Furthermore, footnote usage is being used if any text has been omitted in which compromises the authenticity of the Scripture. Paraphrases Dynamic-equivalence was heavily used in this translation over Literal Formal-equivalence. Due to many discoveries of the biblical manuscripts in the mid-nineteen century that was more ancient than the KJV.
Paraphrase was employed sparingly chiefly to compensate the deficiency of the English language in the process of equivalency translation. What manuscript forms the basis of each translation? In some cases, when consonant has been divided other than the Masoretic text they indicated in the textual footnote.
Later, they consulted the earlier version such as the Dead Sea Scroll as the earlier stage of the transmission of the Hebrew text. Any significant variation from the Dead Sea scroll writings footnote is being employed. Alexandrian texts were used in the New Testament translation. On the other hand, Septuagint and Latin Vulgate were also consulted.
There were only a handful of scholars involved in this translation. This was copyrighted in later revised in , , and Consequently, reconstruction of the original text and the Masoretic text addition are indicated in the footnote. What significant differences are evident in the way each translation renders 1 John ?
The five Bible versions in comparison have been the schism in wordings. Some were familiar but the others shifted a little bit. There are some striking resemblances in the form of phrases. Many words that are synonymous among these verses in different five Bible versions. For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form, and in Him you have been made complete, and He is the head over all rule and authority;. For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, and you have been filled in him, who is the head of all rule and authority. For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, and you have been given fullness in Christ, who is the head over every power and authority.
For in Christ lives all the fullness of God in a human body. So you also are complete through your union with Christ, who is the head over every ruler and authority. Everything of God gets expressed in him, so you can see and hear him clearly.
You don't need a telescope, a microscope, or a horoscope to realize the fullness of Christ, and the emptiness of the universe without him. When you come to him, that fullness comes together for you, too.
His power extends over everything. I think it captures nicely what the text is teaching. And again, The Message is way out in left field. A horoscope! Besides the text says nothing about realizing the fullness of Christ.
Rather, Paul asserts that the fullness of the divine nature or of deity dwells in him. Translation Comparison Chart from Zondervan. Reading Level.
Number of Translators. Translation Philosophy. Example Verse. Formal style in modern English but more readable than the King James Version. But we will not boast beyond our measure, but within the measure of the sphere which God apportioned to us as a measure, to reach even as far as you. AMP [apb2] Amplified. Expanded and "amplified" by means of a system of brackets and parentheses, which sometimes make for fragmented reading. Frances E. Siewert, plus 12 others.
Word-for-word plus additional amplification of word meanings. We, on the other hand, will not boast beyond our legitimate province and proper limit, but will keep within the limits [of our commission which] God has allotted us as our measuring line and which reaches and includes even you. Literal style, but more readable than the King James Version. But we will not boast beyond limits, but will boast only with regard to the area of influence God assigned to us, to reach even you.
Difficult to read due to 17th-century English vocabulary and word order. But we will not boast of things without our measure, but according to the measure of the rule which God hath distributed to us, a measure to reach even unto you.
Easier word usage, but somewhat choppy because it maintains 17th century sentence structure. Authors used the original KJV as a benchmark, while working to produce an accurate and modern word-for-word translation. We, however, will not boast beyond measure, but within the limits of the sphere which God appointed us--a sphere which especially includes you. A highly readable, accurate translation written in modern English. Balance between word-for-word and thought-for-thought.
We, however, will not boast beyond measure, but according to the measure of the area of ministry that God has assigned to us, which reaches even you. Contemporary, dignified with generic language in reference to humans.
Attempts a balance between word-for-word and thought-for-thought. We, however, will not boast beyond limits, but will keep within the field that God has assigned to us, to reach out even as far as you.
A clear and straightforward translation that reads smoothly. Written in basic American English. But we will not boast beyond measure but will keep to the limits God has apportioned us, namely, to reach even you.
Balance between word translation and meaning. By contrast we do not intend to boast beyond measure, but will measure ourselves by the standard which God laid down for us, namely that of having come all the way to you. Attempts to balance between word-for-word and thought-for-thought. None of this fazes us because Jesus loves us. Does it mean he no longer loves us if we have trouble or calamity, or are persecuted, or hungry, or destitute, or in danger, or threatened with death?
Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword? However, I have to point out the issue with paraphrases like The Message. No where in this passage does Paul say that "not even the worst sins listed in Scripture" can separate us from Christ. In fact, our sins are not even what Paul is describing here!
He is saying that nothing external happening to us can ever separate us from Christ's love. So please, whatever translation you choose--if you go for a paraphrase please avoid ones like The Message. Dynamic translations try to find a middle ground between though-for-thought and word-for-word. Often they are very good for most individuals, as they are generally quite accurate while also quite readable.
Both of these passages have the same meaning, and are almost the same. However, the NIV tries to make the verse's wording clearer by replacing "him" with "Christ" where appropriate and making certain phrases clearer.
What are the disadvantages of a dynamic translation? For most people there may not be any notable downsides. Like anything striving to reach a middle ground, there will be plenty of people for whom a dynamic translation is too literal or too loose.
Those who want to know for sure what they are reading is the closest readable form of the original text may not be happy with a dynamic translation in the same way that those who want something written in the most modern language possible would not be happy with how comparatively rigid a dynamic translation can be. There was a time when the only translation most believers held to be valid was the King James Version.
The New International Version or, NIV was one of the first translations which managed to show Christians there were "better" translations available which were just as valid.
The NIV was translated directly from the original languages by more than biblical scholars of various denominations. A self-governing body of fifteen biblical scholars, the Committee on Bible Translation, was developed to oversee the translation work with various teams working on the translation and submitting it for review by intermediate editorial committees and then to a general committee of members before being sent to selected individuals before a final review.
Samples of the translation were tested for clarity and ease of reading with pastors, students, scholars, and many others. While most NIV readers use the revision the latest one was released in The NIV is considered a dynamic translation--seeking to balance between word-for-word and thought-for-thought translation styles. There is a reason the New International Version is this year's 1 selling Bible.
The NIV gets a score of 7. It was originally completed in having been commissioned by King James I of England in response to perceived problems in earlier English translations detected by the Puritans. The Bible in English: its history and influence. James gave the translators instructions to limit Puritan influence on the translation: intending to guarantee that the new version would conform to the ecclesiology and reflect the episcopal structure of the Church of England and its belief in an ordained clergy.
The King James Version differs slightly from other versions of the Bible due to its use of the late Byzantine text-type and Textus Receptus manuscripts. Modern scholars have the advantage of having found many earlier manuscripts which they see as better witnesses to the original text of the biblical authors.
However, most modern translators compare all manuscripts when translating. No matter what the case, the King James Version is still considered quite accurate and the differences have no impact on any major points of the Christian faith. The King James Version is considered a literal translation. However, it does suffer from outdated albeit, beautiful English consisting of thee s and thou s as well as many archaic terms. The KJV gets a score of It is a revision of the edition of the Revised Standard Version, referring back to the original languages while trying to keep the phrasing of the Tyndale-King James legacy for familiarity.
0コメント