What is your preferred Bible translation? and why?

Answer 1

ESV - English Standard Version. It marrys the dynamic equivalency that makes the NIV so readable, but yet sticks to the textual accuracy of the KJV and NKJV. It was translated predominately by conservative evanglical theologians, so it doesn't have a lot of the sticky gender issues.

The language is beautiful and yet still accessible.

Ath

Answer 2

I prefer the NASB - but only because thats the first translation of the entire Bible I read and I'm comfortable with it.
Most of the criticism leveled against different translations isn't really founded (I'd be happy to discuss this with anyone via email). 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. They all have thier strengths and weaknesses (due to the limitations I'll discuss below). Find one that you can understand to use as your "main" source. You can use a website like http://www.studylight.org where you can compare the different translations side by side.
We know that the Scriptures (and all the oldest manuscripts we have available) were originally written in languages other than English. Translating from one language to another isn't as easy as you might think. You can't simply look at a word in Hebrew or Greek and assign one English term as "the" translation of that word in every instance. It'd be nice if it worked that way - but it doesn't. Anyone whose studied a foreign language knows this firsthand. A lot of times there's two or more "right" ways of translating. Sometimes there just isn't one corresponding word and you need a whole sentence to convey the meaning. Other times you run across an idiom or "saying" that wouldn't make much sense if you translated the words alone - so you need to translate the meaning. For example, telling someone in Japanese that "it's raining cats and dogs" is gonna get you some pretty strange looks!
There are basically two ways translation is "done." The first is called "formal" - which is a more word for word translation - the second is called "dynamic" which is a more thought for thought following of the original text. ALL translation use both of these methods - some just "lean" more toward one than the other. The NASB is an example of a more "formal" translation - the NIV is an example of a more "dymanic." Then there are, of course, paraphrases, which are actually rewordings of the originals.
If you're going to seriously study the Bible, you need to get yourself several English translations and a good Bible Dictionary. That way you can grasp the "fuller" meaning of a word or phrase and gain a better understand the Scriptures as a whole.
While it's helpful to learn the orginial languages, and I have studied them - few have the time or inclination to do so - and even that doesn't make you an "expert." (I've spoken English my entire life and I am hardly an English scholar.)
The good news is, we have the expertise of those who DO qualify for that title available to us - so let's use them!

Answer 3

I like the RSV-CE because it's reputed to be a good translation and it's accepted by most mainline Protestant denominations, (except for the CE parts, of course). This makes it easier to discuss this or that verse with a brother of a different denomination. It's pretty easy to understand. If we agree on what a verse says, we're already a step ahead. Were just left with discussing what the verse means. Knowing only English, I rely on the evaluation of, I hope, objective experts as to the quality of a translation. You have to believe somebody. There is a New Revised Standard Version, but I'm not familiar with it.

Answer 4

NIV and NLT are both what's known as "meaning for meaning" translations as opposed to "word for word" translations.

If for example, you wanted to translate "He kicked the bucket" into Chinese, how would you do it? Would you translate each word literally, knowing that the Chinese will have to do research into American colloquialisms in order to make sense of the passage, or would you translate it to "He died," which would be a meaning for meaning translation. The meaning is the same, but some of the flavor of the passage is left out. See what I mean?

While I find nothing wrong in "meaning for meaning" translations as far as getting the main message of the Bible, I find that certain nuances are left out. That is why I prefer the NKJV, which is an up to date "word for word" translation that takes into account the Dead Sea Scrolls.

The only "bible" at the moment I would advise you to stay away from is the TNIV (today's new international version) because it actively changes scripture. It turns Christ into a genderless figure, for example, and it also adds to some of the commandments. Definitely not Biblical.

Answer 5

There are many good ones....

I really like to read the New Living Translation - it's very accurate and very easy to read

I also like the Message bible because it has a modern day take on the language in it...

I also like these because they are easier to read than King James and pretty accurate as well:
New King James
New Internation Version (alot of preachers preach from this one)
and the Amplified bible is a nice bible for referencing....some ppl like to just read it too.

Answer 6

i don't know any translation of the bible into english that is even respectable. (the kjv is possibly the worst translation of any book i have ever seen).

i own a louis segond (french) which i find acceptable and a william morgan (welsh) which i prefer.

but i always check back with the greek if anything seems dubious.

Answer 7

Skeptics Annotated Bible, because it has great cross links. It is based on the King James translation, but you can easily look up other translations. However, the cross links between various passages and the commentary are very valuable.

Answer 8

I quite like the Youth Bible because it has real life stories as well

Answer 9

Why does it not come across as very disturbing that there are different translations (obviously different interpretations) to the Bible? Christians should be up in arms and leaving the church due to that type of corruption. They can not even get the Bible, your main religion source, right. But please keep following blindly and shut off your minds to things like this, because ignorance is bliss and the way of Christians obviously.

Answer 10

The KJV is the Bible.

The NIV and some other "modern" ones are from unbelievers Wescott and Hort.

The NIV is missing so many verses, it's impossible to call it a complete Bible.