Where can I find a list of accurate Bible translations?

Question

I'm trying to find Bibles to use, and I am at a problem: which Bible will be accurate AND understandable? Sometimes, if I think a verse is inaccurate, I go to an accurate translation. But I know I won't be able to find all of them.

I'm trying to find a version to memorize in. I would do KJV cause it's pretty accurate to the "original" texts, but it's so hard to understand and when I quote it, it probably won't make much sense to who I'm talking to.

Does anyone know of a website that rates Bibles by their accuracy to the "original" texts?

(I know that "original" really isn't original, but I mean exclude all texts that are rewritten from more accurate forms)

The reason that I wanted an "original" translation (refer to previous parenthesis) was that I read that some versions, such as the NIV, which was probably my favorite, don't use the original manuscripts, but a reinterpreted manuscript.

Answer 1

The best thing is to use several translations cross-referenced against a Strong's Concordance. Look up the verse in the Hebrew/ Aramaic and Greek sections, and you will get a better picture of placing it in context. It can get tedious, but if you really want to study for understanding, this will be what you're looking for.

Answer 2

By "accurate" I assume you mean "literal". There is no perfectly accurate translation that is readable. There are too many connotations, idioms and syntactical constructions that simply don't translate. The most exact translation is an interlinear, which alternates lines of the original and the translation, in the original word order. It's strictly for study.

Among translations there are three approaches: literal or form-based (attempts to render words and phrases in the original style), idiomatic, dynamic equivalent or sense-based (conveys the meaning, adapting when the literal is confusing), and paraphrase (just gives you the feeling without rigorous translation). Most recent translations try for a balance between form and sense-based. Here are some ratings, although opinions vary a bit:

Most Literal (form-based)
American Standard
King James, New King James
English Standard
New American Standard

Idiomatic (sense-based)
Revised Standard (RSV)
New Revised Standard (NRSV)
Updated NASB
Amplified Bible
New American Bible (NAB)
New International (NIV)
New English Bible
Phillips'

In-Between Literal/Paraphrase
New International Version
Today's English Version/Good News Bible
Jerusalem Bible

Paraphrase
Living Bible (LB)
New Living Bible (NLT)
Modern Language
Contemporary English (CEV, "The Promise")
Today's English
Worldwide English
"The Message"

Some alternate lists and links appear below.

Answer 3

Skepsis had the best answer, but did not discuss the issue of "literal" verses "accurate" sufficiently.

First, you have to realize that translators generally believe that they are producing a translation that is as accurate as possible. Otherwise, they are intentionally mis-translating the scripture, and I don't believe that most translators spent years learning ancient languages to falsify results. It is true, bias *does* appear, but bias is *not* the same as inaccuracy. Therefore, there *is* no really *good* measure of the *accuracy* of a translation. Some, like paraphrase bibles or bibles that "inject" gender-neutral language, can be judged inaccurate with objective considerations, but in the whole, it is difficult even for an expert in ancient languages to *objectively* qualify one translation as more or less accurate than another. A good case can also be made against older translations - because the scholarship and manuscripts available have increased over the centuries - but any bible translated from the original languages in the past 50 years is, *for the most part*, on equal grounds with others.

There are differences in *translation style*. A "literal" (sometimes called a word-for-word) translation can be very useful as a study bible. However, it should be noted that a more literal translation is likely *not* a more accurate translation. *Very often*, phrases have meanings in languages other than the combination of the individual meanings of the words. Thus, when you hear someone say "she's a fox", you know that the person is not *really* speaking of a fox, or even really comparing the woman under discussion to a fox as an animal. However, a literal translation to another language would lead the reader to believe that the animal "fox" *was* pertinent to the statement. Similarly, *any* translation from *any* language, and particularly a translation of a work so far removed in both time and culture from our own.

The KJV was a wonderful translation in its time, but is no longer worthwhile as a study bible when there are *so many* versions available that are both more accurate and more modern. This does not mean that the KJV is of no value, but it is *not* valuable as a study bible. *If* you insist on a KJV, I recommend this version *only* http://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.html?ie=UTF8&location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2FKJV-Cambridge-Paragraph-Bible-Apocrypha%2Fdp%2F0521843863%3Fie%3DUTF8%26s%3Dbooks%26qid%3D1189044700%26sr%3D1-1&tag=wwwjimpettico-20&linkCode=ur2&camp=1789&creative=9325 because it is a scholarly attempt to duplicate the *original* translation (not any specific printing or revision), includes all the books of the original, *and* includes the marginal notes of the original as well - a thing that the translators considered *necessary*.

IMHO, the New Jerusalem Bible, Regular Edition is the most accurate (based on the words used - see my review here http://www.jimpettis.com/bibles/njb.htm ), but this opinion is based only on my reading of several English versions cover-to-cover and not on any ancient-language scholarship. In other words, I may be wrong. You can read my reasons in my review.

Even better, you can look at my "what bible should I pick" answer here: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AjW1GbZrKpiJR.NBw_cgMqjty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20070904112711AAumKmB&show=7#profile-info-B2NeUMphaa . This is hardly the "final word" on bible selection - I have 4 versions at home right now that I have not read (although I am making progress in 2), and I hope to read many more in the future. However, it *should* help you to choose a bible for yourself based on your personal criteria.

