Which translation is the best?
Moderator: grand_puba
Which translation is the best?
There are so many translations, many are written because of a groups beliefs. You have certain groups from times past that have not been able to prove their doctrine through the standard versions so they will create one for themselves.
So the question today is which one is the best? Assuming that we can agree that there are no inspired translators that man is fallable and will find a way to force his bias into the work of translating scripture. After all of that which one is the best?
So the question today is which one is the best? Assuming that we can agree that there are no inspired translators that man is fallable and will find a way to force his bias into the work of translating scripture. After all of that which one is the best?
...in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.9 These shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power...
You raise a topic that is very near to my heart. I will preface my remarks that I don't think there is a "best" translation that folks should use. But, I do think there are some "better" ones than others which gets to the real heart of the matter: to be a Bible student requires one be also committed to seeking the clarity that God's Word guarantees:
Also, many modern translations are in what I call a "race to the bottom" in seeking to make a version that is readable by everyone (least common denominator as called in some circles) and in the process adopting newspaper-esque techniques which sensationalize parts or reduce the words and thoughts into sound bites. Bear in mind that the Word is revealed by God and written as it is for a reason:
This is not to say it requires a theological degree to understand the Bible. Every person can read and understand the Truth revealed in the Bible IF that's what they want to get out of it. But, recall again why Jesus said he taught in parables, not everyone is really seeking the Truth but some seek to stand hypocritically self-justified. To understand the Bible is a life-long journey that requires dedication in LIVING and LEARNING it. To learn it requires improving skills in reading and understanding it. Rather than "simplify" and make it "easy" through translation, the committed follower of Jesus should roll up their sleeves and seek to learn the pure Truth of the Word by whatever means possible.
Please note that I used the word "clarity" and not "easy". The principles exercised in many "modern" translations of the past 20 years have started from making the Bible easier to read and in the process making it much less clear what it really means. This is done with translating philosophies such as Dynamic Equivalence in versions such as the NIV where the authors instead of translating the words instead interpret the "thought", a very scary prospect to my thinking! How can any man stand in judgment of the original words penned to seek to clarify the "true meaning" and translate that!Heb 4:12 wrote:Heb 4:12 For the Word of God is living and powerful and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing apart of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
Also, many modern translations are in what I call a "race to the bottom" in seeking to make a version that is readable by everyone (least common denominator as called in some circles) and in the process adopting newspaper-esque techniques which sensationalize parts or reduce the words and thoughts into sound bites. Bear in mind that the Word is revealed by God and written as it is for a reason:
Referring back to the original quote in Hebrews, the purpose of Gods Word is to be "a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart." That's no simple or small task! Which leads me to a question I ask myself and sometimes ask others: is your translation a "dulled sword" blunted by interpretation and assumption by others? Has it been "reduced" in an effort to make it easy to read and in the process removing the REAL thoughts expressed only in the original way it was said, and thereby no longer discerning a person's thoughts and intents?Matt 13:10-13 wrote:Mat 13:10 And the disciples said to Him, Why do You speak to them in parables?
Mat 13:11 He answered and said to them, Because it is given to you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of Heaven, but it is not given to them.
Mat 13:12 For whoever has, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance. But whoever does not have, from him shall be taken away even that which he has.
Mat 13:13 Therefore I speak to them in parables, because seeing they see not, and hearing they hear not; nor do they understand.
This is not to say it requires a theological degree to understand the Bible. Every person can read and understand the Truth revealed in the Bible IF that's what they want to get out of it. But, recall again why Jesus said he taught in parables, not everyone is really seeking the Truth but some seek to stand hypocritically self-justified. To understand the Bible is a life-long journey that requires dedication in LIVING and LEARNING it. To learn it requires improving skills in reading and understanding it. Rather than "simplify" and make it "easy" through translation, the committed follower of Jesus should roll up their sleeves and seek to learn the pure Truth of the Word by whatever means possible.
-
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 8:45 pm
- Location: Rector
- Contact:
Re: Which translation is the best?
When you say "translation" are you meaning "interpretation"?
The truth is simple, only we make it complicated.
- churchmouse
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 12:12 pm
Re: Which translation is the best?
I'm sorry to see this discussion ended so abruptly. It is a subject of great interest to me.
