When it comes to Bible translation does it really come down to using a so-called word-for-word method? First of all,I don't think it's possible most of the time.Also,I think the old adage about seeing the trees but missing the entire forest can be applied to those who hold to w-f-w.They focus on the individual words to the extent that the meaning may be obscured. Sometimes those with the best intentions are w-f-w advocates. They believe that it is the only God-honoring way to translate.I believe they are sincerely wrong. I think sentence-for-sentence, or phrase-for-phrase is a better way to approach the text.Apparently I am not alone in my belief. Wycliff's second version ( he had died 12 years prior),Luther's version ( many editions in his lifetime) and other worthy Bible translations used sense-for-sense.Word units are too small to work from alone -- in isolation from the context of the surounding sentences. Versions which are advertised as being w-f-w such as the ESV do not live up to their billing anyway.Non w-f-w translations like TNIV use basically the same translational style.The w-f-w hype is just that.