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 the
m 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.
