SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
See Opportunities to Serve with SermonIndex
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Does inerrancy matter?? or is dynamic equivalence sufficient

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( 1 | 2 | 3 Next Page )
PosterThread
proudpapa
Member



Joined: 2012/5/13
Posts: 2936


 Does inerrancy matter?? or is dynamic equivalence sufficient

Last night as I set at the dinner table my wife asked me If I could pour some gravey on her biscuits and handed me her plate, I heard her but I was not particularly listening, so subconsciously I took her plate and began to cut the biscuits in half before pouring on the gravey only to find that my wife did not want her biscuits cut, she had not asked me to cut the biscuits.
I had just subconsciously assumed that if she wanted gravey on her biscuits than that must mean that she wanted them cut. I was not listining to her specific words, I was just interpeting what I thought was her basic intent was. So still responding from some what of a subconscious mind set, I pushed the biscuits to the side and began pouring the gravey to the side of the biscuits, because in my subconscience, if you'r biscuits are not cut, then you would not pour gravey on them.
Because of the fact that I was not listining to my wifes specific words and only interpeting what I thought her real intent was, I once again fell short of her wishes by which she reminded me that she had specifically asked for me to pour gravey on her biscuits.

I jokingly responded to her that I was dynamic equivalently listining to her and not interested in her specific words, by doing so I was far from the mark of her true intent.

I wounder how often we as bible readers fall short of the actual intent because we only pay attention to the general concepts and not the specific written words

 2013/1/18 10:15Profile
MrBillPro
Member



Joined: 2005/2/24
Posts: 3348
Texas

 Re: Does inerrancy matter?? or is dynamic equivalence sufficient

Pappa, we had my sister over for a visit one year and we were frying up some fish and shrimp. When is was all finished and was laying on a paper towel, she begin to start squirting lemon juice on all of it, I thought my wife was going to choke her. I know she did it because she always has, but are we that lost about others desires, that we feel everyone thinks the way we do? God help us all if this is the new norm, by the way, my sister is very narcissistic, as a lot of this nation is.


_________________
Bill

 2013/1/18 10:27Profile
DEADn
Member



Joined: 2011/1/12
Posts: 1378
Lakeland FL

 Re:

Proudpapa

I think that in part this may have to do with language as well. For if we translate this to our Bible reading we read in the English language but it tends to become inferior when wanting to investigate intentions even further. When I took some Spanish classes it brought out a whole new dimension to me. I.E. in English we have the word 'love' but to understand what it means a listener has to understand the context. In Spanish, they have various words for love so there is not mistaking what kind of love is meant whereas in English it can be hard to understand. The same with English and the Bible. We read things but how much are we understanding and appreciating the intent?


_________________
John

 2013/1/18 11:10Profile
MrBillPro
Member



Joined: 2005/2/24
Posts: 3348
Texas

 Re:

This is a common misconception. Some people think that the Bible was written in one language, translated to another language, then translated into yet another and so on until it was finally translated into the English. The complaint is that since it was rewritten so many times in different languages throughout history, it must have become corrupted . The "telephone" analogy is often used as an illustration. It goes like this. One person tells another person a sentence who then tells another person, who tells yet another, and so on and so on until the last person hears a sentence that has little or nothing to do with the original one. The only problem with this analogy is that it doesn't fit the Bible at all.

The fact is that the Bible has not been rewritten. Take the New Testament, for example. The disciples of Jesus wrote the New Testament in Greek and though we do not have the original documents, we do have around 6,000 copies of the Greek manuscripts that were made very close to the time of the originals. These various manuscripts, or copies, agree with each other to almost 100 percent accuracy. Statistically, the New Testament is 99.5% textually pure. That means that there is only 1/2 of 1% of of all the copies that do not agree with each other perfectly. But, if you take that 1/2 of 1% and examine it, you find that the majority of the "problems" are nothing more than spelling errors and very minor word alterations. For example, instead of saying Jesus, a variation might be "Jesus Christ." So the actual amount of textual variation of any concern is extremely low. Therefore, we can say that we have a remarkably accurate compilation of the original documents.

