Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by JesusFan, Jun 20, 2011.
as all 3 purport to be in the "middle/mediating" position in Bible translations?
No,the NLTse does not so purport.
I think the 2011 NIV is the best in that position. Although I favor the HCSB in many places --it's in that spot,but it's not the best i.e. general purpose mediating version. I really like the NLTse even though it's more dynamic.
So the NLT is "more free" while other 2 closer to formal than dynamic versions?
Yes. With the NASB on the left side of the ledger and The Message all the way on the right:
Just a sampling of some. The biggest break would be between the NET Bible and the REB. If point values were given NASBU (10),ESV/NRSV (20),HCSB (25),ISV (26),2011 NIV (27),NET Bible (30),REB (40),NJB (42),NLTse (50),GW (55). In my most humble opinion.
Would the 1977/1995 editions for NASV grade out same?
Where would NKJV/KJV grade out?
For me it's the HCSB. I just like how it reads.
The NLT is probably the easiest to read.
The NIV to me is just ok.
Are you talking about the 84 or 2011 NIV?
The '84...I've only seen bits and pieces of the '11
I think overall the 2011 reads better than the 84. I think the former is a bit more natural than the HCSB,but not by too much. The 2011 is very much like the TNIV. I have done threads comparing the TNIV with the HCSB and in my view the HCSB had some dated expressions at times. But still a good translation all things considered.
We both know that the ISV is very similar to God's Word version, so how can they be so far apart in points?
I like the TNIV, there were some improvements in the NIV 2011 but they returned to the use of "mankind" which I find as a dated compromise for TNIV haters. Which if the recent vote of the SBC convention is any indication, it didn't work. Ridiculous voting clearly knows no bounds.
I was thinking the same thing as I came up with this particular point value system. I showed a 29 point spread when we both know that the ISV liberally "borrowed" so much from GW translation. Yet,the translating team of the ISV covered their tails a bit in giving a number of verses a nudge to the formal side of things more than the GW translation did.
What's your take Franklin? Give me your breakdown point-wise from the NASB --to GW.