Are there any modern English versions of the Bible made by unbiased linguists?

Question

Anyone's that don't tend to favor the doctrines of one denomination or another? I'm comfortable with the old English of the KJV, but I was just wondering.

Thanks

Answer 1

The English Standard Version is a very literal translation so i don't think there is room for much bias in it. Bias has more effect in dynamic translations. However, with literal translation you still have the bias of the reader who interprets it. The best thing is to learn biblical Hebrew and/or Greek then you can compare translatons with the original language and make up your own mind. It takes some effort but is not as hard as most people think.

Answer 2

Try the New International Version (NIV) or the New American Standard Bible (NASB).

---------------------------------------------
The King James Version (KJV) — Translated in 1611 by 47 scholars using the Byzantine family of manuscripts, Textus Receptus. This remains as a good version of the Bible. It has been the most reliable translation for over three centuries, but its Elizabethan style Old English is difficult for modern readers, especially youth. This is still a good translation for those who can deal with the language.


The New American Standard Bible (NASB) — Translated in 1971 by 58 scholars of the Lockman Foundation, from Kittle’s Biblia Hebraica and Nestle’s Greek New Testament 23rd ed., which include the Alexandrian Family codices. Though academic in tone, it is said to be the most exact English translation available. A very good version.


The Living Bible (TLB) — A paraphrased rendition of the King James Version by Kenneth Taylor in 1971. This is not a genuine translation, but is a type of phrase-by-phrase commentary that was originally intended to help the author’s own children understand the scriptures. It is useful for inspiration and commentary, but for serious Bible study it should only be used in conjunction with a legitimate translation.


The New International Version (NIV) — Over 100 translators completed this work in 1978 which was composed from Kittle’s, Nestle’s and United Bible Society’s texts, which include the Alexandrian Family codices. This is considered an “open” style translation. It is a good, easy to read version.


The New King James Version (NKJV) — 130 translators, commissioned by Thomas Nelson Publishers, produced this version from the Byzantine family (Textus Receptus) in 1982. This is a revision of the King James version, updated to modern English with minor translation corrections and retention of traditional phraseology. This is a very good version.

Answer 3

Most any translation will reflect some bias on the part of the translators. It can hardly be avoided since all translators have opinions which influence the decision they make in rendering difficult passages.

I must disagree with anyne who says that the New World Translation is wholly unbiased. It was translated by Jehovah's Witnesses - men with very strong opinions - and unfortunately those opinions sometimes overshadowed their efforts to be unbiased.

They translated the words "god" and "lord" 237 times in the New Testament as "Jehovah". Their reason for doing that was not because there was any question as to what the original language texts said. There was no question or ambiguity - all the texts were in agreement and used 'god' or 'lord' in those verses. So the fact that the NWT translated them as "Jehovah" must be attributed to bias.

There are also good things one can say about the NWT, though; for example, it's quite easy to read and in many places, it strives for accuracy. One should not be misled, however, into thinking that it's more objective and unbiased than other translations because --as the above example shows---it's not.

Answer 4

These questions and MOST answers are due to not knowing the original language.

There are "literal translations", there are paraphrases and then there is ONE that does not follow the rules of grammar in order for it to "adhere" to the beliefs of the cult.

I am a Greek language graduate (for what that's worth).

MANY Bibles are done by societies and have the heart to be as close to the text as possible. Many of the translations are just differences in subtle nuances in the verbal aspects. They will not change how a text is viewed in it's context at all. These translations are true to the text NKJV, KJV, NASB, ESV, NIV if you stay with these (and there are others) you will be fine.

Secondly there are paraphrases PLEASE stay away from these. They change meanings of the text and STRAY from the textual intentions. BUT if you can not find anything else, God can still use them, BUT get a literal if possible.

Thirdly there Bibles that are not TRUE to the text and actually are manipulated to GO AGAINST what the text means to further doctrines that are actually heretical. These are horrible, defaming of God's Word and are heretical and will lead a person to damnable heresies.

The one to stay away from the most is the "New World Translation". It is a travesty what they do to the Greek.

Jason BeDuhn is not credible in the science of Greek languistics and is not regarded highly in the scholarly realm at all. Also he is only ONE campared to the MILLIONS who know Greek that say he is letting his bias get in the way of good scholarship.

Stay with your KJV or I prefer GREEK!

Answer 5

Most of the modern translations were done by committees of scholars where all the major denominations were represented. Of them all, the NIV and the NASB show clear bias towards an Evangelical Protestant perspective. The best (most neutral, most scholarly) are the New Jerusalem Bible, the Revised English Bible, and the Revised Standard Version (the New Revised Standard is controversial because of its gender-neutral language which sometimes oversteps the bounds of good scholarship).

Answer 6

PP, the Bible’s message is obvious for many who will learn it with an open brain and search to realize its which means. The main issue comes while individuals try to make the Word are compatible their preconceived recommendations. This isn't the fault of the Bible, however of the individuals who try to drive the Bible to mention something they wish it to mention. Often the war of words isn't such a lot with the translation of the Scriptures, however with the program.

