BiblesWhyDoPeopleContinueToProduceNewBibleTranslationsP62212.htm
Introduction. Then 14 Very
Informative Subheadings with Fact Informative LINKS within
Introduction
The above question is being asked countless times by people when a new Bible
translation or version comes on the market, or when they learn that there are
so many out there. What could possibly motivate someone to go to all the time,
trouble and expense of producing a new translation when there is such an
abundance of them already available? Rather than just one aim, perhaps some
translations are attempted with several objectives in mind. And some may simply
project a certain bias or bent, not even overtly stated or intended by the
translator. Of course, it would be a bit presumptuous for this writer to claim
to know why every person producing a translation did so. Fortunately, most
translations contain a Preface or Introduction which spells out the reason or
reasons for its features. Unfortunately, there is the very real possibility
that a few translations are produced to further a hidden doctrinal or
theological agenda held by the translator. Others seem to be produced for the
purpose of making a statement, whether political, theological or social. Let’s
look at some of the perceived reasons why people make Bible translations.
1. TO ACHIEVE ACCURACY WITH READABILITY R/in IFCS-AllCap
Undoubtedly, the most predominant reason has to do with the desire by the
translator(s) to produce a version that reflects an accurate, readable
rendition of the Hebrew and Greek texts into English. Of these, the two primary
approaches to translation are the “formal correspondence” method and the
“dynamic equivalence” method. The former, using literal wording to varying
degrees, attempts to present only the words of the Greek text, apart from
paraphrase or amplification (unless such words are placed in italics). The King
James Version, the American Standard Version the New American Standard Version
and the New King James Version are usually held to be prime examples of this
approach. The second method incorporates varying degrees of paraphrase in its
attempt to translate the thought or idea of the text. The word order of
sentences is often rearranged to comply with current ways of stating things.
Such versions in wide use today are The New International Version and The
Revised Standard Version.
Word changed
in Bibles BibleWordsCanTheyBeChanged--
If The Bibles
You Read Haven’t Restored the words
listed in BibleWordsChanged
Your Salvation is not secured-Open- Imitate. Read The-Best Bibles for Salvation Why 1Cor 4:6
The Best Bibles Give YOU a Better
Chance at Gaining Salvation. The last days have drawn near
and God is setting things straight in Bibles Translations
If you believe something that is
printed wrong YOU are being mislead and will not gain Salvation 1-Peter-3-15.htm
Now That We Are In The CommunicationsAge.htm--20.htm YOU
have FREE-WILL (We) Can ***Examine *** Everything Ourselves
Most Bible Readers do not know that a Version is not totally a Translation-- it
someone’s Version of their beliefs. Read The-Best Bibles
2. TO REMOVE OBSOLETE WORDING
With the passing of years, and the inevitable change in the English language,
there are those who periodically feel the need to update the language of
Scripture. Hundreds of words used in the King James Version no longer have
viable meanings to those living in the 21st century. One reference work I
consulted listed more than 400 such words (almug, amerce, alamoth, assupim,
bekah, calamus, choler, ciel, etc. No old words in The-Best Bibles
). So some translations substitute modern-day equivalents for such
archaic words. Translators are correct in assuming that few (if any) persons
reading the Bible containing such words would have the slightest idea of their
meaning. While such words may still appear in certain reference works, it
becomes a distinct deterrent to continuity and possibly even to understanding
for a person to have to look them up while reading the Bible. Most all 20th and
21st century translations have sought to update archaic and obsolete wording.
When
Did Christendom-Start Worshiping-The Trinity-R/in N-C-O-W2.htm
3. TO UTILIZE MODERN LANGUAGE
Besides the removal of obsolete words as a motive, there are numerous new words
that have entered the English language that some translators feel better
express the Biblical concepts than those used 50 to 100 years ago. Such
translations are usually dubbed “modern speech translations.” With the dawn of
the 20th century several of these became quite popular (The 20th Century NT, Moffatt,
θεόςfiguratively, a magistrate; by Hebraism, very Derivation: of uncertain affinity; a deity, especially
(with G3588) the supreme Divinity;
KJV Usage: X exceeding, God, GOD god(-ly, -ward). G3588 Godhead is unoriginal Open
http://www.greeknewtestament.com/B66C001.htm The SAD TRUTH is since the death of the Apostles several words in the original
hand written manuscripts have been changed—Note changes R/in IFCS--AllCaps (3) Nazarene
2000- 2000+- Open /46/015.php and nazarene-friends.org/about / contact shawn.miller@underfootinc.com (4) New World
Translation --NWT is 1950/1984 -NWT no built in Commentary Open- 33.htm Open- allexperts.
4. TO APPEAL TO A SUBCULTURE
Going beyond traditional slang words, these translations gear their message to
a specific subculture having its own peculiar terminology. The idea was that if
the Scriptures were made to speak the language of a certain group that would
not normally read the Bible, such language was acceptable. In the late 60’s, it
was Letters to Street Christians, which used such hippie language as “dig it,”
“turn on,” “Jesus trip,” and “right on.” A similar effort of that era was
Burke’s God is For Real, Man, and God is Beautiful,
5. TO EMPHASIZE DOCTRINAL DISTINCTIVES
While this may seem like an ulterior motive, some individuals have felt so
strongly about a particular Scriptural word or concept that they set about to
produce a translation which carefully incorporates what they feel was neglected
in other translations. This is true of the more than 44 ‘immersion’
translations. In place of “baptize,” or “baptism,” these versions use the word
“immerse” or some other word which conveys the idea of the candidate going
completely under the water. In this category may also be included those
versions which use a form of the tetragrammaton (Jehovah, Yehveh, Yahvah,
etc Open- 33.htm.). The New World Translation
emphasizes such words as “Jehovah,” “cutting-off,” and “impale,” in keeping
with Watchtower Society doctrine. Other versions are merely adaptations of
older translations, with “the proper term” for God’s name inserted (Restoration
of the Original Sacred Name Bible is based on
.