Soon after I began reading the Bible on my own as a college student, I gravitated toward the KJV. I used it almost exclusively for 30 years or more. I began looking into some other translations - from the original texts, not interpretations of translations - in recent years because some people in the church I attended took words out of context and misinterpreted them.
For instance, a man who sinned claimed scriptural support for insistence that he was automatically restored to a relationship with God, without repenting, in Proverbs 24:16:
Another church I started attending used various translations and compared them. After carefully investigating the different translations, I ordered an NASB because it is translated from the original manuscripts using the same standards as the KJV. When I began attending the congregation I'm currently a member of, a woman in the congregation was taken aback because I quoted from the NASB and she obviously expressed concern to the teachers in the church. They acted as though my mind had been corrupted and so I needed to be taught from scratch.
Is there anything wrong with consulting several word-for-word translations to study a biblical passage? I only have a desire to delve into the truth and not to pick and choose at will. A visiting preacher once cited the NASB as comparable to the KJV. But, the woman in the congregation claims she's confident that the KJV is the only correct translation (she doesn't even trust the original manuscripts) because she knows God made provision for us to have the correct translation. If that is so, did God not care about the generations of Anglo-Saxons before the publication and distribution of the KJV? Or the natives of other countries who were without Bibles for centuries? Why would God only approve of a translation authorized by an English monarch? Couldn't we assume by the same logic that the church of England is the one true church? If we should trust a British monarch to give us an infallible Bible translation and to consecrate for all a righteous church, then why does John exhort us to "believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world" (1 John 4:1)?
I am not condemning the KJV, but am just wondering why I'm considered a heretic for wanting to fully understand the scriptures as they were intended? When people try to restrict me from searching the scriptures, or belittle me for doing so, I feel suspicious of them. I'm led to believe those people are hiding something they're afraid I will unearth, and it's certainly looking like it's the case - judging by some of the false doctrines being promoted. In the end, we will all be judged by the same pure, unadulterated word of God.
Soon after I began reading the Bible on my own as a college student, I gravitated toward the KJV. I used it almost exclusively for 30 years or more. I began looking into some other translations - from the original texts, not interpretations of translations - in recent years because some people in the church I attended took words out of context and misinterpreted them.
For instance, a man who sinned claimed scriptural support for insistence that he was automatically restored to a relationship with God, without repenting, in Proverbs 24:16:
I found the NET Bible, which clarified the meaning for me by showing and explaining original words in the study notes. The words translated as "fall" mean to "fall into calamity" and not to fall (spiritually) from God's favor. The same phrase is used to denote the former idea in Job 5:19.For a just man falleth seven times, and riseth up again...
Another church I started attending used various translations and compared them. After carefully investigating the different translations, I ordered an NASB because it is translated from the original manuscripts using the same standards as the KJV. When I began attending the congregation I'm currently a member of, a woman in the congregation was taken aback because I quoted from the NASB and she obviously expressed concern to the teachers in the church. They acted as though my mind had been corrupted and so I needed to be taught from scratch.
Is there anything wrong with consulting several word-for-word translations to study a biblical passage? I only have a desire to delve into the truth and not to pick and choose at will. A visiting preacher once cited the NASB as comparable to the KJV. But, the woman in the congregation claims she's confident that the KJV is the only correct translation (she doesn't even trust the original manuscripts) because she knows God made provision for us to have the correct translation. If that is so, did God not care about the generations of Anglo-Saxons before the publication and distribution of the KJV? Or the natives of other countries who were without Bibles for centuries? Why would God only approve of a translation authorized by an English monarch? Couldn't we assume by the same logic that the church of England is the one true church? If we should trust a British monarch to give us an infallible Bible translation and to consecrate for all a righteous church, then why does John exhort us to "believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world" (1 John 4:1)?
I am not condemning the KJV, but am just wondering why I'm considered a heretic for wanting to fully understand the scriptures as they were intended? When people try to restrict me from searching the scriptures, or belittle me for doing so, I feel suspicious of them. I'm led to believe those people are hiding something they're afraid I will unearth, and it's certainly looking like it's the case - judging by some of the false doctrines being promoted. In the end, we will all be judged by the same pure, unadulterated word of God.
Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. (2 Timothy 2:15)
Re: Which translation is the best?
Hi churchmouse,
Thanks again for the good questions. May I offer a few comments in response to your own?
