Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohio
Strict literalism can lead to worse inaccuracies. How do language idioms sound when translated literally? Ever try to read Robert Young's literal translation (YLT, 1862) of the N.T.?
Philip Comfort classifies translations in this way, with some examples:
- Strictly Literal (NASB)
- Literal (NKJV, RSV, NAB)
- Literal with idiomatic freedom (NIV, NJB, REB)
- Dynamic Equivalent, modern speech (TEV)
- Paraphrastic (TLB)
Let's face it, Lee and LSM always know what is best! 
Personally, I attempted to read the KJV several times in my early life, and quite unsuccessfully. Then a friend from work, along with others, bought cases of Paraphrased Bibles, called The Greatest is Love (TLB) and passed them out. I was wonderfully saved, and filled with His Spirit, just by reading this version of the N.T. After I entered the LC, I was persuaded that my beloved paraphrase too "watered down," childish, and error-prone, so I discarded it. Just recently I found a used book at Amazon and replaced it! Better than a thousand Life Studies! So much for LSM's official version. |
I have referenced
The Message from time to time, and I do think that there is some amount of value in paraphrased text. And I'm sure the concern also exists outside the LC that such things 'dilute' God's Word. I don't see the problem, other than the way scripture is paraphrased is based upon the author's own understanding of scripture.
As you say, literal translations cannot always carry context and idioms. That is what often makes them difficult. Of course, they have their value when it comes to accuracy. Actually, it's ironic that accuracy was a goal with the RcV, because things were deliberately mistranslated to fit Lee's teachings.