Bible Translations...

Place for books, articles, and websites with content that connect or detail Anabaptist theology
lesterb
Posts: 1160
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 11:41 pm
Location: Alberta
Affiliation: Western Fellowship
Contact:

Bible Translations...

Post by lesterb »

What is your favorite translation of the Bible? Since I'm not a Greek or Hebrew scholar, I like to have various translations on my computer. I use E-Sword on my computer. Having all my translations on the same program makes it easy to do comparisons.

These are the versions I have right now.
Image

I just added the NET version, and it came with the study pack. This gives textual notes which are very useful and fairly complete. For instance in Ecc 5 they include 55 textual notes.

Here, for instance is a note on the word "field" in Ecc 5:9
N27 tn The syntax and exegesis of the line is difficult. There are three basic interpretive options: (1) the king takes care of the security of the cultivated land: "in any case, the advantage of a country is that there is a king for the cultivated land"; (2) the king is in favor of a prosperous agricultural policy: "in any case, the advantage of a country is that there is a king who is obeyed for the sake of the agriculture"; and (3) the king exploits the poor farmers: "the produce of the land is [seized] by all, even the king is served by the fields." Perhaps the best option in the light of the context is to take the referent of כֹּל (kol, "all") to the government officials of Ecc_5:8 rather than to the people as a whole. The verse depicts the exploitation of the poor farmers by corrupt government officials. This is reflected in two English versions: "the increase from the land is taken by all; the king himself profits from the fields" (NIV); "the profit of the land is among all of them; a cultivated field has a king" (RSV margin). On the other hand, the Septuagint (LXX) treated the syntax so the king is viewed in a neutral sense: και περισσεια γης ἐπι παντι ἐστι, βασιλευς του αργου εἰργασμενου ("The abundance of the earth is for everyone; the king is dependent on the tilled field"). Most English versions deal with the syntax so that the king is viewed in a neutral or positive sense: "the profit of the earth is for all; the king himself is served by the field" (KJV); "a king who cultivates the field is an advantage to the land" (NASB); "this is an advantage for a land: a king for a plowed field" (NRSV); "the greatest advantage in all the land is his: he controls a field that is cultivated" (NJPS); "a country prospers with a king who has control" (Moffatt); "a king devoted to the field is an advantage to the land" (MLB); "a king is an advantage to a land with cultivated fields" (RSV); "the best thing for a country is a king whose own lands are well tilled" (NEB); and "an advantage for a country in every respect is a king for the arable land" (NAB). See D. BarthÈlemy, ed., Preliminary and Interim Report on the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project, 3:576-77.
0 x
Adam
Posts: 168
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2017 10:35 pm
Location: Papua New Guinea
Affiliation: Kingdom Christian

Re: Bible Translations...

Post by Adam »

The ESV is the Bible I read daily. I like the NLT for a more dynamic translation.
0 x
lesterb
Posts: 1160
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 11:41 pm
Location: Alberta
Affiliation: Western Fellowship
Contact:

Re: Bible Translations...

Post by lesterb »

NOTE: Please don't get into the KJV only arguments here. Instead, tell us what you like about the version(s) you use. It might help other people make good decisions for their study resources.

For instance, a statement by Josh caught my attention and I checked out NET on Bible Gateway. That's a good way to check out a version for free. I could have just used it there, but it fits into my study sequence better to add to my regular Bible program. Anyway, the version with the notes isn't available on Bible Gateway, unless I just didn't notice it.

Over half of the Bibles I have installed are paid versions. The other advantage to E-sword is that the data is on my computer, so I'm not limited to needing internet to study.
0 x
lesterb
Posts: 1160
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 11:41 pm
Location: Alberta
Affiliation: Western Fellowship
Contact:

Re: Bible Translations...

Post by lesterb »

Adam wrote:The ESV is the Bible I read daily. I like the NLT for a more dynamic translation.
I use both of them. For my regular reading, I use the ESV as well.
0 x
MaxPC
Posts: 9044
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 9:09 pm
Location: Former full time RVers
Affiliation: PlainRomanCatholic
Contact:

Re: Bible Translations...

