Friday, February 18, 2011

Bible Translations and Young Preachers

     I am frequently asked by young preachers, "Which translation do you
recommend that I use in my preaching?"  This  is a  great question and  it
comes  from  young  men  who  are  conscientious  about  their  work as
servants  of  the most  high God. It indicates that they want to use the best
texts available in their study, teaching, and life application. First, we must
lay some groundwork.

     No translation of the sacred scriptures is without flaws. All of them were
translated by human beings, and they reflect the background, training, and
deficiencies of the hands that made them. Therefore, do not go on the hunt
for the perfect translation. It's not out there.

     I strongly  believe  preachers  should  use more  than one translation for
study. The "backbone" translation should be one of the modified-literal texts.
Why?  The  modified-literal  translations  will  stay  close  to  the  Hebrew,
Aramaic, and Greek texts. They will give you some idea of what is going on
in the original text. Simply put, if you do not have any background in Hebrew
and Greek, modified-literal versions will get you as close as possible to those
languages short of studying the original languages of scripture. Another reason
for using versions of this kind is the fact that those of us who believe in the
verbal inspiration of scripture, put emphasis on the very words of the text.
(1 Cor. 2:13) Most modified-literal versions try to bring as much from the
original languages into English as possible.

     The reigning "king" of the modified-literal versions is the ASV-1901. In
my judgment, it edges out the NASB most of the time. The NASB is based
on a slightly better text, and uses a more modern vocabulary, but many times
the best translation in the NASB is found in the footnotes! I have found this
to be true quite often. The NASB's strength is in the fact that it attempts to
show  "verbal action,"  but  that  is not all there is to accuracy in translation.
Many  times  this  becomes  artificial  and  is  often inconsistently executed.
Nevertheless, if a person cannot find a usable copy of the ASV, the NASB
is probably a good alternative.

     There  are  translations  that  stand between the very literal ASV and the
so-called dynamic equivalent versions. This middle ground is occupied by the
RSV, ESV, NRSV, and the HCSB. On the whole the ESV is probably the
best though the NRSV is not too far behind. The main flaw of the NRSV is
its   attempt   to   be  "gender  inclusive"  which   sometimes   causes  it    to
butcher English and change the text. The  RSV  is  not  as  bad  as  is  often
alleged.

     There are also versions that are "dynamic equivalent" or more idiomatic
in  their  approach  to  translating  God's  word. There  is a place for such
translations. They often  complement  the  more  literal  versions. They are
usually  easy  to  read  and  can  open  the  door  to good  exegesis  and
understanding.  The   New   International   Version   (NIV),  New  Living
Translation (NLT), and Today's  New  International Version  (TNIV) fall
into this category.

     Young  preachers  would  do  well  to have copies of the ASV, RSV,
NASB,  NIV,  ESV,  NRSV, and TNIV  in  their  library.  They  should
diligently  study  and  compare  them.  By  doing  so, they  will  have the
benefits of broad based scholarship. Learn  to  note the differences among
them and ask "Why do they differ?" Do your research in order to determine
the  reasons for the disparity  in  their  renderings. If  you  will  use  several
translations in your study, they will serve to "balance and counter balance"
each other. The best all-around version is probably the ESV. It is basically
the RSV updated and sometimes corrected by conservative scholars.
                                                                                                         RD

Copyright 2011

No comments:

Post a Comment