Best Bible translations

[pescador]

There is a common misunderstanding that formal translations such as the King James Version translate the early texts word-for-word. That is most definitely not the case, as ancient Hebrew, Aramaic, and Koine Greek are very different languages than English. The word order, tenses, and grammar have little in common with 21st Century English.

Formal translations try to translate the words of the author as closely as possible into English; functional translations try to translate the thoughts of the author as closely as possible into modern thought. Neither one is better; it just depends on what you want.

Personally I almost always reach for a modern functional translation such as the NET Bible or the NIV as I have to do less "translating" to absorb the most information. On the other hand I think that reading the King James "Authorized" version, written over 400 years ago in an English that is long-ago archaic, leads to all kinds of errors.

 

[alexsonofmatthew]

hebrew.

 

[pescador]

hebrew.

What does this mean? Do you prefer the Hebrew bible above all others? If so, why?

BTW, "Hebrew" should be capitalized.

 

[OldStudent]

You ask a key question. For you hang your soul on your selection of your reference Bible. Satan began his work by "editing" God's word in Genesis 3. At this end of history he continues with great finesse and profusion of alternatives. There is money to be had in "the latest translation." So finding quality, trustworthy work can be time consuming and frustrating.

I have settled on the New King James for general use. A significant part of your choice of a study Bible should be, how well is it supported with study tools - especially a good exhaustive concordance. Other translations can be useful for supplimental perspectives. I avoid the NIV and most modern "translations" for routine use because of various adendas, textual criticism philosophies, inadequate or questionable translation staff, among other things.

Understanding words is a key part of deep study. A good concordance, like Strong's or Young's, expand your understanding of the nuances of the original language word. It will also enable you to uncover other passages with that word/idea. You may sputter on the KJVs archaic language but it is still a very well supported text and may make other study tools available to you. It may not be your everyday reading Bible. But when something comes up and you have to dig, the JKV will probably get dusted off.

To me, the fact that a translation has been powerfully used by God in Reformation is a high credential. Thus the Geneva and KJV rank high. I also have Bibles from Webster and Lamsa to use as cross checks.

 

[Alithis]

You ask a key question. For you hang your soul on your selection of your reference Bible. Satan began his work by "editing" God's word in Genesis 3. At this end of history he continues with great finesse and profusion of alternatives. There is money to be had in "the latest translation." So finding quality, trustworthy work can be time consuming and frustrating.

I have settled on the New King James for general use. A significant part of your choice of a study Bible should be, how well is it supported with study tools - especially a good exhaustive concordance. Other translations can be useful for supplimental perspectives. I avoid the NIV and most modern "translations" for routine use because of various adendas, textual criticism philosophies, inadequate or questionable translation staff, among other things.

Understanding words is a key part of deep study. A good concordance, like Strong's or Young's, expand your understanding of the nuances of the original language word. It will also enable you to uncover other passages with that word/idea. You may sputter on the KJVs archaic language but it is still a very well supported text and may make other study tools available to you. It may not be your everyday reading Bible. But when something comes up and you have to dig, the JKV will probably get dusted off.

To me, the fact that a translation has been powerfully used by God in Reformation is a high credential. Thus the Geneva and KJV rank high. I also have Bibles from Webster and Lamsa to use as cross checks.

I too find the kjv to be a superior translation.
Sure not perfect .but the contextual content is better by far ..sure, not perfect but better.
I find the nkjv disappointing with word changes that make no sense due to their context .
I would like to see a kjv with only the thees and thous wouldst ettc ,refined to modern term without anything else changed.
Mind you. Thou... as a word,has more depth of meaning and scope then "you"...
I do think people have forgotten it is God .not man,who gives understanding.man has tried to do gods job with modernization..saying lets make it easier to read..but man has missed the mark,yet again.they have devalued it with their tampering.what was once treasure to be sought out by a sincere searching heart.they have made cheap coins scattered on the surface...they have made it EASY... they have scattered seed on stones .easy to gather by the birds of the air.easy to find easy to discard..few value what they did not have to search for.

 

[abysmul]

I would like to see a kjv with only the thees and thous wouldst ettc ,refined to modern term without anything else changed.

While not 100% to your description have you tried the ESV? I know some staunch KJV readers, that say they have given the ESV a shot and that it is growing on them.

 

[Alithis]

While not 100% to your description have you tried the ESV? I know some staunch KJV readers, that say they have given the ESV a shot and that it is growing on them.

(this is personal opinion-not attacking ,please don't take it that way)
I have found in a study ,far too many odd changes in words which potentially deviate meaning in the esv .. most are subtle changes that on the surface do not seen that big a deal , but collectively they have effect ..
for years I read the niv .. it was Useful , but the more I learn of scripture the more I have found nav esv niv nkjv and many more ..lacking in depth and scope .. the more we simplify the language ..the more we simplify the depth of meaning .we inadvertently detract from it .modern language itself is a deviation from meaningful communication. we do not engage in depth any more we prefer to be amused (anti-think- in Latin ).
we really should leave it up to God to give understanding and not try to do his job methinks .
refer the testimony of Derek prince ... a highly educated uni' professor who became frustrated that teens could comprehend the bible and when he read it he could not make head or tail of it .. and then he got saved and God opened it up to him ...

 

[abysmul]

(this is personal opinion-not attacking ,please don't take it that way)

No worries not at all! I'm a multiple translation person, own a few, and rely on the good old internet for the rest! I've just recently acquired an ESV for "casual" reading (for lack of a better term), but I've not used it for serious study, I like NASB and others (including the KJV ) when I'm really studying something.

