Bible Versions
Modern readers of the Bible, exposed to a multitude of English translations, find it difficult to determine which translation they should read. Since the Bible is such an important book – in fact, the most important book – readers want to be sure that they are using an accurate and understandable translation of the original text.
It would be wonderful if everyone could read the Bible in the original languages: Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Since so very few have learned these ancient languages, nearly everyone depends on translations.
On this page I have attempted to give a philosophy of translation, and a brief description of some. By no means! are all of the available versions listed, only those that are in the most popular use today.
Guidelines:
A common question is what translation should I use? The cry of the Protestant Reformation was Sola Scriptura - Scripture Alone. Many of the Reformers such as William Tyndale died to bring God's word into the language of the people.
So the translation you use is no trivial matter. We are not talking here about Shakespeare but rather the very Word of God. So following are a few guidelines to use when selecting a translation.
Accuracy:
The first thing that should be considered is how accurate is it to the original languages. You want to be using a faithful translation. So immediately that rules out the paraphrases. How good were the translators at doing their jobs.
You want those who have studied the original languages and consider the Bible to be inspired and trustworthy.
Readability:
How easy is it to read? Do you need a dictionary to read it because of all it's sophisticated words or is it so easy to read that it is an insult to your intelligence or sacrilegious. It must be reverent and dignified English and at the same time readable.
Helps:
What helps are in it? Does it have cross references, maps, concordance, footnotes?.
Strictly Literal:
Literal:
King James "Authorized Version" – See Note.
New King James Version – See Note.
Revised Standard Version.
New American Bible.
Literal With Freedom To Be Idiomatic:
Thought - For - Thought:
New International Version.
New Jerusalem Bible.
Revised English Bible (No Reference).
New Jewish Version (No Reference).
Dynamic Equivalent (Modern Speech):
Today's English Version "Good News Bible".
The Amplified Bible.
Paraphrastic:
Conclusion:
The KJV and NKJV: Were both translated from the "Authorized Received Text" manuscripts (Textus Receptus). While the other versions have been translated form later text, (Codex Sanaiticus and Vaticanus, actually older but unavailable to the 1611 translators) along with reference to the Dead Sea Scrolls, for accuracy of some of the O.T. text (ie. Isaiah).
Some feel that the older text is the most accurate (Textus Receptus), while others will argue for the latter (Codex Sanaiticus and Vaticanus). But no matter which you choose, they all remain true to their original manuscripts, with exception of the Living Bible, often referred to as the -- Dead Bible.
The Revised Standard Version: Is much the same as the New Revised Standard Version, with exception of some questionable translation. This has created some serious doctrinal issues with this version. And eliminates its use by those seeking a reliable Bible version. Most of the errors but not all, have been corrected in the New Revised Standard Version (See: New Revised Standard Version). The term "Idiomatic" means: either differs from the usual syntactic patterns, or has a meaning that differs from the literal.
The King James Version:
The King James Version was an academic tour-de-force in 1611, at which time it was a hotly denounced modern translation. In some quarters today it is the only acceptable translation, even though the translators in 1611 explicitly stated that they looked forward to future scholarship to correct whatever errors they may have made.
The King James Version originated when a group of Puritans ambushed King James while he was on a journey and presented him with a petition requesting a new translation of the Bible. Since the petition had a thousand signatures, it was called the Millenary Petition. The Puritans wanted a new translation of the Bible, because most of the existing English Bibles were biased and polemic.
To their surprise, the king readily agreed and assembled the brightest and best Bible scholars in England to undertake the project. They were dismayed at first when the king announced he would personally manage the project, but they were pleasantly surprised when it turned out that he had an excellent background in the subject.
The resulting translation was made mandatory for the Church of England, over many protests from the clergy. Because books were extremely expensive in those days, well out of the reach of the common person, the law also required every church to keep a copy on display 24 hours a day, so that ordinary people could come in and read the Bible at any time.
The Bibles were generally chained to the reading desks to prevent them from being stolen when no one was around. The cost of replacing a stolen Bible in those days could easily bankrupt a local parish.
Disadvantages:
The King James Version is almost incomprehensible to anyone who has not been brought up on it. For example, the word comfort means strengthen, suffer means let, let means prevent, and prevent means precede.
Some verses are completely incomprehensible or misleading; for example, Psalm 5:6, 1 Kings 11:1, and Ezekiel 27:25. The textual scholarship underlying the King James Version has been superseded in the last two centuries.
