Bible translations

[Arduinna]

ok I want to pull my hair out now. Anyone want to discuss Bible translations? Balancing accuracy with poetry of verse.

[Kidzaplenty]

I prefer NKJV just because it "sounds" more like "Bible" to me (it is what I was raised with). DH prefers NAS. I find both to be similar and quite accurate. The original KJV seems to have many "errors" although it is more likely it is word evolutions that caused this (what the words meant then don't have the same meanings today).

For "Bible" reading, I do NOT like The Message (it seems to "water down" the scriptures making it more PC rather than accurate), and The Amplified (too wordy to really read), the Living Bible (just does not seem accurate). I may look at these, but only when I am studying.

I LOVE my e-sword program. It is a Bible computer program where I can have all the versions at a glance and can compare.

BTW, e-sword is free and downloadable
E-sword (just click on "downloads"). It really is a great resourse.

[Arduinna]

Cool, thanks Kidzaplenty I will check out that link. I'm on the fence on translations. I had a KJV when I was a kid, now that I'm Catholic I enjoy Douay-Rheims but sometimes it gets a little to old englishy. I have the Catholic Study Bible which is the NAB translation but I miss the old sounding english a little, so I'm trying to find a middle ground. I'm thinking possibly NASB translation. I don't know but it's getting frustrating to find one I like that balances accuracy of translation with lyrical wording.

[BananaBreadGirl]

I have really been impressed with the ESV (English Standard Version). It is relatively new, leans towards the literal side (I prefer this so that the translators aren't also doing too much of the interpreting for the reader, but on the other hand, it might be slightly more confusing for a newer Bible reader). It is still quite readable for my purposes. I like using it for studying.

I grew up with another translation, the NIV, and still use that often.

I have my criticisms of some of the translations (The Message, for example, might have its place as a helpful type of commentary, almost, but I consider it too approximate to be considered a translation) but I have to remember that God works through them all! Some of it does come to personal preference.

E-Sword is also available for Mac as MacSword.

[AngelBee]

Honestly...I have like 13 different Bibles and read randomly from them all

[Tradd]

Originally Posted by Arduinna

Cool, thanks Kidzaplenty I will check out that link. I'm on the fence on translations. I had a KJV when I was a kid, now that I'm Catholic I enjoy Douay-Rheims but sometimes it gets a little to old englishy. I have the Catholic Study Bible which is the NAB translation but I miss the old sounding english a little, so I'm trying to find a middle ground. I'm thinking possibly NASB translation. I don't know but it's getting frustrating to find one I like that balances accuracy of translation with lyrical wording.

You might want to try the Revised Standard Version-Catholic Edition, 2nd edition. It takes out the Thee and Thou, but is still wonderful. It's easy to understand, but still has some of the KJV flavor. The Psalms are lovely. I have a pretty blue little NT & Psalms of this edition and love it.

http://www.amazon.com/Ignatius-Bible...38/ref=ed_oe_h

I'm an Orthodox Christian, and the RSV, NKJV, and the KJV version are all the "favored" translations, depending on which "jurisdiction" you belong to. The Orthodox use the Greek Septuagint for our Old Testament (not the Hebrew manuscripts), translated in the 3rd century before Christ. There are some differences with the Hebrew. A long-awaited readable, modern English translation of the Septuagint came out about a year ago as part of the complete Orthodox Study Bible. This OT translation uses the NKJV version where it matches the Septuagint.

http://www.amazon.com/Orthodox-Study...2165582&sr=8-1

I really prefer the RSV. Reads well, lovely Psalms (but they don't exactly match the Septugaint, which can be an issue sometimes). It was really the first major translation since the KJV. It has some problems for conservative folks (such as Isaiah 7:14), but that's easy enough to correct yourself.

Standard RSV:

http://www.amazon.com/Annotated-Apoc...2165115&sr=1-4

I love the KJV for Psalms and Isaiah, especially. Trying to read St. Paul's letters in the KJV gives me a massive headache. Basically, the KJV is best for the greater bits of poetry in the Bible, such as the Song of Songs, too.

I recently got a lovely little edition of the Psalter (book of Psalms by themselves) translated from the Septuagint. First done in the 1970s, it was just reissued in a nice little hardcover for personal use. It's the Psalter According to the Seventy (tradition has it that seventy translators, or sets of translators translated the Septuagint=seventy).

The RSV is much nicer for public reading in worship (I serve as a reader in my church). So, I'll use the RSV (it's preferred by my priest) when reading publicly in church, and the Orthodox Study Bible at home - I go back and forth between these two at home. Throw in the Psalter According to the Seventy (which goes with me everywhere - I love reading the Psalms a lot), and some KJV. It's especially instructive to put the RSV & the OSB side-by-side.

[tricia80]

We use KJV at church. I had bought NIV for dd to help her read the bible (she has dyslexia and the wording was easier to follow) but in church it was found to have a few flaws which i am convicted on where it basically contradicted itself because of the annotation at the bottom and it was nothing like my KJV not even close.. so i knew we had some issues...

[Smokering]

I like the ESV. DH recently got the ESV study Bible and has been very impressed with it. It's a literal rather than paraphrased translation, but still quite poetic and not overly wordy. Very similar to the NRSV, I think (based on?).

For more indepth study, though, I tend to use an online source and compare multiple translations, using a lexicon if in doubt. And we used the NIV at school, so I still remember a bunch of passages in that translation (which isn't super, but adequate). I really don't like Living/Message/Expanded-type Bibles, partly because they tend to be misused - the same way study Bibles can be, I suppose. Still, I know some people read them side-by-side with a literal translation to get a free mini-commentary, which is fine as long as one maintains a critical mind.

