Which Translation is the best.

[Edward]

Hi Edward,
I use the NIV quite often and would be interested in references to those missing verses. Particularly the ones you say are blatantly left out. Can you try to dig some up and share them please? Much appreciated.

I'm not sure that I can help you with this anymore WIP. Something very spooky is going on over at Edwards house. I started digging around last night to come up with some references for you, and everything I looked up in my NIV, was there. Printed just as pretty as you please. I gave up on it and texted my friend who showed me this in the beginning. He was visiting, we were talking abut the Lord, he looked it up in my bible and it was a missing verse. I remember us looking it up in my bible, but don't remember the verse.

He texted me back this morning and told me it was Matt. 17:21. So I looked it up, there it is. How can this be? SO I turn my bible over and look at it...This morning my bible is a NKJV. This blows my mind. I've had one new bible in the past 30 years, this is it. My friend bought it for me as a gift and we talked about it being NIV. Easier to understand he said. (He doesn't like KJV) Then my other buddy showed me a missing verse in the same bible, it was not there. I did a little two day stint of looking up missing verses in this bible, like I told you, I found a bunch of them...

This morning I have a NKJV bible. No, I'm not on drugs, lol. I know what I had. I've been wanting to get a new bible to go to church with and don't think a lot of the NIV anymore.

The only thing I can think, is that the Lord gave me a NKJV. That's like, the only explanation which could make sense. Wow.

 

[chessman]

Has anyone ever seen any actual proof that this has happened. Ive heard this line of reasoning before to support the claim that all the non KJV Bibles are bad, but have never seen anyone offer any real evidence that this actually happened. Lacking any solid evidence to support this accusation, I think it's just conjecture made up by those who want to discredit anyone using a Bible that they don't personally approve of.

First, you're wrong on my motivation, though I’m sure some KJVO people might say something like I did for their own reasons. I read and admire lots of different translations and I don't even really have an opinion on which is "the best one". The best study to me is to read several or the AMP so I can see where certain original words (or even grammar) differ in meanings that simply don’t carry over from the Hebrew/Greek so well.

Of course, I cannot speak for the others that you've heard make a similar comment. I assume you’re right, that KJVO people might make a similar claim. I don't even read the KJV anymore (I'm not KJVO) unless it's someone else's posting it on this site or for my personal comparison to other translations. Though I still have the printed copies I grew up with.

I recall the "big fuss" in my community when the NIV first came out. The older generation in my church and community thought it was borderline heretical (if not fully) to corrupt the KJV in such a way. I thought (and still do) think they were being silly if not ignorant on how the KJV was translated in the first place (even back then as a teenager that seemed obvious to me).

As for "having any actual proof that this [being forced by law to avoid the best translation because they cannot legally print what another publisher has already printed word for word]":

No, I've never seen any quotes from anyone serving on a modern translation committee that has said this. Nor have I seen it stated in their various Bible translation prefaces.

But obviously, legally, they cannot just reprint "word for word" full page texts of a previous work and stamp their label on it and make money for selling another’s work. That’s essentially my point. So how do they avoid this issue (assuming they have to account for it)? That’s my question.

For example: Let’s assume the NASB or LEB or ESV was to independently come up with the exact same word-for-word translation as the NIV did in either 1973 or 2011 (or any other update). Every verse, every book, identical! (obviously that’s theoretical but just assume they did) They couldn’t just reprint it and call it there’s (even if they really did come to the same conclusion independently). As I understand the legal copyrights (unless they were to get written permission otherwise), the ESV could not reprint word for word more than 500 verses that are identical to the NIV’s verses. That’s the thing/comment I’m making that is a disadvantage of copyright laws. It has nothing to do with me “liking” one version over another.

But here's an example of what I mean:
Genesis 1:1 (LEB) In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth—
Genesis 1:1 (KJ21) In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Genesis 1:1 (ESV)In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.
Genesis 1:1 (NASB) In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
Genesis 1:1 (NIV) In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

Were it not for punctuation differences and the plural use, all but the KJ21 are identical. So the in the case of the ESV versus the NIV, that’s 1 verse out of the legally available 500 that they could print word-for-word. I guess they thought, hay, its Gen 1:1 so why not. Let’s just go word for word here. So they had 499 left where they could do the same thing legally. Regardless of who’s most ‘right’. Here’s another verse (John 1:1)

(LEB) In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
(KJ21) In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
(ESV) In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
(NASB) In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
(NIV) In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

