Which translation and why?

[JM]

Which translation do you use and why did you choose to use that translation?

 

[Fulton Sheen's Warrior]

+JMJ+

The Douay-Rheims, because it is the most literal translation of the Vulgate.

 

[JM]

+JMJ+

The Douay-Rheims, because it is the most literal translation of the Vulgate.

FSW, are you Latin Vulgate onlyist?

: [kidding]

 

[Dave...]

NKJV, because it's easy to read, while still being a reasonably reliable translation. I don't know for sure, but I feel like i'm on a one way course towards the KJV only camp. It seems the more I grow, the fewer translations I trust.

 

[Georges]

KJV....if it was good enough for Jesus and the Apostles...it's good enough for me....:angel: :angel: :angel:

Seriously....Jay Green's Hebrew/Greek interlinear gives you the strongs numbers along with the translation...with the strong's numbers you can look at the definitions yourself and choose the definition that best fits the subject.

 

[Vic C.]

KJV....if it was good enough for Jesus and the Apostles...it's good enough for me....:angel: :angel: :angel:

Seriously....Jay Green's Hebrew/Greek interlinear gives you the strongs numbers along with the translation...with the strong's numbers you can look at the definitions yourself and choose the definition that best fits the subject.

Oh I see you like Green's Literal also.

 

[Georges]

KJV....if it was good enough for Jesus and the Apostles...it's good enough for me....:angel: :angel: :angel:

Seriously....Jay Green's Hebrew/Greek interlinear gives you the strongs numbers along with the translation...with the strong's numbers you can look at the definitions yourself and choose the definition that best fits the subject.

Oh I see you like Green's Literal also.

yeh...when he agree's with me..... :-D :-D

 

[Vic C.]

Oh I see you like Green's Literal also.

yeh...when he agree's with me..... :-D :-D

Funny guy. :P

Thought you might "like" this:

I have my Trinity of translations; KJV, YLT and the LITV. All three are "TR" derived and usually two out of the three agree with each other. 8-)

 

[JM]

As many of you know, I believe the AV 1611 is the best, Dr. Joel Beeke gives "PRACTICAL REASONS FOR RETAINING THE KJV." I hope you enjoy.

1. The Standard Text of the English Bible
2. Based on the Full Text of the Hebrew and Greek Originals
3. A More Faithful Method of Translation
4. A More Honest Translation
5. A More Precise Idiom
6. The Best Liturgical Text
7. The Best Format For Preaching
8. The Most Beautiful Translation
9. An Ecumenical Text For Reformed Christians
10. A Practical Choice
11. 'Sounds' Like the Bible
12. The Character of the Translators
13. Upholds 'Old Paths'
To read the rest, click below.
http://www.salisburyemmanuel.org.uk/ind ... easons.htm


Below is a good study link that gives you access to Stephens 1550 Textus Receptus, Scrivener 1894 Textus Receptus, Byzantine Majority, Young's Literal Translation, and other modern mix mss.

http://www.greeknewtestament.com/

Peace,

jm

 

[lovely]

Hi James,

I love the KJV, and we memorize from it only. I suppose I like it for those reasons you mentioned. When I am studying I use it mainly, but sometimes I will compare it to my New American Standard.

 

[ZeroTX]

+JMJ+

The Douay-Rheims, because it is the most literal translation of the Vulgate.

As you know, I am also Catholic. However, I cannot buy into the Douay-Rheims-onlyists, either. As an educated man (and possessing God-given intelligence and ability to reason and think), I cannot see how Going from Language 1 -> Language 2 -> Language 3 can be as accurate as Language 1 -> Language 3 directly... from more reliable, older manuscripts with better knowledge of the languages.

In just ONE language translation, you often lose meanings due to not having truly equivalent words.... Imagine how bad that is going from one to another then to yet another? I'm sure the Vulgate in Latin is fine, if I spoke Latin, but I don't want to get a bold-faced guess on what word the authors really had in mind.

I know it does have value as a beautifully worded translation (much as the KJV does), but I can't trust it for serious bible study and it's not easy enough to read to be read just as a casual read, either.

IMO, the English lectionary should be based sctrictly on the RSV and the NAB should be burned.

-Michael

 

[MrVersatile48]

When I was @ inter-denominational evangelical Bible College - (Moorlands, '77/'79 after a year at Emmanuel) - a near-genius prof said NIV was the best & most accurate

Like other Bible teachers since, he recommended combining it with NKJV &/or RSV

2 main problems with KJV are that the meanings of English words have greatly changed in the past 500 years - (how many know that its 'conversation' now means 'way of life'?)

Also, KJV's translators worked a word at a time & so often missed the context of idioms/proverbs meaning something very different from the individual words

Glad no-one has said the Living Bible or The Message, as they are both paraphrases, not translations

Glad also that no-one said CEV or 'New Century' - it claims to be a translation, but seems to totally miss the helpful Hebrew way of repeating thoughts inside many a verse - it's way of shortening so very many verses really does omit many meanings that God deliberately chose the rich Greek & Hebrew languages to convey

John is especially famous for using phrases & words with 2 meanings & meaning them both

For that very reason - the richness of Greek & Hebrew & relative poverty of English - recommend highly the Amplified Bible

Hope that helps

Must go!

