/lit/ - Literature

Geneva

>>16480905
The KJV. If you're Catholic, RSVCE.

>>16480934
KJV

>>16480905
Douay-Rheims. KJV is for kikes and RSVCE is for crypto-kikes.

>>16480905
If by best you mean best literary value, get a King James.
If by best you mean most literal, use Robert Alter for the Masoretic Text (Hebrew Bible, Old Testament) and David Bentley Hart (or NT Wright) for the New Testament. I don’t know if any similar projects for the Septuagint or the Vulgate, though hopefully one gets made soon (perhaps such projects already exist and I only need to be made aware of them).
If you are Catholic, and you’re seeking a good Catholic Bible, I recommend the RSVCE (Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition, also known as the Ignatius Version), not only is it a good translation in its own right but it also is the one used for Bible quotes in English editions of the Catechism of the Catholic Church
If you’re Orthodox Christian and looking for a good Orthodox Bible, I recommend the Orthodox Study Bible by Thomas Nelson. It’s a New King James Bible with a Septuagint Old Testament and commentary explaining Orthodox beliefs
If you’re a protestant, find out what kind of Bible your church uses and read that. It’s probably an NIV or ESV

KJV or NIV
I don't care much for the ones in between.

>>16480965
Hey actually, how many of these terms do you know OP? I took it for granted that you’d know all these, but I realize you may not. Do you understand my post?

>>16480905
>>>/x/

>>16480905
>>16480923
>>16480934
>>16480938
>>16480953
>>16480965
>>16480970
>>16480973

How do I cope with english translations being manipulated left and right, and king james being an initiated freemason

>>16481004
Why did you respond to every post in the thread? I would give you an answer if you had made a normal post, but you instead made this obnoxious post.

>>16480934
>>16480965
If you are Catholic do not read RSVCE

>>16481004
Realize that Catholics resisted translating the Bible into the vernacular for so long because they didn't want anybody reading the Bible who wasn't clergy. Literally prohibiting Christians from reading the word of God.

Only Protestants care about you, anon. Catholics care about power.

>>16481027
Anon, what is your screenshot supposed to prove? Why should I not use an RSVCE?

>>16481028
Don’t respond to fuckass shitdicks who make those replies to every post. Do what >>16481012 did

>>16480905
Latin Vulgate by Jerome

>>16481004
Why did you respond to every post in the thread? I would give you an answer if you had made a normal post, but you instead made this obnoxious post.

>>16481027
RSV2CE has "full of grace" wording. It's the translation for one of the best study Bibles, and certainly seems to have any issues like that fixed.

>>16481027

>>16481118

>>16481047
Ecumenism is a perversion promoted by Vatican II that says that Catholicism should become more flexible in its intepretation of holy texts to include Protestants. This can only be done at the expense of the the truth, for example the passage regarding justification. They ironed out the creases in RSVCE but its still a troubled translation from the get-go.
>>16481110
the issues might be "fixed", but why read a rewrite of a rewrite of a faulty translation when you can just read a better translation, Douay-Rheims.

>>16481027
>>16481125
BTFO

>>16481118
>>16481125
darn, you got me

i like NASB

t. lapsed baptist

>>16480905
NRSV baby, the work of the finest scholars in America.

So which translation is the most accurate?

Monseñor Juan Straubinger (pbuh)

>>16480905

>>16481265
The problem with questions like “which is best” and “which is most accurate” is there are different schools of thought for what that means.
Some say translations are most accurate if they attempt to be as literally word-for-word as possible. Others say that since different words/usages would have different connotations, you should try to convey what the writers meant (thought-for-thought is the common term). Most translations try to strike a happy balance between the two

>>16481265
ERV and ASV are associated versions based on older Alexandrian NT texts that largely revised the popular KJV, and which multiple contemporary translations are traced to. Both are now in the public domain. One notable difference is the ASV's use of "Jehovah" for the sacred name in the OT while the ERV renders it as "the LORD". On the other hand, in the NT the ERV uses the term "Holy Spirit" while the ASV uses "Holy Ghost". The ERV also has translations for the apocrypha.

