What are the best Bible Translations?
by Londo111 49 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Ding
No translation is perfect, of course. Even the most honorable translator has to make choices to try to convey in English what he or she believes the orginal writers were expressing millennia ago in Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek. Often that is not a serious problem; other times it is.
That said, I like the Revised Standard Version (RSV) and the New American Standard Bible (NASB) best.
I think it's best to compare translations (many do agree substantially) and not to base an understanding of an important point on a passage that is obscure or unclear. An unclear or ambiguous passage shouldn't be used to establish a point when there are undisputed passages that are clear on the subject.
Try to look at all the relevant passages on a given topic rather than picking one, coming to a conclusion based on it, and then making your interpretation of every other passage bend to comply. An example of the WTS violating this principle is Ecclesiastes 9:5. They quote part of the verse and ignore what verse 6 says altogether. Instead of really grappling with the end of Luke 16, they then turn it into a fanciful parable about -- who else? -- Jehovah's Witnesses and their opposers. Another example is Rutherford's creating the name "Jehovah's Witnesses" out of a partial quote from Isaiah 43:10 and ignoring the fact that in the New Testament the believers never used that expression. He also ignored what facts it is that Isaiah 43:10 says they are to be witnesses to.
Although you are free to read anything you want, please remember that people like Fred Franz and Joseph Smith, Jr. may have known a few words or phrases but were by no means fluent in the original Bible languages. This makes their "translations" far more suspect than translations endorsed by recognized scholars such as the late Greek scholar Julius Mantey. For example, Franz translated "parousia" as "presence" rather than "coming" not because he was an expert on the Greek word "parousia" but because it matched the interpretation Pastor Russell adopted from Adventist Nelson Barbour in the 1800s and the "invisible presence" teaching they came up with when Jesus failed to appear on the dates they expected him to come.
-
TD
Best for what?
Reading just to enjoy the narrative like you would enjoy Beowulf or the Roman de la Rose or some other piece of ancient literature is not quite the same thing as reading through the lense of the believer for spiritual enlightenment.
-
PSacramento
One of the hardest questions to ask, really.
All translations are biased in one way or another.
No such thing as literal translations since one would have to KNOW what the writer MEANT and which meaning of the word THE writer(s) wanted to convey.
You need to decide WHAT you are reading the bible for.
I have a few verisions:
ESV, NRSV, NKJV, NASB and the Jerusalem bible, also have 3 interlinears and the message bible.
I find the Jerusalem bible the nicest to read ( beautifully written).
-
Ding
There's also an older version called "Young's Literal Translation."
It's interesting, but not always helpful because English syntax and grammar differ quite a bit from those of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek.
-
transhuman68
I say get a Catholic Bible. The Catholic Church virtually wrote the Bible, so they are the experts- plus, you get some apocrapha thrown in for free as a bonus! How good is that?
-
AGuest
I find the Jerusalem Bible the nicest to read ( beautifully written)
It is quite nice to read, dear PSacto (the greatest of love and peace to you!). More... ummmm... "loving" language than some others.
Another help "tool", dear Londo (peace to you, as well!), is one of those that has multiple versions side-by-side. I have one by Tyndale House Publishers that includes eight (8) versions of the NT:
- King James Version
- Phillips Modern English
- Revised Standard Version
- Jerusalem Bible
- Living Bible
- New International Version
- Today's English Version
- New English Bible
Given the gamut of Bible versions used by those who post here, I sometimes refer to it when my Lord tells me what was/was not actually stated/meant... and directs me to post about it. It helps me understand what others THINK was stated/meant, etc., based on the Bible version THEY might consult. When you read the different versions side by side, you can't help but see (well, I can't) the various "slants" of the particular translator.
But I would be doing you a great disservice if I did not direct you to the words of Christ at John 5:39, 40:
"You search the scriptures because you think that by means of them you will have everlasting life. And these are the very ones that bear witness about me; yet, you do not want to come to ME to have life."
The KJV is very misleading at to these verses because it drops the "You" at the start of verse 39. This gives the impression that one is supposed TO search the scriptures, which is the exact opposite of what Christ was saying. The scriptures can't help you find God. Only Christ can do that (John 14:6). The scriptures can't help you find Christ. Only God can do that (John 6:44). The scriptures can't help you know... God OR Christ: only holy spirit can help you do that... which spirit you can only receive from Christ (John 4:10; 7:37, 38; 20:22).
That holy spirit is NOT a person, however, in spite of what some Bible versions publish. It is a spiritual "substance." (John 7:39) So don't be fooled by those versions that state "he" rather than "it" (same Greek word, "autos")... or "who/whom" rather than "which/that" (same Greek word, "hos").
The second chapter of John's first "letter" helps understand this. At the opening of Chapter 2, he explains who the "Comforter/Helper/Advocate" is: Christ (1 John 2:1). Which is corroborated by Paul (2 Corinthians 3:17). But he goes on to explain what holy spirit DOES:
"But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and you all know. ... These things I have written concerning those who are trying to deceive you. As for you, the anointing that you received from him abides in you, and you have no need for anyone to teach you about all things, and is true and is not a lie, and just as IT has taught you, YOU abide in him." (1 John 2:20, 26, 27)
You do not have to believe ME, of course. Truly, you SHOULDN'T; I am just a servant. To that end, you can try to put faith in what you read Christ as having said (as recorded in the Bible), if you don't have faith to hear him say it to you directly (John 10:3, 4, 27; Hebrews 12:25). Of course, faith is a "fruit" of God's holy spirit and so, you can always simply ask for that... faith... so AS to hear. (Luke 11:13) Particularly, when the Spirit and the Bride say to YOU:
"Come! Take 'life's water'... which 'water' IS that holy spirit... the 'water of Life' (John 14:6; Revelation 22:1)... FREE!"
Again, peace to you!
A slave of Christ,
SA
-
soft+gentle
KJV - the best
-
PSacramento
Not a big fan of the KJV, a tad too many "errors"/"omissions" and I don't care for the language BUT I must admit that the language CAN be very nice ot read at times, IF one has the voice of a Patric Steward or Anthony Hopkins, LOL !
I do not !The bible is a great tool to help get an idea of what those the wrote the bible believed and preached about God and Christ.
It CAN be a guide, but for some it can also be a "stumbling block" and one would do well to remember that, like any collcetion of ancient writings, it must be take for what it is.
-
TTWSYF
www.biblos.com is a great site that compares dozens of translations and has interlinears from Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, Latin and others too. A great research tool to compare verse by verse against a dozen translations all at once.
You may stay awhile. Better get some beer and order a pizza
happy studying!
dc