Looking for a good sourse for translation of the Bible

Newbie First Class Joined: Mar 16, 2006 Posts: 47

Just wondering if anyone knows one that both Xians and others will accept as authoritative. I come across a few that are great for some specific verses, but I'd like one that when I'm quoting verse and translating a word, that it is the most sound.

Thanks

Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 5:16 am

There is none. I use biblegateway.com which has any translation you want, including 3 different king james's. Young's literal translation is harder to argue with than most.

Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 6:23 pm

I like the New American Standard the best. I've heard praise from critical, and Christian scholars about it.

Newbie First Class Joined: Mar 16, 2006 Posts: 47

What about a good overview explainging the subtlties of the early languages and their possible meanings as different translations occured?

I've used the Bible gateway but haven't found that it explains why they use one translation over another.

For example, the Micah 5 chapter. Is it "clan" or "city" or "thousands"? THat's just one example.

Posted: Sat Jan 06, 2007 4:03 am

architecto wrote:

What about a good overview explainging the subtlties of the early languages and their possible meanings as different translations occured?

I've used the Bible gateway but haven't found that it explains why they use one translation over another.

For example, the Micah 5 chapter. Is it "clan" or "city" or "thousands"? THat's just one example.

I believe and answer for what you are looking for is called the NET Bible. Download it for free at http://www.bible.org/index.php?scid=3

Posted: Sat Jan 06, 2007 7:04 am

architecto wrote:

What about a good overview explainging the subtlties of the early languages and their possible meanings as different translations occured?

That sounds like a heck of lot of data!

architecto wrote:

I've used the Bible gateway but haven't found that it explains why they use one translation over another.

Well, given that they just publish different translations, its not really Bible Gateway's job to explain why the King James translators came up with one translation, while, perhaps, the NIV came up with another. In fact, I don't know that is even possible, without reading the minds of the King James translators, the NIV translators, etc.

What I think you can do, if you are up for the time involved, would be to familiarize yourself with some of the history behind the major translations. Such as, which manuscripts were available to the translator? For example, it is well known that the manuscripts available to the King James translators were poor for some books or chapters. In some places, all they had was a Latin translation to work from, which is already one language generation away from the original Hebrew and Aramaic.

Another thing you can do is familiarize yourself with what translations are preferred by different denominations, and what they offer as their reasons for preferring the translation they like.

Of course, if you are really gung-ho, you could learn Hebrew and Aramaic, and try to read the manuscripts yourself. That is the route Bart Ehrman took, though he's a far better man than I <g>

Newbie First Class Joined: Mar 16, 2006 Posts: 47

Case,
Thanks for the response. yes, it's a lot of data, but I think doable since there are only so many translations per "important" word.

Anyhow, I've been inspired by the podcast interview of Bishop John Shelby Spong on Truth-Driven Thinking.
PLus, add in Bart Erhman, and Bob Price and you have a pretty clear idea of the Bible.

Myth, myth, myth.... (with a little history thrown in for legitimacy!)

I have to admit, as a rabid atheist, I see the beauty of the Bible (I did my Masters of Archiecture on the "Archiecturalization of Myth" : which basically analyized Jung, Levi-Strauss, Campbell, etc. and found what the human animal found "deep" in terms of spacio-mythical ideals.

When I hear the afore mentioned scholars discuss the Bible, I find it as fascinating as discussing all other myth.

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 4:16 am

I recommend downloading the e-sword bible which is free and what is amazing about it is it comes with a Christian library with it so you can research what is said about the bible by Christians as well as reading the bible itself. It gives you many different english versions to chose from as well. "Google e-sword" or look for it at my website.

The version I recommend is the New King James version but in e-sword the MKJV (Modern King James) is almost the same thing. English is easier to understand than traditional KJV and accuracy is higher than when using paraphrases which tend not to be as accurate a translation.

However for easy reading to get the jist of a topic you may like to read a paraphrase but refer back to a KJV or NKJV or MKJV or Yonges Literal or Darby or American Standard for accuracy when you hit a doctrinal question point in your research.

The NIV is half way between the KJV and the Living Bible. The Living Bible is a very lose translation but a hoot to read and enjoyable to read. Try reading the book of proverbs you will enjoy their take on it.

IF you like check out my website I feature all the main bible search engines there.
http://bibledoor.no-ip.org

knock on the door to get in.

Also I am producing an audio bible that will load on a 2 MB mp3 player. Contact me and I will send you the disk.

bibledoor@rogers.com

God Bless,
Ray,

The Learned Joined: Nov 30, 2004 Posts: 122

architecto wrote:

Just wondering if anyone knows one that both Xians and others will accept as authoritative. I come across a few that are great for some specific verses, but I'd like one that when I'm quoting verse and translating a word, that it is the most sound.

Thanks

I've often heard scholars and theologians alike use and recommend the New American Standard Bible.

It depends on who you talk to. A fundy baptist will insist on the King James Version because they think Satyrs really existed (despite being from Greek legend proving the translation used a more recent text) and that candlesticks were around instead of lampstands and other historical timeline errors. IOW they believe what their KJV says over history and archeology.

But technically there is none, even old codexes and scrolls in Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic are copies.


Create an account	Home · Articles · Downloads · Video Library · Forums · Chat Room · aStore