close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Bible translations

Discussion in 'Religious Issues' started by rick458, Mar 7, 2012.


  1. rick458

    rick458
    Expand Collapse
    USS Texas BB-35

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    4,160
    47
    Location:
    La Porte Texas
    What is your favorite translation?
    and
    Which do you consider the Most accurate/faithful?

    I have read NIV, and New KJV, but I find that the original
    King James Version seem to speak to me the best, the other two translations seem TOO soft, too watered down.

    Bearing fully in mind that I do not speak or read Hebrew, Aramaec, or Latin, so I have to take what translations I have read on faith and with discernment.
     

    Wanna kill these ads? We can help!
  2. FCoulter

    FCoulter
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2011
    986
    0
  3. Brucev

    Brucev
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2009
    9,189
    5
    Once upon a time I went to seminary. There I majored in Biblical Languages... i.e., Hebrew and Greek. There I developed a very healthy appreciation of the fine English translations that are now so commonly available. For the Old Testament, I very much prefer the Revised Standard Version. For the New Testament, I very much prefer the New American Standard. They are about the best. Further, in Greek word order is important. The NASV is sufficiently close that one can use it for a "pony" when translating. As to "faithful and accurate," I prize literal translation. But, no translation is made absent the mind of the translator. I use the RSV and NASV as basic study tools. I use other sources to help me grasp the text in its context. For devotional reading I consider The Message by Eugene Peterson to be very useful.
     
  4. Roering

    Roering
    Expand Collapse
    Sorting nuts

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2008
    5,231
    144
    Location:
    Costa Mesa
    I've grown up in my faith as a NIV man. I love to hear the KJV but I'm not crazy about reading it (too many thee's & thou's for my taste).

    I have recently switched to the RSV-CE. It is a fantastic translation. Closer to a transliteration than the NIV but it still reads well. Interestingly enough the old English is only present at certain times such as when one is speaking/praying to God. I'm only up to the 2nd book of Samuel with this translation but so far I like it.

    The CE stands for Catholic Edition meaning it includes all of the books (Deutero-Cannonical) but there are non Catholic versions as well.

    As for the most accurate or faithful.....well, that's going to bring out a whole lot of opinions :whistling: but really it comes down to a trade off when it comes to us non Hebrew/Greek speaking folk. You could go for extreme accuracy and get something closer to a transliteration which will read like it is in broken English or sacrifice a little accuracy to get a translation which reads well into our modern English.
     
  5. teumessian_fox

    teumessian_fox
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    May 18, 2010
    1,959
    0
    Location:
    Running from the Big Dog
    The NIV isn't a translation. It's a paraphrase. But it reads well.

    The KJV is majestic, but incorrectly translated in some places so as to make it questionable. Acts 12:4, for example, translates pascha as Easter. Easter is never used in the Bible and the correct translation for pascha is Passover.

    The NKJV is pretty good except it has nothing to do with the King James Version. It was published by a Lebanese businessman who decided to make a completely new translation, but wanted the title to include King James so as to broaden its market appeal.

    The ASV is the most accurate translation available, but it is so accurate/precise, it's sometimes difficult to read. (Greek doesn't always translate literally into English. I too studied Greek in college.)

    The RSV is accurate, but conservatives call into question the translation of "young woman" for "virgin" in Isaiah 7:14. In actuality, either is correct and in no way minimizes the "messianic" nature of the Isaiah prophecies.

    The Living Bible is, as far as translations go, a joke.

    I use a wide margin Cambridge King James Bible for my personal studies, but only because I've already made so many notes I'd hate to start over. If I were going to start afresh, I'd probably go with the NKJV, but I use all versions (except the NIV and/or the LB).
     
    #5 teumessian_fox, Mar 7, 2012
    Last edited: Mar 7, 2012
  6. Green_Manelishi

    Green_Manelishi
    Expand Collapse
    Knicker Knotter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2006
    4,716
    0
    Location:
    On the edge but not quite over ...
    I suspect there are many languages that don't well translate into English.
     
  7. rgregoryb

    rgregoryb
    Expand Collapse
    Sapere aude

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    8,251
    1,172
    Location:
    Republic of Alabama
  8. Tilley

    Tilley
    Expand Collapse
    Man of Steel

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2006
    1,750
    2
    Location:
    USA
    The NIV has had the most exhaustive work in terms of scholarships, time and money put into it. A newest version is said to have just come out.

    My next favorite is the New Living Translation. It is a paraphrase, but if you compare it to the NIV, it is very close to it and is easier to read.
     
  9. Vic Hays

    Vic Hays
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2002
    9,218
    76
    Location:
    My home is in heaven
    The NIV is somewhat of a paraphrase also. It is a "dynamic translation" according to the translators. This means that they were not as accurate with the literal translation and tried to make it fit what they thought was the meaning.

    I like the New King James personally. The King James is the Bible that I have in my memory though and I like the taste of the language used in it.

    Psalm 34:8 O taste and see that the LORD is good: blessed is the man that trusteth in him.
     
    #9 Vic Hays, Mar 8, 2012
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2012