These can be quite cumbersome to read, similar to the KJV. The next most convenient all-around options are the latest editions of the ESV and RSV.

The entire Ethiopian Orthodox canon

The ERV and ASV are associated translations based on older Alexandrian NT texts that largely revised the popular KJV, and which multiple contemporary translations are traced to. Both are now in the public domain. One notable difference is the ASV's use of "Jehovah" for the sacred name in the OT, while the ERV renders it as "the LORD". On the other hand, in the NT the ASV uses the term "Holy Spirit" while the ERV renders it as "Holy Ghost". The ERV also has translations for the apocrypha.

These might be somewhat cumbersome to read, similar to the KJV. The next most convenient all-around options are the latest editions of the ESV and RSV.

Two choices:
RSV - 2CE, and
KJV Quad with >>16481362

The Bible was translated horribly into english several times, the King James bible is good for the New Testament, but freemasons and jews wrote it's old testament. If you want to read it fully and understand it perfectly, learn Greek or Hebrew.

>>16482403
Could you give some examples of mistranslations in the King James Old Testament? Specifically stuff that is malicious or promotes masonry/jewry

>>16482413
Samuel 14:41, this is one of the most notable ones. The KJV goes "Therefore Saul said unto the LORD God of Israel, "Give Thummim." And Saul and Jonathan were taken: but the people escaped." Compare this to the true translation: "Therefore Saul said, "O LORD God of Israel, why have you not answered your servant this day? If this guilt is in me or in Jonathan my son, O LORD, God of Israel, give Urim. But if this guilt is in your people Israel, give Thummim." And Jonathan and Saul were taken, but the people escaped." This removal of an entire line loses the meaning of the passage. It does not speak of the guild of the people of Isreal.

>>16482470
*guilt not guild

>>16482470
>If you want to read it fully and understand it perfectly, learn Greek or Hebrew.
That reading is only known in the Greek and Latin versions. The shorter rendering is based on the extant Hebrew text. The only known fragment with that that verse in the Dead Sea Scrolls also agrees with the Masoretic text and is believed to be from the early Hellenistic period.

>>16480965
Haven't read many translations but I did like David Bentley Hart's translation of the new testament, so I'll second it.
Very clear and concise, and decent footnotes that give light on the choices chosen in the translation.

>>16480905
st. jerome's

>>16482624
>rendered more faithfully as Holy Hieronym

>>16480905
Whatever happens, not the KJV.

if we're pointing out King James being a freemason, he wasn't the translator but whatever, then we should also note that David Bentley Hart is a member of the DSA, literally a chapofag

>>16480965
>If by best you mean most literal, use Robert Alter for the Masoretic Text (Hebrew Bible, Old Testament) and David Bentley Hart (or NT Wright) for the New Testament.
Is this true? I want the version that will best help me understand what the original writers meant to say. I don't care about how beautiful it's written and I have no religious allegience

>>16482470
If KJV is that bad for Old Testament, is it really reliable for NT?

>>16481441
They can provide both (one of them in the footnote)

ESV

>>16480905
Not the KJV or NIV, I'd say DRA or RSVCE

>>16482931
You can have a million translators with the same philosophy. Quantity is irrelevant.. who decides?

>>16480905
Don't listen to the anti-KJV shills. These modernists will never understand their Bible because they get a new translation every five years.

KJV is best, but I'm currently reading this ebonics version

>>16482470
Retard.
>>16482981
Its a textual variant, not a mistranslation. They are clearly working from different manuscripts.

>>16483524
>the Kang Jim Bibble was an original production

>>16483700
Incorrect manuscripts from Jews, instead of from the Greek Fathers of the Church.

>>16483812
Are you having a stroke?

>>16484058
Romans 3:2
>Much in every way! First of all, the Jews have been entrusted with the very words of God

It’s you who are using the wrong manuscripts, Satan.

>>16480953
This, Pre-Challoner preferably

>>16483542
>Ebonics version
Da time wen eryting had start, God wen make da sky an da world. Da world come so no mo notting inside, no mo shape notting. On top da wild ocean dat cova eryting, neva had light notting. Ony had God Spirit dea, moving aroun ova da watta.

>>16481614
based and enoch pilled