English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

And have you read all of them to compare them? If so which version do you prefer and why?

2007-10-16 13:33:51 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

19 answers

It depends on whether you wish to have a literal word for word translation, or a dynamic equivalence translation.

While word for word translations are the most literal, they don't always convey the idiom within the original languages.

A parallel Bible using different translations is the most helpful, because you can compare up to four side by side. Then you are able to get the literal and the gist of what is written.

Personally, I like the NASB or NKJV for the literal, and the NIV or NLT for the dynamic equivalence.

2007-10-19 14:14:27 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

Unless you're a Biblical scholar, you haven't read them all, but I have compared verse to verse across a lot of them.

My husband and I, after years of reading, have settled on "The Complete Jewish Bible," for a number of reasons. Most of the Bible was written in Hebrew, a language that was considered dead for nearly 2,000 years. Since Israel became a nation, it is alive and well, and many religious works are being redone based on Hebrew as it was spoken in ancient days. So it is not only a translation, but uses words the way they were used at the time. (That won't please some Christians.)

Since Jesus and the apostles were all Jews, the New Testament (Brit Hadashah in our Bible) considers their Hebrew roots. The Greek-Roman versions of these people and their writings does just about everything possible to remove the Jewishness from them, which deprives us of the true setting.

The format is the same as the original scrolls (see Dead Sea Scrolls). It is not written in the King James verse form. The text is presented as originally written.

2007-10-20 08:53:11 · answer #2 · answered by cmw 6 · 1 0

Who has the time to read all of the Bible's translations?

I personally like the New King James, as it is a modernized version of the earliest known English translation of the Bible. It's easy to read, and accurate, as far as my knowledge. However, it could use some better footnotes to explain the terms better than simply giving the Hebrew word, as if we all know what it means.

If you broaden the parameters to include translations of all languages, I'd go with the Modern Greek, since it is the closest language to Biblical Greek, and Hebrew. Not to mention manuscripts of the original Bible in Greek are available to be translated.

2007-10-16 20:40:20 · answer #3 · answered by YouCannotKnowUnlessUAsk 6 · 0 0

That's a matter of opinion.

My opinion: I haven't read them all, but of the ones I've seen, I think the New World Translation is probably the most accurate translation of the Old Testament. I would also choose it for the New Testament if it weren't for the fact that the translators purposely changed 'lord' and 'god' to Jehovah over 200 times. (They also use 'Jehovah' about 7000 times in the OT, but that's fine because there is manuscript evidence for that.)

But every single original language manuscript of the New Testament argues against 'Jehovah' being used in the NT at all. It's not there. Except for that, there are only a few other problems I have with the NWT, and none of them are major.

I recommend an interlinear translation which shows you the literal word for word translation of the original languages, then compare to several different versions.

2007-10-18 15:11:16 · answer #4 · answered by browneyedgirl 3 · 0 2

I haven't read all of them but i have read a few different ones. I prefer the NIV. Some people actually believe if it isn't the KJV its not an actual bible. Which doesn't make any sense to me at all because that wasn't the original one anyway. The Original was written Hebrew for Old testament and Greek for the new testament. I like the NIV because it breaks it down in simplier terms.

I also agree with Isaiah. I read different ones to get different views if I am confused about something.

2007-10-16 20:40:58 · answer #5 · answered by kim 3 · 1 0

Oh, hell no! I haven't read any but The King James Version (revised)! And lucky to do that! I would still have NO idea which is the most accurate, if I had read "all of them"!
I have a pretty good idea of which were "added to"....
I wasn't there for ANY of the original occurances. I would have NO idea what is and is not accurate. All I can do is rely on what makes sense to me!
}:>

2007-10-16 22:39:55 · answer #6 · answered by Ja'aj };> 6 · 0 0

KJV is the most accurate but NIV is the most comprehensive while maintaining acurracy other versions like NCV NLT and even paraphrases are very good but i suggest that you have a KJV or NIV close by just incase your not sure about the accuracy of the perticular version

2007-10-16 20:39:06 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I've been on the Translation band wagon for awhile and I still need to get an interlinear and concordance.

I agree with Isaiah:
[quote] "They all have inherent strengths and weaknesses. I use several on troublesome verses to get a better view.[unquote]

My Favorites (Not uninformed Favoritism):

Holman Christian Standard Bible

New World Translation

New American Bible

Take Care Everybody.

2007-10-18 17:22:39 · answer #8 · answered by YXM84 5 · 1 1

The King James Version because it is the first and most accurate. All the others have been based off of it yes, but they have all been changed somewhat, and that changes the meaning a lot of times.

2007-10-16 20:38:18 · answer #9 · answered by . 7 · 0 2

King James (not the new version) First translation into English. Also it is not copyrighted. Look inside the cover on anything else, They will be copyrighted

2007-10-16 20:39:01 · answer #10 · answered by wrench'n away 3 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers