Ryken goes on to explain some of the problems associated with the “dynamic equivalence” process, such as not focusing on the words of the texts, destabilizing of the text, falling short of what people expect, and the logical and linguistic impossibility. He also discusses the problem of translating what the Bible “means” vs. what the Bible says. By translating what the Bible “means”, the translators in the “dynamic equivalence” process have gone beyond their role of translation into the realm of interpretation. Hopefully, you can readily see the problem when this occurs; Translators are able to make the text say what they think it means rather than allowing the Holy Spirit to do his work in our lives as we study what the Bible says.
In the last section of the book, Ryken gives us 10 reasons that we can trust the “essentially literal” translations. The ones he mentions are the KJV, NKJV, NASB and the ESV. The ESV, relatively new to the translation world is quickly becoming the translation of choice among those who are particular about the accuracy of the English Bible. I recommend it.
No longer does one have to wander in confusion when trying to decide which translation of the Bible to choose. Leland Ryken has done all of us a favor by writing this little booklet to help us understand what to look for. Read ‘em & Reap!
Buy it here
Print this review
I agree that dynamic equivalence is dangerous and unecessary. Where I disagree is on the merits of the ESV. The ESV is NOT based on the Received Texts (Majority Texts), and that is why I would never use it.
Accuracy is only good if the original material is good.
My 0.02$,
Posted by: Rand at June 21, 2005 09:35 AM
That is a valid point; beyond the scope of this book, but valid. Many scholars would say that the Alexandrian text is a more reliable text than the Byzantine text which is what the TR is based on.
Posted by: Brad at June 21, 2005 09:22 PM
