PDA

View Full Version : Today's English Version Translation



poochie
Dec 24th 2008, 05:09 PM
Anyone ever used this one? My brother seems to start off with the NIV as being his primary and most conservative and uses others below that one on the Dynamic and free scale. I was reading his TEV and comparing it to my ESV. It seemed to be saying the same thing, just in a more contemporary language. What do you say about this version?

The ESV is nice, but sometimes the text is hard to understand when doing exegesis and I do refer tom my NIV, however the NIV and the ESV are similar in many ways as I have compared dozens of passages side by side and they both sound similar. Typically NIV bashers have not done as extensive of comparisons as I have, and I have computer software to aid me.

But anyways is this TEV like the New Living Translation? With the exception of the NIV I own no dynamic or free paraphrases and only use formal equilivent translations.


Thanks..

Chimon
Dec 24th 2008, 06:20 PM
I think most translation of the Bible that we have today are very accurate. It is my opinion that the ESV is the single best 'literal' translation, however, there is a lot of value in using a dynamic equivelency translation, which I esteem just as highly for everything except word and grammar studies.

I think the NLT is the best dynamic equivelency translation we have today, and it is very good.

I use the ESV primarily and the NLT secondarily. When I want to be very very technical and percise about word order and syntax, I bust out my NASB.

I have no personal experience with the TEV, but I can say that, if the ESV is hard for you to understand, the NLT is your best bet in my opinion. I can't say it's better than the TEV because I haven't discussed that version with my Biblical language prof, but I can say that the NLT is superior to the NIV.

That's my two cents. Hope it helps.

Love in Christ,
Chimon

poochie
Dec 24th 2008, 11:17 PM
Thanks for the reply Chimon. The ESV is not hard for me to understand, its just easier to read others in certain sections. Its similar to the NIV in many ways and I have compared dozens and dozens of passages side by side either with my computer or my print copies (3 NIV's, 2 ESV's).

However as one Fundamentalist Evangelist said once "everyone today is looking for a new translation but I am looking for transformation!"

Often do they look down on Dynamic translations which is very sad. But regardless I may check out this NLT. Thanks..



I think most translation of the Bible that we have today are very accurate. It is my opinion that the ESV is the single best 'literal' translation, however, there is a lot of value in using a dynamic equivelency translation, which I esteem just as highly for everything except word and grammar studies.

I think the NLT is the best dynamic equivelency translation we have today, and it is very good.

I use the ESV primarily and the NLT secondarily. When I want to be very very technical and percise about word order and syntax, I bust out my NASB.

I have no personal experience with the TEV, but I can say that, if the ESV is hard for you to understand, the NLT is your best bet in my opinion. I can't say it's better than the TEV because I haven't discussed that version with my Biblical language prof, but I can say that the NLT is superior to the NIV.

That's my two cents. Hope it helps.

Love in Christ,
Chimon

Sirus
Dec 25th 2008, 12:56 AM
Often do they look down on Dynamic translations which is very sad. But regardless I may check out this NLT. Thanks..Why is this very sad? You want to read a dynamic translation, fine, but they simply are not useful for serious study because by necessity they require the translators and the board of the translation to inject their theology, which defeats the purpose of hearing what saith the scripture and ends with what saith man.

All modern translations are corrupt and not just because they use the latest, oldest is automatically better, manuscripts but because of the false theology driving the translators and translation boards when trying to make 'the word of God'-'easier to read'. When translating from Greek meaning is lost. Add to that it must be made easier to read, more is lost. It's just a translation fact.

Psalms Fan
Dec 25th 2008, 01:17 AM
I lean toward the formal-equivalency bibles, but I think that some of the more dynamic-equivalency bibles have their place (even the paraphrases). I bought my wife's grandmother a NLT earlier this year. But the furthest I ever go in that direction are the NIV and HCSB (which claims to be in the middle, or "optimal-equivalency").

The NLT was originally a revision of the paraphrase bible "The Living Bible". Instead of being called the "New Living Bible" it's the "New Living Translation". It probably wouldn't sell as well if people thought of it as a revised paraphrase. Compare the two in any randomly selected passage and you'll see how close they are.

But although I have my preference for formal-equivalency bibles (and some optimal-equivalency; I tend to view the NIV in that group and not the dynamic-equivalency, even though that is what it claims for itself. I tend to see it slightly closer to word-for-word than thought-for-thought), I think that there is plenty of room for liberty in this matter. The Septuagint (LXX, the Greek translation of the OT, 2nd or 3rd century BC) wasn't the best of translations, yet the apostles quoted it almost exclusively to prove doctrine from the OT. So even though the ESV is my favorite, with the NASB as a close second (only because I like the style of the ESV better - I know the NASB is more literal), I believe that other translations, like the NLT or TEV, bring God's word to people's lives just as the LXX did millennia ago, even though it was not as literal as it could be (or so the Greek scholars tell me).