So when we translate the Bible, we do not translate from a translation of a translation of a translation. We translate from the original language into our language. It is a one-step process and not a series of steps that can lead to corruption. It is one translation step from the original to the English or to whatever language in which a person needs to read. So we translate into Spanish from the same Greek and Hebrew manuscripts. Likewise we translate into the German from those same Greek and Hebrew manuscripts as well. This is how it is done for each and every language into which we translate the Bible. We do not translate from the original languages to the English, to the Spanish, and then to the German. It is from the original languages to the English, or into the Spanish, or into the German. Therefore, the translations are very accurate and trustworthy in regards to what the Bible originally said.
Comparison Chart

The following chart represents a compilation of various ancient manuscripts, their original date of writing, the earliest copy, the number of copies in existence, and the time span between the originals and the copies. If the Bible is singled out to be criticized as unreliable then all the other writings listed below must also be discarded.1
Author Date
Written Earliest Copy Approximate Time Span between original & copy

Number of Copies
Accuracy of Copies
Lucretius died 55 or 53 B.C. 1100 yrs 2 ----
Pliny 61-113 A.D. 850 A.D. 750 yrs 7 ----
Plato 427-347 B.C. 900 A.D. 1200 yrs 7 ----
Demosthenes 4th Cent. B.C. 1100 A.D. 800 yrs 8 ----
Herodotus 480-425 B.C. 900 A.D. 1300 yrs 8 ----
Suetonius 75-160 A.D. 950 A.D. 800 yrs 8 ----
Thucydides 460-400 B.C. 900 A.D. 1300 yrs 8 ----
Euripides 480-406 B.C. 1100 A.D. 1300 yrs 9 ----
Aristophanes 450-385 B.C. 900 A.D. 1200 10 ----
Caesar 100-44 B.C. 900 A.D. 1000 10 ----
Livy 59 BC-AD 17 ---- ??? 20 ----
Tacitus circa 100 A.D. 1100 A.D. 1000 yrs 20 ----
Aristotle 384-322 B.C. 1100 A.D. 1400 49 ----
Sophocles 496-406 B.C. 1000 A.D 1400 yrs 193 ----
Homer (Iliad) 900 B.C. 400 B.C. 500 yrs 643 95%
New
Testament 1st Cent. A.D. (50-100 A.D. 2nd Cent. A.D.
(c. 130 A.D. f.) less than 100 years 5600 99.5%

As you can see, the New Testament documents are very accurate. Therefore, when the scholars translate from the Greek into the English (or into any other language), we can trust that what is translated is accurate and reliable.....Matt Slick


_________________
Bill

 2013/1/18 11:20Profile
DEADn
Member



Joined: 2011/1/12
Posts: 1378
Lakeland FL

 Re:

Mr.BillPro

I don't know if your post was a response to mine or to another post but here is more light from my previous post.

English only has the word for 'love' whereas a language such as Spanish has multiple words for 'love' and they have varying degrees so that when a Spanish speaker uses a word the hearer understands and even a non native speaker will understand what type of 'love' is being spoken of. It is harder in English to discern this especially to a non native speaker.
How many times does one hear a preacher talk about LOVE he goes back to the original Greek to give it emphasis because the English language isn't versatile enough? I wonder if one reads a Spanish Bible if a Spanish speaker would pick up on it much more?


_________________
John

 2013/1/18 11:37Profile
proudpapa
Member



Joined: 2012/5/13
Posts: 2936


 Re: Does inerrancy matter?? or is dynamic equivalence sufficient

Bible translation Differences (criteria for excellence in reading and choosing a bible translation) Crossway books 2004 by Leland Ryken (Ph.D.,University of Oregon) Professor of English at Wheaton College and was Literary stylist for the (ESV) translation

endorsed by Dr.Wayne Grudem, Dr.R.Kent Hughes, Dr J.I.Packer, and cheif editor of of World Magazine Marvin Olasky

p.8

/ Here is my concern: Most readers of dynamic equivalent translations do not have any understanding as to the liberties that have been taken with the words of the original text. What dynamic translators give us is a translation plus a commentary, but we have no way of knowing where translation ends and the translation committee's commentary begins/

p.8-9
/...As John MacArthur has noted, such translationes "diminish the glory of divine revelation by being more concerned with the human reader than the divine author"./



