|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
|
[Poll]
|
What versions would you recommend?
|
| KJV |
|
| NKJV |
|
| NASB |
|
| NEB |
|
| NET |
|
| NIV |
|
| NLT |
|
| TNIV |
|
| The Message |
|
| Other |
|
Total Votes : 127
|
(last vote on : 1/4/2009 11:02:39 AM)
(Poll will run till: -- )
|
|
Login  | |
|
What versions would you recommend? - 12/1/2008 8:14:19 PM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 3609
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: offline
|
This question came up, and I though I would put out some of my thoughts on a few of the more popular translations of the bible. Here is what I would suggest, and why I would suggest it.
What would you suggest, and why?
These are the versions I would suggest using for a general purpose everyday bible, if they asked
==================================================================================
NIV: This is what I use most often. It is a good translation, and reads very well. The text is formatted into paragraphs, and the language flow is very smooth which makes (for me) a more enjoyable reading experience. I do think the NIV does push "dynamic equivalence" a little too far in places, and that does bug me a little.
NASB: A good example of a translation that leans towards "formal equivalence" and most (not all) of the differences I have found between the NASB and NIV, I side with the NASB translators. I use this one very often when I study, but I don't like the verse by verse format and the English can be awkward in places, and so I don't read this one devotionally very often.
ESV: I think this is my new favorite version. It leans more to the formal equivalence (Like the NASB) but is formatted in paragraphs and uses smoother English like the NIV. However, I have recently been studying the Song of Songs and I have found the NIV actually has a much better and more formal equivalent translation of this book than does the ESV. Most everything else I have read, I prefer the ESV's translation to the NIV.
These are the versions I would not suggest using, but neither would not encourage anyone to change.
=============================================================
NKJV: Because of its adherence to the KJV textual tradition it sometimes diverges from the best textual evidence in favor of the KJV tradition. Because of this it doesn't represent the most accurate translation available (but it is very good), and it reads similar to the NASB i.e. verse by verse and with awkward English in places. I do check this version often when I study, but I never sit down and just read from this version.
NLT: I use this translation ONLY as a reference during study; It leans the farthest towards "dynamic equivalence" of any of the accepted translations. And its translation is highly interpretive and often uses language that excludes theological options that the original text does not. I think it is a reasonably good translation, but falls far short in comparison to most of the other accepted versions.
This one is in a category by itself.
I would never encourage anyone who has grown up with this text to change, but I would encourage new believes who are unfamiliar with this textual tradition to change to a more modern bible.
=============================================================
KJV: This is the one I grew up with, and because of my Hebrew studies one I have used very often until very recently because many of the study tools for Hebrew are keyed to the KJV/Strong's numbering system. I typically don't recommend this one because for most it is difficult to read and easy to misinterpret. I believe the bible should be as enjoyable to read as any other literature; for many that will never be the case with the KJV.
These are some of the versions I would encourage someone to consider changing.
==============================================================
TNIV: I see very little value in this version because it really is revision of the NIV made for the sole purpose of pushing the envelope of what is acceptable use of inclusive language. I personally believe they are trying to stay two steps ahead of current English usage rather than (as claimed) simply trying to keep up with current usage. In a few cases, I believe the use of inclusive language is a questionable interpretation. It is not a terrible translation, but because I see it has a somewhat agendized translation I could not in good conscience recommend it.
The Message: It is a paraphrase (not a translation) and it is highly interpretive, and in some cases the interpretation is highly questionable, and in many places (especially in the Old Testament) whole passages (and the themes contained in those passages) are completely omitted. Often it feels like you are reading a bible with half the pages removed. I do think "The Message" has a place in Christian literature, but I personally don't think it conveys the truth of scripture accurately enough to be truly called a bible. I think it serves the purpose of a devotional book that complements daily bible reading, but not as a replacement for a regular bible translation.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What versions would you recommend? - 12/2/2008 8:50:41 AM
|
|
|
greatdivide46
Posts: 1308
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Opp, Alabama
Status: offline
|
I voted for "other" since, even though you mentioned the ESV in the OP, you didn't include it in the poll. I like the ESV and it is my main Bible these days.
