Thanks for the input, Lance. It is always good to
hear some thoughtful discourse on the different translations.
Am
I correct in understanding that you object to my statement that the KJV
is the "best" translation? Do you mind if I ask why?
Evaluating the New International
Version
Before we look at any
of the "modern" Bible translations, it is important to understand some
important concepts & principles of linguistics and
translation.
Important Concepts in Bible
Translation
Before we
begin looking at various Bible translations, there are some important
concepts and principles that we need to consider and
understand.
Limits of Language
When we talk about translation, we must first realize that any
translation from one language to another has limits. All languages are
not arranged in the same way. In fact, most languages are arranged
differently.
Grammar: Each
language has its own grammatical rules. We cannot try to apply the
grammar rules of one language to another directly. In the work of
translating, the grammatical rules of each language must be
respected.
Semantic Range: The
meaning of words in one language may not have the same range of
meaning in another language (eg. - eros, agape, philos =
English "love")
Syntax: Syntax refers
to the structure of phrases. Each language has a different way of
putting sentences together. Some have verbs first and nouns second.
Some have the adjective before a noun while others place the
adjectives after the noun.
Literal (verbal
consistency) Some translations choose to translate the words of the
original language directly. The responsibility is therefore on the
reader to check out the meaning of the original word themselves.
Whether it is a form of measurement or an archaic word, those who
prefer to translate literally or word-for-word keep the exact word of
the text.
Idiomatic An
idiomatic translation attempts to make the meaning of the passage
clear, not just give a word-perfect translation. The idea here is that
rather than make you find out what how big a "cubit" is, the
translators give a modern measurement such as "feet" so that the
reader understands the meaning. The translators do the background
research into the ancient forms of measurement and provide a
conversion rate that is mathematically equivalent. This can not only
take place in relation to measurements and the like, but also can
apply to concepts. An idiomatic translation uses a dynamic (or
idiomatic) equivalent.
Note: We never want
to sacrifice historical accuracy (fidelity) for idiomatic _expression_.
For example, just because everyone might not have an understanding of
where Ephesus is located on a map, doesnt mean we change this word to
an equivalent like "Edmonton." Dynamic equivalents are only useful
when they do not change the accuracy of the passage. Our translations
must not add or delete anything from the original meaning just for the
sake of idioms.
Your choice of
literal vs. idiomatic is truly up to you in choosing a translation.
Neither method is right or wrong. It really is a matter of preference.
Some of you will prefer to do the research yourselves and keep the
literal translation. Others of you may figure that your time can be
better spent studying the text rather than researching the dynamic
equivalent.
There are various
reasons one may choose an idiomatic or literal translation. Here are
some:
1. Easy reading
there are some place where a literal translation is quite easy to read
and other places where a literal reading is almost non-sense because
we do not understand the meaning of the words (the words havent been
used for 400 years).
Example:
Matthew 3:15
"Thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness."
OR
"We do well to conform in this way with all that God
requires."
2. Easy understanding
the main reason that a dynamic equivalent would be used is to make
the meaning more clear. Again, rather than the reader having to try to
interpret the image, the translators have converted the word to a
modern equivalent that the reader can understand.
Example: 1
Chronicles 26:18
"...and for the parbar on the west there were four
at the road and two at the parbar."
"As for the court to the west,
there were four [guards] at the road and two at the court
itself."
3. Evangelistic
Most of our Bibles have "theological" terminology in them. Of course,
thats no surprise. The Bible is a book about theology. However, for
the non-Christian, terms like "justification" may not mean a whole lot
until they have had time to be taught the doctrines of the faith. Some
translations are written specifically so that unchurched people can
read and understand them, and so they use more idiomatic language
rather than literal.
Example:
Matthew 3:8
"Bear fruit that befits repentance."
"Do the things
that will show that you have turned from your sins."
4. Bible Study in
contrast to the evangelistic purposes, other translations are designed
more literally so that they can be used for serious Bible study. They
intentionally stick more literally to the text in the original form so
that the student of Scripture can study the Bible
themselves.
Example:
Ephesians 4:1-2 one sentence or two?
NOTE: See page Table
21.1 "Principles for Choosing a Bible" (Wegner, p. 398).
