Style and Preference -An Addition to "Translations Travails"

After reading my Bible today I came to the realization that I was not sufficiently clear in my discussion of translations. I was uneasy with my possible unfairness to the NASB and other more wooden translations. Rather than go back and re-discuss some places I think the NASB linguistically and syntactically does better than the NIV (or other more vernacular translations), I will simply comment on one overarching area that I missed in discussing them. In many cases, the choice of translation is based on nothing more than preference. Sometimes the language that is rendered is stronger in one translation and the other does not capture that "zing" one is looking for, in their opinion. I realized that sometimes our preference for a certain kind of language dictates our choice more than syntactical questions. I came to this realization as I read 1 John 2:16 in my NIV. I enjoy this verse particularly because my dad used to quote it growing up and, through his godly wisdom, I was often protected from those things of the world. When I read a different translation from what I was used to hearing, I felt it missed the punch that I was used to. I missed the clarity that comes from the NASB's rendering of, "For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life, is not from the Father, but is from the world." In that case, my choice was a linguistic one (and a nostalgic one), not based on some syntactical superiority, but simply on style. When many translations are absolutely, without question, faithful to the original intentions of the Biblical authors, many factors come into play in our choice of translation. Preference of style and language is not to be underestimated in this and thus holds a strong place in our weighing of which translation will best suit our needs.