History of the English Bible: question ten

That is correct!

In case you are curious, I primarily use the New American Standard Bible (NASB), but often refer to the ESV and KJV as well. The NASB is known for being very accurate. Some shy away for the NASB feeling that its literalness makes it too choppy and thus not as readable as other versions like the ESV. I have read both, and still vote for the NASB. Its accuracy is greatly valuable, and I like that it capitalizes pronouns for God.

.

Congratulations! You have made it to the last question!

.

TIMELINE
1958 AD: The New Testament in Modern English
1971 AD: The Living Bible
1993/2002 AD: The Message

This last question is also about modern Bibles. Today’s English Bibles tend to fall into one of three categories. There are those that lean towards a word-for-word translation, those that lean more towards a thought-for-thought translation, and paraphrases. Some Bibles are a blend of two different types. The ones that best match the tradition of closely following the original languages like the KJV did are word-for-word translations and essentially literal translations. This approach helps to present a more accurate representation of the original manuscripts and makes them the best choice.  It is good for us to stay as close as possible to the original. God’s word is too valuable to minimize accuracy.

Thought-for-thought translations move away from a word-for word or literal approach and aim to transfer the meaning of phrases or groups of words from the original to an English equivalent. Paraphrases are written to be easier to read and understand than word-for-word and thought-for-thought translations. While this may shed light on the meaning of the text, care should be taken when using them. Paraphrases sometimes change the original meaning too much. If you do choose to use a paraphrase, I recommend using it alongside of a more accurate translation. We cannot accurately handle the word of truth (2 Timothy 2:15) if what we are reading is too different from what was originally written. God’s word “is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword.” (Hebrews 4:12a) Paraphrases can dull the sword and in some cases grind it to a pulp.

There is a paraphrase that has the distinction of always being the furthest away from the word-for-word side of every chart I’ve seen that graphs Bible versions in order from word-for-word to paraphrase. Can you guess which modern version has that distinction?

A. Contemporary English Version
B. The Message
C. New International Reader’s Version
D. The Living Bible

Find Out! (then hit your back button to return)
Bible translations: Comparison charts, Chapter 3 Ministries