Which version or versions of the Bible are best to read?
- Thread starter leefromcanada
- Start date
ViaCrucis
Confessional Lutheran
- Oct 2, 2011
- 37,425
- 26,866
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Lutheran
- Marital Status
- In Relationship
- Politics
- US-Others
In a lot of ways that depends entirely on one's personal use. And so there are different factors to consider, such how easy it is to read, or how precise it is in its translation. Balancing these can be difficult, that's just the nature of translation though.
I am partial toward the English Standard Version (ESV) and New Revised Standard Version (NRSV), these are the two translations that are commonly used in most mainline Protestant churches today. The NRSV is also the most common translation among modern Catholics. So there is some wide appeal for these, and they are both regarded as really good translations.
Other very common translations in use include the New American Standard Bible (NASB), the New King James Version (NKJV), the New International Version (NIV), and the King James Version (KJV).
The general consensus tends to be that if one is wanting to do serious Bible study, it is helpful to compare translations rather than stick to only one. Obviously it would be ideal to learn Hebrew and Greek so as to read the original languages of the Bible, but barring that, comparative reading of different translations can be beneficial in expanding the scope. Again, the nature of translation being what it is, looking at how different ways the same thing was translated can help. Of course, for more casual Bible reading, it's perfectly fine to just stick to one's preferred translation.
-CryptoLutheran
Upvote
0
To me NIV is more on synchronizing or harmonizing the available ancient scrolls at hand today. KJY may be more original in terms of resources available back in 17th century. The trade off between the two is that today's writings can be more textually accurate but I believe ancient humans are more spiritual and dedicated. Today's humans are more knowledgeable but with more distractions. They also have the pride on their own knowledge.
NRSV is more on an effort in keeping the original textual meaning than introducing subjective interpretations.
I also read the Complete Biblical Library Interlinear Bible, which is an interlinear Bible with an effort in keeping the original Greek meaning for NT and Hebrew meaning for OT.
NRSV is more on an effort in keeping the original textual meaning than introducing subjective interpretations.
I also read the Complete Biblical Library Interlinear Bible, which is an interlinear Bible with an effort in keeping the original Greek meaning for NT and Hebrew meaning for OT.
Upvote
0
I will recommend the ESV version though I read NIV 1983 version. I disagree, however, with the changes made to the latest NIV version.
If you want to read NIV, read the 1983 version.
If you want to read NIV, read the 1983 version.
Upvote
0
jayem
Naturalist
- Jun 24, 2003
- 15,269
- 6,956
- 72
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Married
I'm not a Christian, but I have done some Bible study. I personally like the Revised English Bible. It's a 1989 update of the New English Bible. Which is a 1970 British translation, done by a team of scholars from Oxford and Cambridge. It's published jointly by Oxford and Cambridge. (A team from the same same universities did the KJV in 1611.) The translators used the oldest Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek manuscripts available. It's an accurate translation, and is very readable. I think the language is actually rather elegant. If it matters, it takes a middle ground in the use of gender-neutral pronouns. I believe the REB is the officially authorized translation for use by the Anglican Church in the UK. It's not very common in the US, but it's well done, scholarly, and worth a look.
Upvote
0
Within Reason
Active Member
- Feb 21, 2020
- 114
- 38
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Protestant
- Marital Status
- Single
Upvote
0
Similar threads
