All the Words in It

I really do love the NIV and have come to deeply like the TNIV, as well as other dynamic equivalence translations of the Bible. I really do and have. But there are times when only reading dynamic equivalence translations without utilizing formal equivalence translations (ESV, NASB etc.) can hinder a person’s understanding of a text. John Piper explains in this video as he talks about where translations like the NIV and the TNIV fail.

While I’m on the subject of what translation to use. One thing we talked about in hermeneutics class earlier this week is where formal equivalence translations (FET) and dynamic equivalence translations (DET) come into play in the life of a Christian. In the class we talked about how a new convert may not want to read an FET like the NASB because the English is so awkward. The NLT or (T)NIV translations make much more sense for a new convert. But I think a preacher should use a FET from the pulpit for one good reason. When studying the selected text in the original language (knowledge no preacher who has a pulpit ministry should ever be without), the preacher might (almost inevitably) disagree with a DET’s choice of rendering (and even FETs), for multiple reasons that are as simple as what a certain case of noun/adjective is accomplishing. FET’s do a better job preserving the ambiguity of the original language and allowing for the manifold interpretations/translational options open without the preacher having to say the Bible the person is reading is wrong. From a pastoral and preaching standpoint, FETs work better because the preacher is not correcting the Bible, and possibly undermining the hearers’ confidence in the Bible, but can focus on merely interpreting the ambiguity.

A classic example is Romans 1:5 and the phrase ὑπακοὴν πίστεως, “obedience of faith” (ESV, NASB, HCSB) The NIV reads “the obedience that comes from faith;” NLT, “believe and obey him;” TNIV, “faith and obedience.” Even the (N)KJV reads, “obedience to the faith.” All of the above translations are perfectly acceptable renderings of ὑπακοὴν πίστεως, the ESV, NASB, and HCSB all reading the Greek in a literal fashion. But note that the NIV does not agree with the NLT, TNIV, or the (N)KJV translations. All of these translations speak of different realities. Preaching from the FETs (I told you even FET’s are 100% satisfactory as the KJV and NKJV are FETs) like the ESV allows the preacher to just explain the ambiguity and suggest maybe the NIV or the NLT/TNIV as fully giving the sense of the Greek. But the preacher is not saying that the ESV/NASB/HCSB is wrong in its translation. The preacher is just explaining the ambiguous statement, “obedience of faith.”

I really do believe that anyone wanting to fully grasp and wrestle with the Scripture needs to read a good blend and balance of DET and FET, like the ones cited above. I’d through in the NET translation for its superb translator and text critical notes that explain why the English rendering for the text was chosen. Keep that in mind when deciding whether to preach from a DET or FET. Can the preacher explain why there is disagreement with the translation in a way that doesn’t undermine the hearers’ confidence in the Scripture? An FET might make it easier to do so from the pulpit. Just some food for thought on translations.