Which Bible Translation is Currently the MOST Accurate in Your Opinion? (page 2)

Yerusalyim

I like the Revised Standard Version (catholic edition) too.

In response to your inquiry as to which Bible translation is the most accurate there can be only one qualified candidate and that is the NWT, 1984 edition. Recently, Jason deBuhn published a survey which compared several recent translations and the NWT came put on top. But more to the point that when one follows closely the Biblical text with several commentaries then one can easily see the superiorty of the NWT with both the Old and New Testament. I use the Word Biblical Commentary series and have often confirmed and marvelled at the accuracy of this brilliant translation produced by an unknown group of competent biblical scholars.

scholar

BA Hons cand. MA Studies in Religion

Narkissos

Scholar: the NWT may not be so bad (although definitely awkward) in many instances, but how can you recommend a version which, say, destroys Paul's line of reasoning in Romans chapter 10 by substituting "Jehovah" to "kurios" in v. 13 (against all manuscript evidence)? Or translates "theos" "a god" in John's Prologue, against the obviously monotheistic context (even the French NWT translator, who had learnt Hebrew and Greek, desperately tried to avoid that)? Come on...

Only those who use the Bible for quoting verses, not for plain reading, can find the NWT acceptable...

Rosco

Scholar, get this translated by someone who is not a Christian or a believer in God. Oh and who also does not work for the Publishing Company WTS.Check it with your NWT. Big difference. Greek to English

Joh 1:1

᾿Εν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος, καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν, καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος.

Joh 1:2

οὗτος ἦν ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν Θεόν.

Joh 1:3

πάντα δι᾿ αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο, καὶ χωρὶς αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο οὐδὲ ἕν ὃ γέγονεν.

Joh 1:4

ἐν αὐτῷ ζωὴ ἦν, καὶ ἡ ζωὴ ἦν τὸ φῶς τῶν ἀνθρώπων·

Joh 1:5

καὶ τὸ φῶς ἐν τῇ σκοτίᾳ φαίνει, καὶ ἡ σκοτία αὐτὸ οὐ κατέλαβεν.

Joh 1:6

᾿Εγένετο ἄνθρωπος ἀπεσταλμένος παρὰ Θεοῦ, ὄνομα αὐτῷ ᾿Ιωάννης·

Joh 1:7

οὗτος ἦλθεν εἰς μαρτυρίαν, ἵνα μαρτυρήσῃ περὶ τοῦ φωτός, ἵνα πάντες πιστεύσωσι δι᾿ αὐτοῦ.

Joh 1:8

οὐκ ἦν ἐκεῖνος τὸ φῶς, ἀλλ᾿ ἵνα μαρτυρήσῃ περὶ τοῦ φωτός.

Joh 1:9

῏Ην τὸ φῶς τὸ ἀληθινόν, ὃ φωτίζει πάντα ἄνθρωπον, ἐρχόμενον εἰς τὸν κόσμον.

Joh 1:10

ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ ἦν, καὶ ὁ κόσμος δι᾿ αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο, καὶ ὁ κόσμος αὐτὸν οὐκ ἔγνω.

Joh 1:11

εἰς τὰ ἴδια ἦλθε, καὶ οἱ ἴδιοι αὐτὸν οὐ παρέλαβον.

Joh 1:12

ὅσοι δὲ ἔλαβον αὐτόν, ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς ἐξουσίαν τέκνα Θεοῦ γενέσθαι, τοῖς πιστεύουσιν εἰς τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ,

Joh 1:13

οἳ οὐκ ἐξ αἱμάτων, οὐδὲ ἐκ θελήματος σαρκὸς, οὐδὲ ἐκ θελήματος ἀνδρὸς, ἀλλ᾿ ἐκ Θεοῦ ἐγεννήθησαν.

Joh 1:14

Καὶ ὁ Λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο καὶ ἐσκήνωσεν ἐν ἡμῖν, καὶ ἐθεασάμεθα τὴν δόξαν αὐτοῦ, δόξαν ὡς μονογενοῦς παρὰ πατρός, πλήρης χάριτος καὶ ἀληθείας.

archangel01

New Jerusalem Bible.... Ive been meaning to pick that one up

I like the Living Bible, NIV, & New International Version. They are all good they each have alittle different in the wording But the meanings are the same/context. I find reading the different wordings helps you understand the context better. I also use a 1611 edition KJV.

The New Oxford Annotated Bible with the Apocrypha is Great. Just remember the 66 books take presidents Over the apocrypha, so if something in the apocrypha contradict's the 66 books of the Bible you have to Believe the 66 books over the apocrypha. The 66 books are from GOD as for the others they are not, not saying they can't be true an are totally wrong. I did some research on all this. The apocrypha was written inbetween the old an New testament. Like the Lost Books of Adam..EDEN. They are not really lost but were written When the bible was being written.

I would love to see the old scroll etc.You can look at them online/photos of them. The Bible is such a cool subject! The 66 books are all you need to know because we do know they are from GOD and they all flow together in harmony with one another. From Beginning to end.

That's my two cent and a dime

Euphemism

Frannie... it really depends on what your project is.

If your main concern is accuracy, you would want a translation that tries to be as literal as possible, which would rule out the NIV. I think the NASB and the RSV would probably be the two best choices, although I've heard that the New Jerusalem is good as well.

Frannie Banannie

Mega-thanks, Yall! I was looking for the most accurate *verbatim* translation, because I'm translating some passages into musical notes. All of yall's opinions are truly helpful, including the PM's I recv'd. Am short on time this morn, but will poll yall's answers this evening....I truly appreciate yall's help here.

Bebu, you can add water, if the sauce is too thick for yall...glad yall enjoyed, chere!

Frannie B

fjtoth

In my view, no translation is perfect, though some are a tad more accurate than others. No translation can be trusted 100 percent in every single verse. Having a variety of translations is best. Often the original meaning can be deciphered by noting what the majority of translations say.

The NASB and the NIV were produced by trinitarians, as were most translations, and they show a bias in several texts toward the Trinity. The NWT was produced by non-trinitarians, and it's obvious that John 1:1 shows their bias against the Trinity. But in fairness to the NWT, very few translations seem to have it just right at John 1:1, a verse that is difficult to translate into English. "God" and "a god" are equally as tolerable and as inaccurate as the other.

In my opinion, and according to many articles I've read during the past few years, the NASB, the RSV and The New Jerusalem Bible are as accurate as any, and nobody will be steered far wrong by the NWT either. The NIV Study Bible has excellent footnotes that appeal in most instances to both trinitarians and non-trinitarians.

fjt

LittleToe

I use the KJV for my day to day reading, as I love the language (very Shakespearian).

I use the NIV Study bible for the footnotes (I don't find it all that readable, though).

I use the Literal Version (LITV on e-sword) for my main study. It uses the divine name in the OT, where appropriate (translated as Jehovah, but I'm happy to let that slide)

I love the colloquial language of "The Message"

I intend to get hold of the new "English Standard Version", which I am informed is very good.

I cross compare several versions and the original languages, treble checking with Strongs and Vines, etc.,

I agree with Fjoth that "the NASB, the RSV and The New Jerusalem Bible are as accurate as any".

I completely disagree with Scholar, that the NWT is the best. That position is seriously biased and flawed, as can be demonstrated by the fact that even Fjoth, as a Unitarian, doesn't prefer it.
If they had translated the NT appropriately in connection with the divine name, and not stuck with certain doctrinal predilictions, they might have been on with a winner (for all it's clunkiness, which in fairness is hard to avoid when looking for a "literal" translation into English).

Which Bible Translation is Currently the MOST Accurate in Your Opinion?