One final important
comment:
As much as possible, we should not thrust our theology
into our translation. The task of the translator is to represent the
accurate meaning of the text in the authors original intent. The task
of the translator is not to "correct" the writers theology.
Certainly, it is doubtful that a translation of one passage should
contradict the translation of another passage. However, that is an
issue of hermeneutics and exegesis, not an issue of translation. We
should not impose our theology upon our translation. Rather our
translation should accurately indicate that a certain theological
stance is indeed Biblical..
Evaluating the NIV
The New International
Version has become the most popular English Bible in the world. In
1965 committees from the Christian Reformed Church and the National
Association of Evangelicals met in Palos Heights, Illinois to consider
a new translation of the Bible in contemporary English. The Committee
on Bible Translation (CBT) was formed in 1966 comprised primarily of
Bible scholars from college, seminaries and universities from around
the world (USA, Canada, Great Britain, Australia and New Zealand) and
from a variety of denominations (Anglican, Assemblies of God, Baptist,
Brethern, Christian Reformed, Church of Christ, Evangelical Free,
Lutheran, Mennonite, Methodist, Nazarene, Presbyterian, Wesleyan and
others. The New York Bible Society underwrote the cost of the project.
The NIV was first published in 1973.
The CBT had certain
goals in mind for the NIV:
![bullet]() |
That it would be an
accurate translation (Accuracy) |
![bullet]() |
one that would have
clarity and literary quality and so prove suitable for public
and private reading, teaching, preaching, memorizing and
liturgical use. (Clarity, Beauty & Dignity)
|
The NIV was
intended to be a fairly idiomatic (as opposed to word-for-word)
translation.
As I see it, there is
only one major disadvantage to using the NIV, and this potential
problem is only expressed in some places, not all. The NIV is not a
particularly great English translation for serious Bible study. Dont
get me wrong. I still believe the NIV is a good and accurate
translation of the meaning of the original text of Scripture. It is
important to point out however, that for purposes of readability, the
NIV does compromise in a few places some important exegetical
features. The good student of the Word will do sufficient study and
research into the passage they are teaching or preaching on to find
the original sentence structure or grammatical features that are
important for exegesis. Thus, this is not a serious problem. However,
if one is doing mechanical layouts, for example, from the NIV, these
can be a poor representation of the original text. Most of these
difficulties come in the Pauline epistles where the NIV takes Pauls
inspired run-on sentences and puts them into two or three sentences
for obvious reasons of clarity. One of the best examples of this is
Ephesians 2:1-7 which in the Greek text is all one sentence, but in
the NIV is five sentences .
Examples:
Ephesians
4:1-3
The NIV translates the passage with three imperatives
(commands): 1) "Be completely humble and gentle, 2) be patient,
bearing with one another in love. 3) Make every
effort..."
The Greek text does
not actually have three commands, but rather one exhortation in verse
1 "live a life worthy of the calling you have received," followed by
four ways in which to achieve this instruction.. 1) being humble and
gentle, 2) being patient, 3) bearing with one another, 4) making every
effort to keep the unity of the Spirit..."
Another classic
example of this type of verb tense change is Jude 20-21.
Matthew
28:19-20
The NIV translation of The Great Commission begins
"Therefore, go and make disciples..." It appears that there are two
commands: "go" and "make disciples." While this is a possible reading
(imperatival participle), the grammatically preferable option is "As
you going, make disciples of all nations,..." This is not of
particularly great theological significance. Regardless of whether
"go" is an imperative or a participle, it is clear that "go"-ing is
part of the package of The Great Commission. However without careful
Bible study, the NIV could lead you astray in the grammatical
structure of the passage.
The word sarx
The word sarx is often translated in the NIV as "sinful
nature." Most of the times this is quite a good translation (eg.
Romans 8; Galatians 5). However, there are a few places in which the
concept of "sinful nature" may not really be the intent of the word
sarx. This word can also be translated as simply "flesh" (See 1
Corinthians 5:5). The translators have made interpretive decisions in
a few places that I personally would prefer to study and make
myself.
In conclusion, I
believe the NIV is a good English translation of the Scriptures for
use by all people. I personally would not use it alone for preparing a
sermon, Bible study, or any serious study of a passage. Nonetheless,
it is a useful translation that serves a valuable purpose in making
God's Word readable for all English speaking people.
