by Jessica Gordon

Created on: September 07, 2009   Last Updated: September 09, 2009

"The Bible is a fascinating book that continues to have relevance in a world that is constantly changing, even though it was written millennia ago." (Wegner 13). The Bible is a very popular book, and has various uses. It is most commonly used as a religious text in many major religions. It is also used as a historical reference. In 1456 it became the first printed book, and today is the most printed book. When

the Bible was originally compiled it contained letters written by various authors. Somewhere through the millenia, the Bible went from the original letters that made up the first Bible to the various versions that we see in bookstores today. Many people wonder, "which version is best used in studying the Bible?" In studying the Bible, the usage of multiple versions is the most effective way to grasp the full meaning of the passage that is being studied.

The Bible was not originally written in English, but in Hebrew and Greek (and a little bit in Aramaic), therefore if someone wanted to make a Bible in English, they would have to translate it from the original languages into English (Arnold 29). The problem is that a line of Hebrew or Greek translated directly into English makes no sense because the way that sentences are structured in those languages is different than in English. Thus, the person who wants to translate a Bible into English also has to interpret what he is writing (Arnold 31). There are two ways to do this: dynamic equivalence and formal equivalence interpretations. Dynamic equivalence is a thought-for-thought translation and formal equivalence is a word-for-word translation (Klein 129). Each has its own advantages and disadvantages. An advantage of a dynamic equivalence translation is that it is very readable so it easily used for private reading and personal studies, but a disadvantage is that it doesn't follow the original Greek and Hebrew Bible exactly.

An advantage of a formal equivalence translation is that it follows the original texts quite closely so it is easily used for public readings and for in-depth studies, but a disadvantage is that it is not as readable (Arnold 36). There are some translations that try to balance both formal and dynamic equivalence which is very useful for private reading and also for simple studies and public readings, such as in sermons. The downfall of such a translation is actually it's strength: it is a middle ground, so it is not as useful for in-depth studies as a formal equivalent translation and

• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next Page >>