_____________________________
greatdivide46
SFC, USA (Ret)
The reflections of the heart belong to man, but the answer of the tongue is from the LORD -- Proverbs 16:1
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What versions would you recommend? - 12/2/2008 9:13:49 AM
|
|
|
floydette
Posts: 1087
Status: offline
|
benel-
You mentioned that ESV is your new fav. You may be interested in a paper that Mark Strauss just presented last week at SBL. While ESV is his fav as well, he has some strong concerns. It may be worth a read for you... Here is the link to the paper. http://bible-translation.110mb.com/improvingesv.pdf
_____________________________
“The eye sees only what the mind is prepared to comprehend.” Henri Bergson
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What versions would you recommend? - 12/2/2008 9:59:45 AM
|
|
|
Him4all
Posts: 479
Joined: 6/26/2007
From: Kansas
Status: offline
|
I heard a man once say the bible doesn't need to be rewrote it needs to be reread. I think that there is a lot of truth in that statement. I always tell people to read the one they like best. They are all capable of helping one truly seeking God to 'walk' as a believer. But if you're wanting to 'talk' doctrine, then I don't think there is 'a' best translation, though some are better...for the very reasons you pointed out benelchi. But, in the end, I think they all come up short, since they've all been interpreted, and therefore tampered with, by man.
I found this comment one time, and thought it quite good:
The Best Bible Translation is one that will conform your life to the incorruptible image of Jesus the Messiah, the Anointed One, the One full of the Holy Spirit without measure. If you want to be “translated” into His marvelous kingdom, then let the true Word of God, Jesus, along with The Holy Spirit completely have their way with you. They will indeed lead you into all Truth. And your Bible translation, regardless of which one you use, will be transformed right before your eyes.
DR
_____________________________
When you violate LOVE you violate GOD.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What versions would you recommend? - 12/2/2008 10:08:52 AM
|
|
|
DrIjames
Posts: 44
Joined: 11/16/2008
Status: offline
|
I study KJV but I love the Amplified. Being a student of Hebrew and Greek, I find that this "Amplification, (not a version) is the closest to the Hebrew and the Greek and Aramaic manuscripts. However I preach from the KJV
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What versions would you recommend? - 12/2/2008 10:20:25 AM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 3609
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: floydette
benel-
You mentioned that ESV is your new fav. You may be interested in a paper that Mark Strauss just presented last week at SBL. While ESV is his fav as well, he has some strong concerns. It may be worth a read for you... Here is the link to the paper. http://bible-translation.110mb.com/improvingesv.pdf
I appreciate the article, and I have a great respect for Mark Strauss. I have ever since I read his book "twisting scripture", and while I agree with almost all of his critisms of the ESV, I think that I would ultimately disagree with his conclusions (other than the conclusion that a new revision is needed). I think that part of the reason is I am a little more inclined to want to see the Hebrew and Greek structure come through as much as is reasonable because I think it aids in understanding the culture from which the bible arose. For example in Exodus 1:5 the Hebrew literally reads "And it was all the souls coming out of the loins of Jacob." This is an unique and poetic way of expressing "The descendants of Jacob" (as this phrase is translated by NIV). In the Hebrew bible the term "descendants of" is quite commonly represented by the term "toldoth" and I think it was a mistake for the translators of the NIV (and the ESV by the way) to not to have shown the distinctive and poetic language used uniquely in this verse; in the NASB it reads "all the persons that came from the loins of Jacob." Sometimes in trying to make the language more easily understood, I think we have lost some of its beauty. And too often I think modern translators are ready to concede to changes of our understanding of the English language that haven't yet culturally taken place, but are instead a reflection of the cultural battle still being waged, I personally would like to make my stand until the battle has truly been lost because often the cultural pressure for these changes to our language represent an ideology that is ungodly.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What versions would you recommend? - 12/2/2008 10:30:18 AM
|
|
|
floydette
Posts: 1087
Status: offline
|
Wow, that is a difference isn't it? As I was reading your post I was thinking - "they probably did that because our culture is often not tuned into "poetic beauty." And, of course, you end your post saying nearly the same thing. It is totally a shame - and something that I hope we can revive in some manner. (the loss of an ability to see beauty in various forms) I agree with you - it is probably a reflection of the culture.
In our home, we value the arts tremendously. So, my dd has read and attended plays (inc. William S - who we all consider hysterical on many levels), understands works of art, enjoys poetry, etc. She is always amazed at her other friends who, being in high school, have never attended the theatre, the art museum, etc. Never once. It seems that this is the same kind of move we see. However, the encouraging thing is - that in postmodernism, I see a move toward seeking to understand some of the things that moderns laid aside. So, perhaps we are making an important turn in society. In turn, perhaps that will allow translators to keep in the beauty in some translations - do you think??
_____________________________
“The eye sees only what the mind is prepared to comprehend.” Henri Bergson
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What versions would you recommend? - 12/2/2008 10:50:16 AM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 3609
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: floydette
Wow, that is a difference isn't it? As I was reading your post I was thinking - "they probably did that because our culture is often not tuned into "poetic beauty." And, of course, you end your post saying nearly the same thing. It is totally a shame - and something that I hope we can revive in some manner. (the loss of an ability to see beauty in various forms) I agree with you - it is probably a reflection of the culture.
In our home, we value the arts tremendously. So, my dd has read and attended plays (inc. William S - who we all consider hysterical on many levels), understands works of art, enjoys poetry, etc. She is always amazed at her other friends who, being in high school, have never attended the theatre, the art museum, etc. Never once. It seems that this is the same kind of move we see. However, the encouraging thing is - that in postmodernism, I see a move toward seeking to understand some of the things that moderns laid aside. So, perhaps we are making an important turn in society. In turn, perhaps that will allow translators to keep in the beauty in some translations - do you think??
Maybe someday, but right now it is the more conservative "old school" scholars that are likely to embrasure the poetic side of Scripture; when "post moderns" do embrace the poetic nature of Scripture, they are far more inclined to invent something new and different than they are to adhere to what was written long ago.
PS. I also encourage my kids to be involved with the arts and take them to the theater, symphony, etc... My youngest has followed in my footsteps; he is a Horn player like me. 
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What versions would you recommend? - 12/2/2008 12:47:24 PM
|
|
|
DaveW
Posts: 4161
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: MD suburbs of Washington DC
Status: online
|
I like the Nasb the best, and the NKJV is a close second. I also like the ESV a lot.
_____________________________
Avatar is Saphira 5 months and Louvena at 23 months!
We are now grandparents TWICE!!
====================================
Our CD is now available here:
http://cdbaby.com/cd/dswaggoner
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What versions would you recommend? - 12/2/2008 12:53:30 PM
|
|
|
rofaith
Posts: 80
Joined: 1/17/2008
From: rofaith, a believer
Status: online
|
I read the NLT and NKJV/KJV for the most part. I am troubled by the origins of the NIV (Alexandrian manuscripts etc) but do have a copy. I realize the NLT is also based on these, but unlike the NIV, at least there are footnotes that specify what has been added/subtracted from the text. I use the Life Application NLT with it's notes which are very helpful. As Chuck Missler says though, as you mature in your faith you gravitate away from these kinds of notes and now, I am struggling in that I used to read the notes and almost equivalenced them with scripture(which is obviously a wrong thing to do) and am now looking for a more comprehensive/scholarly study bible with notes.... any suggestions would be helpful. Send me private EMail as I don't want to clutter this blog with all the anecdotes from our exchanges.... thanks in advance, rofaith@aol.com
_____________________________
There is no other name....
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What versions would you recommend? - 12/2/2008 1:05:23 PM
|
|
|
Liveloved
Posts: 2069
Status: offline
|
quote:
The Best Bible Translation is one that will conform your life to the incorruptible image of Jesus the Messiah, the Anointed One, the One full of the Holy Spirit without measure. If you want to be “translated” into His marvelous kingdom, then let the true Word of God, Jesus, along with The Holy Spirit completely have their way with you. They will indeed lead you into all Truth. And your Bible translation, regardless of which one you use, will be transformed right before your eyes.
This bears repeating. AMEN!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What versions would you recommend? - 12/2/2008 1:24:09 PM
|
|
|
Mark328
Posts: 200
Joined: 8/9/2008
Status: offline
|
When I first became a Christian 4 years ago, I started with NLT, since that was the New Testament given to me at the new believer's class I attended. I enjoy the flow of the NLT with the way it reads, and I recommend it for any new believer who would be intimidated by the Shakespearean writing of KJV. I still read NLT, but I have also moved on NKJV, NASB and HCSB as well. Excellent translations!
I'm not so keen on NIV only because of the way the words flow as you read. I've been checking out NET and ESV, and haven't found too many bad things about either one.
That said, the best bible translation is really up to the individual believer. Him4All made an excellent point with that post.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What versions would you recommend? - 12/2/2008 1:25:53 PM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 3609
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Liveloved
quote:
The Best Bible Translation is one that will conform your life to the incorruptible image of Jesus the Messiah, the Anointed One, the One full of the Holy Spirit without measure. If you want to be “translated” into His marvelous kingdom, then let the true Word of God, Jesus, along with The Holy Spirit completely have their way with you. They will indeed lead you into all Truth. And your Bible translation, regardless of which one you use, will be transformed right before your eyes.
This bears repeating. AMEN!
I think it bears cautiously repeating. There is a whole lot of truth in this statement, but at the same time I have seen horribly heretical and destructive doctrines justified by the idea that apart from study the Holy Spirit will "lead you into all Truth." In the extreme, the measure of truth becomes our own "feelings" rather than the standard of God's word. If we believe that the absolute truth of God is contained in Scripture, then we should seek to use the versions that most accurately convey these truths in English. No version does this perfectly which is why using a variety of versions is a very good idea, but we should seek to understand the strengths and weaknesses of the versions we use because we know that none are perfect rather than assuming that those differences don't matter.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What versions would you recommend? - 12/2/2008 2:15:27 PM
|
|
|
Liveloved
Posts: 2069
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: benelchi
quote:
ORIGINAL: Liveloved
quote:
The Best Bible Translation is one that will conform your life to the incorruptible image of Jesus the Messiah, the Anointed One, the One full of the Holy Spirit without measure. If you want to be “translated” into His marvelous kingdom, then let the true Word of God, Jesus, along with The Holy Spirit completely have their way with you. They will indeed lead you into all Truth. And your Bible translation, regardless of which one you use, will be transformed right before your eyes.
This bears repeating. AMEN!
I think it bears cautiously repeating. There is a whole lot of truth in this statement, but at the same time I have seen horribly heretical and destructive doctrines justified by the idea that apart from study the Holy Spirit will "lead you into all Truth." In the extreme, the measure of truth becomes our own "feelings" rather than the standard of God's word. If we believe that the absolute truth of God is contained in Scripture, then we should seek to use the versions that most accurately convey these truths in English. No version does this perfectly which is why using a variety of versions is a very good idea, but we should seek to understand the strengths and weaknesses of the versions we use because we know that none are perfect rather than assuming that those differences don't matter.