TO EMPHASIZE DOCTRINAL DISTINCTIVES imitate only the Doctrines approves by the
Apostle—All
other should be
foot-noted as only a mire possibility and an mental imaginary concept R/in DOCTRINEBuster1.htm and Life.htm
and C
6. TO ENHANCE PERSONAL DEVOTION
Some people have chosen to translate the Bible in order to enhance their personal
understanding of the Scriptures as part of their personal devotional life. By
having to grapple with the meaning of each verse or passage, they were able to
see the truth of God’s word unfold before them in a unique way. Some had little
or no interest in having the work published beyond a few copies distributed to
close friends and relatives. Jack J. Blanco’s, The Clear Word Bible, was
initially produced “to enrich [his] own spiritual life” as was this writer’s
effort with An Understandable Version. Some of these translations, though often
not of the caliber of those produced by committees of scholars, are eventually
produced in larger quantities for wider distribution, while others remain
obscure and are often in high demand by collectors because of their scarcity.
7. TO SIMPLIFY LANGUAGE
This group of translations is to be distinguished from the “modern speech”
translations. Where persons speak English as a second language, it is often the
case that they have a very limited vocabulary. Some versions have taken this
deficit into consideration by producing a translation using shorter and fewer
English words. S. H. Hooke
translated The New Testament in Basic English in 1941, based on a language
called “Basic English,” consisting of 850 words. He added 50 more special
“Bible words” plus another 100 to produce his translation. Gleason Ledyard and
his wife, while doing missionary work among the primitive Eskimos in the
Central Canadian Arctic in the 1940s, produced their New Life Testament to aid
these Indians in learning English and eventually in reading the Scriptures. Norlie’s, Simplified New
Testament uses simpler words and shorter sentences to appeal to teen-agers and
young people. Many other such translations have been geared to readers who find
the standard translations somewhat difficult to understand in places. TO SIMPLIFY LANGUAGE Open NSB
8. TO MAINTAIN EXACT LITERALNESS
Some translators, who take the position of “formal correspondence” to an extreme,
insist that the best version is the one that retains an exact word-for-word
translation of the original text, often using the same English word every time
its Greek counterpart appears. Some even follow the Greek word order, which
makes for very difficult reading in English. While such translations use
varying degrees of exact literalness, an early one that comes to mind is that
by Robert Young. Later came the Concordant Version by Knoch and in more recent times some of Jay Green’s
many translations. Interlinear word-for-word translations would fall into this
category as well.
TO
MAINTAIN EXACT LITERALNESS--Read The Literal/Free Dual Translation. Not Online Capel,V. 21st
9. TO INCORPORATE PERCEIVED INSIGHTS
Some persons entertain the notion that they have been in some way especially
endowed (inspired?) to alter or improve on the standard translations of their
day. Some insist that the original language of portions of the New Testament
was Aramaic (or Syriac),
and that only when one is familiar with such languages can they do an adequate
job of translating the text (Lamsa,
Torrey, Lewis). Others
claim some supernatural guidance or direction in their “translation” effort. Pershall states “I have been
given divine authority . . . to bring the true translation of the original
Greek text.” Greber states
that “the divine spirits” told him which Greek texts were correct, and when
none was found he “used the text as it was given to me by those spirits.” Of
course, it is well known that Joseph Smith doctored certain portions of the KJV
as he felt supernaturally led.
10. TO UTILIZE A PREFERRED GREEK TEXT
The school of thought that considers the Textus
Receptus to be the only accurate
Greek text insists that any translation made from other texts cannot possibly
be a true rendition of the Scriptures. Some translators developed their own
Greek text, based on the study of numerous manuscripts (
11. TO INCORPORATE GENDER-INCLUSIVE LANGUAGE
While the issue of gender-inclusive language is being dealt with in a wide
range of versions, and in varying degrees today (New Revised Standard Version,
New Century Version, Contemporary English Version, etc.) most versions of this
type simply use such language as “person” or “human being” for “man.” However,
there are several versions that seem to carry the principle far beyond these
versions. The New Testament of the Inclusive Language Bible uses “Parent” in
place of “Father” and “Sovereign” instead of “Lord”; The New Testament and
Psalms, An Inclusive Version reads “Our Father-Mother” in the Lord’s Prayer
(Matt. 6:9). Such versions open themselves up to accusations of being
influenced by advocates of the radical feminist movement.
The King
James Version is Undoubtedly the Most Inaccurate English New Testament in Common Use Today...R/in KJV.htm
It explains Textus Receptus
and Other important Facts.
In the
beginning there was the Word. The Word was with The God (gr. Ton Theon) and the Word was
John 1:1.The R/in Word
was God, intentionally Fallacy – Homoousion BiblicalTheology.htm
The Word was god-- or
The Word was a god—
All three are correct Why? Open Word
Biblical Theology-ID Compare Homoousion To The Original Text and You Can Learn
Biblical Mythology -GentilePP
Written
by William E. Paul
(Bible Editions &
Versions, January-March, 2003)
Simple
Answer---Why Not—There Are Many People Right ?
All
Corrected the
It
is pretty safe to say that there is REALLY only Two Types of Bibles Today—Read
Return to the
new The Expository Library index HomePage Open www.simplebibletruths.net
Or View The
Old (Open) HomePage.html. It has been updated For YOU on