That’s two verses “copied” legally. 498 out of 500 left. Rom 3:23 (another one ‘copied’) so that’s 497. Etc.
So how is it that they avoid outright copyright infringement? I don’t actually know. I’m only asking and assuming here. But I feel like they use very, very minor differences where they can do so. Here’s an example with Matt 28:19:

(LEB) Therefore, go and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
(KJ21) Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,
(ESV) Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
(NASB) Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,
(NIV) Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
My observations:

1. The LEB has avoided infringing on the NIV with this verse by saying “the nations” instead of just nations. Fine. To me, it makes zero difference in the verse’s meaning. And I don’t even know who’s more ‘correct’ to the Greek manuscripts one way or the other. Even if I did know, neither have the original writings of Matthew to begin with so they are ALL using the available manuscripts (some leaning more toward the Greek/western ones, some more toward the Eastern ones, etc.). They have no way of knowing whether Matthew had the article there in the original or not other than the reliability of [the] various complications of the manuscripts that they used and how well they were copied. My point is, I bet you that the LEB inserted “the” in their translation of “the nations” specifically to avoid an outright ‘copy’ of the other’s copyrighted material. Not so much because of the actual Greek manuscripts use of an definite article. But I don’t know for sure.

2. KJV 21st Century says “Go ye”. Who speaks like in the 21st Century? To me, that’s funny actually. But I think I know why they published “Go ye” in 1994. But I could be wrong. After all they say; “Not since 1611 has there been a Bible that is so - Right for its time, Right for traditionalist, Right for Bible lovers.” They must know what they are talking about, right?

3. The ESV ‘copied’ the NASB word-for-word but both avoided the exact word-for-word of the NIV verse by simply saying “Go therefore” versus “Therefore go”. To me, it makes zero difference in the message. But legally, I guess, it makes quite a bit of difference. Matt 28:19 didn’t count as one of the available 500 verses infringement rule against the NIV, legally, in other words.
This is the type of thing that I’m wondering whether it occurs (or not). Again, I really don’t know if they have this in mind or not. I suspect they must, legally, take this into consideration. And I suspect they do based on some of these minor differences that I see between them all over the place (but not within the most “famous” verses). Remembering that they only have 500 or so to print exactly as the other current copyrighted versions do (depending on the reprint legal copyrights) it seems to me, they are required to differ in some way or the other (even if its minor). But I simply don’t know nor do I know how to find out.

Do you?

 

[Obadiah]

Someone asked about why some of us like ESV over other Bibles. In Seminary, in Hebrew, we compared the various versions to the actual Hebrew. It only took a few weeks of translating to realize the ESV was closest to the original language. That is verb tenses, word order, and actual word usage. I have done a lot of translating of the Greek, and the same thing applies. I have an ESV study, and it has very good notes, which point out the variations, esp. when the words are not in the earliest manuscripts.

The problem with the Majority Texts or the Byzantine, is the only reason they are in the majority, is because the Greeks still spoke Greek, so they continued to reproduce the largest amount of manuscripts in that language, whereas other cultures translated into their languages. However, the later Greeks also liked to "embellish" the earlier texts, and that is why the later manuscripts have so many transcriptional errors. The KJV used those later manuscripts, which just have too many mistakes to be of value. More modern versions go back to the earlier texts, and translate them, instead of the later embellished Byzantine texts. I read from Nestle Aland, which puts all the variations and codes them to the particular manuscripts. That way I get the whole picture of where the variations crept in. Even so, I think most modern Bibles truly deliver the gospel. ESV can be very stilted. It does not follow the grammar as precisely as KJV, which is why so many people think KJV is poetic. It is actually because both Greek and to a lesser extent Hebrew have radically different word order than modern English. KJV often seems like a pretty turn of phrase, when it is in fact just following the original word order. No poetry there!
I am not against KJV, I memorized many verses in Sunday School when I was a young child, and those verses did not return void - I remembered them, and God saved me. In fact, it was nice to have consistence in memory verses. I think the modern versions have driven people away from memorizing, which to me is hiding God's Word in your heart. However, I still prefer to read a translation I know translates the original languages better than any other version. So that is ESV, after so much translating and comparing, I am pretty much convinced that it does the best job!

Fascinating! Thank you!

 

[Obadiah]

First, you're wrong on my motivation, though I’m sure some KJVO people might say something like I did for their own reasons.

