Anyone here on their own found a bible most true to original language?

by EndofMysteries 22 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  EndofMysteries

  Okay, let alone which scrolls it was translated from, in reading a hebrew scriptures old testament interlinear, I am not too happy.

  It shows the hebrew word, the english translation, then the phrase in it's bible.

  Genesis 5:2 - He created them male and female, and blessed them and called them ADAM in the day they were created. (some bibles had that, like original KJV but changed it to mankind, some changed it to human or man.

  Also, in the hebrew scriptures, God's name appears as "IEUE", NOT YHWH, or JVHV. Yet seeing the hebrew, it was IEUE, then english translation said Yahweh, then in the bible print said LORD. If you've researched and found a very good translation, post it here please.

  I am researching available ancient scrolls in which all bibles published have been based off of, and after comparing them and their content, then I am hoping to find a true translation where the translator doesn't 'assume' what was meant, and leaves it for the reader to decide. If not, anyone recommend a good large paper version of the hebrew and greek scriptures?

  These translations can majorly change the meaning.
• 

  poppers

  then I am hoping to find a true translation where the translator doesn't 'assume' what was meant

  Don't get your hopes up - how would you know for certain if the translator hasn't put in his/her assumptions?
• 

  EndofMysteries

  I would be testing it, here is a REALLY good example, Isaiah 14:9 look it up. Now go here......www.scripture4all.org and get to the old testament interlinear of hebrew. SAUL is replaced with HELL and Rephilim/Giants/Etc are replaced with DEAD. HOW is Saul, spelt exactly as Saul of King Saul, changed to HELL? Unless the hebrew to english word translation is wrong, there are WAY too many changes like this.

  I can't wait to read the whole bible with things like this fixed, I bet it would put a different spin on quite a few things.
• 

  Doug Mason

  EOM,

  You dream the impossible dream. If anyone had the autographs, they would shout it from the mountain tops. They only have the omelets; the eggs are already broken, stirred and cooked. It is no longer possible to find an individual egg.

  You see, even when the earliest works were copied, as they needed to be since the base material had a finite life, the copiers were not averse to making their own amendments and comments. And over time, even these comments became incorporated into the text. I strongly suggest that you research the many books on the subject before you go any further. Many have walked the path you seek to walk.

  And it is one thing to understand the words of their language, but it is even more important, and far more difficult, to understand the culture that produced and edited each document. Do not make the mistake of imposing our culture upon theirs. Their writings were not produced or edited in a vacuum, and cognisance neeeds to be taken of the various secular, religious and political sectors of their environment, as well as their idiomatic expressions, attitudes, the way they structured their writings, who their immediate intended audience was, and so on. The challenge is far far broader than what you appear to have set out on.

  I hope you now understand what the Hebrew word for "man" is. The WTS can't even work out the difference in meaning for those Hebrews between "man", "inhabitant" and "people".

  Doug
• 

  EndofMysteries

  The WTS didn't even translate the bible, it was all taken from Westcott and Hort. The scripture omissions are the same as the ones from the scrolls Westcott and Hort translated from. That would explain how when writers were questioned and they didn't understand hebrew or greek, because it wasn't ever translated, they took Westcott and Horts work and changed a few words here or there, if anything.
• 

  Leolaia

  I am researching available ancient scrolls in which all bibles published have been based off of, and after comparing them and their content, then I am hoping to find a true translation where the translator doesn't 'assume' what was meant, and leaves it for the reader to decide. If not, anyone recommend a good large paper version of the hebrew and greek scriptures?

  Every single translation, even the wooden literal ones, makes assumptions about how to render the text. In fact, even completely fluent speakers of Hebrew could disagree about how a text may be read or understood. There may be several different levels of meaning in a text or the meaning may be ambiguous (sometimes even intentionally so), but the act of translation inevitably alters, reduces, simplifies, and plain changes the sense or array of senses in the original text (leaving aside the problem of determining if there is in fact an "original" text). That is why I recommend, if you are unfamiliar with the language (and even if you are) to collect a range of translations and a range of commentaries; the latter are especially valuable in explaining why the translator has made the decisions that were made. This may give some grasp of the literary connections, wordplay, subtle nuances, etc. that are in the original language. Your first post, for instance, touched on how 'dm "human" is used as a proper name in the primeval narratives of Genesis, and there are ambiguities of whether the word should be understood as a noun or a name. The Eden narrative in Genesis is a masterpiece chock full with puns and assonances -- all of which are obscured by English translation. The story of Babel in ch. 11 is another text which cannot be fully appreciated without paying attention to these literary touches. But those are some of the more finer points. More basic is taking each story or literary unit on its own terms and consider how it interprets and builds on earlier scriptures or ideas, and how themes are developed not only within canonical scripture, but how they draw on and modify themes and concepts in Jewish and Christian literature in general.
• 

  PSacramento

  SPeaking of bibles.

  Any suggestions on a good one?

  The ones I have tend to be "teaching" bibles and interliners.

  ESV?

  NIV?

  NRSV?

  I heard the Jerusalem Bible is a good one.
• 

  wobble

  It is said by our friends in Islam that you cannot appreciate the beauty of the Holy Quran unless you are a native speaker of Arabic, even those who learn it well as a language often miss the full import and beauty of what is being said, the poetic and religious quality of the Quran is something felt,in the heart, rather than merely understood in an academic way.

  I rather suspect that the early Hebrew sacred writings are similar, so unless you have many years to immerse yourself in the culture of that day, and become an ancient, the good advice of our dear Leolaia is worth following, good commentators have tried to do all the hard work for you.

  Love

  Wobble
• 

  PSacramento

  To echo what was said, commentaries are indeed a great help.

  But I am still curious as to which versions people tend to prefer and why.
• 

  lovelylil2

  Hello and welcome!

  Personally for the OT, I like to read the Tanakh itself and that is because there are subtle differences that reflect on the text. The one I have was translated by the Jewish Publication Society and is a very accurate translation of the OT from the original Hebrew.

  Another Bible I have that I enjoy is the "Holy Bible in Modern English", by Ferrar Fenton. This bible translates directly from the original Hebrew, Chaldee and Greek languages.

  I have several bible translations I use. I do find that they have subtle differences, like you said it depends on the particular view of the translator. Although I do like the New International Version because when there are 2 or 3 different accepted views of the text, it gives you them and lets you decide for yourself which to accept. I think this one is a good study Bible version.

  I have never found that these subtle differences between texts affected the Bible's overall harmony with the other scriptures, or that they change the overall message trying to be conveyed by the author, so I do not let these differences affect my view of the Bible in general. And I am saying this after comparing many bible translations myself.

  Hope this helps, Peace, Lilly