Theological bias has a negative connotation as something to be avoided, and in general, I think it is. But I do not think it would be realistic to argue that Bible translation can be done without theological bias. It is not simply a matter of whether the translator has a theological agenda or not; there are passages in which all the choices of wording necessarily reflect theological positions. Furthermore, if we are going to be completely objective, even orthodoxy is a bias. That is, it is by definition an opinion that inclines or prejudices the translator toward a particular choice of wording when his choices all have theological implications.
MORE ON THE 1995 NASB – 2020 NASB TRANSLATION DRAMA
I am not going to assume but I am going to make some educated inferences about the Lockman Foundation and the NASB. First, let me preface it with I respect the NASB and every translator that has worked on it from the beginning.
Review of Bill Mounce’s Article Literal Translations and Paraphrases
William D. Mounce is a scholar of New Testament Greek. He is the son of noted scholar Robert H. Mounce. He is the President of BiblicalTraining, a non-profit organization offering educational resources for discipleship in the local church. Bill is the founder and President of BiblicalTraining.org, serves on the Committee for Bible Translation (which is responsible for the NIV translation of the Bible), he was the chief translator for the English Standard Version (ESV) and has written the best-selling biblical Greek textbook, Basics of Biblical Greek, and many other Greek resources.
MARK 10:15 Over and Under Translating the Bible?
Dynamic equivalent (interpretive) translations are very much guilty of over translating the words of the original text, which might be better expressed as going beyond the words of the authors.
Function Vs. Form – a False Dichotomy
The reader needs and deserves to know what the passage actually says, even if it is difficult to understand. A contextual interpretation that ignores or deviates from the Original Language does not provide that, and since this kind of interpretation is a basic element of Dynamic Equivalent / Functional Equivalent translation, there is little or no “equivalency” to the OL in these passages at all. So on this score, the distinction between DE/FE translations and literal translations truly is a false dichotomy. The real distinction is between translations whose philosophies permit this kind of contextual interpretation in place of literal translation and translations that formally correspond to the OL as much as possible.
Romans 9:5 Why Are Translation Choices No Easy Matter?
A Worthy Translation is Faithful What exactly do we mean by faithful, and faithful to what or whom? By faithful, we mean unwavering to the original, to the author himself. The translation committees must choose to be faithful to the original text. Obviously, theological bias should not affect its rendering. We have the following translation... Continue Reading →
PREFACE TO THE UPDATED AMERICAN STANDARD VERSION of The Holy Bible
Our primary purpose is to give the Bible readers what God said by way of his human authors, not what a translator thinks God meant in its place.—Truth Matters! Our primary goal is to be accurate and faithful to the original text. The meaning of a word is the responsibility of the interpreter (i.e., reader), not the translator.—Translating Truth!
Principles of Bible Translation for the Updated American Standard Version (UASV)
Our primary purpose is to give the Bible readers what God said by way of his human authors, not what a translator thinks God meant in its place.—Truth Matters! Our primary goal is to be accurate and faithful to the original text. The meaning of a word is the responsibility of the interpreter (i.e., reader), not the translator.—Translating Truth!
The 2017 Christian Standard Bible (CSB) In Its Own Words As to Trustworthiness
Below are two verses that I used for many principles in life, so let's use these verses for translation principles as well. We will use the 2017 Christian Standard Bible (CSB). My words are in the brackets, of course. Bold is mine. But first, by way of explanation, Dynamic equivalence (CEV, TEV, NLT, NIV, TNIV) and formal equivalence (KJV,... Continue Reading →
Which English Bible Translation Is Preferred by Most Christian Bible Scholars?
The better question is "which type of translation do they prefer": literal (word-for-word) vs dynamic (thought-for-thought), or should I say what God said by way of the human authors (literal AKA Form) vs. what the translators think God meant by those words, interpretative (dynamic equivalent).