• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

What Makes a Bible Version a Paraphrase?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes

tdidymas

Newbie
Aug 28, 2014
2,823
1,134
Houston, TX
✟215,876.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Paraphrased Bibles aren't necessarily inaccurate just because they are paraphrased. One example is the NLT - New Living Translation. It is a paraphrase by the list of definitions here, except the one where it is based on a single English version (IOW, "The Living Bible"). The NLT is called a translation because the Greek and Hebrew manuscripts are used to confirm the meanings (and/or adjusted accordingly).

It is called a translation because it is a thought-for-thought translation, as opposed to a word-for-word translation. Word-for-word translations like NKJV and NASB are even not really word-for-word, because the language structure isn't the same, idioms are adjusted according to culture (ex. "God forbid"), and other aspects. You can notice that even interlinears must add words or eliminate words from the original text in order to make sense of it. So to some extent, even word-for-word translations have thought-for-thought translation in it. Thought-for-thought translation is much like someone speaking Spanish, and then a translator speaks the same meaning in English. Naturally, you must have checks and balances, and the who of the translation as well as who is reviewing it (and how many) is important.

As far as the NLT, I have gone through it several times, and every time I saw a difference in the reading of the NLT (in regard to meaning of the text) and the KJV, I did some research with interlinears and commentaries, and found that the NLT was actually the more accurate translation than the KJV. I am fairly certain that this statement will be offensive to the KJV-onlyists. I'm simply saying what I found in my research.

There are other "translations" such as The New World Translation that have cultic agendas. The Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible would be another one of these.
TD
 
Reactions: JAM2b
Upvote 0

Hidden In Him

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 7, 2017
3,430
2,836
61
Lafayette, LA
✟605,484.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
tdidymas said:
I did some research with interlinears and commentaries, and found that the NLT was actually the more accurate translation than the KJV.
Click to expand...

Ikes! I actually got saved on a Living Bible, and I'm certainly no KJV-only adherent. But I think you'd have to do some convincing before I'd be willing to believe it exhibits greater equivalency (under any definition) than an actual translation.

But I invite your examples. If you'd like to show me some parallel texts for comparison, I'd certainly give it a once over, and maybe compare some verses and passages with you myself.

Blessings in Christ!
 
Upvote 0

tdidymas

Newbie
Aug 28, 2014
2,823
1,134
Houston, TX
✟215,876.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Sorry to disappoint you, but at the time my research was for myself, and I didn't think I was going to need to make note of it in order to prove it to someone else. I'm sure eventually I'll come across them and then I can write those verses into a journal for posterity.

But I can tell you this, that you getting saved by reading the Living Bible is proof positive that any differences in translations and paraphrases are minor, and doesn't affect the teaching needed to be saved. In all cases of differences in meaning between the NLT and the KJV there was no impact on the doctrines of the Christian faith.

I could go so far in saying that a paraphrase could even be better than a word-for-word translation, because it might convey the meaning of the text better in the target cultural audience. With a translation such as the KJV, you have both time (historical) and cultural obstacles to overcome in the language. This is why modern paraphrases are so much easier to understand.

I am a strong advocate for studying the Hebrew and Greek, if only for confirming that what you believe the text means is its real meaning. This way I'm not relying on a single translator or a single group of reviewers, but getting more into the original text, and this because I teach others. But that even is not adequate, and even translators have biases.

For this reason, I boldly declare that the words of the Bible are not necessarily God's word, since those are merely words on a page. It is the arrangement of the words, that is, the meaning of the words, that is the word of God. Let's take an example: "having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ" might not be as good in conveying this truth as this paraphrase: "We were completely accepted by God when we trusted in Jesus Christ as our authority." The test is, which one requires more explanation?

The more I study the scripture, the more that contextual meaning becomes top priority. What I see in the scripture, and specifically the NT, is the many different ways in which one single truth is conveyed. IOW, not lots of different truths, but lots of different explanations for one single truth.

