Featured Dynamic Equivalence--Again!

One has to have those literal words to begin with in order to that if needed.

 

The literal words are in the original languages --not English.

 

One still has to begin with God's words and know it's literal meaning and original usage to translate from God's word.

 

Translators are not able to translate words 'literally.' They have to translate them according to their meaning in context.

 

Not always true. And in every case a translator must start with the original literal words.

 

"While one may appropriately speak of a primary sense of a word, this is very different from a literal meaning. A primary sense refers to the most common meaning... To call a primary sense the literal meaning, however, assumes the lexical fallacy that one sense of a lexeme governs or controls all others... This is a fallacy. It is context alone that determines which sense of a lexeme is intended within its semantic range." (Taken from Current Issues in the Gender-Language Debate, pgs. 133,134 by Mark Strauss --which is contained in the larger work of The Challenge Of Bible Translation)

 

In addition to JJ's lack of proof regarding Existentialism in any modern English translation he has not demonstrated anything concerning neo orthodoxy in any Bible translation.

It's funny. He cites Nida constantly, but can't document anything regarding all the evils supposedly out there in Bible translations.

His thesis has failed.

 

Perhaps the quality of some Bibles are not very accurate. Perhaps they are way below the quality of what people have seen in other versions.