Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | Genesis 2:2 By the seventh day God completed His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done. |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | Genesis 2:2 And by the seventh day God completed His work which He had done, and He rested (ceased) on the seventh day from all His work which He had done. [Heb 4:9, 10] |
Bible Question:
That's my problem Brad. I don't know what free interpretation is. It seems to be a technical term with a set definition. I've asked what free interpretation and formal interpretation were and haven't gotten an answer. I don't know what they are and therefore don't know the differences between them. Sola scriptura is what I adhere to. That the Bible tells stories to illustrate the Truth does not negate any authority of the Bible. The parables of Jesus were stories -- I don't think anyone argues against that -- and they tell the Truth that Jesus wanted to tell us. Good folk disagree on what other passages/pericopes were and were not stories. |
Bible Answer: Thank you Rick, I appreciate your comments as being forthright, and I feel that when you have given personal interpretations, you have labeled them as such. Therefore I enjoy conversations with you, because we are all here to learn and grow, and this is exactly what I am doing here. You asked about what I call a 'free' interpretation, and what this falls under is the paraphrase category. Please let me explain myself. Many people today think that a good translation of the Bible means a word-for-word translation. If the original has a noun, then there is a noun in the translation. If the verse has six words, they don't want to see seven words in the translation. This method of translation is referred to as literal, or "formal equivalence." The King James, old American Standard, and the New American Standard are found near the formal end, where a literal translation would be the very end. On the other hand is a more free translation, what is referred to as a "dynamic equivalent". This is not as concerned with the grammar of the original, as it is with the basic gist, or the essence of the original. A dynamic equivalent is more interpretive, which makes it easier to read. One major complaint with this style is that it leaves too much open to the convictions of the interpretors. The New International Version and the New English Bible fall into this category. At the far free end of the spectrum are what is often called 'paraphrased'. These throw out grammatical rules and simply convert the text on a thought-for-thought basis. These include the Good News Bible, and the like. For an instance of how this type of interpretation can be damaging, let's look at Hebrews 1:3 and see who the translation says Jesus actually is. The KJV (formal equivalent) reads, Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; And the NIV (Dynamic equivalent) has it: The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven. Now for the free end of the spectrum. The Good News Translation was first published in 1976 by the American Bible Society in a "common language." The simple, everyday language makes it especially popular for children and those learning English. GNT says, (parenthesis mine throughout) "He reflects the brightness of God's glory (!) and is the exact likeness of God's own being, sustaining the universe with his powerful word. Here is the RSV, He reflects the glory of God (!) and bears the very stamp of his nature, upholding the universe by his word of power. And this is the New Century Version: The Son reflects the glory of God (!) and shows exactly what God is like.(!) He holds everything together with his powerful word. Now, the paraphrase versions are dangerously free, because they change the description of Christ. If Christ is a reflection of God's glory, then He has no glory of His own. This makes Christ to be to God, as the moon is to the sun. The sun is the light, and the moon gives off no light but reflects the light from the sun. Is this how we want to portray Christ to an unbeliever who is seeking answers? This will only lead to confusion. God is not an author of confusion but the enemy uses this as an arrow in his quiver. A college professor used to say, "The Christian army is the only army in the world that shoots its wounded!" Unfortunately, this is especially true when it comes to translations of the Bible. This is why we should be careful with our own thoughts. It is okay when we label them as our own thoughts (as I think Rick has done here) But when we say " the Bible says" for what amounts to a private interpretation, then we are coming dangerously close to an offense to God and violating the TOU. |