I understand your caution. But we must throw caution to the wind, throw ourselves on God Himself, and believe that He is able to conform us to His image. And, yes, His word is imperative. But I have seen far too many who have erred on the opposite side. They can quote and use God's word. But they do not know The Word. I entrust myself to my Faithful Creator. He will not fail me.
And please don't misunderstand me. I Thess 2:13 is one of my favorite verses. It is His word that performs its work in me. I need the written word of God. Personally I use the NASB. It is God's voice to me. But He can and does speak through any translation.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What versions would you recommend? - 12/2/2008 2:40:23 PM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 3609
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: offline
|
quote:
I understand your caution. But we must throw caution to the wind, throw ourselves on God Himself, and believe that He is able to conform us to His image. And, yes, His word is imperative. But I have seen far too many who have erred on the opposite side. They can quote and use God's word. But they do not know The Word. I entrust myself to my Faithful Creator. He will not fail me.
And please don't misunderstand me. I Thess 2:13 is one of my favorite verses. It is His word that performs its work in me. I need the written word of God. Personally I use the NASB. It is God's voice to me. But He can and does speak through any translation.
Neither extreme is healthy!
Both extremes pose the risk that the gospel message will be missed completely. Those who "throw caution to the wind" may be deceived by false teachers and end up believing a lie. For example, the Christian church rejects the JW's "New World Translation" because we know that it does not accurately convey the truth of God's word; however, there are many JW's who have "thrown caution to the wind" and continue to believe the lie taught in their churches today.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What versions would you recommend? - 12/2/2008 6:02:41 PM
|
|
|
Him4all
Posts: 479
Joined: 6/26/2007
From: Kansas
Status: offline
|
benelchi,
quote:
Neither extreme is healthy!
If your above observation is concerning 'the quote' I must admit that saddens me. I don't think the quote is speaking of 'either' of the bar ditch approaches of one's coming to 'doctrinal beliefs'. I think it speaks to the centrality of 'the gospel'.
quote:
For example, the Christian church rejects the JW's "New World Translation" because we know that it does not accurately convey the truth of God's word;
I actually bought a JW New World Greek interlinear one time after a bible school student told me they used it in one of their classes, because it was "pretty good". Yes, there were "doctrinal" discrepancies. But that's where one needs maturity AND the Spirit of truth IMO.
DR
_____________________________
When you violate LOVE you violate GOD.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What versions would you recommend? - 12/3/2008 12:11:01 AM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 3609
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Him4all
benelchi,
quote:
Neither extreme is healthy!
If your above observation is concerning 'the quote' I must admit that saddens me. I don't think the quote is speaking of 'either' of the bar ditch approaches of one's coming to 'doctrinal beliefs'. I think it speaks to the centrality of 'the gospel'.
I wasn't speaking of the quote here, but of the interpretation of that quote given by another poster. Of the quote I had said "I think it bears cautiously repeating." I think the quite does speak to the "centrality of 'the gospel'" and that is why I think it should be repeated, but it is very easy to misapply the intention of this quote if one so desires which is why I urged caution.
quote:
quote:
For example, the Christian church rejects the JW's "New World Translation" because we know that it does not accurately convey the truth of God's word;
I actually bought a JW New World Greek interlinear one time after a bible school student told me they used it in one of their classes, because it was "pretty good". Yes, there were "doctrinal" discrepancies. But that's where one needs maturity AND the Spirit of truth IMO.
DR
The NWT is a "pretty good" version because they started with a legitimate version of the bible as the basis of for the NWT; however, the emendations that the JW's have made were based entirely on doctrine and not on the original Greek or Hebrew texts. At the points where the NWT diverges from the original work, it is a very poor translation. For many verses these emendations depart very far from the original text, so much so that I would be curious to see how they attempted to deal with this in an Interlinear.
Those who have "maturity AND the Spirit of truth" would recognize the deceptive nature of this translation and seek one they could trust.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What versions would you recommend? - 12/4/2008 1:06:17 PM
|
|
|
uncabeeil
Posts: 5548
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Joisey. Got a problem wit dat?
