Bible Translation

Mark Ward: [I]f you can’t read Hebrew or Greek, how can you know which differences between English translations are due to textual variants and which aren’t?

William Mounce: My point is that if you want to be clear, you have to be more interpretive. If you want to be less interpretive, you will be less clear and more ambiguous. You simply can’t have it both ways.

Dan Wallace: There’s always something lost in translation. But how much is lost? Here I want to explore five more myths about Bible translation.

Dan Wallace: Perhaps the number one myth about Bible translation is that a word-for-word translation is the best kind.

B&H Publishing: [We] announced today the completed revision of the Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB).

Bill Mounce: Once again we see the fact illustrated, that sometimes a word for word translation makes no sense. We translate meaning, not words.

Bill Mounce: The standard answer is that a “literal” Bible is the most accurate, and by “literal” they generally mean word-for-word. If the Greek has a verb, the English should have a verb. If the text uses the same Greek three times, the same English word should be used three times. This understanding is seriously flawed at two levels.

“Over 140 Christian organizations dedicated to providing copies of the Bible translated in people’s native languages will converge in Philadelphia this week for a World Assembly that only happens once every six years.” CP

Andy Naselli: This illustrates how difficult it is to explain the concept of slavery in the OT and NT to people in America today. It also illustrates good translation sense.

An excellent, even-handed video sermon advocating a gender-neutral translation - like the NIV 2011. Some good, practical insight on translation philosophies - even if you disagree. The Pastor explains why they chose NIV 2011 over the ESV.