translation (paraphrase). Translates the ideas from the original text but without being constrained by the original words or language. Readable, but possibly not precise. Examples: (TLB), The Message

The KJV is based on the Textus Receptus,since then earlier a better(4th c) MSS have been discovered: Codex Vaticanus and codex Sinaiticus. Modern translations are helpful.

Craig Clark
Boulder, CO

Anyone who is serious about studying the Bible (Christian or not) is hopefully doing so to expand their understanding instead of merely finding reinforcement for what they already believe. They would benefit even more by considering one of the New Testament translations by Jewish scholars.

I have eight translations and I agree that modern translations are very helpful. I have a high regard for the Revised English Bible because of its secular scholarship and especially its broad inclusion of Catholic and Protestants across several denominations in an effort to avoid any sectarian bias. It’s also very readable.

sharrona
layton, UT

RE: Craig Clark, " I have eight translations and I agree that modern translations are very helpful”.
The N.T. was written in Greek and the advantage is you have Greek Apparatuses available in Christian book stores; i.e
(John 1:18 KJV)No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son(*monogenes), which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

(John 1:18 NLT)No one has ever seen God. But the unique One*, who is himself God, is near to the Father’s heart. He has revealed God to us.

John1:18 NET)No one has ever seen God. The only one,* himself God, who is in closest fellowship with the Father, has made God known.

The textual problem monogenes God=(“the only God”) versus ὁ monogenes son ,( “the only son)”. One letter would have differentiated the readings in the mss, since both words would have been contracted as nomina sacra.

Modern translation(older and better MS) and the KJV, Which translation is best?"

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments