Bible Translations?

Question

Please give me a good answer, if you don't know please don't answer.really i have already asked this many times

What is the difference between all the translations and what the best one for really reading and having full understanding. I need a bible that does not change the meaning of Scriptures. (Gideons, NLT, ESV, NKJV, NIV, NASB , Amplified Bible and all others)
Have a blessed day!

Answer 1

It isn't always possible to directly translate from one language to another for several reasons - i.e. there might not be a corresponding word in the target language. or you might be dealing with an idiom which would be meaningless or senseless if translated literally. This is true of any translation process, including the translation of Scripture from the original languages.
There are two basic ways this is dealt with. The first is the "formal" - a more word for word translation (NASB is a good example of this) - the second is "dynamic" - a thought for thought translation (NIV is a good example here). ALL translations, however, incorporate both of these methods.
Save for a few that are obviously flawed and therefore rejected by the vast majority biblical scholars,(the NWT for example) there really is no "best" translation. The best thing for the serious student of Scripture to do is use several English translations and a good Bible dictionary to help them grasp the fullest and clearest meaning of the text.

Answer 2

Ok - so you have a good foundation that the original Sciptures
were written in Hebrew (OT) and Greek (NT)

When the KJV was first written, it was the 4th 'authorized' version as the 'church' had the only copies and the congregations for the most part were illiterate. So - we will read it for you. That is up to KJV.

The KJV was a very well done version, for its day, with the English language only having 5,000 words and their scrolls only 400-500 years old. Since our ancecstors did not have copy machines - this was all done by hand - and as we copied scrolls (YEAH could you bring me a sandwich) misteaks were made - and recopied as mistakes - and in 1947 we hit a goldmine with the Dead Sea Scrolls - where we have texts back to the first century.

KJV was not challenged for about 200 years and was a landmark translation. But - when scholars down the road started comparing - some words were transliterated - rather than translated.
i.e. baptismo - means to immerse
however, King Jimmy's church put a rose in water and sprinkled the candidate - soooooooooo we made the change so as not to lose our HEAD! and baptismo in greek became BAPTISM or BAPTISE

I believe the New KJV is just a 20th C rewording of the Original KJV. To see the difference, get an old KJV - and read the original preface - whoa - that will take you back.

We don't speak that way anymore. (as a side note - I was honored to read my OT professor's hand written thesis from his great great grandfather from 1865. whoa nellie! we don;t talk anything like that)and that was 200 years past King Jimmy.

So what you are looking for is a 'new' translation - the key is translation - as we now have over 25,000 words in our vocabulary - however, virgin means virgin!

My personal Bible is a New American Standard, and I also have a Revised Standard Version. I appreciate the Gideons work and support their ministry.

The key is to read 'key passages' to see how they are interpreted.

I saw a Bible on a book sale for $1 and thought - MINE - until I read John 1:1

In the beginning was the word, and the word was with god, and the word was a god.
(note the capitalization -or lack of it?)

I still have my dollar

blessings O, Theophilus

Answer 3

The primary difference between the English language translations is that different people or groups of people translated them, in different timeframes.

Gideons do not have a translation, typically they use the NKJV.

A lot of these translations you mention descend from the King James translation - the NKJV obviously, and also the ESV, which descends from the Revised Standard Version (RSV) lineage.

Bible translations are often evaluated with a yardstick that measures the amount of paraphrasing vs. literalism. Most bible translations make trade-offs in this area, as a literal word by word translation of Greek makes almost no sense without rearranging some of the words and contextualizing a little.

The KJV lineage are fairly literal, with the KJV itself being surprisingly so (to the extent that they had correct manuscripts of the Greek to work off of.) The NIV is a little less concerned with a direct concordance of the language, and instead tries for the best rendering of each sentence in the scripture. The Amplified Bible goes even more in this direction.

Answer 4

The differences in the translations is that some stick closer to the Greek such as the NASB, some are older (KJV) and others are more readable (NIV). There are also paraphrased versions which take the Greek and reword it, NLV and The Message. I would stay away from the paraphrased versions and take a good translation. I personally use the NASB around 99% of the time. It reads well and is probably the most accurate one on the market.

Answer 5

If you really want to read the scriptures without any changes, you'll have to learn Hebrew for the Old Testament and Greek for the New Testament. Even then, sad to say, there are NO existing original writings for any of the books of the Bible -- zero, zip, nada. The best you can do is go back to the oldest available manuscripts. I recommend this book: http://www.amazon.com/Misquoting-Jesus-Story-Behind-Changed/dp/0060738170

Personally, I prefer the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) or Today's New International Version (TNIV). They are the most up-to-date translations, using the latest discoveries and scholarship in biblical translation. Fireball's recommendation of the NRSV Life Application Bible is a good one.

Edit -- the difference between a work such as NRSV and a paraphrase such as The Message is that the paraphrase is generally one person's translation, while the NRSV or TNIV has been translated by a large group of scholars, so that no one person's bias is able to dominate.

The King James Version was a wonderful piece of work 400 years ago, and it still sounds beautifully poetic to our ears -- but as translations go it's a poor one. We have learned so much about the Hebrew and Greek languages, and found so many documents to help us translate those languages into English, in the past 400 years.

.

Answer 6

Translation is a very difficult process for a number of reasons including that the original meaning is sometimes not clear. From the limited amount of work I have done, I would say that NIV and the Revised English Bible are excellent. I think the translators who worked on NKJV were hampered by the wish to retain a good flavour of KJV. I can't comment on the others

Answer 7

I believe the orginal King James Version of the Bible to be THE Bible for study. All the others can be used as references, but be careful because most if not all have watered down the Word.

Examples:
The NIV leave out parts of and sometimes all of some verses.

The NKJV uses the word 'goodness' for the word 'mercy'.
I can be good to someone all day long and NEVER show them mercy. They are NOT the same.

This is just a few of the examples of changes to the Word which I consider unacceptable.

BTW: The Amplified is the best comparative version to use in studying the Bible (KJV)

Answer 8

Wikipedia has a good article about the different translations. Differences include:
1. There are different groups translating, so they will come up with slightly different words.
2. There are different focuses. For example, BBE tries to use simple English and not complex words. NIV tries to use International English that will be understood by different countries.
3. There is a variance between how much is literally translated and how much is dynamically translated. Dynamic translation, as I understand it, tries to interpret the words based on the text around it a bit.
4. There is variance between the ages. King James for example was great for its time, but people don't use thee and thou much anymore.
5. Some versions are paraphrased instead of translated.

Most Bibles seem quite good to me. I personally stay away from paraphrased versions most of the time, but consider them more of a commentary for another person's thoughts. Each approach has advantages and disadvantages. I also often look at several versions for passages I don't understand.

By your description of what you are looking for, it sounds like you want a literal translation with little or no dynamic translation. You want it to be easy to read also. It sounds to me like you would like either the New American Standard Bible (NASB) or Modern King James Version (MKJV).

Answer 9

Personally my favorite translation is the NCV (New Century Version.) It is a translation and not a paraphrase. My next fave is the NLT (New Living Translation). Third place goes to the NKJV (New King James Version.)

You can check out these three translations on-line at:
www.biblegateway.com to see which one is easiest to read, understand and apply to your life.

God tells us in Isaiah, that "His word will not come back void."

All of the translations you mentioned are God's Word, well maybe the exception is the ESV.

Truly the best translation is the one that you will read, understand and apply.

Best wishes and blessings!

In His Service,
SLJ

Answer 10

They each have different "strengths"....for instance, the amplified does just that - "amplifies" the translation so you can better understand the inherent meaning of words in their original language and context that may not necessarily be carried over to the English (or other) language when translated in a shorter translation. The NIV, however, is my favorite for general reading....it is an easy to understand translation (unlike the KJV for instance, which is often difficult to get because of the style of English used).