-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Translation Comparison Charts
- Thread starter Salty
- Start date
They have one of the top charts on the wall at the Christian bookstore I go to.
Compliment each other, as a formal one best for serious studies, while the other one good for getting the flow thru of the passage, more like a speed reading thru, also good for comparison.
Interesting where the Esv rated!
This one has the ESV more "formal" than the NASB
https://csbible.com/about-the-csb/translation-philosophy/"
Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
very bstrange, as I have never seen anything rated as being more formal, as the Nkjv was about on same level!
Dave G
Well-Known Member
I'll stick with word-for-word, definitely.
" But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." ( Matthew 4:4 )
" My son, attend to my words; incline thine ear unto my sayings.
21 Let them not depart from thine eyes; keep them in the midst of thine heart.
22 For they [are] life unto those that find them, and health to all their flesh." ( Proverbs 4:20 )
" My son, keep my words, and lay up my commandments with thee." ( Proverbs 7:1 )
To me, thought-for-thought just replaces what God actually said, with what men think that He said.
" But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." ( Matthew 4:4 )
" My son, attend to my words; incline thine ear unto my sayings.
21 Let them not depart from thine eyes; keep them in the midst of thine heart.
22 For they [are] life unto those that find them, and health to all their flesh." ( Proverbs 4:20 )
" My son, keep my words, and lay up my commandments with thee." ( Proverbs 7:1 )
To me, thought-for-thought just replaces what God actually said, with what men think that He said.
Last edited:
While I understand what you mean, it’s not really possible to do a “word for word” translation because languages don’t work that way.
For example,
Podemos in Spanish translates to “we are able” in English.
So one word in Spanish and 3 words in English.
I do however believe each word in the Greek or Hebrew needs to be translated completely, fully and as accurately as possible into whatever language you are translating into.
I would argue that each morpheme in the originals needs to be translated into the target language.
https://glossary.sil.org/term/morpheme
Except there is no such thing as a "word for word" translation. The closest we can come is a verbal/formal equivalent translation.
I agree. But thinking one must choose either a "word for word" translation or a "thought for thought" translation is to commit the logical fallacy of the false dilemma. There are other options.
and would it be possible to translate it as "are able" as the pronoun "we" could be considered as "understood"
For, example - (keep in mind- every sentence must have a verb and a noun)
I heard the policeman yell. Stop!
The second sentence above does have a noun - but it is "understood to be "you" as in "You Stop"
Dave G
Well-Known Member
Knowing English, and having a working knowledge of French, some Spanish and a touch of other languages, I realize that you are correct.
There is always a small amount of what some may call, "Dynamic Equivalency" involved.
One can be accurate if one understands the nuances, IMO.
Even, say, the "ton" before "Theon" in John 1:1?
Or would that be a case of the exception that makes the rule?
Would you see the more formal versions such as Nas/Nkjv good to use than?
Even the Kjv and Nas at times used a more dynamic rendering!
Dave G
Well-Known Member
" For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ." ( 2 Corinthians 2:17 )
" For we are not like many, peddling the word of God, but as from sincerity, but as from God, we speak in Christ in the sight of God." ( 2 Corinthians 2:17, NASB )
" For we are not, as so many, peddling the word of God; but as of sincerity, but as from God, we speak in the sight of God in Christ." ( 2 Corinthians 2:17, NKJV )
In the AV, we see "corrupt", as in "to pervert ", "make worse", "change for the worse"...opposite of "purify" or to "keep pure".
In the others, we see "peddling", which means to "sell cheaply", "promote", or simply "to sell".
Big difference.
Either this is a translation error ( that carries over into two competing translations? ) or a manuscript problem...I think the latter.
Regardless, it changes the word "corrupt" to "peddle"...a much less serious term, and a term that isn't even related.
To put it bluntly, the very verse in which Paul is stating that they were not as many who corrupt the word of God, has been corrupted when compared to the KJV.
Someone has a sense of humor, and to me, it isn't the Lord.
Dave G
Well-Known Member
In other words, no.
The 1560 Geneva Bible, one of the pre-1611 English Bibles of which the KJV is a revision, has the following translation of a Textus Receptus edition of 2 Corinthians 2:17
For we are not as many, which make merchandize of the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.