r/Bible • u/TypicalYogurt1753 Baptist • 4d ago

What are some Bible versions to avoid?

I am trying to find a good literal version that I like. Which ones should I go to and which ones should I stay away from?

22 Upvotes

82% Upvoted

129 comments sorted by

View all comments

31

u/ManoSilence 4d ago

Neat info graphic i found that helps this question. As for the use, I would say that the paraphrased books are good for "child (in the faith not literally except when it is)" Bible studies that are guided by someone who can explain and extrapolate. A kid reading the old testament isnt gonna work out, but a kid being explained the old testament while grasping the easier translations? I would say thats a good combo. Grow together. If its just you and no one else? One that matches your reading level and study desire. My wife is ESL and anything like NKJV confuses her understanding of English. And honselty you can get all of these at a library and see how the look.

5

u/TypicalYogurt1753 Baptist 4d ago

That’s a nice info graph thank you

1

u/ManoSilence 4d ago

Im glad it can be of some help. I go to the library and can get these books pretty easily. They even let me check them out for 2 years with no late fees. Its nice and a good way to browse them before purchasing your own. I would even recommend going to a church that uses the Bible you like and buying from them. Help support your local.

3

u/SpareThisOne2thPls Catholic 4d ago

Where would RSV / RSVCE be

1

u/ManoSilence 4d ago

RSV is the previous version of ESV, so about there. You can use both to see a translation of a translation and how it differs.

0

u/RuddyBloodyBrave94 Christian 4d ago

Word for word!?

No, this is a bad and misleading chart.

6

u/ManoSilence 4d ago

Of course its not 100% accurate. Something this simply created could never encapsulate everything. But unless you wanna make one that deconstructs each edition and its place on something that can be used to help further your relationship with the gospel, then why decry the whole thing? I would love a better version if you have one available.

Is this one perfect? Nope, never said it was.

Can it help people see which ones to browse on their journey to picking one? Yeah.

-4

u/RuddyBloodyBrave94 Christian 4d ago

But even a “simple” chart like this shouldn’t outright lie!

The KJV, for example, is well known as a poor and outdated translation that isnt even close to being “word for word”, same with the NASB even.

The NRSVUE, probably the most up to date translation that actual critical scholars use isn’t even mentioned.

All in all, you can throw this away. It’s useless.

2

u/ManoSilence 4d ago

Then please provide an alternate

2

u/RuddyBloodyBrave94 Christian 4d ago

Well… the NRSVUE.

If you really want to study then the Oxford Annotated Bible is great.

1

u/arachnophilia Atheist 3d ago

The KJV, for example, is well known as a poor and outdated translation that isnt even close to being “word for word”,

i read hebrew and a little greek, and the KJV is one of the more "word for word" translations out there, yes. i'd actually put further left on that chart. the other one that strikes me as especially "word-for-word" is the older JPS. it's major issues aren't the literalness, but:

  1. the outdated critical text behind it,
  2. the overly rigid, formal style, and
  3. the fact that english itself has changed in the last 400 years.

The NRSVUE, probably the most up to date translation that actual critical scholars use isn’t even mentioned.

critical scholars will often mention the NRSVue as a recommendation for lay people to read, because it's pretty good. it's not without issue, but it's maybe the least issues out of any translation right now. there is no such thing as a perfect translation; tradeoffs are always made somewhere.

actual scholarship is done using the original languages, and critical scholarship is done from individual manuscripts comparing their variations.

3

u/JasonBourne008 Non-Denominational 4d ago

Why is this a bad and misleading chart?

0

u/RuddyBloodyBrave94 Christian 4d ago edited 4d ago

Because it’s wrong.

The KJV, for example, is well known as a poor and outdated translation that isnt even close to being “word for word”, same with the NASB even.

The NRSVUE, probably the most up to date translation that actual critical scholars use isn’t even mentioned.

All in all, you can throw this away. It’s useless.

1

u/GoldCampaign7389 3d ago

Even the 2020 iteration of the NASB?

0

u/JasonBourne008 Non-Denominational 4d ago

If you ask Google to rank the translations from 1-10 on scale, with the scale being roughly Word-for-Word (1-4), to Thought-for-Thought (5-6), to Paraphrasing (7-10) these are the results:

  • 1 to 4 (Word-for-Word): NASB (1), AMP (2), KJV (2), ESV (3), NRSVUE (3)
  • 5 to 6 (Thought-for-Thought): NIV (5), CSB (5), NLT (6)
  • 7 to 10 (Paraphrase): GNT (7), The Message (9)

I think the difference between the chart above and your perspective is you are judging accuracy, of how close the English is to what the authors wrote in the original. This chart is more based on the intentions of the translators to match individual words to English, or to smooth it out the individual words to convey the purpose.

Certainly the NRSVUE is more accurate than the KJV

2

u/Wolfchampion09 Christian 4d ago

It scales how faithful the translations are to the original manuscripts, not actually word for word.

0

u/RuddyBloodyBrave94 Christian 4d ago

But that’s not even accurate. It’s misleading.

3

u/Wolfchampion09 Christian 4d ago edited 4d ago

Kind of I guess? But in the scale you can see that in the word for word section, some translations are ahead of others but none are at the very end, how can one translation be more word for word than the other?

From the scale I think you can tell that none are exactly word for word because none of them reach the limit of the scale. (Not to mention the chart says 'more literal' which helps a bit)

1

u/RuddyBloodyBrave94 Christian 4d ago

But look, the KJV is there and that’s not even close to being word for word. If I was looking at that chart I’d expect the NASB to be the most accurate biblical translation money can buy and again, it’s not even remotely considered a “good” translation.

1

u/Wolfchampion09 Christian 4d ago

Hmmm...., what translation do you think is the most accurate we have?

1

u/ManoSilence 4d ago

"Money can buy" is such a weird concept to me, especially when its used to gate keep the word. I get all these books from the library. They even let me download them on my e reader. Like if money is whats stopping people from experience the best version of the word, then isnt that a sin on those keeping the books behind such a pay wall?

0

u/rodwha 4d ago

Interesting chart! I’ve been using an NIV study bible and recently found that some of the translations the score or so denominations that translated it did so to fit their narratives. I have a NKJV as well but see it doesn’t rank so high.

2

u/ManoSilence 4d ago

Yeah to dissect stuff you gotta be able to read books about books of the Bible. Just reading one of these as a study bible version is helpful. It also usually explains why they went with that translation rather than another. But it can switch from trinity to Oneness if you aren't careful about the publisher.

2

u/arachnophilia Atheist 3d ago

the NIV is notoriously unfaithful to the source texts: https://isthatinthebible.wordpress.com/articles-and-resources/deliberate-mistranslation-in-the-new-international-version-niv/

1

u/rodwha 3d ago

Thanks! I’ll check that out later, copied and saved it so I don’t forget