Someone Teach Me About Translations

Wow...great questions.

The TNIV is short for the Today's New International Version. It is a recent retranslation of the NIV. It is available from Zondervan. Its a good dynamic/functional equivalence translation imho.

One resource that I might suggest off hand is to pick up a copy of both How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth and How to Choose a Translation for All Its Worth by Stuart & Fee.

I'm between flights and will try to get back with you soon. Thanks!

btw, this is a great thread but has potential for much evil from others' influences. We all should be on our mutual guards.

 

There are many here far more qualified than me on the subject... But here's my $1.49 (inflation )

All English versions are translations from Greek/Hebrew/Aramaic texts.

KJVO holds that the King James Bible is an inspired translation.

Modern Version proponents hold that the text under the KJV is not the most accurate and that discoveries since then have rendered it (for lack of better terms) obsolete.
Most also hold that the elizebethan english is to antiquated for the modern reader to grasp.


Not in depth, but hopefully a start in the right direction.

 

"Modern versions" are simply new translations of either the same text used for translating the KJV, or similar texts. There's not much difference between the various texts in reality.

Modern language usage has changed over the years, as has our knowledge of the archeology of the bible and its people and the customs of these people. in light of these two events newer translations have been made to bring the bible up to where we are in both language usage and in updating it with what we have learned.

Neither of these changes God's words, mind you. God's words are timeless and unchanging. Our words, however, are in a constant state of flux. What meant one thing a few years ago can mean something different today or have no meaning whatsoever. Translating is converting on language to another; in the case of the bible it is taking Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek (mostly) and bringing it over into modern English.

All true translations try to be as accurate as possible. The differences in the ways translations are done (dynamic or not) can have an impact on this, as a dynamic translation tries to use a thought for thought means rather than a word for word approach. Paraphrases are a whole other matter, though.

I don't have a problem with the KJV. I don't use it, as I speak modern English. I do use the NKJV a good bit, as well as the NASB and a few other translations.

 

I Like using the KJV and newer translations. In my opinion, when I study the Bible, I want to be able to try and best understand what God intended when He used the Holy Spirit to breath life into the originals. So I appreciate the value that translator notes and for that matter more than one translation gives me towards that end. It is like looking at a statue of a person. Being able to walk around all sides of him and get a better appreciation of what that person really looked like. Versus looking at just a painted portrait of that same person.

 

The TNIV should not be placed in the realm of dynamic-equivalent translations.It doesn't belong there.I already have done a couple of threads demonstrating that the TNIV has no affinity with the translational practices of the GNB (otherwise known as the GNT and TEV etc.)

In one of my threads I have shown the common ground that the TNIV shares with the NASBU.

The TNIV is a mediating version.It's essentially more formal with functionally-equivalent renderings when necessary. That is sometimes known as a 'modified-literal' approach. That represents a third category aside from just the dynamic and formally-equivalent philosophies.(I'm not counting paraphrases.)

The TNIV occupies the same turf as the HCSB,ISV and NET translations.Going back in time, the MLB is in the same grouping.

 

There's a book by Ron Rhodes that just came out:
The Complete Guide to Bible Translations: *How They Were Developed *Understanding Their Differences *Finding the Right One for You by Ron Rhodes (Paperback - Mar 1, 2009)

There's a difference between KJVO and those who prefer the King James or think it's the best translation. KJVO is very cultic - they believe the King James translation is inspired and usually believe that any other version is not God's word.

A good book on the KJVO issue - giving their views and refutations of it - is
King James Only Controversy, The: Can You Trust the Modern Translations? by James R. White (Paperback - Jun 1, 2009)

The above is a more recent edition - it first came out in 1995.

 

No Thank you! I read James' book and found many false comments in that book. I do not recommend it to anyone.

 

Askjo, assertions do not = proof. You have never given any documentation that Dr. White was wrong about anything in his book.But I'm glad you are on a first-name basis with him by calling him James.

I would certainly recommend his book, especially his latest edition which I shall soon get. Dr.White is knowledgeable about so many things -- he is a real blessing to the Church. Praise the Lord for his ministry.

 

Some books on the Bible translation issue by fundamentalists include the following:

God's Word Preserved: A Defense of Historic Separatist Definitions and Beliefs by Michael D. Sproul [Whetstone Precepts Press, Tempe, AZ]

One Bible Only? Examining Exclusive Claims for the King James Bible edited by Roy Beacham and Kevin Bauder [Kregel Publications, Grand Rapids, MI]

God's Word in Our Hands: The Bible Preserved for Us edited by James B. Williams and Randolph Shaylor [Ambassador, Greenville, SC]

The Unbound Scriptures: A Review of KJV-only Claims and Publications by Rick Norris [Unbound Scriptures Publications, Statesville, NC]

King James Onlyism: A New Sect by James D. Price

 

There were some differences in the various editions of the Textus Receptus from which the pre-1611 English Bibles and the KJV were translated. For example, some of the pre-1611 English Bibles did not have two verses [Mark 11:26 and Luke 17:36] because those verses were not found in the printed edition of the Textus Receptus from which they were translated. There are some modern English versions that are based on the same original language texts as the KJV such as the NKJV, the Modern KJV, the KJ21, the KJ2000.

 

Another poster posted the article against Dr. White and his book, but no one refuted it. I won't post a same article here AGAIN.

 

PreachJesus, If you've read the book you're recommending, then you know that the TNIV is not a dynamic/functional equivalence.

Unless you're depending on a difference source for your characterization of the TNIV.

 

Don't know why, but when I first looked at this post, I read this as "between fights" for some unknown reason.

Curious!

Ya' think it might just be the particular forum that caused me to initially mis-read it, in this manner??

Ed

 

Good luck. If they get wind that you are trying you might find yourself running for your life, or out on your ear.

One thing that turned me away from KJVO leanings were the teachings of great men of the word. Those who use the KJV would often stop and explain what a word means and give a better word (but not necessarily say "a better translation would be..."). But I noticed that many used a different bible than I did... theirs said the same thing but said so that I could readily understand it.

If you want to help shine a light to a KJVO crowd, give them a parallel passage from a different translation. Don't announce it, but read the KJV and then say, "Or something like this..." and give the parallel. If that sounds too risky, just use the key words or phrase. True, it won't be letting them know that you are using a different translation, but it will give them something they can use.

Some are so mired up in KJVO and the BS of it all that nothing will dynamite them out of it. I have met several who fall into this category. We have had some around here, too, but they usually don't last too long. They tend to hang themselves before long through slander and unChristlike attacks. Sad, but true.

Something else that might help would be to lend or give books by authors who use a different translation. Charles Stanley's books helped my wife see the value of other translations. She still uses her KJV, but whe will grab up another translation to better understand something.

 

Patience, my son, and not to worry!

Plenty of time left.

We are not yet off page 2. :tear:

The best response I ever saw, at least on the Baptist Board, was from one who had been preaching from a 'particular version' when someone said this:

"What kind of new Bible version are you preaching from? Mine doesn't say what you read."

He merely opened up and showed them his Greek NT, as the message was from the NT, that service. I believe he said that was the last thing he heard about what version he was using. :thumbs:

Ed

 

After checking this book, oh nooo!