Is the ESV Literal and the NIV Gender Neutral? – Mondays with Mounce 286
This blog is purely on translation and not directly on Greek, but I have been thinking about this a lot lately so thought I would share it.
Most people say there are two translation camps, formal equivalent and functional equivalent (or dynamic equivalent). The longer I am in translation work, the more I see how simplistic this division is.
There actually are five methods on translation with three sub-categories for the handling of gender language. Translations are all on a continuum, overlapping one another, and hence it is misleading to picture them as different points on a line. I am guessing, but for example, about eighty percent of the ESV and the
The Power of a “So” (John 13:4) – Mondays with Mounce 290
It is a well-known fact that Greek sentences tend to be longer than English, and therefore a translator will regularly turn a long Greek sentence into two of more English sentences.
The problem with this is that often the connection between the two English sentences will lose some meaning. In other words, the Greek will convey meaning that the English does not.
I came across a great example of this today in the NIV of John 13:4. This is the beginning of the Upper Room Discourse. V 4 reads, “so he got up from the meal, took off his outer clothing, and wrapped a towel around his waist.”…
The Flexible Dative (Jude 1) — Mondays with Mounce 255
The NIV footnote to Jude 1 alerted me to a great example of the challenges of the dative case.
The second part of the salutation reads, “To those who have been called, who are loved in God the Father (τοῖς ἐν θεῷ πατρὶ ἠγαπημένοις) and kept for Jesus Christ (Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ τετηρημένοις).”
The NIV goes with “in” for ἐν, although its meaning is not immediately apparent, and it goes with “for” for the dative Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ. The footnote reds, “Or by; or in.”
You can see other translations struggling with this rather ambiguous construction. The ESV footnotes “for” with, “Or by.” The HCSB keeps the same preposition for both, “loved by God the Father and kept by Jesus Christ.” The NET has, “to those who are called, wrapped in the love of God the Father and kept for Jesus Christ.”…
Doug Moo’s Insights into the Nature and Philosophy of Bible Translation
(Can’t see the video? Watch it here)
“We still don’t get it,” writes Doug Moo, critiquing the relationship between evangelicals and Bible translation — specifically, the evangelical emphasis on “literal” translation. Watch the video above for more of Dr. Moo’s insightful perspective.
The video reveals a special presentation from Doug Moo, current chair of the Committee on Bible Translation (CBT), on the nature and philosophy of Bible translations. Dr. Moo delivered his paper, entitled “We Still Don’t Get It: Evangelical and Bible Translation Fifty Years After James Barr,” at a special event celebrating the 50th anniversary of the commissioning of the New International Version. The special event occurred at the 66th annual meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society (ETS) in San Diego, CA, in 2014.
Fortunately for those of us…
Douglas J. Moo on Words and Where Meaning Lies
Last month, at the 66th annual meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society, Zondervan held a special event celebrating the 50th anniversary of the commissioning of the NIV. That evening, Doug Moo, current chair of the Committee on Bible Translation (CBT), reflected on not only the impact of the NIV, but also the nature and philosophy of Bible translations. We shared a link to the BibleGateway live-blog, as well as some highlights of Moo’s insights.
Fortunately for those of us who couldn’t attend, Moo’s impassioned and insightful presentation was packaged as a free small booklet and PDF download, called “We Still Don’t Get It: Evangelicals and Bible Translation Fifty Years After James Barr.”
Not only is it a fascinating glimpse into the translation philosophy of the CBT, which stewards the NIV, it’s also a challenging, insightful read…
Subtle Ways of Translating — Mondays with Mounce 243
I never cease to be amazed at the literary quality of the NIV. Yes, I know, I am on the committee, but I am thinking about verses that I find periodically that were written before I came on.
In class last week I came across a couple. Paul is talking about divisions in the church and warns the Corinthians about the seriousness of their divisiveness. The ESV reads, “Do you not know that you* (ἐστε) are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in you (ἐν ὑμῖν)?” The footnote on “you” indicates it and the other pronouns are plural.
That’s all fine and good if you assume people read footnotes, which, considering all the superscript references in our Bible, is not a good assumption. The NIV reads, “Don’t you know that you yourselves are God’s temple and…
Linguistics Is Not Prescriptive, Says Doug Moo
At the 66th annual meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society, Zondervan held a special event celebrating the 50th anniversary of the commissioning of the NIV. That evening , Doug Moo, current chair of the Committee on Bible Translation (CBT), gave an impassioned presentation and reflection on not only the impact of the NIV, but also the relationship between evangelicals and Bible translations. We shared a link to the BibleGateway live-blog, as well as some highlights of Moo’s insights.
While most of us couldn’t attend the event and listen to Moo’s presentation, fortunately it was packaged as a small booklet and PDF download, called “We Still Don’t Get It: Evangelicals and Bible Translation Fifty Years After James Barr.”
Not only is it a fascinating glimpse into the translation philosophy of the CBT, which…
Evangelicals and Bible Translations 50 Years After the NIV
At a special event celebrating this anniversary at the 66th annual meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society, Doug Moo, current chair of the CBT, gave an impassioned presentation and reflection on not only the impact of the NIV, but also the relationship between evangelicals and Bible translations. He also gave some interesting insights into the CBT’s specific translation philosophy and Bible translating more broadly.
You can go here to see the whole live-blog, but below we’ve highlighted some of Moo’s insights:
One of Moo’s more insightful comments was in regards to principles of modern linguistics: A major principle is that “meaning is found not in individual words, as vital as they are, but in larger…
Who is tormented? (Rev 14:11) — Mondays with Mounce 236
The third angel cries, “If anyone worships the beast and its image and (καί) receives a mark on his forehead or on his hand, he also will drink the wine of God’s wrath … and they have no rest, day or night, these worshipers of the beast and its image, and (καί) whoever receives the mark of its name” (Rev 14:9-11).
I was asked if there are one or two groups of people who will be punished: those who worshipped the beast; those who received the mark. What raised the question was the differences in translations.
“And” is used by NASB, ESV, NRSV, NLT and KJV implying there are two groups and a person has to do both: worship; receive the mark. “Or” is used by the NIV, suggesting there are two groups and you only have…