[Tradd]

Originally Posted by tricia80

We use KJV at church. I had bought NIV for dd to help her read the bible (she has dyslexia and the wording was easier to follow) but in church it was found to have a few flaws which i am convicted on where it basically contradicted itself because of the annotation at the bottom and it was nothing like my KJV not even close.. so i knew we had some issues...

You might want to check out the NKJV. It's basically a KJV with all the strange Elizabethan words that trip up so many gone, no Thee or Thou - this is an oversimplified description, but I'm definitely no biblical scholar, lol. Sounds like it would be good for your dd since she would be using it to follow along in church.

[Arduinna]

I don't know why they get rid of thee and thou, those are easy, it's the privily and the like that are a PITA.

[DahliaRW]

My dh has studied Biblical Greek and he finds that he likes the English Standard Version for clarity and translation. He also likes the New American Standard. The King James is accurate too, but harder to read and understand in modern English. Anyways, those are the best for studying, unless you read Biblical Greek.

I personally like the NIV for daily reading (not studying, just reading) as it's easy and flows well.

www.blueletterbible.org is a great site for reading different translations of verse side by side and even checking out words in the original Greek.

[indie]

The KJV was a good translation at the time (1611), but there are plenty of mistakes and we know a lot more since ancient manuscripts and documents have been found since then that shed light on translation issues. Unfortunately, while the NKJV updated the language a bit, the translators failed to consult the new discoveries in order to update inaccuracies.

I personally like the NRSV. I think that it strikes a good balance between being literal and communicating meaning. There is some inconsistancy in translation from book to book (with different people leading up the translation of each book), but overall I like it.

[Suzukimom]

:

Originally Posted by indie

The KJV was a good translation at the time (1611), but there are plenty of mistakes and we know a lot more since ancient manuscripts and documents have been found since then that shed light on translation issues. Unfortunately, while the NKJV updated the language a bit, the translators failed to consult the new discoveries in order to update inaccuracies.

I personally like the NRSV. I think that it strikes a good balance between being literal and communicating meaning. There is some inconsistancy in translation from book to book (with different people leading up the translation of each book), but overall I like it.

:

[Smokering]

I don't know why they get rid of thee and thou, those are easy, it's the privily and the like that are a PITA.

I don't know why they got rid of thee and thou, but there's good reason to - using those words in a modern context gives the text an artificial formality. The Bible was written in plain colloquial language, not high-faluting or ritualistic language, and I think it's good for a translation to reflect that. I get what you mean about the KJV sounding 'Biblical', but I think it's more important for the text to reflect the down-to-earth tone of the actual Bible. Plus, the archaicisms of the KJV annoy me because they're not even genuine post-Elizabethan. The language was deliberately archaicised to a dialect which never actually existed, in order to do the exact opposite of the point I made above. They wanted to make it sound more high-faluting. That, combined with the translation issues indie mentioned, makes me not a fan of the KJV.

[Kidzaplenty]

That is why I like the New King James, or even the Modern King James for "reading". I don't like the "better than thou" feel of the original KJV. But, I also do lots of word studies on what I read. And once I know what the verse was really saying, I can read the NKJV and see it for what it means.

[lilyka]

I use the New King James (because it is the only one that comes in the handy dandy Orthodox Study Bible) and the NIV (because iot is what I have all my scriptures memorized in).

the important thing to know first is weather it is a translation (from original manuscripts, and if so which ones and how many) or a paraphrase which often means someone sat down with a few English translations and put their spin and interpretation on it.

Since you are Catholic you will likely be looking at the Bible through the scope of church tradition so I would recommend checking with your priest about what he recommends. remember, The Church built the Bible, not the other way around.

Also if you are going to study the Bible I recommend getting a current Strongs concordance or something similar. (this is available free online but I am not sure where. and for translation fun i recommend www.biblegateway.com You can look up a verse and then see it in like 25 translation at the click of the button. compare and contrast. fun fun.

[SquishyBuggles]

I go between the NKJ and the NIV

[hkowell1]

I love biblegateway. Its how I study

[christianmomof3]

Here is a bible translation comparrison chart http://www.apbrown2.net/web/Translat...risonChart.htm
I also like Bible Gateway - it is a great tool http://www.biblegateway.com/
and I like Blue Letter Bible Online http://www.blueletterbible.org/

Basically, the types of tranlation run from very literal, to dynamic - which tries to put it into wording that is more understandable yet still trying to retain the original meaning, to paraphrase which puts the Bible into someone else's words trying to make it "flow" a certain way.

I favor the more literal translations because the farther from that you get the more changes there can be in the meaning of the text.
I like the American Standard and Recovery Version and Revised Standard Versions best.

I like the Amplified when studying certain verses - it is basically like a thesaurus and Bible rolled into one - check it out on Bible Gateway.

I like King James the best for the Psalms - they were written as poetry and the King James translators did a wonderful job of translating it as poetry and it is so beautiful in that version .

Here is a link to the Recovery Version which is a literal translation with footnotes http://online.recoveryversion.org/index2.asp

I just saw that you are Catholic - I am not, but have looked at some Catholic Bibles. I do NOT like the New American Bible and I have heard that some Catholics don't like it either. I do like the Revised Standard Version, which I believe is also used by Catholics - the one I have has the apocryphyl books in it.

The Bible Dudes site explains how the Bible was cannonized or put together -
here - http://bibledudes.com/bible/canon.php

[Arduinna]

Thanks, I like biblegateway too. I like reading away from the computer so I haven't been using it much, except to compare different translations. After all this thinking and reading I realized that I really don't want another paper edition and I'm going to get a digital copy. I'm spoiled from being able to read the bible on my kindle and iphone and have been using the programs on olivetree.com

I'm hoping they will get the Catholic version of RSV for iphone or kindle soon.