Posted on 05/17/2008 1:50:25 AM PDT by Gamecock
The theory of translation that seeks to represent the original text by translating in a word-for-word paradigm, rather than a thought-for-thought paradigm. Formal Equivalence translations would include, among others, the KJV, NASB, ESV, and RSV.
Also see Dynamic Equivalence
All I ask is that you tell us your preferred version and why. Doing so will give others some food for thought.
TWOTD Ping
ESV here.
It maintains much of the majesty of the KJV, ans has big theological words that are very precise in their meaning.
It is also endorsed by many preachers/theologians who I respect greatly: Sproul, Piper, Bridges, Chapell, Ryken, Eareckson Tada, Brown...
I like the KJV for studying (Strong’s is useful, plus I’ve memorized many verses in KJV english), and I like the Message paraphrase for relaxed reading.
I think Formal Equivalence is good, but I also see the value in Dynamic Equivalence. For example, shalom means much more than just “peace”, and sozo means much more than “salvation”.
It’s good to study deeply with both methods.
The KJV because the Greek Text underlying it is more trustworthy and the Formal Equivalence makes it easier to find my way back to the actual Greek word underlying the English word in the translation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.