Dynamic Sense or Real Meaning?

            Often, in modern translations of the Scriptures, the translators have been content to give us the “dynamic” meaning of the original text, while still claiming “commitment to the authority and infallibility of the Bible as the Word of God.” With those words, the translation committee that gave us “The New International Version” of the Bible, while never speaking of inerrancy or verbal inspiration, seeks to assure their readers that they have been faithful in their work, employing multi-denominational scholars from five countries.

Then, in the name of “scholarship,” they tell us that “the Greek text used in translating the New Testament was an eclectic one.” Rather than adhering to the Textus Receptus (Received Text), they chose the texts “according to accepted principles of New Testament textual criticism.

            I do not suggest that the NIV or some of the other modern translations of the Bible are evil, or that the translators are wicked. I am saying that none of the modern translations are needed or in any way helpful. I am not interested in someone giving me the “dynamic sense” of Holy Scripture. Please, give me the real meaning of the words. That — the King James translators did far better than any of their successors.

Don Fortner

Listen to sermons at FreeGraceRadio.com