Favorite Bible Translation

[Mark]

Hi I'm Mark and this is my second post. My first one being on the introduction page. I thought I would post something not very  controversial  and fun. So what is everyones favorite bible translation and why? Mine is the Emphatic Diaglott I have always been able to read that and get a better understanding of scriptures that I read in other translations that seem confusing. It's not the most easy to read along but it works for me. Thats not the only bible I read just my favorite.

[WhiteWings]

Here that's a quite controversial question :)
I have no real favorite. I do have a set of Bibles I use most often.

KJV because of it's Strong numbers. The translation itself is sub standard in my view.
Others I use are CLV, EBR, ECB, ERRB, JPS, YLT and TCB.

Not really a translation but I very frequently use Thayer and BDB lexicons.
If I want something very literal I use ISA2. http://www.scripture4all.org/

[jabcat]

Hi Mark.  I like to look up scrips on Biblos.  Has many translations of each scripture http://bible.cc/mark/3-1.htm

I'll try to do this is some type of order;

for accuracy - Young's, Modern Young's, The Christian Bible, Concordant, Greek Interlinear, Aramaic

for readability - NASB, English Standard, New Living

for beauty - KJV

[lomarah]

Hi Mark!
I am loving the ESV right now. I like it's readability and the informative footnotes that many other Bibles don't have. (Or at least none that I had read previously.) I read the electronic version but I'm sure the hard copy has the footnotes as well. Never heard of the Emphatic Diaglott. Sounds fancy.

[Mark]

I don't think I have ever read an ESV before I'll have to give it a try. I have esword a free bible software program that lets you download different translations so I'll check it out.  And the Emphatic Diaglott isn't fancy lol. It's a Greek Interlinear translation and it has the Greek on on the left and the english on the right. Above the Greek is an exact word for word translation. It makes it choppy to read sometimes but for me its a valuable tool. It's Emphatic  because on the english side it emphasizes certain words by putting them into all caps and bold. It's pretty cool.


I hope I don't sound like a Diaglott salesman  anyway I have several Bibles around that I like.. I do have a Youngs Literal and a NIV that's easy to read..I also have a couple of New World Translations, the ones the JW's use that I really like. Probably because that is the one I grew up on.
I guess there all good and they all have there flaws..Just like the people who made them 

PS there are a lot of smileys to choose from!

[lomarah]

That's cool, so how come they emphasize certain words? Were those words somehow emphasized in the Greek?

[truthquest]

I like to compare different translations when doing a study. Recently I've been using the Aramaic bible frequently because of its accuracy and I find it easy to read.

[Mark]

That's cool, so how come they emphasize certain words? Were those words somehow emphasized in the Greek?

Right that's exactly why they do it. It was written that way in the Greek and the emphasis on those words gives a better understanding of how it was written and how that would sound if it was spoken.
It is pretty cool

[jabcat]

Mark, I know very little about the translation, but I've briefly read that the Emphatic Diaglot was the translation Jehovah's Witnesses used for 70+ years prior to their current NWT.  Also, that it has some doctrinal bias (Christadelphian) which translates away from the deity of Christ [as God's Son, divine].   I'll read up on it some more, but do you have some thoughts on those assertions?  Thanks.

[Mark]

Yes I do..The witnesses used this book (along with others they say..they won't say which ones exactly) to get there NWT. One of the reasons this book is unique is what the witnesses did with it. They tried repeatedly to buy the rights to the book but couldn't because there was a man who would not sell it. After that man died his heirs did sell the book to the witnesses, actually they were called the Watchtower Bible Association or something at the time, and they printed it on there own presses and used it. At some point after the founder Charles Taze Russel died the Bible Tract society went into a different direction. There were some people who didn't like that direction and they splintered off into another group. I think they were called Bible Students I can't remember exactly.

Anyway at some point after the JWs were an official organization they stopped printing the Diaglott. They wouldn't let anyone print it. And after they had there own translation, the NWT, they came out with there own "Diaglott" called the Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures ( fancy huh?) It was similar to the Diaglott but different. On the Greek side of the book was the exact Greek text as the Diaglott. The only difference was the English side where they CHANGED EVERY WORD lol. The new interlinear is pretty much a NWT with Greek under it. I have one from the 60s my mom used when she was a witness. In fact after they stopped printing it Brothers and Sisters were encouraged to  "turn in" there old copies of the Diaglott where they were destroyed. And if you can find a Witness Diaglott pre 1940, I think before they changed it. It is worth money. I have seen them on Ebay for 3-5 thousand dollars.