I think that a person needs to find a translation that works for them, and immerse himself in it. If God wants that person to read another one, as that person draws closer to God, with that translation helping him do that, God will show him in His own time.

People fuss about one translation being better and condemning others, when what we ought to be worrying about is how well we forgive, or how we can be more generous, or how we can be better fathers and mothers, etc. Whether our translation is the best one available ought to be the least of our concerns as christians.

Andrew111
Dec 25th 2008, 01:46 AM
I looked up the TEV on the Internet, and the articles say that the TEV is the same thing as the Good News Tranlation. I have a GNT and like the fact that it is so easy to understand. But I have an alternate suggestion. There is free software called e-Sword. It comes with many Bibles, including the ESV and the GNT. You can view these side by side any time you want to check alternate translations. You can also read commentary, which is included with e-Sword.

poochie
Dec 25th 2008, 01:46 AM
The words of a Fundamentalist evangelist.

"Everyone today is looking for a new translation, but I am looking for transformation!"

Sirus
Dec 25th 2008, 02:21 AM
said that already, point?
btw; I am not kjo like those that have bashed you in the past, so you will have to find another argument.

Andrew111
Dec 25th 2008, 03:28 PM
I think that a person needs to find a translation that works for them, and immerse himself in it. If God wants that person to read another one, as that person draws closer to God, with that translation helping him do that, God will show him in His own time.Good point. I was not able to get very far until I used one with dynamic equivilency. With this, I could follow the story and get the point, most of the time. Then later, I started rereading passages using a literal Bible. This was possible because the dynamic Bible had already aquainted me with the material.

poochie
Dec 25th 2008, 04:34 PM
Good point. I was not able to get very far until I used one with dynamic equivilency. With this, I could follow the story and get the point, most of the time. Then later, I started rereading passages using a literal Bible. This was possible because the dynamic Bible had already aquainted me with the material.

My point exactly. The NIV is nice but its too familiar with the literal translations in many places that it may not be the best Dynamic translation. I have compared dozens and dozens of passages side by side with my print bibles or my computer software.

grit
Dec 25th 2008, 05:44 PM
Hi poochie. It sounds like you've done a lot of homework. Hey, all. :wave:

For what it's worth, I prefer many of the English translations generally categorized as formally equivalent or transmitter-specific - like the NASB, ESV, NKJV, NRSV, NAB, and KJV.

I'd just like to add a couple of considerations about the TEV, which I think is overall a helpful translation.

Most translations have not been proffered without some controversy. The TEV is no exception, as may be seen in some of the criticism found at wiki's general article on the GNB (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_News_Bible). There continue to be concerns about its liberal leanings, and particularly the contributions to the translation and views of Robert Bratcher, which merits investigation for any serious translation student.

Also, it's noteworthy to mention that the TEV is meant as an ecumenical translation for use by both Protestants and Roman Catholics and so, like the NLT, NRSV, and other ecumenical translations, it offers editions which include the Protestant OT Apocrypha as inspired Scripture (in Roman Catholic editions of the Bible).

Also, perhaps as salient a factor in the popularity of the GNB/TEV has been the line drawing contributions of Swiss artist Annie Vallotton (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/3501430.stm) (link is to a BBC news article detailing her as the best-selling artist ever). It's amazing how much can be conveyed in a simple picture. The line-drawings do not appear in all editions and were briefly discontinued in others, over contractual disputes with various publishing and copyright permissions, but they were paramount in the initial popularity of the GNB.

The 'art connection' with the TEV/GNB is also particularly relevant in that it has been the GNB which has recently been adapted to one of the newest controversial Bible offerings, the Bible Illuminated: The Book, from Dag Söderberg's Illuminated World publishers, of Sweden, who have partnered with the American Bible Society and their TEV. The Bible Illuminated contains provocative photography and conceptual Hollywoodessence designed to make the Bible more accessible and readable to a modern audience. It has raised the ire, or at least a discernable groan, of many conservative Christians here in the U.S., where conservative 'markets' have been hesitant to endorse it.

It must be said, however, that it continues to place the TEV on the leading edge of marketing the Word to a modern (or post-modern) audience, where The Book, according to Illuminated World, managed to increase the Bible market in Sweden by nearly 50 percent in less than a year.

Andrew111
Dec 25th 2008, 11:25 PM
My point exactly. The NIV is nice but its too familiar with the literal translations in many places that it may not be the best Dynamic translation. I have compared dozens and dozens of passages side by side with my print bibles or my computer software.Looking at the dynamic translations that include GNB, GW, and CEV, I have yet to see anyone deem any of these more accurate than each other. And if these help you, I say go for it. Because these have proven very helpful for many people. Then, later, you reread in the literal versions, it will be much easier to pick up fine points. Or read commentary on the fine points, and then study those passages.