There are easily more than 100 major translations of the Bible in English, including separate translations of the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh), the Torah, and the New Testament. There is an amazingly complete Web site provided by Tyndale House in Cambridge that lists most of them, characterizes their translation theory, and offers a sample translation. Theories of translation are enthusiastically and even “hotly” debated among both non-specialists and the scholars. There are entire sessions devoted to discussions of the issues involved in Bible translation at professional meetings, such as the Society for Biblical Literature. The debate largely focuses around whether a translation should be “word for word” equivalent (“literal”) to the original or what is called dynamic or “functionally” equivalent. A good overview of this issue is an article written by Richard Van Leeuwen in Christianity Today some years ago, titled “We Really Do Need Another Translation?” Van Leeuwen points out how so many of the newer translations (NIV, NRSV, REB) are influenced by the “dynamic equivalence” method of translation, that departs from the “literal” approach to make understanding easier for modern readers. Here is a chart showing the range of some of the major translations based upon this criterion:

In trying to evaluate which translation is the “best” or the “most accurate” one’s conclusion really turns on what one is looking for in a translation. If one wants a readable overview of the story-line of the Bible one of the less literal translations can be quite helpful. On the other hand, for close and careful study, with full attention to original text and its style, rhythm, and idiom, a “word for word” translation is essential. The Transparent English Bible is certainly at the far, far, end of the “word for word” spectrum, but it is really much more than just “literal.” We have adopted a method unlike that of any other major translation, including the more “literal” ones such as the King James Version, New American Standard, New King James, and the English Standard Version. The problem with these is that they still do not show the meticulous care to reflect the original text that is possible, but more important, they are completely saturated with traditional Christian theological language. The idea behind the TEB is to carry over the literal words of the text, and this includes details such as singulars and plurals, definite articles, and our effort to consistently reflect the root meaning of words to the extent that is possible in English without the theological overlay so common in almost all English Bibles.

One result of this method is that the idioms, rhythm, cadence, and “feel” of the original languages also begins to come through in the English. This can seem a bit awkward to the reader at first, but once one becomes used to it the literary and verbal power of this method begins to come through. This is best experienced if one reads the translation out loud. Here are comments from two readers that get at this very point:

“I’ve only read the first thee chapters, but I have to tell you, it’s at once familiar but also like reading something I’ve not read before. There’s an ancient, mysterious quality about it that makes me want to, like Moses, take off my shoes while standing on holy ground. Obviously, I’m having a hard time describing the experience. The ungrammatical, strange cadence to the language may have something to do with it, but there’s also the feeling that I’ve discovered something that’s been hidden for ages.”

“It has an unusual nostalgia that makes it exciting, yet biblically sound with an unusual cadence…I feel the excitement a child would have with a new story book!”

This is precisely the effect that we intend. There is no doubt that the TEB takes some time getting used to. It is so radically different from any other version of the Bible that at first it might even come across crude and uneven to the reader used to the easy and familiar cadences of traditional English translations.