Featured Article of the Week
"Translations of the Bible"

The Bible is the inspired word of God (2 Tim. 3:16 -17). Holy men spake as they were moved by the His Spirit to record His will for all humanity (1 Pet. 1:21 ), but they did so primarily in the Hebrew and Greek languages. So then, in order for the world to have access to the scriptures, they have been translated into various languages, including English. It is important for us to remember, however, that the men who have done the great work of translating the Bible have not been di-vinely inspired. They have been well-educated, but not "moved by the Holy Spirit." Therefore, it is incumbent upon each of us to investigate various translations and versions to ensure that we depend only upon those that have been accurately translated.

There is approved scriptural example for using translations of the scrip-tures. About 250 years before Jesus' birth, the Old Testament, originally writ-ten in Hebrew (and some Aramaic), was translated into the common Greek language. When the Grecian empire reigned, Jews were dispersed all throughout the empire and, over time, began to speak the Greek language more and more. Approximately 70 Jewish scholars produced the Septuagint, and it was read by many early Christians. Moreover, New Testament writers relied heavily on the Septuagint. The majority of Old Testament quotes cited in the New Testament are quoted directly from this Greek translation.

Since the early translation of the Old Testament into the Greek language, the Holy Scriptures have been translated into all of the world's major lan-guages. Today, there are a great number of translations (and versions) avail-able in the English language alone. The availability of so many translations can make the matter of choosing the right Bible for reading and/or studying somewhat more complicated than we would like. No matter which version one chooses, he or she should thoroughly research the history of both the translation and the translators and be prepared to use all available aids (e.g., concordances and lexicons) to ensure an accurate understanding of the au-thors˜ original meanings. There are several principles that will help the reader select and use translations effectively.

First, translations undertaken by large committees are usually more accurate than those done by individuals or small groups. The New World Translation, published by the "Jehovah's Witnesses," is a prime example of the dangers of small group translations. In order to advance their particular doctrine, the "translators" altered hundreds of scriptures. For example, in John 1:1, the NWT reads "the Word was a god." There is no manuscript in the entire world that in-serts an "a" before the word "God" in this verse and no other translation renders it this way. The "Jehovah's Witnesses" simply made it up. The more learned in-dividuals involved, the more likely they are to correct one another's mistakes.

Second, one must consider how the translation was made. Translators vary widely when bringing the original, inspired words into English. Some strive to translate the original text so that we can know, as accurately as possible, the words that were penned by the writers. However, others convey what they be-lieve the original words mean, even if it means completely restructuring the sen-tence or thought structure. Still others paraphrase what the original text says, which means adding commentary. Paraphrases are inherently less dependable because the writers simply say what they think the Bible means. This, by defini-tion, is a commentary and not a translation. These should be avoided as primary study Bibles.

Third, when deciding upon a Bible translation for one's primary study, one must consider the religious background of the translators. Some translations are produced for the sole purpose of placing some religious organization's doctrine in the text of the Bible itself. As a rule, when the translating committee is comprised of people from many different denominations, their translation is likely to be more accurate than it would be if the translators come from one denomination. When men have differing religious affiliations, they will be careful to ensure that their fellow translators do not improperly render a verse or pas-sage in a way that supports one denominational belief or another.

There are differing approaches to Bible translation and it is imperative that one understand which was employed in producing his or her translation. The basic methods are known as “formal equiva-lence” and “dynamic equivalence.” These approaches have different emphases on readability and literal faithfulness to the original text. However, no sharp boundary can be drawn between dynamic and formal equivalence. The approaches represent ends of a spectrum and, while all translations of the Bible fit within this spectrum, each is necessarily closer to one end or the other.

With the "formal equivalence" or "complete equivalence" method, translators attempt to render each word of the original language into the receptor language while preserving the original word order and sentence structure as much as possible. The goal is to preserve all of the information in the text and present it in good literary form so that the English text that is both accurate and readable. For example, the KJV truly renders the original text in expressions such as "lift up her voice, and wept" (Gen. 21:16); and "I also have given you cleanness of teeth" (Amos 4:6). Some of the wording may be awkward, but it is the closest English equivalent of the original-language text.

With the "dynamic equivalence" or "functional equivalence" method, the translators' goal is to produce the closest natural equivalent of the message ex-pressed by the original-language text. The biblical words and phrases are ren-dered in clear and contemporary English, according to the translators' under-standing, in order to increase reader comprehension. Such translations, also called “thought-for-thought translations” are a relatively modern phenome-non. The danger with them, of course, is that this method of translation neces-sarily results in paraphrases, which are the words of man, not God. It can be hard to distinguish between the two when depending upon these Bibles.