When we approach the question of Bible translation, we stand before a fundamental tension: readers want to understand what God has spoken, yet translators are often tempted to provide what readers expect or demand rather than what the inspired text actually says. A translation, therefore, must balance fidelity to the original with accessibility in the receptor language. The problem, however, is that many modern translations have shifted this balance too far toward catering to the reader’s assumed desires, rather than preserving what the divine Author has truly given. This article explores what the reader should rightly want from a Bible translation and what the translator, if faithful, can and must give.

---

The Reader’s Proper Desire: God’s Exact Words

At the most basic level, the faithful reader of Scripture does not merely want religious sentiments or paraphrased summaries of divine truths; he desires the very words of God. The biblical authors claimed inspiration for their words (2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Pet. 1:21), and Jesus Himself argued from the precise wording of Scripture (Matt. 22:31–32; John 10:35). Thus, the reader should want, above all, a translation that gives him access to those very words in his own language.

This is not an unrealistic expectation. For centuries, believers have cherished the conviction that translation can faithfully bridge languages. When Jerome produced the Latin Vulgate, when Wycliffe rendered Scripture into Middle English, and when Tyndale gave the plowboy the Word of God in plain English, the goal was never to domesticate God’s Word into cultural clichés but to preserve its inspired form in intelligible language. The true reader of Scripture today should want no less.

---

The Translator’s Sacred Obligation: Faithfulness Over Creativity

If the reader’s rightful desire is to hear God’s words, then the translator’s obligation is not to act as a commentator, mediator, or cultural adaptor, but as a faithful conveyor of meaning. This requires resisting the temptation to make the Bible say what is “clear” or “relevant” according to modern sensibilities.

Translation is not interpretation, though the two overlap at points. Every act of translation involves choices, but the faithful translator minimizes his own intrusion, striving to reproduce the form, structure, and lexical content of the original as closely as English allows. The translator cannot give what the text does not provide; he must restrict himself to rendering what God inspired, however challenging, foreign, or even unsettling it may appear to the modern reader.

---

Readers Should Want Precision, Not Paraphrase

Many today assume that accessibility should be the highest goal of Bible translation. Thus, publishers promote translations as “easy to read” or “written in today’s language.” But if accessibility comes at the cost of accuracy, the reader is left with a diminished Bible. A paraphrase may be simple, but it is no longer Scripture in the strict sense—it is an explanation or retelling of Scripture.

The serious Bible reader should want precision, even if it requires effort to study. A literal rendering that preserves technical theological terms such as justification, sanctification, and propitiation serves the church far better than a flattened paraphrase like “made right with God” or “set apart.” Readers who love God’s Word should desire the fullest vocabulary of revelation, not a reduced or diluted version designed for quick consumption.

---

The Translator Can Give Consistency Across Scripture

Another aspect the reader should want is consistency. If God has inspired a particular term, repeated across contexts, then the translator should aim to preserve that repetition in English. This allows readers to trace themes, connections, and theological patterns across the canon.

For example, the Greek sarx (“flesh”) carries a range of meanings in Paul’s letters, yet dynamic translations render it inconsistently as “sinful nature,” “human effort,” or “self.” This erases intertextual links and forces readers into the translator’s interpretive grid. A literal rendering of “flesh,” consistently applied, allows the reader to explore Paul’s theology with accuracy. The translator can give this consistency, and the reader should want it.

---

Readers Should Want the Challenge of the Text

God did not design His Word to be instantly and exhaustively understood. Scripture contains “things hard to understand” (2 Pet. 3:16), requiring diligent study, prayer, and the aid of teachers. The desire for a simplified, spoon-fed Bible contradicts the very nature of divine revelation, which invites reflection, meditation, and growth.

The faithful reader should not want a Bible that removes difficulty but one that preserves it, so that he may learn and mature. The translator, therefore, must not preemptively flatten ambiguities, explain figures of speech, or resolve tensions. He must leave the text as it stands, for in that form God has given it.

---

The Translator Can Give Historical and Cultural Authenticity

Another element the reader should rightly desire is the preservation of the Bible’s historical and cultural context. Translators who replace “denarius” with “a day’s wage” or “cubit” with “18 inches” in the text itself rob the reader of direct connection with the ancient world of the Bible. Such explanations belong in footnotes, not in the inspired text.

The translator can and must give the realia of the original world, trusting readers to learn and adapt. Just as modern people study the vocabulary of Shakespeare or Homer without demanding that their works be paraphrased into 21st-century idiom, so too can Bible readers learn the terminology of Scripture. Authenticity, not domestication, is what the reader should want and what the translator can provide.

---

Readers Should Want Transparency, Not Hidden Interpretations

Dynamic equivalent translations often conceal the translator’s interpretive decisions behind a smooth English rendering. By resolving ambiguities or supplying interpretive glosses, they deprive the reader of seeing where the text itself leaves room for multiple possibilities. For example, the Greek genitive phrase pistis Christou in Romans 3:22 can mean either “faith in Christ” or “faithfulness of Christ.” A dynamic translation typically chooses one option and hides the other, but a literal rendering allows the reader to confront the text’s richness and ambiguity.

The faithful reader should want this transparency, and the translator can give it—by resisting the urge to decide for the reader what the text “really” means.

---

The Translator Can Give Reverence to the Divine Name

A further element of fidelity lies in preserving the divine Name, Jehovah, wherever the Hebrew text uses the Tetragrammaton (JHVH). Readers should want to see the Name God revealed, not a replacement such as “the LORD.” Substituting a title for God’s personal Name obscures the covenantal reality of His self-disclosure. The translator has the capacity to restore this, and the reader should insist upon it.

---

Readers Should Want Faithful Form, Not Stylistic Substitution

The Bible comes to us not merely in isolated words but in grammatical forms, discourse structures, and literary genres. Poetic parallelism, chiastic structures, Hebraic idioms, and Semitic turns of phrase carry meaning beyond mere words. Dynamic translations often suppress these features in the name of “good English.” But in doing so, they rob the reader of the inspired form.

Faithful readers should want the Bible’s form preserved wherever possible, even if it stretches English style. The translator can give this by allowing Hebrew poetry to sound like Hebrew poetry and Greek rhetoric to sound like Greek rhetoric, rather than recasting them into modern English prose.

---

What the Reader Should Want Above All: God’s Voice, Not Man’s

Ultimately, the reader should want the translator to disappear—not in skill, but in self-assertion. The reader should want to hear God’s voice, not the translator’s. Dynamic equivalence and paraphrase, for all their good intentions, often amplify the translator’s interpretive voice at the expense of the inspired text.

The translator can give God’s voice, faithfully rendered, if he adheres to a literal philosophy: preserving words, forms, and ambiguities as God inspired them, while providing explanatory helps in notes, prefaces, and study materials. In this way, the reader receives exactly what he should want, and the translator fulfills his sacred duty.

You May Also Enjoy

Literal Translation: Seven Fallacies About the Bible

About the Author

CLICK LINKED IMAGE TO VISIT ONLINE STORE

CLICK TO SCROLL THROUGH OUR BOOKS