Which Translation is the best.

[Chopper]

My son asked me, "since there are so many translations out there, If I asked God to pick the one that He thinks is the most accurate, which one would He choose.

He is frustrated by the fact that he can read a passage of Scripture in the KJV and the same passage out of the NIV and get two different meanings. In other words, which one is right? I think he just wants to stick with one Bible.

 

[farouk]

My son asked me, "since there are so many translations out there, If I asked God to pick the one that He thinks is the most accurate, which one would He choose.

He is frustrated by the fact that he can read a passage of Scripture in the KJV and the same passage out of the NIV and get two different meanings. In other words, which one is right? I think he just wants to stick with one Bible.

It's the nature of language that is the issue, often.

God did not produce the English language on gold plates; rather, translations, some more accurate than others, convey the original. So there is not one right and accurate way to translate; instead there are right and accurate ways (plural) and less accurate ways (again, plural).

I love and use the King James, but the King James Only denunciators don't serve the cause of accurate Bible translation when they ignore facts about the nature of language and translation.

Sometimes it's a textual issue as well; for example, the King James uses the Textus Receptus, as does the New King James.

Blessings.

 

[ardchoille]

I believe that simply reading the bible, without praying to God for understanding, will not always give us what we need when we need it. I have been studying the bible for many years and I still find that I have a better understanding of certain passages than I did when I had previously read them. I feel that God will give us what we need when we need it. I always tell people that the bible never gets old, if our heart is in it we'll get something out of it.

 

[farouk]

I believe that simply reading the bible, without praying to God for understanding, will not always give us what we need when we need it. I have been studying the bible for many years and I still find that I have a better understanding of certain passages than I did when I had previously read them. I feel that God will give us what we need when we need it. I always tell people that the bible never gets old, if our heart is in it we'll get something out of it.

The 'washing of water by the word' is an experience of a lifetime.

Prayer is vitally important, yes.

Blessings.

 

[TRUTH over TRADITION]

I think he just wants to stick with one Bible.

Unfortunately doing that is not the best course of action if accuracy is paramount. No translation is flawless, but some are better than others. The KJV is not the easiest to read, but its rendering of the OT books is pretty good compared with other translations. It does not do as good a job on the NT, however as it transiterates many words and at times does a poor job of accurately translating the meaning of the original writings to the English language. FOr the NT, I like Richard F. Weymouth's NT because in translating he "aimed to discover how the inspired writers themselves would have expressed and described the events of the New Testament and Gospels, had they been actually writing in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. In doing so, he has succeeded in rendering it into a dignified modern English edition without ecclesiastical nor doctrinal bias making it desirable to Christian readers of all denominations." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weymouth_New_Testament) Additionally I like Frank Daniel's 'A Non-Ecclesiastical NT (http://www.eyeoftheneedle.net/Translations-Versions/a_non-ecclesiastical%20N.T..htm) as well as an online version called the 2001 Translation (www.2001translation) as it works a lot like Wikipedia in that it is constantly able to be edited and revised whenever accuracy is in question. For the OT, I like the NASB or ESV.

 

[King James]

For OT, KJV. NKJV will suffice if you don't like the old english. For NT, ALTD is best.

NKJV is not KJV. This link is KJVO, but who knows better about the KJV? http://www.angelfire.com/la2/prophet1/NKJVOmissions.html

 

[Skillet]

I use the NLT when I read a "physical" bible and on my phone I use GWT.
I don't really like reading the KJV because of the old English in it, which makes it hard to read for me.

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

I speak english and I am from the United States.
There's nothing like the NIV.
Say what you want, but I've been using it for 28 1/2 years and I do pretty good with it.

 

[King James]

I speak english and I am from the United States.
There's nothing like the NIV.
Say what you want, but I've been using it for 28 1/2 years and I do pretty good with it.

So you like the NIV84. What do you think about the TNIV or the NIV2011? Lately, I've been reading Brenton's LXX. Since it's in the awfulith Olde English, I don't recommend to the OP.

 

[Brother Mike]

Additionally I like Frank Daniel's 'A Non-Ecclesiastical NT (http://www.eyeoftheneedle.net/Transl...cal N.T..htm)

I would like to find a e-sword module for this one.

found a .pdf here.

http://www.friktech.com/rel/net.pdf

Mike.