 2013/1/18 11:50Profile
proudpapa
Member



Joined: 2012/5/13
Posts: 2936


 Re: Does inerrancy matter?? or is dynamic equivalence sufficient

'The NIV reconsidered A fresh look at a popular translation'
1990 Kerugma,inc by Earl Radmacher BA and MA from Bob Jones University and ThM and ThD from Dallas Theological Seminary and Zane Hodges BA degree from Wheaton and ThM from Dallas Theological Seminary

p.12 1. Decreasing Confidence in the inspired text.
The Holy Spirit conveyed the thoughts of God through the very words of scripture. We must be careful, therefore, of creating too great of a gulf between Gods thoughts and the human author's words. According to the Apostle Paul, he did not speak "in words which man's wisdom teaches, but which the Holy Spirit teaches"(1Cor 2:13,NKJV)
Over the last fifty years, however, there has been a marked shift in translation theory later on in our book. For now it is enough to say that "dynamic equivalence" has led some of its practitioners into very free and imprecise style of Bible translation. The implication can be drawn that the exact wording of the inspired original is not crucial matters of concern.

 2013/1/18 12:34Profile
TMK
Member



Joined: 2012/2/8
Posts: 5830
NC, USA

 Re:

just for clarity can someone give some example of which "translations" are "dynamic equivalents?"


_________________
Todd

 2013/1/18 12:42Profile
proudpapa
Member



Joined: 2012/5/13
Posts: 2936


 Re: TMK

Hi TMK

TMK wrote // just for clarity can someone give some example of which "translations" are "dynamic equivalents?"//

NIV,TNIV,REB,CEV,NLT, the Message and etc.

rather than literal translations like the KJV,NKJV,NASB,and ESV

 2013/1/18 12:52Profile
ccchhhrrriiisss
Member



Joined: 2003/11/23
Posts: 4582


 Re:

Hi proudpapa,

Quote:

dynamic equivalents? NIV,TNIV,REB,CEV,NLT, the Message and etc.

rather than literal translations like the KJV,NKJV,NASB,and ESV



This isn't entirely accurate. The translators of the NIV (1984) relied upon both moderate use of dynamic equivalence and also "literal" methods depending upon words, phrases, and whether or not it would make "sense" in a literal way. There have stated very plausible reasons for this in their forward and document some of those reasons on their publisher's website. It is also possible to contact them as well for an explanation to their translation techniques and methods. I suspect that some other versions/publishers/translators may do likewise.

Moreover, if you read the writings of the translators of the KJV, you will find that they weren't entirely "formal" or "literal" either. They may be a little more "literal" than versions like the NIV; however, they also had to conclude specific intent on quite a few occasions.

EXAMPLE: Acts 20:7
http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Act&c=20&v=7&t=KJV#conc/7

Greek:

20:7 Ἐν δὲ τῇ μιᾷ τῶν σαββάτων συνηγμένων τῶν μαθητῶν τοῦ κλάσαι ἄρτον ὁ Παῦλος διελέγετο αὐτοῖς μέλλων ἐξιέναι τῇ ἐπαύριον παρέτεινέν τε τὸν λόγον μέχρι μεσονυκτίου

KJV:

20:7 And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight.

A.) The word "first" is actually "μια" ("mia"). It literally is the number "one" but is rendered here as "first." In other places in the KJV, it is translated as "one," "first," "a certain," "a," and "the other." The translators assumed how it should be translated by getting a sense of the context.

B.) The word "week" is actually "σαββατων" ("sabbaton"). It literally means "sabbath" but is rendered "week" because of the sense of context with what the phrase is trying to convey. In 59 other instances, the KJV translators most translated this word as "sabbath" or "sabbath day." In nine cases, they rendered the word as "week."

C.) The word "day" does not appear as a word in the Greek at all. It is simply an ellipsis. In conjunction with the other way that the translators of the KJV judged this via context, it was rendered "day" in this passage.

This is just one example of how KJV translators used a form of what is often labeled "dynamic equivalence" (or "sense-by-sense" method) when translating the Bible. So, is the KJV a "literal" translation? Yes...but not in a formal or precisely literal word-for-word way. You can examine each and every passage of the KJV and will find multiple examples of how words are not translated literally but by sense through context.

A more accurate assessment would be to state that certain translations relied more on dynamic equivalence in certain instances than others. I hope that this makes sense. I know that Brother Ron Bailey ("philologos") has offered quite a bit of insight here at SermonIndex and elsewhere into the translation of the KJV and has helped clear up some of the myths and widespread assumptions as well.


_________________
Christopher

 2013/1/18 14:09Profile





©2002-2021 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Affiliate Disclosure | Privacy Policy