Conclusion: it is very difficult, if not impossible, to grade a translation of the bible as more or less inaccurate than another. The best thing that you can do is choose a translation that is modern in scholarship, appropriate for your purposes, and not making use of techniques that you deem detract from its worth (such as paraphrase, for example).

Jim, http://www.life-after-harry-potter.com

Answer 4

I don't know about the New Testament, but the best translations for the 1st 5 books of Moses is a book titled, Etz Hayim, which presents the Hebrew and English side-by-side along with commentary on the meanings of the text and why some words are translated differently in English from the original Hebrew. The book is written with the right side of the book being the beginning and the left side being the end.

It can be purchased from the Jewish Publication Society online.

Answer 5

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

(Please note that according to Dr. Jason BeDuhn, only the NWT translated John 1:1 correctly)

Concerning the NIV:

Why did the recently published “New International Version” (NIV) of the Bible fail to use the name of God where it appears about 7,000 times in ancient Bible manuscripts? In response to a person who inquired about this, Edwin H. Palmer, Th.D., Executive Secretary for the NIV’s committee wrote:

“Here is why we did not: You are right that Jehovah is a distinctive name for God and ideally we should have used it. But we put 2 1/4 million dollars into this translation and a sure way of throwing that down the drain is to translate, for example, Psalm 23 as, ‘Yahweh is my shepherd.’ Immediately, we would have translated for nothing. Nobody would have used it. Oh, maybe you and a handful [of] others. But a Christian has to be also wise and practical. We are the victims of 350 years of the King James tradition. It is far better to get two million to read it—that is how many have bought it to date—and to follow the King James, than to have two thousand buy it and have the correct translation of Yahweh. . . . It was a hard decision, and many of our translators agree with you.”


Bruce Metzger Concerning the NIV:
(NIV) "It is surprising that translators who profess to have 'a high view of scripture" should take liberties with text by omitting words or, more often, by adding words that are not in the manuscripts."

.

Answer 6

Blueletter bible is a good source on the web. You can click on the concordance and read the word in Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek depending on the word. I have many translations along with an interlinear which has the original text. I also have a "Hebrew Greek Study bible" that has a concordance, and lexicon that explains the meanings of the words.

Answer 7

All of the translations have their good points and bad points, but here is what you do look at who translated the Bibles and if it is done just by one person, then look for one that was translated by more that one person, like the King James was translated by a panel of fifty people so the translation is pretty close.

But also the translations lack for some of the words are not translated right because of word differences, from Hebrew to English.

Answer 8

I have memorized for over 40 years from the NASB and I don't regret it one bit. NASB is a literal translation and very accurate. It did use the Alexandrian manuscripts which is a bit of a drawback, but I don't think you will find one that is more accurate. 2nd choice would be the NKJV. NIV is a paraphrase and so far off I would never consider memorizing in it.

Answer 9

The best translation of the BIBLE is the Recovery Version of the BIBLE. It is good to know that His precious Word is so available to us today. It has not always been so. In fact, from the sixth to the fourteenth centuries, the Bible was largely inaccessible to the public. During this period, the bright light contained in the Bible and many of the precious truths revealed in it and enjoyed by the early Christians were not generally available. Since the 1500s, beginning with Martin Luther's groundbreaking realization that justification is by faith, the Lord has continued to gradually recover more light and truth from His Word. This recovery in spiritual and scriptural understanding has ushered in a corresponding recovery in both the individual and the corporate aspects of the Christian life. The New Testament Recovery Version is so named because its text and footnotes crystallize many of these truths and experiences.

In 1385 John Wycliffe translated the Bible into English from the Latin Vulgate. This translation and its subsequent distribution was instrumental in opening the door to the spread of the truth. Around 1525 the Bible was translated into English directly from the original languages by William Tyndale. Since then many excellent English translations have followed. The New Testament Recovery Version is translated from the original languages according to principles and standards of translation established by major English translations of the last five centuries.

The New Testament Recovery Version was translated and revised by the Editorial Section of Living Stream Ministry from 1974 to 1991. The New Testament Recovery Version contains numerous study aids, including, the subject and background of each book; detailed, interpretive outlines; enlightening footnotes, valuable cross-references, and a variety of useful charts and maps. All of these study aids were written by Witness Lee, who received much help from the writings of noted Bible expositors throughout church history, including his co-worker, Watchman Nee. The New Testament Recovery Version in its current format in English was published in 1991, and it is also available in Chinese, Spanish, Russian, Japanese, and several other languages. The Recovery Version of the Bible, including outlines, footnotes, and cross-references for both the Old and New Testaments is now available.

For example: Revelation 21:2

And I saw the holy city, 1 new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.

Answer 10

Aside from Learning greek and reading the ancient texts.....I would recommend the RSV Version. KJV is not accurate to the original texts. Not the greek. it's a crappy mix of the Latin vulgate translated back into greek and then into english and a mash up of ancient greek texts.

www.blueletterbible.org