Does a 'Thought for Thought' translation or 'Dynamic Equivalence' make a difference?

[hobie]

Now most people will say that in reading different versions of the Bible it really seems no different, and it appears that they say the same thing in their eyes. The thing is, that the NIV claims it is a 'Thought for Thought' translation or 'Dynamic Equivalence', but you have to ask, whose thoughts. That is why they may seem to say much the same thing and yet, just a few changes or even words can make a big difference.

Here is one that definitely makes a difference and its done in Gods Ten Commandments:

But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:

but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your manservant or maidservant, nor your animals, nor the alien within your gates.

Do you see what they did. Its very subtle, but if you look "the Sabbath" is changed to "a Sabbath". This would broaden the scope of the command to cover ALL sabbaths including 'ceremonial' ones and not just the one made for man on the seventh day, and effectively create confusion within the Bible itself, for God did not create the world in seven days prior to each of the ceremonial sabbaths.

The "ceremonial law" was dealing with forms of worshipping God and with ritual cleanness and judicial precepts came into existence only with the Law of Moses and were only temporary. So the "ceremonial sabbaths" or high sabbaths", were seven annual biblical festivals or feast days, such as Passover which reminded the people of how God took care of them or His blessing to them.

So its a big difference from "the Sabbath" to "a Sabbath". but it would escape most readers, and the subterfuge remain hidden..

 

[Frankj]

The original language, both the spoken and written forms, of the bible have been translated according to a bit of guesswork since their written forms often didn't have punctuation included to reflect the truest meaning of what was first spoken and then written, and often written in a different language than spoken.

On the Cross, did Jesus say "“Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise.”" as is commonly translated from the hebrew he spoke and written Koine Greek or did he say “Truly I tell you today, you will be with me in paradise.”?

The latter would actually make more sense since he was not in heaven till several days latter.

But the actual meaning, that he accepted the thief's repentance as he was dying, is still there either way.

 

[tango]

In this specific case it seems that saying the seventh day is a Sabbath is more accurate, given there are the seven annual Sabbaths that you mentioned yourself.

In some instances the difference between a definite article and indefinite article is a crucial distinction. I'm not sure that's the case here - if anything usage of an indefinite article explicitly acknowledges the other Sabbaths.

 

[hobie]

The original language, both the spoken and written forms, of the bible have been translated according to a bit of guesswork since their written forms often didn't have punctuation included to reflect the truest meaning of what was first spoken and then written, and often written in a different language than spoken.

On the Cross, did Jesus say "“Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise.”" as is commonly translated from the hebrew he spoke and written Koine Greek or did he say “Truly I tell you today, you will be with me in paradise.”?

The latter would actually make more sense since he was not in heaven till several days latter.

But the actual meaning, that he accepted the thief's repentance as he was dying, is still there either way.

Nope, nothing was taken or added by the Jews. It was word for word, and the later translators strived for the same bar. But the new versions have no such compulsory standards if you check closely.