Ian

 

[ttg]

I use the RSV-CE, sometimes called the "Ignatius" version. I also have a KJV, an NIV Student Bible and there are several childrens bibles on the shelves.

About the KJV, there are those less educated folks (my ex-wife included) who believe the KJV is the original Bible, handed down straight from God sometime in the 1500's and no Bible existed prior to it. It makes for great conversation.

 

[JM]

For me, it's a matter of mss and for the folks that use modern translations based upon the minority texts, how is it the translators determine which verses from which mss to use? For example, many if not all the new Bibles will pick the odd verse from the LXX (OT) and exchange it for one found in the masoretic mss because they 'believe' it is closer to the oringal, who decides what is the Word and what isn't? What is the criteria for making such decisions? Does it mean modern translators deny the inspiration of the (very) Words of Scripture? I know the Church [Greek Orthodox Church as well] has used translations that are not based on the MT/Byzantine/TR family of mss. for hundreds of years, so I use AV to the exclusion of other, newer translations which I believe are a hog pog of mixed mss the Church has shown little interest in.

KVO is not the issue, the issue is the mss, and the "less educated folks" assume they have the word of God when they don't even know which mss the translation is taken from. :

A good friend of mine who goes by the internet handle AVBunyan wrote the follow to help explain some of the foolishness that goes on today. Enjoy.

Picture this:

Elder Dim Whit, “Welcome everybody to the Truth of Truth Ministry’s weekly Bible study. Thanks for being here. I’m stoked. Our passage to study tonight is John 11:35 Jesus wept. Let’s see what we can learn from this passage. Who wants to go first?â€Â

Bob, “Well, my New English Common Vernacular version doesn’t read Jesus wept but that “Jesus groaned.â€Â

Mary, “Interesting, you know the Greek word there for wept is ‘awahuu’ – I got this from Nestle.â€Â

Bill, “Wow, profound!â€Â

Bob, “But my version, The “Newest English Super Common Version†says grunt.â€Â

Jack, “You mean Jesus grunted?!?!â€Â

Mike: “My new “Authentic Expository Rendition†matches Vaticanus! And didn’t they find this great manuscript in trash can in the Vatican library?

AVBunyan: “Yes, they did – maybe they should have left it there.â€Â

Harry, “I have a Greek lexicon from the 4th century Syrian that says the word for wept is really, ‘awahooie’ which makes a major difference in the phrasing! Wow, I get so excited when I use the Greek – makes me feel, well, just enlightened like an angel of light!â€Â

Elder Dim Whit, “I can see this is going to be a very uplifting night. Nothing like some real dynamic equivalent renderings using the aros tense of the subjective superlative!â€Â

Bill, “Harry, where did you learn Greek?â€Â

Harry, “I don’t really know Greek I just read it in Zodiates book, “How to Master Greek in 30 Days.â€Â

Martha, “Well, I have a Greek lexicon from the 14th Century revision of the Lollard #3 and the word wept can also be translated moaned.â€Â

Martha, “You have to understand the trials and tribulations for the times for without this information you can’t enter into the emotional congatative condiveness of the sureality.â€Â

AV, “What am I missing here – we are only talking about two words.â€Â

Harry, “Hush, AV, you’ve got a bad attitude! What about all those poor people before 1611?â€Â

Elder Dim Whit, “Hush, AV you are not exhibiting the sweet spirit of the Christ here. Also, what about all those people in other countries who can’t even speak English?
Now let’s get back to our Bible study. Who has some more nuggets on, Jesus wept?â€Â

Mr. Brilliant, “My new updated ‘Antioch Gratulative Retention Bible’ speaks of the word wept being in the past tense conjegative thus meaning that Jesus was weeping before he ever got there. This really touched my heart.â€Â

Mary, “Oh, I feel my life is now completely changed based upon that nugget – thanks Mr. Brilliant.â€Â

Mr. Brilliant, “By the way my new version is special for the translators of this great work translated it so there are no words with less than 9 letters long so as to bring out the most demonstrative and subjectivelatuative meaning of the words thus enabling me to get all that can be gotten from the most complicated renderings thus making me even more brilliant in the eyes of unenlightened believers.â€Â

Harry, “I still think we need to examine the different 3rd century renditions of the Greek word ‘awahooe’ so we can see how other Greek writers used the word so we can determine the most reliable and effective use of the word for the most authentic rendering of the verse thus pulling from it all the vast riches of this profound word ‘awahooe’.

