|
|
Post by melinky on Dec 22, 2004 7:11:12 GMT -5
Keeping with the thought that "all scripture is God-breathed," what translation(s) of the Bible do you enjoy most or least. Don't forget to explain what it is you do or don't like.
May God's blessings rain down upon you,
Melinda
|
|
|
|
Post by Soulfyre on Dec 22, 2004 10:06:26 GMT -5
An excellent question, Melinda! I might even put it another way: Which translation do you feel most accurately conveys the meaning of the original texts (Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek) of the Bible? Be sure to explain your answer. And for bonus points: do you prefer an English translation of the Greek Received (or Majority) Text or the Nestle-Aland Critical Text for your New Testament study? (If you are not aware of the difference, don't worry--this is a question only a Greek Geek could love! And I'm not speaking of a "Frat Rat"...no insult intended to any visiting Fraternity Row Christians). God bless you, Matthew (soulfyre)  |
|
|
|
Post by melinky on Dec 22, 2004 14:20:13 GMT -5
An excellent question, Melinda! I might even put it another way: Which translation do you feel most accurately conveys the meaning of the original texts (Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek) of the Bible? Be sure to explain your answer. And for bonus points: do you prefer an English translation of the Greek Received (or Majority) Text or the Nestle-Aland Critical Text for your New Testament study? (If you are not aware of the difference, don't worry--this is a question only a Greek Geek could love! And I'm not speaking of a "Frat Rat"...no insult intended to any visiting Fraternity Row Christians). God bless you, Matthew (soulfyre) Not being a Greek Geek, I have to say that I don't know what you're talking about! LOL Seriously though, I've heard, but I don't know for a fact, that the NIV was translated from the original texts. As far as reading the bible goes, my favorite translation is NIV because I can read it and concentrate on the message. I don't really care for the KJV because all of the "thee's" and "thou's" tend to distract me from the message, although I do kind of like the Pslams in KJV; I think they're a bit more lyrical. This year in my Bible study class I've been using the TEV/Good News version which is also very understandable, though I don't have any idea what it was translated from. What I've read of the Message translation is good, though I haven't spent much time with it. Melinda |
|
|
|
Post by rgrove on Dec 22, 2004 18:26:58 GMT -5
I personally prefer the English Standard Version (ESV). I prefer formal translations over dynamic equivelancy translations such as the NIV, but they can get wooden in their English. I point to the NASB on this point. I refer to it a lot, but it's a terrible Bible (in my opinion) for memorization. The English just doesn't flow properly. I believe the ESV has done a superior job in trying to maintain a formal translation method, but also maintain quality English. Read their website for more info: www.gnpcb.org/page/esv.philosophyI prefer the Nestle and Aland over the Majority text, but I can live with either. I want my Bible translation to be as true to the original Greek as possible and with as little theological input from the translators as humanly possible. I have been somewhat unhappy with all English translations in this regard and that is what has driven me to study Koine Greek a little on my own. I frequenlty use my Russian Bible to get a more accurate reflection of the original Greek until my Koine Greek is good enough to read effectively in the original language. Right now I'm just not good enough in the original, but Lord willing it will continue to improve as time goes on. I have compared many passages from the Russian to the Greek, however, and I feel confident that since the grammar is very similar in the languages (meaning the sentence structure is maintained in Russian), that I can depend on that in the meantime. The differences I find between my Greek interlinear and the Russian are because the Russian is from the Received Text and my interlinear is from Nestle and Aland. So much translation is affected, whether consciously or not, by the theological views of the translator! After having studied Russian, Serbo-Croatian, and German, it's an unavoidable reality in my opinion. In Christ, Ron |
|
|
|
Post by melinky on Dec 22, 2004 19:47:36 GMT -5
I personally prefer the English Standard Version (ESV). I prefer formal translations over dynamic equivelancy translations such as the NIV, but they can get wooden in their English. I point to the NASB on this point. I refer to it a lot, but it's a terrible Bible (in my opinion) for memorization. The English just doesn't flow properly. I believe the ESV has done a superior job in trying to maintain a formal translation method, but also maintain quality English. Read their website for more info: www.gnpcb.org/page/esv.philosophyI prefer the Nestle and Aland over the Majority text, but I can live with either. I want my Bible translation to be as true to the original Greek as possible and with as little theological input from the translators as humanly possible. I have been somewhat unhappy with all English translations in this regard and that is what has driven me to study Koine Greek a little on my own. I