What's the best/most accurate Bible translation?

[tjdee]

The Bible's pretty old, lots of translations.
It occurs to me I don't own one since I lost the one my mom bought me a few years ago.

I would like to get as close to the original texts (and text meanings), wondering if anyone has any idears. KJ, NKJV, NIV, RSV???

Someone in the other thread recommended the Harper Collins Study Bible, which is in NRSV (whatever that is)...I would like extras (back history, context history, etc.) but I could probably figure that out if I figure out which version first.

Pretty sure I don't want either of the King James versions, though.

[TreasonousBastard]

1. Tough to say...

since "best" is a relative term, but I've been happy with annotated "student" versions of RSV and NIV.

They're pretty cheap, and you can pick up a few different recent translations and revisions for not much money. The texts aren't significantly different, most of the time, but the commentaries in each vary enough to make it worthwhile.

[tjdee]

2. Yeah, I know.

They're all similar, I imagine...maybe I just don't understand the differences in each version?

[MissWaverly]

9. no, they're not

the one I have, the index stinks, I tried to look up the quote about false prophets, "by their actions you will know them" it's not in the
index, it's the KJV ultra thin concordance

[RevCheesehead]

3. New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)

All the joy of the NRSV, with sensitivity to inclusiveness, etc..

It's perhaps the most accurate translation available, and the most recent.

For a good paraphrase, I like "The Message" by Eugene Peterson. His theology is sound, and he gets right to the heart of the matter.

[tjdee]

4. Holy moly, that's Bono's favorite version, I think...

I seem to remember the name Peterson and Bono talking about it...maybe I'll google that...

[RevCheesehead]

12. Remember the difference between "version" and "paraphrase"

A "version" is a translation, either from the original Hebrew/Greek, or from the Latin Vulgate (that's a secondary translation, and is what the King James' is translated from..., so the King James is a 3rd-hand version Greek -> Latin -> English; and the "New King James" adds another step. The problem here is that there were errors in the Latin Vulgate translation!)

A paraphrase is simply that... a re-wording of the text, in order for it to be better understood. A paraphrase is based on a "version". These include the Living Bible, the Cotton Patch Bible, and others.

Go with Peterson - his theology is sound. (I think he's Lutheran, but am not sure)

[tjdee]

13. Thank you for the correction--what was wrong with the Latin Vulgate?

I know next to nothing about this, so I appreciate the explanations.
I'm sure that the Latin Vulgate answer is kind of involved, but whatever you feel like saying about it will help!

[RevCheesehead]

14. I'm no expert here-

But the Vulgate was the Latin translation from Hebrew and Greek texts. As one of my seminary profs used to say, "Let's just say 'Mistakes were made.'" :)

[megatherium]

6. The New Oxford Annotated Bible is a very good edition of the NRSV.

This was recommended to me by a friend who has a PhD in theology.

If you're inclined towards a traditional view of Biblical inspiration or inerrancy, you might find the NOAB disconcerting in places. For example, their introduction to the book of Daniel explains that it was written in the 2nd century BCE (and therefore its prophetic material is less than supernatural). On the other hand, their introduction to the New Testament was written by Bruce Metzger, a highly-regarded mainstream scholar who has an orthodox Christian faith.

[RevCheesehead]

11. The "New Oxford" is an edition of a version (NRSV)

You can probably get a Children's NRSV, etc.... it's all in the packaging. (I think publishers keep asking "how do we re-package Cornflakes?")

I used that particular edition while in seminary, and have found it helpful for homiletical research. I completely agree that the historical/critical information in that edition is, by far, the most complete. In addition to the introductions, etc., I found their footnotes to be the most complete in offering text variations, alternate interpretations, and disputed authenticity.

But for everyday, non-scholarly use, a plain ol' NRSV, pew edition, is all you need (and it's much cheaper: $10, vs. $45).

[Up2Late]

5. It depends on what "flavor" of Christianity you want to be part of...

You're right about the KJV, that's probably the worst and most out of date version still being used. It's only value is the elegant sounding quotes it produces for wall posters.

A good "modern" translation is "The New American Bible," which is the official, post-Vatican II version, used by the American Catholic churches, or "The Jerusalem Bible," which I call "the Hippie Bible," because it came out in the early 1970's, and also uses modern language.

I have no knowledge of the versions being used the by other churches.

[Democracy White]

7. Actually...

Most of today's versions of the Bible stem from the KJV, which was translated from the original Greek, the Greek being translated from Hebrew. If you really want to have the best and original Bible you would have to know Aramaic and good luck with that since there are only six people in the world that know it and they all work for the Vatican.

However if you want to get closer to this Aramaic version and know what and how the pre-Pauline Christians believed, I would suggest getting the Gnostic Bible. Its very metaphorical and hard to understand but gives such a higher understanding of Jesus, the Essenes and the Sophia.

