Bible Translations

Translations of the Old and New Testaments into English are invaluable tools for Bible study, especially for those who are not proficient in the original languages. However, it is important to understand the limitations of even the best versions of the Bible. There are no two languages in which words overlap perfectly.

The idea that a “perfect” translation of the Bible exists in English is wrong. Any attempt at a literal, word-for-word translation of the original languages of Scripture, whether Hebrew or Greek, will produce an unintelligible text in English. Besides the difficulty in finding the exact equivalent of a Hebrew or Greek word with all its nuances in English, there is also the challenge of syntax (word ordering). For example, a word-for-word, literal translation of James 3:3 would read, “If but of the horses the bridles into the mouths we put in order the to be persuaded them by us.”

Current English translations differ from formal to dynamic equivalence. Formal equivalence translations preserve more of the forms of the original language. The King James Version is a good example of formal equivalence, but it is not a literal translation. Dynamic (or functional) equivalence translations use words that seek to communicate the original intent in contemporary language rather than translating word-for-word.

On the extreme ends of the spectrum are Young’s Literal Translation and paraphrases like The Message Bible. Nineteenth-century scholar Robert Young, known for his concordance of the King James Version, produced his translation based on the premise that a word-by-word and tense-by-tense translation gets the reader closest to the inspired text. However, it is wrong to assume that form is the most important factor in reproducing meaning from one language to another. The ultimate goal of a translator should be communicating the intended meaning, not form. Paraphrases like The Message Bible, on the other hand, take too many liberties by introducing words that would have been unknown in the ancient world.

Bible students should read versions that stay within the spectrum of formal (KJV, ESV, NASB, NKJV, NRSV, etc) to dynamic equivalence (NIV, NLT, CEV, etc). A good example of the difference between formal and dynamic equivalence is found in Matthew 1:18, which speaks about Mary being pregnant with Jesus. Notice the differences between two translations. The King James Version provides a formal equivalent translation by saying that Mary was “found with child.” Notice how the NIV, on the other hand, moves toward a more dynamic, functional reading by saying that Mary was “found to be pregnant.”

Both styles of translation are helpful and should be used. For example, when translating idioms, a dynamic translation will be more effective in conveying the intended meaning. Imagine translating the idioms “raining cats and dogs” or “seeing the light” into another language. A literal, word-for-word rendering may miss the mark. In translation, it would be better to say it was raining hard (rather than “raining cats and dogs”) or understanding (rather than “seeing the light”).

Another example of how dynamic translations can be helpful is in the translation of wordplays (witty exploitation of the meanings and ambiguities of words). In Amos 8:1-2, it says, “This is what the Sovereign Lord showed me: a basket of ripe fruit. ‘What do you see, Amos?’ he asked. ‘A basket of ripe fruit,’ I answered. Then the Lord said to me, ‘The time is ripe for my people Israel; I will spare them no longer’” (NIV). Notice how the NIV repeats the word “ripe.” In the ESV, the same passage reads, “This is what the Lord God showed me: behold, a basket of summer fruit. And he said, “Amos, what do you see?” And I said, “A basket of summer fruit [קָ֑יִץ (qayiṣ)].” Then the Lord said to me, “The end [קֵּץ֙ (qēṣ)] has come upon my people Israel; I will never again pass by them” (ESV). The ESV provides a more literal translation of the Hebrew words קֵץ (qēṣ), which means “end,” and קַיִץ (qayiṣ), which means “summer" or “summer fruit.” These two words, though written slightly differently, were pronounced in almost the same way. The NIV, recognizing this play on words, translates both words as “ripe.”

Notice how the NIV translates Genesis 31:35: “Rachel said to her father, “Don’t be angry, my lord, that I cannot stand up in your presence; I’m having my period.” The ESV stays closer to the original by translating Rachel’s words as “the way of women is upon me” rather than “I’m having my period.” In Genesis 18:11, the ESV states that “the way of women had ceased to be with Sarah,” while the NIV states that “Sarah was past the age of childbearing.” In 2 Samuel 13:14, the ESV states that Ammon “violated” his sister. The NIV is more explicit in saying that “he raped her.”

So why do versions of the Bible differ in several passages? One reason is a different translation philosophy. Scholars also will often disagree over interpretation and choices concerning textual variants. It is important to note, however, that these differences deal more with nuances and normally don’t compromise the fundamental truths of the Christian faith.