Sorry I was raised a witness and their history is interesting to me to say the least. But back to the point it was pretty recently, like last 20 years maybe, that the Diaglott in it's original form has been easily available to get. People have started printing it and thats pretty cool. I don't believe it has any sort of religious bias ( the witnesses certainly do) that I see. It's basically just a translation from Greek to English. I think the JW's hid it because they just couldn't let that "aion" word out. Too many questions about why the NWT translates it forever here and not there. How it is this "present wicked system of things" ( yeah they got all those words from that) and Forever cutting off when it suits them. The coolest part is the emphasizing. The book emphasizes certain words in verses to give a better understanding of how that sentence was used in the original Greek. It's not the be all end all in bible translations (nothing is) but I have found it a useful tool in getting a better understanding of the scriptures. That,along with it's interesting history, is why it is my favorite translation. One bad thing about it is that it is New Testament only :(

This turned into a really long post for me  I have not made a post this long in quite some time. Thanks for bearing with me everyone!

[jabcat]

That's interesting info, Mark, thanks.  The one (rather scathing) review I saw was from a pretty conservative ET'er.  (I'm pretty conservative, but a conservative heretic :).  Anyway, part of his gripe was also about aion, which in this case, was probably just rubbing him wrong.  He was making the correlation between JWs translating aion as "cutting off" [annihilationism], and the Emphatic Diaglott as not saying "forever/eternal", etc., rather age or whatever it says.  Since the JWs had used the Diaglott, he was tying it all together.  But it sounds like the Emp.Diag. is more accurate than the JWs interpretion of it, i.e., "cutting off" - like it's more in tune with Young's for example (which is good).

So, that's interesting info about the JWs and Diaglott, and I bet most don't know - perhaps even fellows like this guy who was ripping it.  So to be clear - they did use the original for awhile, then re-translated their own version of it and called it their Interlinear?  Is there anything different about the Diaglott today and the one they used?  And if not, they just sort did their own "re-writing/re-interpreting" of some things to fit their own doctrine (which the NWT now "fixes" for them)?  It's intersting, but a little confusing.

Anyway, bottom line, you see the Diaglott as solid translation, different but not necessarily less accurate than Young's for instance?

Thanks, James.

[WhiteWings]

"cutting off" [annihilationism],

Hummm, Jesus was cut off in the midst of the week.
I know of no denomination that understands it as permanently annihilated.

Anyway, bottom line, you see the Diaglott as solid translation, different but not necessarily less accurate than Young's for instance?

The way I read Mark's words the Diaglott isn't just about translation.

The book emphasizes certain words in verses to give a better understanding of how that sentence was used in the original Greek.

You could use that info to better understand your KJV, TCB or YLT.....

[Mark]

Jabcat ..Yes they used it as it was for awhile then changed it. But really back then, like 20s-early 40s
they used alot of different bibles in there studies. Back then they didn't have there own translation and weren't so organized with dogma like they are today. But after they became more like the JW's today all that changed. Material published by the "Society" became the only thing people read. In fact that's the only recognized "truth" they have now. So in that atmosphere they changed the Diaglott into a society approved interlinear. You would be hard pressed to find a witness who even knows this story much less ever consider reading an original Diaglott (or any other bible for that matter)

The Diaglott is now available as an exact reproduction of the one that was written in the 1860s. And it is alot like Youngs Literal really. One difference is where Youngs translates aion-aionian as age or age during the Diaglott just leaves it as aion-aionian. I don't see the Diaglott as more accurate than Youngs I think they both do the same thing as far as literal translation. The one thing I like better about the Diaglott is the emphasizing of words used in sentences to give a better understanding of how that sentence would sound. I have a Youngs Literal and I use it all the time. Young's has the Old and New testament which the Diaglott is NT only. 