Dee

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

10. not all work for the Vatican

I would suggest you read the works of Neil Douglas-Klotz, a Sufi Murshid who has spent years studying Aramaic, Hebrew, and other ancient languages. His works are a good accompaniment for any Bible study, and include these works:

Prayers of the Cosmos: Meditataions on the Aramaic Words of Jesus
A pineering book in the movement to recover the wisdom of Jesus as a Native Middle Eastern person. The Lord's Prayer and Beatitudes in new, mult-layered interpretive translations, from the native languages of Jesus.

Desert Wisdom: Sacred Middle Eastern Writings from the Goddess to the Sufis
From ancient Egypt through mystical Judaism and the Aramaic Jesus to classical Sufism...can be used as a handbook for daily inspiration. Includes chants, meditations, and body prayers.

The Hidden Gospel: Decoding the Spiritual Message of the Aramic Jesus. Jesus' familiar sayings newly translated from Aramaic...what emerges is a hopeful, nurturing, and very contemporary spiritual message.

I have copies of the first two books and have found them immeasurably helpful in understanding the Bible.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

16. Not quite--you're conflating two versions

The Old Testament was written in Hebrew with a few parts in Aramaic, a "daughter language" of Hebrew, but there was a Greek version called the Septuagint, translated for the benefit of Jews living outside Judaea.

The New Testament was always in Greek, as far as we know, but in real life, Jesus and the disciples would have spoken Aramaic. Greek was chosen because it was the "English" of its day, the language that educated people throughout the Roman Empire spoke. Jesus and Pilate would most likely have spoken to each other in Greek.

[Democracy White]

19. I always love being educated!

Thanks so much for telling me this, I love learning new things about religion. Thanks Ayesha for telling me about these books I will try to look them up in the library. I like to extend my knowledge about the Bible in any avenue that I can.
And thanks to the other poster for telling about the languages used, I kinda figured that was the case about the Greek language.

Dee

[China_cat]

8. The Jefferson bible.

[Tux]

21. Haven't read it yet

But I plan too. It's a great Deist Gospel.

KJV should be avoided since it promotes the killing of pagans and possibliy non-Christians: Thou shall not suffer a witch to live.

[lavenderdiva]

15. I have and love the New American Standard...

very easy to read, more correctly translated than reading the Living Bible. Not that I dislike the Living Bible version, but it is not a translation (as stated above), but more an interpretation. NAS reads quickly and easily...

[Igel]

17. "Either" of the King James Versions ...

sigh ... there are so many. KJV, ASV, NASV, NKJV ... the alphabet soup gets getting thicker.

For New Testament, I like Phillips. It's an iconoclast version, some biases, but refreshing. He avoided reading all English versions for decades, read only the Greek, until he more or less forgot the English versions he had learned. Then he translated it as prose. If nothing else, the idiosyncrasies are fairly obvious.

Overall, I seem to be using the Holman Christian Bible. Haven't even got through it once yet, although it seems reasonable so far; I'm not sure of its 'genealogy'. It's best to have a translation that preserves the ambiguities of the original, and that don't stuff the originals into modern day ideas. The translation of a 2000 year old book shouldn't have archaic language in it (nor jarringly modern lingo), but it also shouldn't be sanitized. That makes for harder reading, to be sure.

There are a couple of Jewish translations of the OT that are decent and worth looking at. They have their own version of sanitizing bits here and there.

One thing I'll defend the KJV for, however, is the use of grammatical number. The "thee" and "ye" business is damned useful in some places in keeping straight whether one person or many are being addressed, and there are some shifts in addressee in the OT and NT that people routinely gloss over, to the detriment of their understanding. Unlike many European languages in which the plural 'you' also standards for 'polite singular you', the plural "you" forms only were used for plurals. (There are a few places where the gender that the Hebrew verb shows would come in handy, but English doesn't allow it, English "thou" is indetermine for gender.)

As for the Aramaic "originals" for the NT (2-3 gospels, at least), there are no original texts. The assumption is that they were written in Aramaic, and there are a few hints that either some writers or gospels had Aramaic as first language--the distinction is lost on some people, but it's important. The Greek is as close as we come to the originals, however. We have some late Aramaic translations from the Greek, but I don't think they're regarded as any more authoritative than the Vulgate.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

18. For a Christian

or someone trying to understand Christianity, I don't know, but as poetry the KJV is far superior to any other version I've ever seen.

It also has the advantage that it's what a lot of English writers will have meant by The Bible, so that it arguably makes it easier to see where they are coming from if you have read it.

I'm a committed atheist, but I still enjoy reading it, and I am always vaguely... disappointed when I open another version and find that it doesn't begin with "in the beginning was the Word"

[Dervill Crow]

20. I like the New American Standard for reading.

I used the Amplified Bible as a study bible and liked it, too.

[MemphisTiger]

22. Supposedly, the New American Stanard Version

is the best translation into English from the original Greek and Hebrew. At least that is what my fundie friend told me when he saw me reading the NIV, which he turned his nose up at.

[shawn703]

23. Harper Collins Study or Holman Christian Standard?

Maybe there are two HCSB's, but I use the Holman. It's a pretty new translation which is supposedly highly accurate and as close to modern English as possible without losing meaning.