One must assume that the falling and rising of Proverbs 24:16 pertains to spiritual approval and salvation to prove this man's conclusion. However the text does not specify what kind of rising and falling is in view. Once one opens his mind to accepting the ambiguity of this text and looking for clarity from other texts, the error and truth can be easily ascertained from other passages that speak clearly on the question at hand. (Forgiveness requires repentance, I John 1:9; Luke 17:3-5.) ... FWIW, I think the context also points to providential, circumstantial, or earthly tribulations - not a process of justification (Proverbs 24:12-18).
Textus Receptus / Majority Text Based Translations:
The NIV uses too much "dynamic equivalence" for me to trust it as my primary "working" Bible, plus I have stumbled over a few passages that have a strong, unjustified Calvinistic rendering that further deepens my distrust for it (see, Psalm 51:5 in NIV versus most other reputable translations). However, the NIV does an excellent job of clarifying the Greek on some otherwise difficult to understand passages (see, I John 3:6, 9 in NIV versus NKJV and NASB).
The ESV is newer, and although it rejects "dynamic equivalence", it still reorders the words and "simplifies" a few verses unnecessarily in my opinion. However, I do consult it regularly.
So, to summarize, I think it is beneficial to learn from the folly of KJV-Only people. No translation is inspired. Even the better translations are guilty of injecting their prejudice on rare occasion or just choosing a more difficult wording. Therefore, although I work from the NKJV as a compromise between preserving my childhood memory verses and modern vernacular, I regularly consult the NASB, ASV, NIV, ESV, and Young's Literal Translation (YLT). Consulting these works as a whole is one of the best "commentaries" I could ever recommend. Plus, I use some Bible software to compare the underlying Greek, where necessary or helpful. My wife uses a NASB, and we regularly compare the translations during Bible study. I all together avoid the "commentary translations". I don't think I have ever found them to be more helpful than these more literal translations on any verse.
I pray this will be helpful and encouraging to you and others.
Thanks again for the good questions. May I offer a few comments in response to your own?
Your usage of clearer translations is very helpful on this point. May I offer a corroborative thought?churchmouse wrote:For instance, a man who sinned claimed scriptural support for insistence that he was automatically restored to a relationship with God, without repenting, in Proverbs 24:16:I found the NET Bible, which clarified the meaning for me by showing and explaining original words in the study notes. The words translated as "fall" mean to "fall into calamity" and not to fall (spiritually) from God's favor. The same phrase is used to denote the former idea in Job 5:19.For a just man falleth seven times, and riseth up again...
One must assume that the falling and rising of Proverbs 24:16 pertains to spiritual approval and salvation to prove this man's conclusion. However the text does not specify what kind of rising and falling is in view. Once one opens his mind to accepting the ambiguity of this text and looking for clarity from other texts, the error and truth can be easily ascertained from other passages that speak clearly on the question at hand. (Forgiveness requires repentance, I John 1:9; Luke 17:3-5.) ... FWIW, I think the context also points to providential, circumstantial, or earthly tribulations - not a process of justification (Proverbs 24:12-18).
The KJV-Only position - for lack of a better term - is very short-sighted and presumptuous. The undeniable alterations, marginal readings, and errors make it impossible to sustain that the translation is uniquely inspired or authoritative. The necessary lack of providential care for all people preceding 1611 and outside of the English speaking world is brash at best. I think your questions point well to these ends. Here are a few other articles I found on the internet, which present more organized and better documented arguments than I can offer at this time:churchmouse wrote:Another church I started attending used various translations and compared them. After carefully investigating the different translations, I ordered an NASB because it is translated from the original manuscripts using the same standards as the KJV. When I began attending the congregation I'm currently a member of, a woman in the congregation was taken aback because I quoted from the NASB and she obviously expressed concern to the teachers in the church. They acted as though my mind had been corrupted and so I needed to be taught from scratch. ... the woman in the congregation claims she's confident that the KJV is the only correct translation (she doesn't even trust the original manuscripts) because she knows God made provision for us to have the correct translation. If that is so, did God not care about the generations of Anglo-Saxons before the publication and distribution of the KJV? Or the natives of other countries who were without Bibles for centuries? Why would God only approve of a translation authorized by an English monarch? Couldn't we assume by the same logic that the church of England is the one true church? If we should trust a British monarch to give us an infallible Bible translation and to consecrate for all a righteous church, then why does John exhort us to "believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world" (1 John 4:1)? ... I am not condemning the KJV, but am just wondering why I'm considered a heretic for wanting to fully understand the scriptures as they were intended? When people try to restrict me from searching the scriptures, or belittle me for doing so, I feel suspicious of them. I'm led to believe those people are hiding something they're afraid I will unearth, and it's certainly looking like it's the case - judging by some of the false doctrines being promoted. In the end, we will all be judged by the same pure, unadulterated word of God.
