How We Got Our Bible: Dynamic Equivalence and Paraphrase

The second main approach is dynamic equivalence. Rather than accounting for each word of the original, it aims to carry the meaning across - rendering what the sentence does, in language that does the same thing in English.
Then there is a third thing that often gets listed alongside these two, and it should not be. Paraphrase is not really a translation philosophy at all.
The distinction is not snobbery, it is a description of what the work involves. A paraphrase restates the content in freer, fresher words. The Living Bible of 1971 paraphrases an existing English version - it is not a true translation. The Message is different: a highly idiomatic rendering made from the Hebrew and Greek, but free enough that it reads like a paraphrase. Neither should be treated as a close, word-for-word study Bible.
That does not make paraphrases worthless. They can open a passage up, and many people have been helped by them. But they should not be the Bible you study from or build doctrine on, because a paraphrase has already made interpretive decisions for you and has not shown you where.
Know which of the three you are holding. It changes what you can safely ask of it.
Scripture links:
- 2 Timothy 3:16 - all Scripture is breathed out by God.
- Nehemiah 8:8 - reading clearly and giving the sense.
- Acts 8:30-31 - do you understand what you are reading?
Three different jobs. Only two of them are translation.