 

[farouk]

I kind of do like the old King James. (Though I'm not King James Only.)

Blessings.

 

[Brother Mike]

There's nothing like the NIV

I am thankful for that.

Mike.

 

[Obadiah]

Just my opinion, but I think he should pick the one he finds easiest to read and just read it without worrying about which version it is. If he comes across something questionable he can always study that particular section, reading for himself and seeking counsel from more knowledgeable elders. But the key is to just read. The majority of people in church have never read the Bible for themselves. They may read a few sections here and there, but have never really read the whole thing. If he picks a version he likes to read, there is more chance he will be one of the few who actually reads it, and that will put him head and shoulders above the average church going Christian!

 

[Matthew G]

I'm going to echo a lot of what's already been said. Ultimately it comes down to what he's comfortable reading, and a willingness to study and research something he doesn't understand.

For myself, I am most comfortable with the KJV, and it is the primary version I use. The first Bible I was ever given was a KJV, so that's what I "grew up" with. But I'm not KJVO. I also regularly use the ESV and NLT. But regardless of which version I'm reading, when I come across a passage that I don't quite understand or that I want to know more about, then I begin research into the original Greek or Hebrew.

In my opinion, if you're willing to do that, then it ultimately doesn't really matter which translation you read.

 

[Speculative]

I also like the KJV. I don't have a problem with the other translations (so long as it is an actual translation, and not a paraphrase). I just started out with the KJV and the new ones I've read didn't seem to help me out any more so I just decided to stick with the one I started with I DO concur with the recommendation of the Strong's Exhaustive Concordance, though. That has been a big help.

 

[Chopper]

Thank you all very much for all your advise. I will pass on all this info.

 

[PrivateTimm]

Anyone who has ever done translations knows that you can not really do word for word translations. You have to read and understand a passage and then be able to convey the meaning of the passage in new words. It is doubly difficult when the language is not a current language.

The NIV has been criticized for "leaving out words", but it is very faithful to the concepts in a passage.

If you look at 1 Cor. 6:9-20 in the NIV, NASB and KJV you can see a prime example of how three separate translations deal with words in Biblical Greek like "arsenokoitai" that is unknown in written language other than the two times it appears in Scripture. The translators had to make judgment calls on what it might mean and translations are not God breathed, they are the work of men.

So bottom line, pick a translation you are comfortable.

 

[turnorburn]

King James, wanna know why? shortly after i got saved we went to a bible book store, years ago before they started clearing the shelves of "controversial text" Walked over to the bibles, wow look at all those bibles! Pretty sure which one i wanted but thought these guys probably knew better than me, so i asked the Lord.. That's why..

Years later after things started getting foggy in the version department i asked him again, you guys always ask him don't you? Anyhow i found this, which low and behold confirmed the Lord told me true, he always does you know..

http://biblebelievers.com/New_Eye_Opener.html

tob

 

[PrivateTimm]

King James, wanna know why? shortly after i got saved we went to a bible book store, years ago before they started clearing the shelves of "controversial text" Walked over to the bibles, wow look at all those bibles! Pretty sure which one i wanted but thought these guys probably knew better than me, so i asked the Lord.. That's why..

Years later after things started getting foggy in the version department i asked him again, you guys always ask him don't you? Anyhow i found this, which low and behold confirmed the Lord told me true, he always does you know..

http://biblebelievers.com/New_Eye_Opener.html

The link you post assumes that the KJV is a correct translation, the others are wrong, and they have an agenda obviously.

Just one example of where they are wrong about the "words removed" is 1 Cor 16:23.

In the original Greek the direct translation is "the grace of the Lord Jesus with you", the NIV & NASB translate it as "the grace of the Lord Jesus be with you". They add the "be" so it makes more sense in English. The KJV translate the passage as "the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you".

I don't think the meaning of what Paul is saying is changed in any of the three translations, but the word for "Christ" simply does not appear in the Greek text, the KJV inserted it as well as changing "of the" to "our".

 

[jasoncran]

I don't like the niv. to me its for easy reading but if you go into the study side of things. the niv will fall. I had this argument with my chaplain. he taught james with the niv and had to use a commentary.