[jabcat]

That sounds good.  My guess then would be, at least some of the critical analysis of the Daiglott could be based on inaccurate information and bias against the JWs, by tying their doctrine too closely (and inaccurately) to the Diaglott itself.     Reasonable?

Thanks for all the good info.   

[reFORMer]

(WhiteWings,, somebody, don't you have something explaining Concordant Literal Translation?  I'm so tired and it's so late I just have to postpone most of my answer.)

The JW's originally had an advance order for 5,000 copies of the Concordant Literal when it came our; but, they withdrew the order over things like the consistent use of eon for eon, eons for eons, etc.  Access to many features of the Greek through little symbols in the text, no confused or lax renderings, no words doing double duty for other words.  Additionally, so consistent and ultra literal, their interlinear when used alongside the readers edition, there simply is no better access to the original.  Using these I think the most information from the Greek is transferred to the English reader, way ahead other translations in spite of a few quirky word choices.  You can, for instance, change "laud" to "praise" every time you see it because it is consistently so translated.  You know what always underlies "laud" in the original.

I also like Wuest's Expanded Translation (N.T.)  I've used the Amplified that's based on it as well and must say Wuest is best.  He uses as many words as he deems necessary to carry the meaning of the original.

[WhiteWings]

(WhiteWings,, somebody, don't you have something explaining Concordant Literal Translation?

Not really. Just a few examples on their own site.
http://concordant.org/version/index.html

[Mark]

Thanks everyone for posting I picked up on some interesting things..

Truthquest brought up an Aramaic Bible ..hadn't really though of that before..Are there many translations of Aramaic Bibles? If so which one do you use?

 

[jabcat]

I mentioned it in my list, and if he's talking about the same thing, it's on the biblios link.  It's a pretty good translation by one particular fellow..forgot his name, but I've read about it.  I like it.

[jabcat]

I'll bump this and you'll have the direct link - to "Mark" even :)

Hi Mark.  I like to look up scrips on Biblos.  Has many translations of each scripture

http://bible.cc/mark/3-1.htm

I'll try to do this is some type of order;

for accuracy - Young's, Modern Young's, The Christian Bible, Concordant, Greek Interlinear, Aramaic

for readability - NASB, English Standard, New Living

for beauty - KJV

[Mark]

Thanks! 

[jabcat]

Thanks! 

 

[reFORMer]

for accuracy - Young's, Modern Young's, The Christian Bible, Concordant, Greek Interlinear, Aramaic

Where do you find Modern Young's as mentioned above?

[jabcat]

I think I just first read about it online somehow - ran across it.

They're sold on Amazon and often on ebay.  I've ended up giving my copies away so keep ordering them, and I think he last one I bought was on ebay.

It's just NT, no OT.  It's basically Young's, trying to not change any of his translation, just trying to word it a little less like the King's English.

[WhiteWings]

http://www.amazon.com/Modern-Youngs-Literal-Translation-Testament/dp/0965307875/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1342160069&sr=1-3&keywords=modern+young+translation

Psalm and Proverbs are also in Modern Young????

Online version

Personally I think if you are going for modern because of, suprise, more modern laguage TCB may be better to spend your cash on (or PM me).
TCB reads like everyday very modern English. Print quality is perfect. I once intended to buy the Modern Young but I decided not to do so because some editions have real bad/tiny print.
I already fell in that trap once before with the Bullinger Bible. Very vague letters. I binned it because of that.

[jabcat]

http://www.amazon.com/Modern-Youngs-Literal-Translation-Testament/dp/0965307875/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1342160069&sr=1-3&keywords=modern+young+translation

Psalm and Proverbs are also in Modern Young????

Online version

Personally I think if you are going for modern because of, suprise, more modern laguage TCB may be better to spend your cash on (or PM me).
TCB reads like everyday very modern English. Print quality is perfect. I once intended to buy the Modern Young but I decided not to do so because some editions have real bad/tiny print.
I already fell in that trap once before with the Bullinger Bible. Very vague letters. I binned it because of that.

Yes, you're right...Psalms and Proverbs included..hmm, I've always found the print and quality of the Modern Young's to be excellent.     Have probably owned 4 or 5 of them.

But yes, The Christian Bible is a very interesting translation.