I think multiple translations have clearly assisted in bringing countless people to Christ.

 

[Jaelyn Liza]

I mostly read the plain NIV Bible, but I also really like TLB translation, as well as The Voice Bible.

 

[pescador]

I too find the kjv to be a superior translation.
Sure not perfect .but the contextual content is better by far ..sure, not perfect but better.
I find the nkjv disappointing with word changes that make no sense due to their context .
I would like to see a kjv with only the thees and thous wouldst ettc ,refined to modern term without anything else changed.
Mind you. Thou... as a word,has more depth of meaning and scope then "you"...
I do think people have forgotten it is God .not man,who gives understanding.man has tried to do gods job with modernization..saying lets make it easier to read..but man has missed the mark,yet again.they have devalued it with their tampering.what was once treasure to be sought out by a sincere searching heart.they have made cheap coins scattered on the surface...they have made it EASY... they have scattered seed on stones .easy to gather by the birds of the air.easy to find easy to discard..few value what they did not have to search for.

Quite obviously you are worshiping a book instead of God. God's word, as originally written, was easily understood by the people of the time when it was read to them. God is not the author of confusion! By using a bible translation that is easily misunderstood because it is not written in the language that we all use today you are adding a burden that God never intended us to carry. Beware of false idols!

Additionally, why do you write with such unusual style if you're so concerned with accuracy of meaning? Your use of punctuation, capitalization, etc. make your posts difficult to read and understand. You claim to understand the value of language yet practice obfuscation.

 

[Jeo7]

Study Hebrew.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Study Hebrew.

Amen.

 

[New Legacy]

Hebrew is a very difficult language to learn to translate. Not forgetting that only gives you an understanding of the OT.

 

[ForJesusChrist]

Anyone ever studied Gaelic?

It seems interesting.

 

[AXO]

What do you think about the RSV-CE and NRSV-CE? I read they were pure garbage for Catholic readers who really are demanding for a quality version of the Holy Scripture. I also read that NRSV-CE was approved by the Catholic Church...

 

[stevenfrancis]

What do you think about the RSV-CE and NRSV-CE? I read they were pure garbage for Catholic readers who really are demanding for a quality version of the Holy Scripture. I also read that NRSV-CE was approved by the Catholic Church...

The RSV-CE is hardly garbage. It's a fine translation. It's actually quite similar to the KJV and ESV, but of course with the full Catholic Canon of scripture. The NRSV-CE, however, I do have some personal difficulties with. I wouldn't recommend it to anyone personally, though I know some like it. If one just doesn't like the thees and thous, but does want a KJV type translation, I would recommend the RSV2-CE, which removed thees and thous, remained scholarly, but eschewed the idea of inclusive language, and is the version as well chosen by the Ignatius press for their amazing Catholic Study Bible, (still being created and released as it's written), and it is the Bible used in the English YouCat (Youth Catechism of the Catholic Church).

Having said all that, I have recently discovered, (and bought - I think I'm becoming a collector), the Msgr. Knox Translation. It is a faithful English adaptation of St. Jerome's Latin Vulgate. (Clementine Vulgate). The language is stunning. The treatment of St. Paul's work is the best I've ever seen. It was out of print for a long time, and has just been brought back, but only in one edition. It is now my current bible of choice. I use this and the RSV2-CE together.

The Knox translation, does retain the thees and thous, however. They are believed to convey more depth in the pronoun department, setting a closer understanding of the Latin base of the Vulgate, and the Greek base of the Septuagint.

You can read the Knox Translation for free, by the way, at NewAdvent.org. It is the Catholic Bible used on their website.

NEW ADVENT BIBLE: Genesis 1

It had me from hello:

Genesis 1:1 God, at the beginning of time, created heaven and earth. 2 Earth was still an empty waste, and darkness hung over the deep; but already, over its waters, stirred the breath of God.

 

[justlookinla]

I have mostly been reading the ESV, however I was just wondering, what bible translations do you recommend? Other than KJV (I just don't care for it as much) and NLT (I feel that its too far from the actual meaning).

Thanks for any advice!

God Bless

I mainly use the NASB but still think in terms of the KJV when I'm trying to remember a scripture. I guess that's because for the first 40 years of my life I only used the KJV.

When I started serious bible study, I found the KJV to be lacking. For example, "world" is used in the KJV when "age" should be used. That's a significant difference in determining the meaning of scripture. Another example is "hell". In the KJV, it's kinda a generic term, but in the actual Greek, the meanings are much different. So, the version you choose does make a difference in study.

 

[AXO]

...

Much to my regret I don't quite like the Vulgate, even translated by St Jerome... It's riddled with vague expressions and circumlotions. The Church assented to use it as the official translation... Hope that Knox made a turnaround in all of this.

 

[stevenfrancis]

Much to my regret I don't quite like the Vulgate, even translated by St Jerome... It's riddled with vague expressions and circumlotions. The Church assented to use it as the official translation... Hope that Knox made a turnaround in all of this.

I've heard this before. The Knox Bible is free to view online. It is used by New Advent. org

Check it out, and see what you think. I found it beautiful. But it IS a translation of the Vulgate. By the way, this one isn't modern in language even. It still retains the thees and thous, but I don't find those a stumbling block. I know most younger folk do these days. I'm not a younger folk. ;-)

NEW ADVENT BIBLE: Genesis 1

 

[setfreeandforgivin]

ESV is my pick, NIV a close second, then NKJV