What do you think?
Rate this book
Choosing a Bible: Understanding Bible Translation Differences
Of the many Bible translations available today, are some better than others? If so, what criteria can we use to determine what makes a good translation? Leland Ryken introduces readers to the central issues in this debate and presents several reasons why essentially literal-word-for-word-translations are superior to dynamic equivalent-thought-for-thought-translations. You don't have to be a Bible scholar to recognize the need for a quality Bible translation. We all want to know that the Bible we read, study, and memorize is faithful to the original. Dr. Ryken tackles this issue and breaks it down in this concise, logical, and straightforward book, giving readers a valuable tool for selecting a Bible translation.
32 pages, Paperback
First published May 16, 2005
3 people are currently reading
109 people want to read
About the author
Leland Ryken
128 books139 followersDr. Ryken has served on the faculty of Wheaton College since 1968. He has published over thirty books and more than one hundred articles and essays, devoting much of his scholarship to Bible translations and the study of the Bible as literature. He served as Literary Chairman for the English Standard Version (ESV) of the Bible and in 2003 received the distinguished Gutenberg Award for his contributions to education, writing, and the understanding of the Bible.
He is the father of Philip Graham Ryken
He is the father of Philip Graham Ryken
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews
July 11, 2023
Short, concise, and readable. An excellent introduction to understanding Bible translations.
December 13, 2021
This is actually a pamphlet as opposed to a full blown book. If you have ever been asked "What Bible translation should I read?" You must check this book out. In 30 pages Ryken makes a stellar case for essentially literal translations of the Bible. I have been more gracious with dynamic equivalent translations the last couple of years, but this book reinforces the need to "srudy" out of multiple translations and essentially literal translations like the NKJV, ESV, and NASB.
April 30, 2018
Actual Ratings: 4.25
January 28, 2022
A great case for essentially literal translations as opposed to dynamic equivalence. RIP to anyone who likes the CSB.
“Throughout the Bible, Scripture is referred to as the word of God, not the thoughts of God.” Pg 29-30
“Throughout the Bible, Scripture is referred to as the word of God, not the thoughts of God.” Pg 29-30
October 4, 2014
Very good pamphlet, 3 stars because it was interesting how towards the last chapter his references to the NASB just disappeared putting the ESV as the only good literal translation.
June 1, 2023
I am advocate of formal equivalence translations, but I am increasingly finding that the foremost defenders of the methodology just make bad arguments and honestly do not seem to understand linguistics. Ryken raises legitimate concerns concerning overly free translations, but others are nitpicking and just choosing the worst examples to engage with to make a point. At places, he seems to he repeating arguments that would have been used against translations other than the KJV (e.g. simplifying language, paring down vocabulary, pandering to lowest common denominator, etc).
No literal translation truly communicates EXACTLY what the biblical writers originally wrote; you only get this from reading the original languages. Literal translations are never truly literal.
I felt this passage was somewhat instructive in at least demonstrating a lack of nuance in his Hebrew:
'Here is how a range of translations express the agreed upon meaning:
“Whatsoever he doeth shall prosper” ( KJV ).
“In all that he does, he prospers” ( RSV , ESV ; NASB similar).
“In all that they do, they prosper” ( NRSV ; NLT nearly identical).
“Whatever he does prospers” ( NIV ).
“They succeed in everything they do” ( GNB ).
Do these translations communicate the same meaning? No. To project prosperity into the future with the formula “shall prosper” is not the same as to assert the present reality that the godly person “prospers.” To locate the prosperity in the person by saying that in all that the godly person does “he prospers” is different from saying that “whatever he does” or “they do” prospers. To paint a portrait of the godly person (singular) communicates a different meaning from the communal or group implication of the plural “they.”'
Frankly, there is a translation difficulty at Psalm 1:3 that Ryken glazes right over and tends to attribute to poor translation philosophy. The imperfect tense could be understood as either present or future (prosper/prospers), while the subject of the verb itself is ambiguous and could grammatically refer to the righteous man (he prospers) or the relative pronoun (whatever... prospers). Hebrew also uses singular to stand for a general principle in a way that English commonly uses plural groups to make general statements. All translation is interpretation to some degree, and sometimes translators simply have to make a decision because they do not have the option of being ambiguous in English in the same way that the Hebrew is.
In my opinion, the English language has been so influenced by the legacy of the KJV that formal equivalence translations are generally to be preferred. I just wish the argumentation wasn't so overstated and peppered with poor linguistic understanding.
No literal translation truly communicates EXACTLY what the biblical writers originally wrote; you only get this from reading the original languages. Literal translations are never truly literal.
I felt this passage was somewhat instructive in at least demonstrating a lack of nuance in his Hebrew:
'Here is how a range of translations express the agreed upon meaning:
“Whatsoever he doeth shall prosper” ( KJV ).
“In all that he does, he prospers” ( RSV , ESV ; NASB similar).
“In all that they do, they prosper” ( NRSV ; NLT nearly identical).
“Whatever he does prospers” ( NIV ).
“They succeed in everything they do” ( GNB ).
Do these translations communicate the same meaning? No. To project prosperity into the future with the formula “shall prosper” is not the same as to assert the present reality that the godly person “prospers.” To locate the prosperity in the person by saying that in all that the godly person does “he prospers” is different from saying that “whatever he does” or “they do” prospers. To paint a portrait of the godly person (singular) communicates a different meaning from the communal or group implication of the plural “they.”'
Frankly, there is a translation difficulty at Psalm 1:3 that Ryken glazes right over and tends to attribute to poor translation philosophy. The imperfect tense could be understood as either present or future (prosper/prospers), while the subject of the verb itself is ambiguous and could grammatically refer to the righteous man (he prospers) or the relative pronoun (whatever... prospers). Hebrew also uses singular to stand for a general principle in a way that English commonly uses plural groups to make general statements. All translation is interpretation to some degree, and sometimes translators simply have to make a decision because they do not have the option of being ambiguous in English in the same way that the Hebrew is.
