Most Accurate Bible Translation I Have Seen

524 Views | 19 Replies | Last: 20 yr ago by aggiebryan07
Homsar
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I really like the New English Translation (NET) Bible. It has been around for awhile, bit you can now access the entire translation on www.bible.org.

As far as I have seen, it is the most accurate outside of the Greek. The footnotes are spectacular, giving alternate traslations and other readings of passages. Check it out.
Aggie4Life02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The NET is a Dynamic Equivalence, much like the NIV. When you say it is, "The most accurate outside of the Greek," the implication is that the NET is a Formal Equivalence, or a word-for-word translation. It most certainly is not. The KJV, NKJV, and NASB are more word-for-word than the NET is.

That's not to take anything away from the NET. I haven't read it much, but it seems to be a good translation based on what I have read about it.
Notafraid
How long do you want to ignore this user?
There are some problems with both Dynamic Equivalence and Formal Equivalence. I prefer to go with the Formal Equivalence NASV most of the time, but on verses like 1 John 3:9 the tense seems to always be missing, and therefore misleading, yet the Dynamic Equivalence versions like the NIV seem to get it right. The new ESV is a refreshing balance between the two, which is why it is touted by so many of the heavy weight theologians out there.
Homsar
How long do you want to ignore this user?
In a perfect world, every Christian would read Greek.
blueagman
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I knew Notafraid would tell you how you were wrong.
Homsar
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Well we all have our differences of opinion, but a word for word traslation is not necessarily the best as there are nuances that English most certainly cannot express.

Also, word for word translations must take many liberties when translating.

Both ways have their virtues, let us leave it at that for the sake of harmony.

My point is that the NET's traslational footnotes are great and give other perspectives on how to read verses.

[This message has been edited by Homsar (edited 1/9/2006 1:45p).]

[This message has been edited by Homsar (edited 1/9/2006 1:47p).]
94chem
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Homsar, there are actually people who believe that, unfortunately. I think it's nice that I DON'T have to read Greek because there are others who can and are able to help when necessary. One thing I didn't really realize until a few years ago was that of all the people who can "read Greek", very few of them actually know Greek as a spoken or written language. They only know the words that were actually used in the NT. That's fine, but it doesn't make them Greek scholars; rather they are BIBLE scholars.
Notafraid
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Blue,

quote:

I knew Notafraid would tell you how you were wrong.



I never told anyone they were wrong... I think this is another example of you seeing what you want to be true...

Notafraid
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Homsar,

quote:

Also, word for word translations must take many liberties when translating.


I agree! That, I think, is the attraction of the ESV. I still can not stop using the NASV though, becuase I just like it so much.
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yeah, they are no bilingual speakers of Ancient Greek and Modern English. You just get the same interpretation of the words from a language instructor or text that you would have gotten from a translation.
Homsar
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ramblin,

Not necessarily,

There are lots of things that I pick up in Greek that I never did in English.
Guadaloop474
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I vote for the RSV...
94chem
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ESV = RSV (well, more like a Reformed, conservative, evangelical, Calvinist RSV...)
Notafraid
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quote:

ESV = RSV (well, more like a Reformed, conservative, evangelical, Calvinist RSV...)


I thought the RSV was like a 100+ year old Formal Equivalence interpretation. The RCs that I know have used NASV over it. I have read however that the new ESV used it as a english basis. Hard to beleive really. They seem nothing alike to me.



[This message has been edited by Notafraid (edited 1/9/2006 7:19p).]
Lsal
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The best translation is the one that reaches YOU, and brings you closer to our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.
Homsar
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Isal

I couldn't agree more

Heck if it is going to get you in the Word, go get the Cottonpatch Bible.

[This message has been edited by Homsar (edited 1/9/2006 8:31p).]
texag_89
How long do you want to ignore this user?
With the Peace and Love of Christ, I could not disagree more with Isal...It is this kind of "what ever makes you feel good" mentality that have allowed us to lose our moral direction and compass....And, the same can be said for the different Bibles and Scripture out their with loose translations and "translator editing".

As with all The Church, look back in History and look for the Apostolic ties to Scripture and the Bible. For my money - and more importantly for my Soul - I would want a Bible that was taken straight from the scribes' native text and writings, and one that dates back to a Church Father - St. Jerome. And, one that was taken from the Church Jesus Christ instituted on earth...Give me the Old English beauty of the KJV and the Histology of The Church...Give me the Douay Rheims Bible:

______________________________________________

The Holy Bible
Douay-Rheims Version

With Challoner Revisions 1749-52
1899 Edition of the John Murphy Company

Pope Damasus assembled the first list of books of the Bible at the Roman Council in 382 A.D. He commissioned St. Jerome to translate the original Greek and Hebrew texts into Latin, which became known as the Latin Vulgate Bible and was declared by the Church to be the only authentic and official version, in 1546.

The DR New Testament was first published by the English College at Rheims in 1582 A.D. The DR Old Testament was first published by the English College at Douay in 1609 A.D. The first King James Version was not published until 1611. This online DRV contains all 73 books, including the seven Deutero-Canonical books (erroneously called Apocrypha by Protestants). These seven books were included in the 1611 KJV, but not in later KJV Bibles.

The whole Douay-Rheims Bible was revised and diligently compared with the Latin Vulgate by Bishop Richard Challoner in 1749-1752 A.D. The notes included in the text were written by Dr. Challoner.

The DR Bible was photographically reproduced from the 1899 edition of the John Murphy Company, Baltimore, Maryland, by Tan Books in 1971. Eventually, this edition was optically scanned to produce a large text file which this publisher used for creating this website, with the aid of text-processing software.

One important goal of this project was to preserve the original text "as is", without making any changes in the wording, because the original text had the Imprimatur of James Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore, dated Sept 1st 1899.

The text file was checked quite thoroughly by software written by the publisher for punctuation errors and verses out of order. The index was humanly checked for misspelled words and the corrections were made to the text. However, some spelling errors may still be present in the text. Many verses were out of order in the original file. These have been corrected.

Every effort was made to ensure that this online version is an exact match to the original printed version. No words were added or ommitted from the text, except for correcting errors caused by the scanning process. No words were rearranged. No verse numbers were changed, except in the case of Psalm 9.

Psalm 9 originally contained 21 verses and there were 2 versions of Psalm 10, numbering 1-18 and 1-8. This obviously caused a conflict, so it was decided to make the first Psalm 10 as the last part of Psalm 9 and renumber the verses 22-39. This retains the same numbering as all the Douay Rheims. Note, in the Protestant Bibles the numbering of Psalms 10 through 146 differs by one.
____________________________________________

In His Word....


texag_89
Guadaloop474
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The Douay Rheims version is great, but all of the thees and thous and shouldests are kind of distracting.
Homsar
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quote:
...It is this kind of "what ever makes you feel good" mentality that have allowed us to lose our moral direction and compass

I really don't think he meant it how you took it.

Of course I don't believe in a "whatever makes you feel good" mentality. But there are MANY translations of scripture and pretty much all that I have read have the same Theological truths.

There are exceptions, however, but I also believe that you should not limit yourself to one translation.
Homsar
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The problem with older translations is that you are throwing out years of great scholarship and acquired knowledge of the Greek and Hebrew languages, not to mention the discovery of more and more manuscripts yearly.
aggiebryan07
How long do you want to ignore this user?
All of the churches I've been to lately have used the ESV/NASB... but I can't bring myself to leave the NIV.
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.