Answer 7

You can download Free Bible Software from www.e-sword.net and there SEVERAL ENGLISH translations of the Bible and there are ALSO other language translations there. Some of the Asian and Far East versions are there and many European versions there!

You may have to download the MS Language Fonts to get them to print out in the particular language!

There is also the NT Greek and the OT Hebrew there!

Thanks, RR

Answer 8

Try the New World Translation. You can get a free copy from your local Kingdom Hall or from any Jehovah's Witness you know or who comes by. Many people say we have our own Bible, but the truth of the matter is that its a translation used by many Bible scholars who acknowledge that it is very accurate in its translation. Additionally, it isn't written in the King's English so it is easily understood.

Answer 9

For honesty and accuracy I perfer the
NWT, Why?

Old Testament:
In fact, the New World Translation is a scholarly work. In 1989, Professor Benjamin Kedar of Israel said:
"In my linguistic research in connection with the Hebrew Bible and translation, I often refer to the English edition as what is known as the New World Translation. In doing so, I find my feeling repeatedly confirmed that this kind of work reflects an honest endeavor to achieve an understanding of the text that is as accurate as possible. Giving evidence of a broad command of the original language, it renders the original words into a second language understandably without deviating unnecessarily from the specific structure of the Hebrew....Every statement of language allows for a certain latitude in interpreting or translating. So the linguistic solution in any given case may be open to debate. But I have never discovered in the New World Translation any biased intent to read something into the text that it does not contain."

New Testament:

While critical of some of its translation choices, BeDuhn called the New World Translation a “remarkably good” translation, “better by far” and “consistently better” than some of the others considered. Overall, concluded BeDuhn, the New World Translation “is one of the most accurate English translations of the New Testament currently available” and “the most accurate of the translations compared.”—Truth in Translation: Accuracy and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament.

“Here at last is a comprehensive comparison of nine major translations of the Bible:

King James Version,
New American Standard Bible,
New International Version,
New Revised Standard Version,
New American Bible,
Amplified Bible,
Today's English Version (Good News Bible),
Living Bible,
and the New World Translation.

The book provides a general introduction to the history and methods of Bible translation, and gives background on each of these versions. Then it compares them on key passages of the New Testament to determine their accuracy and identify their bias. Passages looked at include:

John 1:1; John 8:58; Philippians 2:5-11; Colossians 1:15-20; Titus 2:13; Hebrews 1:8; 2 Peter 1:1

Jason BeDuhn
Associate Professor of Religious Studies, and Chair
Department of Humanities, Arts, and Religion
Northern Arizona University

This does not mean I use only the NWT, but the more I compare it to other translations and Strong's, the more I've come to appreciate the accuracy of this bible

---edit-----

theologian C. Houtman in the scholarly Nederlands Theologisch Tijdschrift(Dutch Theological Magazine). Houtman notes that on the point of translator bias "the New World Translation of the Jehovah's Witnesses can survive the scrutiny of criticism(1984, 38, pp279-280

How To Choose Your Bible Wisely, A.S.Duthie. in his updated copy lists the NWT as one of the three bibles 'bible students' should have.

"..for detailed word studies and similar interests in the original languages, we suggest either a very literal version like the N[ew] A[merican] S[tandard], N[ew] W[orld] T[ranslation..."

Note BeDuhn's remark of "If, however, you want an objective assessment of bible translation, don't ask theologians, ask secular bible scholars at public universities."

Now you know why many theologians don't approve of Dr. BeDuhn, not because he isn't qualified, but because he corrects their Greek.

“I am interested in the mission work of your people, and its world wide scope, and much pleased with the free, frank and vigorous translation. It exhibits a vast array of sound serious learning, as I can testify.”—Letter, December 8, 1950, from Edgar J. Goodspeed, translator of the Greek “New Testament” in An American Translation.

“The translation is evidently the work of skilled and clever scholars, who have sought to bring out as much of the true sense of the Greek text as the English language is capable of expressing.”—Hebrew and Greek scholar Alexander Thomson, in The Differentiator, April 1952, pages 52-7.

“The translation of the New Testament is evidence of the presence in the movement of scholars qualified to deal intelligently with the many problems of Biblical translation.”—Andover Newton Quarterly, January 1963.

“The New Testament translation was made by a committee whose membership has never been revealed—a committee that possessed an unusual competence in Greek.”—Andover Newton Quarterly, September 1966.

“This is no ordinary interlinear: the integrity of the text is preserved, and the English which appears below it is simply the basic meaning of the Greek word. . . . After examining a copy, I equipped several interested second-year Greek students with it as an auxiliary text. . . . The translation by the anonymous committee is thoroughly up-to-date and consistently accurate. . . . In sum, when a Witness comes to the door, the classicist, Greek student, or Bible student alike would do well to bring him in and place an order.”—From a review of The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures, by Thomas N. Winter of the University of Nebraska, appearing in The Classical Journal, April–May 1974.

Answer 10

Unfortunately, although some may claim to be, there are none. Always read any and all versions with an openness to the direction of the Spirit and He/She will be able to use any of them to enlighten and guide you...