Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by alexander284, Dec 18, 2005.
Which of the following Bible translations, is the most underrated?
I think the HCSB is the most underrated version listed in the poll.
The TNIV I personally consider a mistranslation due to it's "politically correct" handling of the gender references often used by the original writers.
The NLT I do not consider a viable Bible version due to its links with Taylor's Living Bible.
The Message is merely a paraphrase and I have never considered any of them as truly viable Bibie versions.
These thoughts are just my own opinion. They are not intended to be inflammatory or to start some big argument over the merits or the shortcomings of certain versions.
Keith, I agree with all of your assessments. I really love the HCSB. In fact, I'm struggling right now about which bible to use for personal daily use. I really like the HCSB but don't want to give up my familiarities with the text, notes and helps of my NKJV Study Bible.
I have often found the HCSB rather clumsy and awkward reading and, though the translation is okay,it is still basically inferior to the NIV. For my daily reading and study, I stick to the ESV.
I really like the HCSB and have been using it for a coulple of years along with the ESV for Study .
"None of the above."
Probably ESV, with Dr. Cassidy's answer coming in a close second
Holman seems to be linked to the SBC, so normal Baptists have little exposure to it.
ESV is better than I expected.
Does this mean that Southern Baptists aren't normal, Dr. Bob?
Are normal Baptists normal?
'Normal Baptists' hahahahaha LOL. Good joke, Dr. Bob.
I think it is interesting that the TNIV is not getting much attention. I guess political correctness does not belong in the translation room. I am quite suprised they went ahead and published it.
Of course, there are probably a lot of liberal churches (non-Baptist OF COURSE!) who are purchasing them by the truck-load.
This is a case where a really poor translation is probably going to become a mainstream translation.
HCSB, ESV are both underrated and I agree with Dr. Bob the ESV is a really sound translation.On the other hand wasn't to thrilled with the comment about the SBC.
Im curious, do you have examples? The only places I can find gener-neutral references are places where the the source texts are also gender neutral, but often translated "men/man" (such as the word "anthropos" being translated "men", though it means "people" in general).
Im curious, do you have examples? The only places I can find gener-neutral references are places where the the source texts are also gender neutral, but often translated "men/man" (such as the word "anthropos" being translated "men", though it means "people" in general). </font>[/QUOTE]JohnV, I've wondered about this, too. I am not automatically against translating terms such as you mention as "people" instead of "men" but it seems there are issues beyond this with the TNIV.
This lists some of what may be inaccuracies of the TNIV:
While I agreed with what Dr. Bob said, I think I agreed more with TCassidy:
The choices were not meaningful to me.
There was a one of the translators of the ESV on our local christian talk radio show the other day .People were calling in asking about some versions .
I called in and asked him his thoughts on the HCSB .He got all excited and said it was a fantastic translation he went on and on about how good it is .I thought it was funny you would have thought he was connected to the HCSB instead of the ESV .
I told him I liked his the ESV to .
I believe the ESV is a wonderful translation that has not received the attention it deserves. I do feel that people are starting to see what an absolute treasure this translation is though... one that is able to meld literal & flow into an extremely readible and accurate bible version.
One thing I appreciate about the publisher of ESV is their willingess to distribute the translation at no cost. I was surprised when I found it on E-Sword for free and then HCSB followed suit (seems like they took it back off). ESV also permitted others free Bible software programs to use their translation without cost. Recently Palm Bible+ asked them if they could distribute the translation freely and they were given quick permission. I believe they have 6 different formats for the ESV now. OliveTree also freely distributes ESV for their Palm software. During the hurricane disasters they distributed ten thousand free Bibles to victims. Obviously they cannot compete with the SBC publishinghouse, but it seems they are more interested in getting the Word out than making or saving a quick buck.
So what are you saying? None of those translations are good?
On the other hand I believe another excellent translation that is underrated would be the ISV.