Advantages:
For people who were brought up on it, this is an excellent translation. For newcomers to the Bible, it is a puzzle. It is suitable for study as long as you are familiar with the language. It is widely known, readily available and inexpensive.
Today's English Version:
The Good News Bible is a project of the American Bible Society to render the Bible in a form that unchurched people can understand.
Disadvantages:
For people who attend church regularly and are familiar with the Bible, the fact that the Good News Bible does not use traditional religious vocabulary is a disadvantage.
Since clarity is the overriding goal of this translation, it often seems to be inaccurate when compared to other translations, but it is in fact an accurate translation.
Advantages:
The Good News Bible is written at a very low grade level and is consequently very easy to understand. It is excellent as story book. In fact, the Old Testament can be read from Genesis to 2 Kings as easily as a novel.
The Living Bible:
The Living Bible is the work of Kenneth N. Taylor, who in 1954 began paraphrasing scripture for use in family devotions.
The first complete Living Bible appeared in 1970. It has been revised many times and appears in many different versions.
Disadvantages:
The Living Bible mixes the author's interpretations with text, making objective study impossible unless you agree with Kenneth N. Taylor's views.
It is strongly tendentious, as the author often inserts wording that has no basis whatsoever in the original text in order to conform it to fundamentalist viewpoints on end-times, sexuality, politics, and social policy.
(For example, compare Jude 7 in the Living Bible with Jude 7 in the King James Version and notice how much extra text they inserted.)
Depending on your views, you may see the Living Bible as clarifying the meaning that is already present in the text or as imputing meaning into the text that is not there. Essentially, the Living Bible does the interpreting for you. Even some fundamentalists find it controversial.
Advantages:
The Living Bible is easy to read and it makes a good story book. Many editions explain the nature and purpose of the paraphrase.
The New American Standard Bible:
The New American Standard Bible was the project of the Lockman Foundation, which sought to produce an accurate, readable translation.
The translators came from a wide variety of evangelical backgrounds.
Disadvantages:
The New American Standard Bible does not lend itself well to reading out loud to an audience.
The drive for accuracy led to some peculiarities in the renderings. There is occasional emphasis on relatively minor grammatical points.
Advantages:
Excellent for serious study, very accurate. The current edition that you find in bookstores has been updated for improved readability.
The New King James Version:
There is no real connection between the King James Version and the New King James Bible except for the name, the textual basis of the New Testament, and some similarity in the language.
It was the brainchild of Sam Moore, who saw a market for a King-James-sounding modern translation.
Disadvantages:
The New King James Bible sounds like a modernized King James Version, but it is neither modern nor Jacobean English. The New Testament is based on the Majority Text (also called the Textus Receptus) rather than the current state of textual research.
If you live outside the United States, please note that King James Version is the American name for the Authorised Version.
Advantages:
Although the New King James Bible, like all other translations, is not perfect, it is a more accurate rendering of the Greek than the King James Version and is less likely to puzzle the reader.
This is an especially good translation for people with a Wesleyan or Eastern Orthodox background. The New Testament of this version was chosen to serve as the basis for an Eastern Orthodox study Bible.
The New American Bible:
The New American Bible is principally a lay-oriented Roman Catholic Bible translation, although some non-Catholic scholars were involved.
It is primarily the outgrowth of an encyclical by Pope Pius XII (Divino afflante Spiritu) which encouraged Bible-reading among Roman Catholics.
Disadvantages:
The New American Bible is not as good as the Jerusalem Bible for serious study.
The notes have a distinct Roman Catholic flavor, which can be a disadvantage for people who are not Roman Catholics.
Advantages:
This is a very good Bible for the lay Catholic. The notes have a distinct Roman Catholic flavor, which can be an advantage for Roman Catholics or for people who are not Roman Catholics themselves, but wish to inform themselves about the position of the Roman Catholic church on specific passages.
The New Jerusalem Bible:
The (New) Jerusalem Bible is the product of the best Bible scholarship in the Roman Catholic Church.
Disadvantages:
The (New) Jerusalem Bible's wording is often clumsy and opaque to non-scholars. This is a matter of English style rather than accuracy in translation.
The notes have a distinct Roman Catholic flavor, which can be an advantage for Roman Catholics or for people who are not Roman Catholics themselves, but wish to inform themselves about the position of the Roman Catholic church on specific passages
Advantages:
The (New) Jerusalem Bible is an excellent scholarly work for serious students of the Bible, especially Roman Catholics.