Status: offline
|
quote:
am now looking for a more comprehensive/scholarly study bible with notes If you want to stay with the NLT, Tyndale just published The NLT Study Bible. The study notes are not the same ones as in the Life Application. If you want to move to a more literal translation, Zondervan's NASB Study Bible is a good option.
_____________________________
I don't recall all of the details
But I know life is better when shared. -Jon Troast
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What versions would you recommend? - 12/4/2008 1:28:41 PM
|
|
|
figmentPez
Posts: 2120
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: TX
Status: offline
|
In regards to the NLT. I think it's important to note the reason behind this translation. The NLT was translated for the purposes of being read aloud. From my experience it serves this purpose fairly well. When I was leading middle school youth (6th-8th grade) at my church, I found that they were often able to follow scripture better when I read from the NLT as opposed to the NIV or NASB, because the phrasing was more easily understood when read aloud.
I can't speak to the NLT's use as a study Bible, but I can say that if my goal were mainly to read scripture aloud, I would choose the NLT. Reading to children, reading to someone sick in bed, even reading aloud at a Bible study before examining the passage in depth. I would readily use the NLT in any of these situations.
_____________________________
I make this challenge to all Christians:
Read Daniel 7:13-14
And tell me: Who do you say that the Son of Man is?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What versions would you recommend? - 12/4/2008 1:29:49 PM
|
|
|
dwtramm
Posts: 310
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
There is also the ESV Study Bible. I have it and have been enjoying it so far.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What versions would you recommend? - 12/4/2008 3:23:55 PM
|
|
|
raivyne
Posts: 1010
Joined: 8/28/2008
Status: offline
|
I use about 5 different translations of the bible. There's really nothing wrong with the message bible, but I wouldn't use it (or any other translation) as my only source for reading the word.
_____________________________
P.U.S.H. – Pray Until Something Happens
What if God is asking us for a sign?
Knowledge is proud; wisdom is humble.
Patiently waiting for my KSA
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What versions would you recommend? - 12/4/2008 3:33:12 PM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 3609
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: raivyne
I use about 5 different translations of the bible. There's really nothing wrong with the message bible, but I wouldn't use it (or any other translation) as my only source for reading the word.
The messages as a commentary, I would agree it is acceptable, but as a valid translation of God's word I simply could not recommend it for anyone. There are huge portions of scripture that are simply missing from the message. It was kind of like Peterson decided portions of the bible were unimportant and just decided to skip them rather than translating them.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What versions would you recommend? - 12/4/2008 3:47:49 PM
|
|
|
raivyne
Posts: 1010
Joined: 8/28/2008
Status: offline
|
I don't think the way the Message is written takes away anything from the theme (i.e. the message) of the bible, but YMMV. At any rate the point is sort of moot... I don't think anyone should use just one translation of the bible.
_____________________________
P.U.S.H. – Pray Until Something Happens
What if God is asking us for a sign?
Knowledge is proud; wisdom is humble.
Patiently waiting for my KSA
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What versions would you recommend? - 12/5/2008 2:17:34 AM
|
|
|
whisperingwaters
Posts: 155
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: Michigan
Status: offline
|
I voted other for The Webster Bible
_____________________________
The words of a man's mouth are as deep waters, and the well-spring of wisdom as a flowing brook. Proverbs 18:4
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What versions would you recommend? - 12/5/2008 3:10:21 PM
|
|
|
Lapidoth
Posts: 3467
Joined: 4/13/2005
From: OKLAHOMA
Status: offline
|
I voted "other" in that I recommend the version
that the reader knows he/she can understand.
After 45 years of study, I use them all.
_____________________________
Why does He keep quoting Torah? Doesn't He know He's about to abolish it?
http://www.tedpearce.com/Videos/TheForgottenpeople.html
BARUCH HABA BASHEM YAHUAH
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
