Dynamic Unequivalency

It is my determination to not be a Bible translation/adaptation snob.
There are uses for most versions of the Bible, from simply-worded adaptations for new believers who are not familiar with common Christian terminology, to heavily annotated study Bibles designed to be used in conjunction with multi-volume concordances. (This grace does not extend to gender-neutralized adaptations; for those who wish to neutralize gender in violation of both Biblical, natural, and grammatical principles, I believe Paul had some choice words in Galatians 5 which might apply rather well.)

However, I admit that when possible, I prefer as little dynamic equivalency as possible.
I realize that some things in ancient Hebrew simply have no English equivalent, and thus must be taken over as a thought and not word-for-word, but in the NIV, for example, we have thought-for-thought taken so far that the original meaning can become obscured.

In a study of John I led a few years ago, we often came across places where Jesus says or does things that seem paradoxial. Not being eastern in our philosophy, we feel that these apparent paradoxes should be resolved, and that's where the trouble starts. When the NIV translators, with good and God-glorifying intentions I have absolutely no doubt, decided to smooth over a few passages by adding or changing a word here or there, they removed some of the "punch" of Jesus' words, and in a few cases nearly obscured the original meaning altogether.

One example we ran across was Jesus' first miracle, at the wedding in Cana.
When Mary asks Jesus to help, Jesus' response, in the NIV, is as follows:

"Dear woman, why do you involve me?" Jesus replied, "My time has not yet come."

Contrast this to His more literal reply in the ESV:

And Jesus said to her, "Woman, what does this have to do with me? My hour has not yet come."

The "Dear" is an addition. There is no "Dear" in Hebrew.

At this point, some are quick to rush in.
"But obviously Jesus wouldn't have been rude to His mother, so He must have meant it in a endearing way." Or more subtly, "'Woman' was considered a term of endearment in Hebrew culture at the time, so adding 'Dear' is just clarifying that for modern readers."

That may be so. But the fact remains that Jesus said "Woman".
If you want to know why He said it that way, go do some research. You might learn some things you wouldn't have otherwise. But don't change the Bible on the off-chance that some people might be confused about Jesus' philial piety, please.

The root of the issue is that we want Jesus to conform to our standards of morality.
"Oh, He wouldn't have done/said/meant that, so let's clarify it by adding something"

Jesus IS morality. He and the Father are One, and the Father is the Great I Am.
And all of creation has been placed specifically under His dominion. All laws that are true and binding have their source in Him.

We have no call to go trying to conform Him to our understanding of morality and right behavior.
The duty of any Bible translator is to as accurately as humanly possible recreate exactly what Christ said and did. If He did something that was apparently paradoxical, perhaps He intended it to be that way?

In the before-mentioned John study, we uncovered much valuable information by looking at these apparent paradoxes. What we found is that every time there is what appears to be a paradox, Jesus is being consistent, and we are being inconsistent. We were forced to change our thinking as a result, and learned a great deal.

Had we only had a dynamic equivalency text for study purposes, that learning would have been impossible, as the confusing portions would have all been glossed over, leaving us with something true, but less extensive, and certainly less mind-renewing.

As for me, I like my Bible with the crusts still on.
Don't give me the rounded-off edges of truth, please, it's demeaning to God and all of us to say that He didn't know what He was doing when He said that, or that we are not intelligent enough to figure it out.

-Joseph

PS: Did I mention I was excited that I'll be learning to read the Bible in its original languages soon? Greek and Hebrew, here I come...