- https://bible.org/article/why-i-do-not- ... able-today
- http://www.bible.ca/b-kjv-only.htm
- http://www.davnet.org/kevin/articles/preserve_word.html
I will echo what Steve (sledford) said earlier. We must be careful that we do not seek only for the Bible that is the easiest to read. We should seek for a translation that most accurately translates the original Greek and Hebrew into our modern vernacular. Translations that use "thought for thought" or "dynamic equivalence" philosophies are little better than commentaries, because they are merely telling us what they think God was really telling us. This opens the door to too much prejudice, bias, and opinion to be injected. Consequently, I much prefer translations that maintain "formal equivalence" or more literal translations. Based on this second philosphy, I think there are 2 "families" of reputable translations:churchmouse wrote:Is there anything wrong with consulting several word-for-word translations to study a biblical passage? I only have a desire to delve into the truth and not to pick and choose at will.
Textus Receptus / Majority Text Based Translations:
- King James Version, aka Authorized Version
- New King James Version
- American Standard Version
- New American Standard Bible
- Revised Standard Version Bible
The NIV uses too much "dynamic equivalence" for me to trust it as my primary "working" Bible, plus I have stumbled over a few passages that have a strong, unjustified Calvinistic rendering that further deepens my distrust for it (see, Psalm 51:5 in NIV versus most other reputable translations). However, the NIV does an excellent job of clarifying the Greek on some otherwise difficult to understand passages (see, I John 3:6, 9 in NIV versus NKJV and NASB).
The ESV is newer, and although it rejects "dynamic equivalence", it still reorders the words and "simplifies" a few verses unnecessarily in my opinion. However, I do consult it regularly.
So, to summarize, I think it is beneficial to learn from the folly of KJV-Only people. No translation is inspired. Even the better translations are guilty of injecting their prejudice on rare occasion or just choosing a more difficult wording. Therefore, although I work from the NKJV as a compromise between preserving my childhood memory verses and modern vernacular, I regularly consult the NASB, ASV, NIV, ESV, and Young's Literal Translation (YLT). Consulting these works as a whole is one of the best "commentaries" I could ever recommend. Plus, I use some Bible software to compare the underlying Greek, where necessary or helpful. My wife uses a NASB, and we regularly compare the translations during Bible study. I all together avoid the "commentary translations". I don't think I have ever found them to be more helpful than these more literal translations on any verse.
I pray this will be helpful and encouraging to you and others.
May God help us to love truth sincerely and supremely (II Thessalonians 2:11-12)
- churchmouse
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 12:12 pm
Re: Which translation is the best?
It is helpful and encouraging to me, m273p15c. I'm glad someone else understands how I feel. I have become very skittish of people in a church who dictate what I should believe while it appears their beliefs contradict the Word of God. That was my experience in the church I attended for nearly 20 years. I wept and prayed and studied and struggled most of those 20 years because we were taught that the ministry were divinely inspired and represented God, so any beliefs contrary to their views were considered heretical. It became clearer and clearer that they were conveniently twisting scriptures but it was taboo to mention any scriptures that contradicted their beliefs. After I realized that obeying the ministry in that church was actually defiance toward God, I left and now am very cautious about where I place my loyalties. I do not want to place my loyalties in people, whether they are in the ministry, teachers in the church, Bible translators, or perceived as biblical authorities. I just want to be certain that my loyalties are with God. I greatly appreciate others who feel the same way.I pray this will be helpful and encouraging to you and others.
Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. (2 Timothy 2:15)
Re: Which translation is the best?
I'm sorry for the difficulties you have faced, but I am thankful and encouraged that you are overcoming. It's always good to know a fellow truthseeker, who puts God and His truth above all else. I know it's not always easy, but you are doing great. Please keep "fighting the good fight".
May God help us to love truth sincerely and supremely (II Thessalonians 2:11-12)