Page 203 - Way of Life Encyclopedia of the Bible Christianity. Based on the King James Bible

DYNAMIC EQUIVALENCY

misunderstood, for that is one method of torture and TEV—“The people reply, ‘Who would have believed
killing (Eugene A. Nida, God’s Word in Man’s Language, what we report? Who could have seen the Lord’s hand
p. 17). in this?’”
This type of problem becomes a strawman to draw The things added and changed in this passage
attention away from the improper liberties dynamic illustrate that dynamic equivalency goes beyond any
equivalency proponents take with the Word of God. The proper bounds of faithful translating. Upon what
solution to a woodenly literal translation is not dynamic authority have the TEV translators added “the people
equivalency, but a reasonable, spiritual translation reply” to this passage? Upon what authority have they
which seeks to be utterly true to the original words and changed the tenses of the verbs? Upon what authority
form and which does not take the frightful liberties of have they changed “arm of the Lord” to “the Lord’s
dynamic equivalency, but is willing to let the Word of hand”? Translators who do this type of thing might
God say what it says rather than change it—even for the claim only to be making explicit that which is implicit,
sake of simplification. but in actuality they are perverting the Word of God.
Second, dynamic equivalency says the translator must None of these changes are truly implicit in this verse.
interpret. This is true! An example is Is. 7:14 where it is Consider another example. This time we will
arguably possible to translate the Hebrew word “almah” compare Ep. 3:2-4 in the KJV to the Contemporary
either as “young woman” or as “virgin.” The Christ- English Version (CEV):
honoring, Bible-believing translator will always choose KJV—“If ye have heard of the dispensation of the
virgin because he knows that the verse is a Messianic grace of God which is given me to you-ward: How that
prophecy of Christ’s virgin birth. This is the result of by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as
interpretation. Another example: In the Nepali language I wrote afore in few words, Whereby, when ye read, ye
there is no generic term for wine as there is in Greek may understand my knowledge in the mystery of
and Hebrew. The translator, therefore, must interpret Christ).”
passages such as Jn. 2 when he is selecting a Nepali CEV—“You have surely heard about God’s kindness
word for wine. He must translate it “grape juice” or in choosing me to help you. In fact, this letter tells you a
“strong drink,” etc., depending upon the context. little about how God has shown me his mysterious
All translators face this, but the fact that a translator ways. As you read the letter, you will also find out how
must interpret things in Scripture before they are well I really do understand the mystery about Christ.”
translated does not justify the extreme liberties which We see that the liberties taken by dynamic
are being taken in dynamic equivalency versions. equivalency translators go beyond any proper bounds of
Third, dynamic equivalency says that the people for Bible translation. This is true for practically any example
whom the translation is being made must be kept in mind. we could give from these versions. They simply aren’t
Again, this is true. Every translator must have the faithful. Dynamic equivalency proponents won’t admit
people in mind for whom he is translating, but it does that, but, friends, it’s true. Dynamic equivalency (by any
not mean we can change fig tree to banana tree, or name) is a proud new methodology which men of God
blood to death, or plough to hoe, or grace to kindness, of old—the William Tyndales and the Adoniram Judsons
or saints to people of God, or pastors to church officials! —would have rejected in trembling and disgust.
Fourth, dynamic equivalency says some things implicit Dynamic equivalency is especially dangerous because
must be made explicit. This is true. For instance, it is a subtle mixture of truth and error. Many of those
sometimes words must be added in the translation to who are following this method of translation have
make a passage intelligible and/or to bring out words accepted the bitter cake of dynamic equivalency because
implicit in the original. An example is seen in the many of the sweetness of the truth intermingled therein. The
words which appear in italic print in the King James principles can sound so reasonable. But the bottom line
Version. These are words which were added by the is that dynamic equivalency is a perversion of Scripture.
translators but which are not explicitly in the original DYNAMIC EQUIVALENCY IS AN IMPROPER
texts. Such is essential in Bible translation work and is ANSWER TO VERY REAL PROBLEMS.
something which has always been done. But contrast
this important translation principle with the dynamic Promoters of dynamic equivalency delight in drawing
equivalency perversion of it in the following example examples from translation work in undeveloped nations
from Is. 53:1 in the Today’s English Version: among illiterate people and using these to justify the
method of dynamic equivalency.
KJV—“Who hath believed our report? and to whom
is the arm of the Lord revealed?” “How do you talk about sheep to people who have
never seen sheep and have no word for such an
animal? What do you use for ‘wine’ in a language

Way of Life Encyclopedia of the Bible & Christianity 203