AV, “But how do you decide who is right?â€Â

Mike, “AV, you are so narrow-minded! How can you read a Bible with Easter in it anyway?â€Â

Nancy, “How do we even know John 11:35 was really in the originals?â€Â

Neal, “I found a scholar who read of a professor who talked with his gardener who knew an archeologists who was able to gaze upon the famous fragment P734075439.479 1/2 from the collection over in Dead Sea Visitor’s Center, oh I mean the ‘Dead Sea Museum of Ancient Artifacts’ and he says it is there.â€Â

Nancy, “Wow, could the archeologists read Greek?â€Â

Neal, “No, but theitor could and he told him that P734075439.479 1/2 contained the verse as it stands in many of the modern versions.â€Â

Elder Dim Whit, “Well, that is great – I think we can call this Bible study a great success. Let’s meet next week so we can have some time to digest these great truths. Then we will be prepared to really dig into John 11:35 verse using all the modern tools and resources available.â€Â

Mary, “You are not coming next week are you AV?â€Â

AV, “No, I think I’ll just stay home and watch some Captain Kangaroo reruns, thank you for asking and for being so thoughtful.â€Â
Peace,

jm

 

[lovely]

Hi Michael,

I don't think I have ever been called a "nut-bar" before, though imbecile has been used a few times. :o :-D "The ones who believe God lowered down from heaven the leather-bound, gold-guilded KJV straight from heaven and that it is the direct, untranslated Word of God?" Don't recall ever thinking, or saying, that. If you are reading hearts, and minds, you got me all wrong. :wink: I still use my KJV the most, and as I said we only memorize from that version....it is very beautiful.

Anyway, I do agree with this.

"Protestant in origin, very good word-for-word translation, not quite as "pretty" to read, but great for direct word-for-word study without learning hebrew or greek:
New American Standard Bible (NASB) "

I do think this translation is one of the best for study. Of course, I don't intend to lean on it, I have been studying Greek in an effort to teach it to my children this year so that we all will have a better understanding of the Word. Thankfully, they are better a learning languages than I am. :-?

I have to say, and this is for everyone, I rely mostly on the Holy Spirit to teach me the Word now, not the translation. I didn't when I was younger, and the words didn't seem to live, you know? Don't get me wrong, I am not saying we should check our brains at the door at all. I know the translation does matter, and it does go hand in hand to a degree for the purpose of understanding, but the Word is so much more than the nuts and bolts of translation. It seems when read as a whole, and in the Spirit, it transcends translation. The real Truth of the it comes from the Holy Spirit, and it opens your eyes to the Jesus, the Living Word. I don't want to say that translation doesn't matter, but I do want to say that it won't matter apart from the Holy Spirit's teaching. The Lord bless all of you.

 

[Fulton Sheen's Warrior]

+JMJ+

As you know, I am also Catholic. However, I cannot buy into the Douay-Rheims-onlyists, either

Hey Michael,

I problably should have made myself more clear. I use the Douay-Rheims bible for devotional purposes (i.e. spiritual reading, praying the Rosary etc). However, for studying I use the RSV-CE.

Though I do prefer the Doauy-Rheims. :-D

IMO, the English lectionary should be based sctrictly on the RSV and the NAB should be burned.

:smt023 I agree 100%.

 

[BradtheImpaler]

Which translation do you use and why did you choose to use that translation?

The New American Standard, because it is based on the oldest available manuscripts. It still may be a very poor translation in comparison to the original manuscripts because we don't have them nor know what they said. But, as for what we have, I choose the NASB.

 

[JM]

Which translation do you use and why did you choose to use that translation?

The New American Standard, because it is based on the oldest available manuscripts. It still may be a very poor translation in comparison to the original manuscripts because we don't have them nor know what they said. But, as for what we have, I choose the NASB.

Thank you Brad for giving an answer without trying to pick a fight! This thread isn't about KJVO, it's not about fighting it out over translations, I was just wondering which Bible translation and why...that's it.

Question: Isn't the RCC Latin Vulgate only? Isn't the offical Bible, the Vulgate translation? Wouldn't that make Bible translations from other mss. against Catholic dogma?

Thanks again Brad for not reading too much into this topic.

Peace,

jm

 

[Vic C.]

Lovely, I've been called far worse myself, so you're in good company. :-D

My apologies. I will choose my words more charitably in the future. There are those who believe just what I said, though. Is it naivety or pride that makes them stand by such a belief?

-Michael

Thanks Michael. It get pretty hot under the collar around here, even without the insults. Enjoy the rode! 8-)

 

[BradtheImpaler]

Thank you Brad for giving an answer without trying to pick a fight!

I am a lover, not a fighter :smt055

This thread isn't about KJVO, it's not about fighting it out over translations, I was just wondering which Bible translation and why...that's it.

Question: Isn't the RCC Latin Vulgate only? Isn't the offical Bible, the Vulgate translation? Wouldn't that make Bible translations from other mss. against Catholic dogma?

Let the Catholics answer.

Thanks again Brad for not reading too much into this topic.

You're welcome. Just consider me a humble guide along the pathway of truth :smt039