The Best?

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by Salty, Sep 5, 2012.

  1. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,131
    Likes Received:
    221
  2. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    I believe in the plenary verbal inspiration of Scripture. Words do matter.

    My preference in descending order KJV, NKJV, NASV, ASV, ESV, ................................. HSCB, NIV, paraphrases.

    Have recently come into possession of the Geneva Bible. Reads much like KJV but reading limited.

    Then there is the MKJV and KJ21 but these are one person translations.

    The Third Millennium Bible is the KJV with archaic words replaced but it has the Apocrypha.

    Some of the stuff coming out now I avoid.
     
  3. preachinjesus

    preachinjesus
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,406
    Likes Received:
    99
    Depends on what one is looking for in a translation.

    There are lots of things that go into that point. Since I do primary work out of the originals I find myself preferring translations that keep the broader point of a passage in mind but also acknowledge nuance in the original language. I try not to rank a translation since each has different aims.

    It is sort of like looking at athletes from the NBA, NFL, NHL, MLB, Tennis, WNBA, & Track and Field and figure out who is the best athlete. Different disciplines require different strengths.
     
  4. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    Shouldn't the aim of any translation be to accurately present the Words of God?

    I believe so!
     
  5. Mexdeaf

    Mexdeaf
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    No one here would disagree overall, but we would likely have a hard time agreeing on a definition of "accurately present".
     
  6. Gregory Perry Sr.

    Gregory Perry Sr.
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,993
    Likes Received:
    0
    Not Me...!


    Not Me....I have no doubt which one is accurate!:smilewinkgrin:

    Bro.Greg
     
  7. Mexdeaf

    Mexdeaf
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    Define "accurate".:smilewinkgrin:
     
  8. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    Me too! :thumbs::thumbs:
     
  9. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    The 1994 KJ21 or 21st Century King James Version is basically the same as the 1998 Third Millennium Bible, and the two are slight revisions or updatings of the KJV made by the same people. If I recall correctly, there were four people involved in doing the updating in the KJ21.

    One difference is that the Third Millennium Bible includes the Apocrypha as the 1611 KJV and many standard KJV editions did.

    Both do not claim to be new translations or even revisions but "an accurate updating" of the KJV.
     
  10. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    17,126
    Likes Received:
    52
    Depends on how one defines being accurate!

    Closest to what was actually wriiten down in the original texts, or best to how we would understand stand it being said today?
     
  11. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    You are correct about the KJ21. The Third Millennium Bible is an updated version of the KJ21 with the apocrypha.

    The MKJV is a new translation by Jay Green. He had an earlier version out called the KJII. Green's latest version is the KJ3.

    http://www.sgpbooks.com/cubecart/read-kj3-here/info_16.html

    He carries literalism to the extreme in my opinion.

    Genesis 1:20. And God said, Let the waters swarm with swarmers having a soul of life; and let the birds fly over the earth and the expanse of the heavens.
     
  12. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,410
    Likes Received:
    328
    The more literal a translation is ...the more inaccurate and nonsensical.
     
  13. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    17,126
    Likes Received:
    52
    all depends on what the level of comprehension is held by the person reading and trying to understand it!

    IF one has a hard time with English , hard to follow a version that adheres to a more strict wording o fthe original text!
     
    #13 Yeshua1, Sep 14, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 14, 2012
  14. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,410
    Likes Received:
    328
    The more a so-called translation strives to be word-for-word (an impossible task) the more cumbersome the English. It's not a matter of having high literacy.
     

Share This Page

Loading...