WHAT is the BEST BIBLE TRANSLATION❓(fair opinion after 3 years of thought)

[@bushcrafter6416]

New King James is my go to...But can't beat the good ole King James version...

[@bluecollarbiblemanpreacher]

Wonderful translations!

[@chanceotter8121]

I have always found the NT textual footnotes in the NKJV to be very helpful in understanding the differences between the TR used for the translation and the NU manuscripts and the Majority Text manuscripts, and therefore one of its greatest strengths, and why I used NKJV alongside NASB ‘95 for years. Curious if you compared the NIV 2011 with the NIV 1984. It was the ‘84 translation that dominated the evangelical world for over 30 years, rivaling the KJV in sales and the success of the NIV Study Bible opened the gates to the plethora of study Bibles available today. It was Zondervan’s desire to update it in 2005 and 2011, and discontinue publishing the ‘84 edition, that opened the door for the ESV and HCSB/CSB to find a foothold in the marketplace as churches decided to replace the NIV, but did not want to go to NKJV or NASB. You can a find a thousand different NIV ‘84 in used book stores, but it is only published in new editions by Oxford Press’s Scofield Study NIV edition. I think the criticism of the “woodeness” of NASB ‘95 is leftover from valid criticism of NASB ‘77. The update in 1995 corrected that stiffness in my opinion, but when it came out the NIV ‘84 was at the height of its popularity, so any thing ‘literal’ was going to feel different.

[@rduse4125]

25:21 - Ease of reading: John 3:7 (KJV) Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. Same verse in the NIV, You should not be surprised at my saying, 'You must be born again. The words “thee” and “ye” are intentionally used to convey the specificity of the Greek. - Jesus is saying to Nicodemus, I’m telling you (Nicodemus) that y’all (everybody) must be born again. This distinction is lost in the NIV but preserved in the KJV.

[@bluecollarbiblemanpreacher]

Actually, if you look at the footnotes for that verse in the ESV, NLT, NET, and NIV, the translators say that the Greek word for you is plural and not singular. So I would actually say the NIV has it more correct.

[@rduse4125]

@@bluecollarbiblemanpreacher interesting… in the blue letter bible, there are two separate Greek words. I wonder if there is a difference in the foundational manuscripts between the received text and the wescott and short version???

[@rduse4125]

I’m commenting 10 minutes in, so I may have to go back and edit this, but, I’ll forget if I do t put this down now. The problem with ANYTHING other than a literal translation (in my opinion) is that there are three forces at play that might be lost in translation. 1) There is the literal translation of words from Greek and Hebrew that could be translated wrong. While I think this is the least likely problem, it is there. 2) In a “thought for thought” or dynamic translation, the translator may not have the proper historical context and miss the point of the original (ie., first century Judea vs. modern worldviews, politics, social norms etc.). To me, this is a bigger problem than #1, but not the biggest. 3) The Bible is also written on an allegorical level. Now, I’m not a person who thinks the Bible is 100% allegorical…I take it literally, BUT, I do think the actual accounts ALSO have a deeper, spiritual meaning. THIS is exactly where the biases of the translator could have the most destructive effects. - A person could be a linguist, and get the words perfectly. A person could also be a historian, and know the context of the civilization in which the original was written. BUT, that some person could lack the spiritual understanding to glean the deeper, hidden message (or type, or foreshadowing etc.) and inadvertently change the entire point contained within the passage without even realizing it. And THIS is, to me, the the most grave, and potentially the most innocent of the three problems with a dynamic equivalent or paraphrase versions. As Dr. Chuck Missler pointed out, the Bible has a sort of “code” within it, that can only be deciphered in the original language. The further you venture into the translation landscape (a translation of a translation of a translation etc.) the more the subtle glory of God can be irretrievably lost.

[@bluecollarbiblemanpreacher]

I agree with your comment. Looking at it logically there are negatives to each translation philosophy. But I do think the majority of them are from dynamic equivalence to the complete natural equivalence. Overall, I think word for word is safest. I think if we were to try to teach biblical Greek more and make it more affordable and accessible to people it would be amazing.

[@rduse4125]

I think your heart is in the right place, and I thank you for your videos. - When you talk about “good” or “great” translations, it seems like you’re basing that on readability by the general Christian population. However, as I stated in a previous comment, the casual reader can miss easily miss some of the very deep literary meaning that only shows up after years of reading and studying and walking in the spirit. I’ve gotten to the point where I’m sure that I’m missing things in the text simply because I can’t read Hebrew and Greek.

[@bluecollarbiblemanpreacher]

I appreciate that. Yeah that’s a fair perspective, I don’t really like the term, but you could say that I am familiar with and prefer biblish. The reason, though that I prefer that from my point of view is not, just because that’s what I am familiar with, It’s because I prefer the wording and structure of the original, therefore I prefer Word for Word. I’m not saying every Bible translation in other languages even has to be super high-level. But I agree with Leland Ryken and that there are places in the original languages, where to translate it accurately, you have to maintain that high form of speech. Now, to be fair, my next point could just be because of my cultural context. But I do think there is something to be said for pushing people to excel instead of everything being made easy. God is not a microwave with express buttons. And I feel like if we start to mix modern context, philosophy of translation that caters to peoples modern impatience, and the need to be pampered because of modern convenience. I feel like overtime, although with the best of intentions, we begin to twist and warp the view of God in most peoples minds. And also, I don’t think it’s a coincidence that Theo Ogens, who have a God centered theology. Use more word for word. And theologians who have a man centered theology tend to go more to the far literal side. I know that is a blanket statement and that’s not accurate with everyone. But if you look up different types of theologians, from conservative to liberal, and you look at the Bible translation, they use. That is something you will recognize.

[@KMM61873]

I just became a believer a year ago. I’ve read 7 versions so far and have 2 to go. My favourites were the NKJV and the NASB. And my least favourites were the ESV and the NIV. I also read the KJV and I only don’t like it because it’s in Shakespeare language so it’s hard to understand.

[@bluecollarbiblemanpreacher]

Praise the Lord. Both of those translations are really great. There are some things about the NKJV that puts it in its own category for me. I really like it. Have you tried the Berean standard Bible?

[@gmac6503]

You have a heckuva lot more studying to do on this topic. This was really bad. You need to study this topic from critical scholars and not apologists. There are dozens of books on this topic but with your presuppositions that it is from the HS you are just an apologist and will reach your conclusions because that is what you want to do. This was not fair nor scholarly

[@bluecollarbiblemanpreacher]

Appreciate the feedback

[@ahammer7000]

The KJV is a legal document in American law, it is our Heavenly Father’s will for his children, written in the end times universal language of the internet. Christians better heed the warnings against adding or subtracting or else face the legal ramifications of revelation 21:19.

[@bluecollarbiblemanpreacher]

The kjv translation is not THE word of God. But it is a wonderful, faithful translation from the words of God in the original languages.

[@ahammer7000]

@@bluecollarbiblemanpreacher you are calling God a liar and you are a traitor to America who thinks he is smarter than god, you will stand in judgement day as an unbeliever.

[@ahammer7000]

@@bluecollarbiblemanpreacher your opinion is worthless and doesn’t change the fact that American law comes from the KJV and it is the legal document that secures our national right. Only and total idiot would say it is not God’s word.