The notes have a distinct Roman Catholic flavor, which can be a disadvantage for people who are not Roman Catholics.
The New International Version:
The New International Version is the product of evangelical scholars from a wide variety of church backgrounds under the auspices of the New York Bible Society International.
Disadvantages:
The New International Version has a slight premillennial tinge. For example, the Greek word thlipsis is only translated as tribulation in contexts that fit premillennialism.
However, that is not much of an obstacle. A Lutheran publishing house even issued a study Bible based on the New International Version, even though for the last 400 years Lutherans have considered any form of millennialism to be a heresy.
The New International Version has a number of innovative renderings here and there. For example, a single Hebrew word is rendered valley, gorge, river, ravine, or brook in different passages.
Advantages:
The New International Version is an excellent translation into very good contemporary English, very suitable for study and reading out loud.
The word international in the name means that the translators took pains to make sure that their work would be usable in any English-speaking country on the globe, although it appears in versions with American and British spelling. The Psalms are rendered poetically.
The Amplified Bible:
The Amplified bible, is a product of the Lockman Foundation started in 1958 with the first edition of the Amplified New Testament.
Followed by the first part of the Amplified Old Testament in 1962, with its completion of both Old, and New Testaments in 1965.
The one we are now familiar with the new expanded edition, was published in 1987.
Disadvantages:
The in text brackets [ ] with their clarifying notes, and comments clutter the text making it confusing to the reader. The notes are of course opinionative, and do not necessarily reflect everyone's view of the verses.
The wording of the text is modern, but with a few not so modern words included for flavour. All together the Amplified Bible does not make a good translation for public reading, or in the larger opinion accurate study.
Advantages:
The text of the Amplified Bible is easy to understand, and is made easier to understand by the inclusion of informative footnotes which give historical background, archaeological information, and solid traditional scholarship, both academic and devotional in character.
The New Revised Standard Version:
The New Revised Standard Version is the direct descendant of the King James Version. But was not translated from the Textus Receptus, some editions contain the Apocrypha and Deuterocanonical books of the original Revised Standard Version.
Disadvantages:
The initial editions of the Revised Standard Version were controversial and were too liberal for many evangelicals, but questionable renderings have been repaired in recent editions. It has clumsy English syntax in places. The Psalms are not poetically rendered and don't lend themselves well to responsive or unison reading.
The New Revised Standard Version's attempts to be gender-inclusive can lead to occasional problems. In Galatians 3, it changes the Greek word sons to children, paradoxically lowering the status of women. (Changing the word to agents would have been more faithful to the meaning and it would have been inclusive besides.) In Hebrews 2, it pluralizes a passage that traditionally applies to Jesus Christ, forcing it to be interpreted as applying to Christians.
Advantages:
The Revised Standard Version is excellent for study. The New Revised Standard Version is largely successful in removing spurious gender bias without going overboard.
It has fewer controversial renderings than before and has excellent scholarship. It is available in an edition that contains every book that is considered canonical by any major Christian group.
Conclusion:
Its not so much a matter of the version you choose, ( # My personal is the KJV, although I use and own others) its that you use it.
Carpenter's tools are of no use until the Carpenter takes them in hand. Owning a Bible is not enough you must use it, ( Hose 4:6 Says it well).
4:6 - My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children. ...
KJV
There are to many Christians today that will fall for any manner of doctrine, when it is not necessary. Even when Paul Preached there were those who sought not to disprove Paul, but to affirm that the things he taught – according to the scriptures (Acts 17:10–11) were so.
Make the choice of your Bible wisely, and use it in the same manner.
# Note: There are ongoing arguments over which version of the Bible is the most accurate, and which you should use. There are admittedly some versions, that are far superior to others. But in the end!, the one you can read with the easiest comprehension is always the best one.
My suggestion for a good combination would be the KJV along with the NASB, for the best of both manuscripts – for comparison and study. The NASB is written in a more modern language form – for easier reading, while the KJV is the accepted standard for all Bible Study. Both are literal translations of their original manuscripts.
While the NKJV is supposed to be a modern version of the KJV; I find the use of many sophisticated words, leaving the average reader puzzled at their meanings. Which is no better than the outdated words of the KJV. There is a volume that will help with the KJV's old words, produced by Thomas Nelson Publishing – "The King James Bible Word Book".
God Bless ..... Samuel Owen. †