frequenlty use my Russian Bible to get a more accurate reflection of the original Greek until my Koine Greek is good enough to read effectively in the original language. Right now I'm just not good enough in the original, but Lord willing it will continue to improve as time goes on. I have compared many passages from the Russian to the Greek, however, and I feel confident that since the grammar is very similar in the languages (meaning the sentence structure is maintained in Russian), that I can depend on that in the meantime. The differences I find between my Greek interlinear and the Russian are because the Russian is from the Received Text and my interlinear is from Nestle and Aland. So much translation is affected, whether consciously or not, by the theological views of the translator! After having studied Russian, Serbo-Croatian, and German, it's an unavoidable reality in my opinion. In Christ, Ron Hi Ron, ESV is a new one to me, I'll check your link later. I had never really thought about the translator's theological views having an effect on the translation, although it makes sense. So far I haven't run into any real differences in how I understand scripture in the small amount of cross-referencing that I've done, but I'm still very new to all of this. Yours in Christ, Melinda |
|
|
|
Post by rgrove on Dec 23, 2004 22:00:29 GMT -5
Hi Ron, ESV is a new one to me, I'll check your link later. You can check it's translation every once in a while at www.biblegateway.com/ . I love that website! Don't get me wrong and get afraid that there's an agenda behind every translated sentence or anything. But it does make a difference at times in very subtle ways. Often you won't notice anything unless you're really digging deep on a difficult passage, looking at various translations, reading various commentaries, etc. Usually someone will point it out in that process. Some people, like King James Version Only (KJVO) proponents see the devil behind every other translation. Odd, and definitely not what I'm saying.  In Christ, Ron Yours in Christ, Melinda[/quote] |
|
|
|
Post by melinky on Dec 24, 2004 11:25:55 GMT -5
You can check it's translation every once in a while at www.biblegateway.com/ . I love that website! Don't get me wrong and get afraid that there's an agenda behind every translated sentence or anything. But it does make a difference at times in very subtle ways. Often you won't notice anything unless you're really digging deep on a difficult passage, looking at various translations, reading various commentaries, etc. Usually someone will point it out in that process. Some people, like King James Version Only (KJVO) proponents see the devil behind every other translation. Odd, and definitely not what I'm saying. In Christ, Ron Ron, I've run into a few KJVO people in my life, my dad and my brother and his wife are that way. They belong to the Church of Christ and I think their standard belief is that there is only ONE Bible and that's the KJV, but I'm not positive about that. I've also read some pretty militant KJVO websites in the past. I understand being more comfortable with one version over another, but I don't understand why a Bible should have to say "thee" "thou" "makest" "doth" etc. My opinion of why people prefer KJV over the more modern translations is that they feel the language sounds more holy, but again, that's just my opinion. Blessings, Melinda |
|
|
|
Post by fairbank on Dec 24, 2004 21:42:03 GMT -5
Melinky,
I love the iambic pentameter of the KJV, and it provides the scriptures with a very rhythmic, sing-song sound. When I preach, I will use whatever version the congregation prefers. The NASB is extremely accurrate (particularly in the New Testament), but as another member observed, it is very wooden and awkward to read due in part to the excessive use of participles. For personal reading, I prefer the NIV. I find it very smooth and easy to memorize. You may want to try the New KJV, I also really enjoy reading that, and it is without the archaisms of the KJV. Let us know which version you finally land on. Either way you win because you are spending time in the Word! God bless you my sister.
|
|
mpethe
Supporting Member
Posts: 62
|
Post by mpethe on Jan 6, 2005 16:36:29 GMT -5
This summer I made the switch from NIV to ESV and am quite satisfied so far. I doubt I'll go back to NIV.
I think it's a good idea to not just rely on one translation. Even if you don't know Greek or Hebrew, you should consult a few different english translations when doing more in-depth study.
I also have the NLT. It's more of a thought-for-thought kind of translation - so the reading is very easy. It was translated by a team of people who are fairly respected in their field. However, it does have some problems...
ie - it converts certain dimensions and measurements to feet, inches etc. as opposed to using the ancient measurements. This provides a problem in books like Revelation, where the measurements carry theological significance. These unfortunatley get lost in the translation. (but they do footnote the changes they've made).
|
|
|
|
Post by Mysterion on Apr 3, 2005 21:29:59 GMT -5
I read the ESV, but prefer the RSV for serious work in the texts. I'm a Nestle-Aland man, Textus Receptus is partly back-translated from the Latin text if I am not mistaken...
|
|