I appologize for that. I didn't mean it that way but this morning looking back on my wording put together with the fact that your comment is what triggered my question, I can see how it comes across like that. When I was talking about the motivation, I was actually referring to the motivation of the hard core militant type of KJVO supporters that originally came up with these kind of things to support their position. You didn't come across as one of those at all. But I've heard a lot of people repeat many of these things just because they've heard them from others and never bothered to think for themselves as to whether or not it's true, or just propaganda. Once again, sorry for the misunderstanding.

Ok, now off to read what you've written, it looks interesting.

 

[King James]

But I've heard a lot of people repeat many of these things just because they've heard them from others and never bothered to think for themselves as to whether or not it's true, or just propaganda.

This is also true for politics. Most don't know any of the real facts.
They just parrot the front men of the party they are cheerleading for, thinking it
makes "their side" look better.

 

[MysticalJourney]

That was me. This is what I wanted to hear. Thank you brother.

I'm glad it helped. But I am a woman! Yes, women can go to Seminary. I got the Greek award for Outstanding Greek Student,(99%) and 101% in Hebrew (I had to write an extra paper to accomplish that, which I wanted to do!) I just graduated in May, so the experience is still very fresh in my mind, and I am missing the classroom and the profs and students. But enjoying ministry, when I am not too sick to go out and do it!

Off topic, but prayers appreciated for a solution to some major health issues. Thanks!

 

[Edward]

I'm glad it helped. But I am a woman! Yes, women can go to Seminary. I got the Greek award for Outstanding Greek Student,(99%) and 101% in Hebrew (I had to write an extra paper to accomplish that, which I wanted to do!) I just graduated in May, so the experience is still very fresh in my mind, and I am missing the classroom and the profs and students. But enjoying ministry, when I am not too sick to go out and do it!

Off topic, but prayers appreciated for a solution to some major health issues. Thanks!

Oh, I'm sorry sister. I've done that a couple other times with sisters on the board accidently. It would be cool if the staff could install a widget that would display the little symbol for man or woman below the name. Another site I frequent has this.

Congratulations on graduating Seminary! That's awesome and wonderful that you did so good in Greek and Hebrew. I will certainly pray for you for your health.

 

[MysticalJourney]

It's ok Edward! Maybe the women's names could be in pink, and the men's in blue. I guess there is no way you could tell I am female from my name or avatar. Thanks for the congrats!

 

[Edward]

 

[for_his_glory]

My personal choice is the KJV, the Jerusalem Bible and my Strong's Exhausted Concordance. But most importantly is praying first and asking the Holy Spirit teach you for all wisdom and understanding.

 

[Edward]

Does anyone use Vines?

 

[MysticalJourney]

I have a copy of Vine's which was handy before I knew Greek. I don't use it at all, now that I have Greek Dictionaries and Exegetical Word studies. I don't like study materials that are based on KJV either. Too many mistakes and archaisms for my liking.

 

[Edward]

So Vines is like a Strongs. I heard a Pastor mention it once and wondered about it. You are the one who knows Greek and Hebrew so well. Ok. I had it confused the other day and had thought it was Kathi.

No matter which translation one uses, I think word studies into the Greek and Hebrew are the way to go in pursuing clarity of message. I like to take a particular verse and then re-write the verse, paraphrased into different language based on the word study of the Greek or Hebrew. Many times it will read much differently and provide increased comprehension. All this in addition to, of course, prayer and help from the Holy Spirit.

 

[Deborah13]

So Vines is like a Strongs. I heard a Pastor mention it once and wondered about it. You are the one who knows Greek and Hebrew so well. Ok. I had it confused the other day and had thought it was Kathi.

No matter which translation one uses, I think word studies into the Greek and Hebrew are the way to go in pursuing clarity of message. I like to take a particular verse and then re-write the verse, paraphrased into different language based on the word study of the Greek or Hebrew. Many times it will read much differently and provide increased comprehension. All this in addition to, of course, prayer and help from the Holy Spirit.

Word study in the languages is good, imo. I always have to be careful because the same word can mean different things and be used differently within the context of the whole scripture and not just that verse.
I don't trust that I can always know the difference, so I don't stray far from the original transliteration, usually not at all. Hebrew is especially difficult, more so than Greek, I think.

 

[Edward]

I think you're right. Stick to the originality of the passage, first and foremost. Commentaries and such very secondary.