Therefore, comparing versions becomes important for overcoming the bias obstacle. BTW, I was talking about the NLT, not the LB, as there is a big difference.
TD
 
Upvote 0

Hidden In Him

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 7, 2017
3,430
2,836
61
Lafayette, LA
✟605,484.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married

Not a problem. I just thought if you wanted to.

Umm... well, if you read my previous posts in this thread, here is where I would probably differ from you some. But it's ok. We just have a different perspective.

Absolutely.

An interesting perspective. And I do at least agree that when the meaning of a verse or passage is accurately conveyed there is no internet problem with whatever words are used, equivalent or not. I'm simply arguing for the need to rightly distinguish what I consider to be genuine translations from paraphrased interpretations on the text.
tdidymas said:
Therefore, comparing versions becomes important for overcoming the bias obstacle. BTW, I was talking about the NLT, not the LB, as there is a big difference.
TD
Click to expand...

Oh! My apologies. Sometimes I'm reading too fast. NLT starts to look like BLT if I'm getting hungry, LoL.
 
Upvote 0

Radagast

comes and goes
Site Supporter
Dec 10, 2003
23,896
9,865
✟344,561.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
tdidymas said:
Paraphrased Bibles aren't necessarily inaccurate just because they are paraphrased. One example is the NLT - New Living Translation. It is a paraphrase by the list of definitions here
Click to expand...

The NLT is not a paraphrase. Look at Consider Romans 1:1-8 again. Here is the ESV:

1 Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, 2 which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy Scriptures, 3 concerning his Son, who was descended from David according to the flesh 4 and was declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord, 5 through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of his name among all the nations, 6 including you who are called to belong to Jesus Christ, 7 To all those in Rome who are loved by God and called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. 8 First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for all of you, because your faith is proclaimed in all the world.

The NLT says:

This letter is from Paul, a slave of Christ Jesus, chosen by God to be an apostle and sent out to preach his Good News. 2 God promised this Good News long ago through his prophets in the holy Scriptures. 3 The Good News is about his Son. In his earthly life he was born into King David’s family line, 4 and he was shown to be the Son of God when he was raised from the dead by the power of the Holy Spirit. He is Jesus Christ our Lord. 5 Through Christ, God has given us the privilege and authority as apostles to tell Gentiles everywhere what God has done for them, so that they will believe and obey him, bringing glory to his name.

6 And you are included among those Gentiles who have been called to belong to Jesus Christ. 7 I am writing to all of you in Rome who are loved by God and are called to be his own holy people. May God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ give you grace and peace.

8 Let me say first that I thank my God through Jesus Christ for all of you, because your faith in him is being talked about all over the world.

That's a translation all right, and quite a good one. It's looser than the ESV, and does a tiny bit more interpretation, but it's much easier to read, and it still corresponds to what the Greek says. The main changes are chopping up the long Greek sentences to make shorter English ones, and adding a few words implied by the fact that this is a letter (like, "This letter is from...").

tdidymas said:
Word-for-word translations like NKJV and NASB are even not really word-for-word, because the language structure isn't the same, idioms are adjusted according to culture (ex. "God forbid"), and other aspects.
Click to expand...

This is true. They're a little closer to the original, but they are not the original.

tdidymas said:
Naturally, you must have checks and balances, and the who of the translation as well as who is reviewing it (and how many) is important.
Click to expand...

Exactly!


I'm not surprised.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Millions receive Scripture in their own language as Bible translation work accelerates
Replies
3
Views
237
Current News & Events (Articles Required)
RileyG
A LITTLE MORE INFORMATION
Replies
6
Views
586
Bibliology & Hermeneutics
WordSword
Are modern Bible translations always better? A Catholic linguist praises St. Jerome’s Vulgate
Replies
0
Views
92
One Bread, One Body - Catholic
Michie
Condensed Compilation
Replies
2
Views
273
Soteriology DEBATE
WordSword
The biggest contradiction in the Bible that’s not a contradiction
Replies
1
Views
359
Christian Scriptures
Aseyesee
Menu
Log in
Register