Post by MaxPC »

For most purposes we have the RSV-CE. For in-depth scholarly purposes I'll trot out my Navarre and Douay-Rheims. All are Catholic; all have the deuterocanonical books. But you probably guessed that already :lol:
0 x
Max (Plain Catholic)
Mt 24:35
Proverbs 18:2 A fool does not delight in understanding but only in revealing his own mind.
1 Corinthians 3:19 For the wisdom of this world is folly with God
User avatar
Bootstrap
Posts: 14442
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:59 am
Affiliation: Mennonite

Re: Bible Translations...

Post by Bootstrap »

MaxPC wrote:For most purposes we have the RSV-CE. For in-depth scholarly purposes I'll trot out my Navarre and Douay-Rheims. All are Catholic; all have the deuterocanonical books. But you probably guessed that already :lol:
Let me translate this into Protestant-Speak ;->

RSV-CE is the RSV translation, "Catholic Edition". The Navarre Bible is a Catholic study Bible that uses the RSV-CE translation.

Douay-Rheims is the King James Version of the Catholic Church, an older translation from the Latin Vulgate (not from the Greek text). It's a very literal translation of the Latin Vulgate, but the Latin Vulgate isn't a terribly literal translation of the Greek text, and was translated before we had a lot of the earliest manuscripts available to us today.
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
User avatar
Bootstrap
Posts: 14442
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:59 am
Affiliation: Mennonite

Re: Bible Translations...

Post by Bootstrap »

lesterb wrote:
Adam wrote:The ESV is the Bible I read daily. I like the NLT for a more dynamic translation.
I use both of them. For my regular reading, I use the ESV as well.
I keep going back to ESV, HCSB, and NLT when I need a translation (or LEB for an extremely literal translation). ESV is very similar to the RSV with a little nicer English. NLT is a nice dynamic translation that is still a real translation. HCSB is almost as readable as the NLT and almost as literal as ESV, the balance is nice. My daily reading is usually in Greek (from the Nestle 1904, because of something I'm working on ...)
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
User avatar
Bootstrap
Posts: 14442
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:59 am
Affiliation: Mennonite

Re: Bible Translations...

Post by Bootstrap »

lesterb wrote:For instance, a statement by Josh caught my attention and I checked out NET on Bible Gateway. That's a good way to check out a version for free. I could have just used it there, but it fits into my study sequence better to add to my regular Bible program. Anyway, the version with the notes isn't available on Bible Gateway, unless I just didn't notice it.
The excellent translations are the best part of the NET Bible. The translation itself is not that great, sort of NIV level, IMHO, but the notes are really useful. You can read the notes free on the bible.org site: https://lumina.bible.org/bible/Matthew+1#

Or for Lester ...

https://lumina.bible.org/bible/Ecclesiastes+1
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
Neto
Posts: 4578
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 5:43 pm
Location: Holmes County, Ohio
Affiliation: Gospel Haven

Re: Bible Translations...

Post by Neto »

For reading I use the old NIV. The NET has about the best notes I've seen in a study Bible. (I don't have a printed copy of the NET, just the free version in The Word.) After I quit the KJV I used the NASB (New American Standard Bible) until the full NIV came out. For study, I also use a bunch of English versions, & a couple of Portuguese versions, in addition to the Nestle Greek text. (I had the Cotton Patch version for a short time, but sent it back for a refund. That was back when it came out, probably, back in the 70's, anyway.)
0 x
Congregation: Gospel Haven Mennonite Fellowship, Benton, Ohio (Holmes Co.) a split from Beachy-Amish Mennonite.
Personal heritage & general theological viewpoint: conservative Mennonite Brethren.
User avatar
Bootstrap
Posts: 14442
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:59 am
Affiliation: Mennonite

Re: Bible Translations...

Post by Bootstrap »

I just read what I wrote earlier and realized one sentence was nonsense. Here's what I said:
Bootstrap wrote:The excellent translations are the best part of the NET Bible. The translation itself is not that great, sort of NIV level, IMHO, but the notes are really useful.
Ooops!

Here's what I mean to say:
Bootstrap wrote:The excellent translation notes are the best part of the NET Bible. The translation itself is not that great, sort of NIV level, IMHO, but the notes are really useful.
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
Post Reply