The OSB uses the NKJV for the New Testament & I don't really see any EO Bible translated into English. Is the NKJV close to the original which is in Greek? How trustworthy are interlineal Bibles, the Brenton Bible, and likewise how accurate is the Russian Synodical Bible?
https://www.quora.com/What-version-of-the-Holy-Bible-is-used-by-the-Orthodox-Church
The Eastern Orthodox Church does not officially endorse any English translation of the Bible. They recognize the Septuagint (Greek) Old Testament and the Byzantine majority text of the Greek New Testament, and they recognize specific Old Church Slavonic and Arabic translations.
Individual bishops have recommended the King James and New King James versions, primarily because they follow the majority text of the New Testament (unlike the vast majority of modern English translations, which follow the critical text), but that is not an official recommendation offered by the Church as a whole.
Eastern Orthodox scholars were partly involved in the translation of the New Revised Standard Version, but they expressed some disappointment over the final result.
Many Orthodox churches in the United States use the Revised Standard Version for all public readings, but that is by no means universal.
I should add that the Septuagint includes the Apocrypha by default, but opinions on the Apocryphal books vary from one Church to another. Among the Greeks, for example, the Apocrypha is typically relegated to deuterocanonical status, while the Slavic churches tend to make no distinction between the Apocrypha and the rest of the Bible.
"Growing up in the Syrian Antiochian Orthodox Church, our late Archbishop Antony Bashir recommenced THE COMMON BIBLE, either the King James or Revised Standard Version since the children of our faithful could no longer read the Greek Septuagint or Arabic Bibles. THE COMMON BIBLE included ALL of the Books for the various jurisdictions of the Eastern Orthodox Church. The Ethiopian (Oriental) Orthodox even has additional books such as Enoch etc. THE COMMON BIBLE is long out of print. And even a few editions omitt 3 & 4 Maccabees and Psalms 151. So be careful if you order one online to what is included. My editions list 84 Books in the index but a few of them are additions to existing books such as Letter(Epistle) of Jeremiah which is Baruch Chapter 6 or Additions to Esther etc. The much awaited ORTHODOX STUDY BIBLE was intended to be the book to use but ended up falling short! The OSB left out 4 Maccabees & 2 Esdras. The OSB does have a book called 2 Esdras but is just Ezra and no actual 2 Esdras . TCB has both Ezra and 2 Esdras . The original excerpts to the OSB were not often included. I heard the Publisher suggested to keep under so many pages but they included Western Ikons that should have been left out for scriptures!" Anthony Albert
Orthodox Study Bible: "My NT is a New King James version, filled with notes explaining exactly what specific phrases & words mean & have always meant, particularly when the phrases are commonly misunderstood. For example, when Jesus asks the disciples if they have any swords & Peter says “Yes, we have two.” Jesus responded by saying “It is enough.” Today, people who self interpret the Bible believe a variety of meanings from this. What mine says is that “It is enough.” is an Aramaic phrase meaning “Enough of this!” or “Knock it off!”, which corresponds with Jesus's reaction afterwards. The OT is the Septuagint, also filled with notes & articles. It includes all the books that the Apostle Paul knew in 60 AD." Sverigielle Von Gothenburg
Closest to which Greek text? The small collection of greek manuscripts that the KJV translators had available to them collected into the Textus Receptus? The collection of greek manuscripts we have available now. Or more importantly which subset of the collection of greek manuscripts we have now. Different bibles and different scholars place value on different "families" of greek manuscripts, each manuscript "family" has subtle differences that ultimately influence the English. So before we ask if a particular translation communicates the Greek text more accurately, we must first establish which Greek text we are measuring the translation against.
Which Manuscript Family is Your English Bible Based Upon?
When it comes to the many thousands of manuscripts upon which our English New Testaments are based, there are basically two major “families” of manuscripts: the Byzantine family and the Alexandrian family.
The predominant view among conservative Bible scholars today is to prefer the ALEXANDRIAN family of manuscripts…
…hence most modern English translations either footnote or bracket certain words, phrases, sentences, and even paragraphs (John 7:53-8:11; Mark 16:9-20)… words, phrases, sentences, and paragraphs which were accepted as God’s Word in Bibles prior to the 20th Century.
But I want to give you five reasons, among many, that I prefer the BYZANTINE family of manuscripts:
1. While we have no 2nd Century manuscripts from this family, we see 2nd Century Church Fathers quoting Byzantine readings.
2. The Alexandrian family was discovered only in one region of Egypt; the Byzantine family was found in all parts of the Mediterranean world.
3. A massive majority suggests early Christians thought these renderings were superior and chose to copy from this family rather than the other. (The Alexandrian family was located in a remote part of the known world and probably had less manuscripts to compare).
4. The Byzantine family seems complete; the Alexandrian does not (see Mark 16).
5. God has kept the Byzantine family preserved and known through the entire history of the Church; the Alexandrian family was lost and unknown for over 1,500 years.
The words of the Lord are pure words,
Like silver tried in a furnace of earth,
Purified seven times.
You shall keep them, O Lord,
You shall preserve them from this generation forever. – Psalm 12.6-7
Probably most of the readers of this blog are using English Bibles that are based more upon the Alexandrian family than the Byzantine family. Should you burn them and go back to the tried and true KJV? No. Here’s the thing, it’s not a major deal.
* Less than 5% difference between the two families of texts, the main difference being the Alexandrian family is smaller (Mark 16:9-20 omitted, other verses and words omitted).
* No major Christian doctrine impacted or changed (the most significant doctrinal issue is that the importance of fasting is weakened in the Alexandrian texts).
* As proof that I do not believe it is a major concern, I continue to preach and teach from an Alexandrian-based translation (ESV) even though I have preferred the Byzantine family for some time now. When I get to a verse or passage in the ESV that is impacted, such as Matthew 6:13, I point out how the verse(s) is bracketed or in footnotes, explain why, and then preach it as God’s Word.
Whichever textual family is actually correct, the Christian faith is not compromised.
)