 

[MysticalJourney]

Actually, studies of Seminary students show them equally divided as to which language is harder to learn. 50% preferred Hebrew, and 50% preferred Hebrew. My Old Testament prof and I discussed this. He said he hated Greek, and went on to studied advanced Hebrew, he enjoyed it so much. Another friend said she loved Hebrew, and almost failed Greek she found it so hard. That was weird for me to accept.

I really psyched myself out the first semester of Hebrew. All those squiggles, vowel points and weird words like Qal and Piel for verb tenses (stems actually) really threw me off. By the 2nd semester I was loving it, and I have been studying it ever since. Greek was a dream come true right from day 1. The alphabet is close enough to English that it was easy to learn. I also know French and German, and German has cases which made the verbs simple as can be. I often reviewed my grammar by taking my advanced University French book and reading the chapter in French and applying it to Greek. That only fell apart in one place - participles. It wasn't in any of the grammar books I have studied, and although we have them, they are not important and time sensitive like Greek. But the prof said most Greek students find them hard, and it was only 2 chapters. I get them now, just a bit of a shock the first time around.

I think the biggest hindrance to learning Greek and Hebrew is a lack of a good grammar background in English. I was raised British style in the 60's and English class consisted of boards and boards of conjugating verbs, and worksheets on verbs. Then in high school, the same thing in French. So a lot of similarities in grammar. My profs told me the thing that best indicated how well a student would do was their ability to write in English, and their knowledge of grammar. And oh yes, a really good memory for memorizing verb sheets and vocabulary. Greek is so easy to me, I just read it out of the book. And for those hapax legomena, I keep a good dictionary around. No one should feel bad about not knowing a word that only appears once in the whole Bible!

I highly recommend everyone who really wants to study the Bible to learn Greek and Hebrew, not necessarily in that order. Bill Mounce has a really good website you can sign up for and watch the videos that go with the text books and audio CD's with. Plus there is an on-line chat section to ask questions and/or answer them. And you probably don't need to spend more than 20 hours a week learning! Just joking! I did that, but I wanted an A+, prideful woman that I am!

 

[Edward]

Mystical Journey:...Greek is so easy to me, I just read it out of the book.

Interesting. Let me ask you a question. Can you think in Greek?

Going back to the Greek language in order to gain insight to a passage is good of course, but then the definition is also translated back to English. I was wondering if there are nuances to Greek that can not be translated effectively. That it may really take being able to think in Greek to be able to "get it" in it's entirety.

 

[MysticalJourney]

I can think a bit in Greek. I won't say fluently, because I don't speak it. I read Greek, I speak French well and I can think in it. Sometimes when I am supposed to be thinking in Spanish or German, I think in French. I don't mix up Greek, because I never learned to speak and think in it. I don't know if that is even taught anywhere. In high school, we had a group of 4 of us who took both German and French, and we had a mixed language, which we spoke to each other in. By the end of high school, we spoke well in both languages, because we used them so much. The nice thing was that no one except our German teacher spoke both languages, so it was like a secret language. Sometimes I do try and think things in Greek to myself, but I really need a partner, and preferably someone with a good accent to speak it with.

Maybe a time machine, and going back to the Middle East at the time of Christ to practice Hebrew with Jews, and Greek with the Greeks and Romans? Now that is my ideal dream vacation!

 

[Edward]

It's possible. We see time travel all over the bible. John from Patmos, I'm not sure if Abraham time traveled or not, he wanted to see when the Messiah came but it is unclear if he visited that time, perhaps not, and didn't God turn back the clock for Hezekiah? I think he did, I need to read that. it says He will give us our hearts desire.

 

[MysticalJourney]

My heart's desire is to be cured of RA! But a dream vacation in New Testament Israel is definitely high on the list. Not sure how you are getting time travel out of John's vision.

"The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show to his servants the things that must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John, 2 who bore witness to the word of God and to the testimony of Jesus Christ, even to all that he saw. " Rev. 1:1-2

I always interpreted this to mean that God created the first Imax Cinema for John to sit back and watch the show!

Abraham went to Egypt, but not the past or the future. Hezekiah was granted to live 15 more years instead of dying. During that time, his wicked son Manasseh was born and he ruled with evil over Judah for 55 years. If Hezekiah had not lived longer this would not have happened. I am sure God knew about this, but maybe the history of Israel would have been different, if Hezekiah had died in his time, and Manasseh had not been born. Or not!