In my opinion, the English language has been so influenced by the legacy of the KJV that formal equivalence translations are generally to be preferred. I just wish the argumentation wasn't so overstated and peppered with poor linguistic understanding.
September 12, 2022
Helpful to understand differences between dynamic equivalence and formal equivalence. Ryken makes a strong case that dynamic equivalent translations are not really translations - they are a hybrid between translations and commentaries. He argues that since they seek to express the author's intended thought (not his words), they are adding interpretation to the translation. He reasons that the author's intended thought is expressed in the actual words they used when they could have just as easily used other words. Therefore, if we translate their thoughts rather than their words, we are taking away from the very words the Holy Spirit inspired them to pen.
January 11, 2018
A more honest title would have been "Choose The ESV: Why (Most) Other Translations Are Horrible".
March 8, 2018
Dr. Ryken is correct throughout the book, now if only the ESV translation committee would follow his lead.
June 13, 2021
Helpful... Recommend
July 7, 2011
MY REVIEW:
Whether you are curious about the various Bible translations or not you should read this book. It is very short - all of 30 pages - and extremely informative and helpful in both learning and making a choice on what version of the Bible you want to use for your personal study.
I appreciated the way Ryken succinctly shares the facts in a book that can be easily read in one sitting. It is a book that is to the point and nothing but the point versus a thick "flowery" book that one never quite manages to read from cover to cover. While this is not a comprehensive book - as I am sure there is more that could be said - it says enough to help one know the appropriate settings in which to use the various types of versions.
My only disappointment in this book was that Ryken uses a lot of big words which make it a little hard to wade through at times. However, if you're willing to either look up words a few times or read what you can, you will enjoy it and benefit greatly from it. And the fact is, it's so short it's not that bad to work through - even if you don't know a word or two. Overall this is a must read for teens to adults of any age. If nothing else you will walk away with a basic understanding of Essentially Literal and Dynamic Equivalent translations.
Whether you are curious about the various Bible translations or not you should read this book. It is very short - all of 30 pages - and extremely informative and helpful in both learning and making a choice on what version of the Bible you want to use for your personal study.
I appreciated the way Ryken succinctly shares the facts in a book that can be easily read in one sitting. It is a book that is to the point and nothing but the point versus a thick "flowery" book that one never quite manages to read from cover to cover. While this is not a comprehensive book - as I am sure there is more that could be said - it says enough to help one know the appropriate settings in which to use the various types of versions.
My only disappointment in this book was that Ryken uses a lot of big words which make it a little hard to wade through at times. However, if you're willing to either look up words a few times or read what you can, you will enjoy it and benefit greatly from it. And the fact is, it's so short it's not that bad to work through - even if you don't know a word or two. Overall this is a must read for teens to adults of any age. If nothing else you will walk away with a basic understanding of Essentially Literal and Dynamic Equivalent translations.
July 10, 2013
A helpful pamphlet to have around. I thought it was a short book but more like a pamphlet (32 pgs).
It is helpful. Ryken takes Dynamic Equivalence theory and translators to task arguing for an Essentially Literal translation.
Eye opening to the liberties taken in Dynamic Equivalent translations.
He brings out 5 basic problems with Dynamic Equivalence translations:
(1) Makes changes we wouldn't allow in our own works.
(2) Lacks translation process controls. Results in destabilizing the English text.
(3) Replaces what Bible says with what translators interpret Bible to mean.
(4) Not what we would expect. Expect to read authors words not translators opinions and commentary.
(5) Confuse origin of meaning. Meaning is not found at the phrase level but the word level.
It is helpful. Ryken takes Dynamic Equivalence theory and translators to task arguing for an Essentially Literal translation.
Eye opening to the liberties taken in Dynamic Equivalent translations.
He brings out 5 basic problems with Dynamic Equivalence translations:
(1) Makes changes we wouldn't allow in our own works.
(2) Lacks translation process controls. Results in destabilizing the English text.
(3) Replaces what Bible says with what translators interpret Bible to mean.
(4) Not what we would expect. Expect to read authors words not translators opinions and commentary.
(5) Confuse origin of meaning. Meaning is not found at the phrase level but the word level.
December 30, 2013
Why are there so many different translations of the Bible? What makes one translation of the Bible different from another? Are any to be preferred? Yes, says Ryken, who uses this brief booklet to explain the methods used by translators. He points to the inherent flaws in ‘thought-for-thought’ systems, instead highlighting the advantages of a ‘word-for-word’ approach the preserves the integrity of the original text. He offers much to consider in a helpful, yet accessible manner.
March 24, 2010
A bit wordy and technical for many people, but he's an English professor. The book argues that essentially literal Bible translations are better than dynamic equivalence Bibles. I like his reasons and agree with his opinion.
I would recommend this book to anyone with questions about how Bible translations are different. Keep an open mind if you think he's too wordy.
I would recommend this book to anyone with questions about how Bible translations are different. Keep an open mind if you think he's too wordy.
June 13, 2016
Helpful pamphlet describing why there are so many different translations of the Bible, and how to choose the best one. Ryken argues for formal (word-for-word) equivalence translations over dynamic (thought-for-thought) equivalence translations, highlighting how a formal equivalence translation preserves the integrity of the inspired text.
August 3, 2013
Short informational and helpful book. Took me about an hour to read and is 1.99$ on Kendle
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_nos...
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_nos...
June 7, 2018
This is helpful. Especially for those who REALLY want to know which translation is the best
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews