[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 90 KB, 371x278, bibles.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19606432 No.19606432[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

What's the best English translation of the Bible?

>> No.19606446
File: 100 KB, 1075x1044, 269686495_1608847112798687_1034821334133360000_n.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19606446

>>19606432
NWT

>> No.19606499

>>19606432
The bible was written in English by King James, stupid.

>> No.19606505

ESV

>> No.19606511

>>19606432
KJV and it's not even close. However if you are a pleb then read the RSV or NASB. ESV is lame imo, no sovl.

>> No.19606519

I also made a Bible thread over here bros >>19606405

>> No.19606537

For me, it's RSV/RSVCE

>> No.19606556

>>19606537
>RSV
RSV is a comfy translation anon

>> No.19606583

>>19606432
Kjv
The language is so beautiful
Although fuck religion

>> No.19606592

>>19606583
>Kjv
based
>fuck religion
cringe

>> No.19606649

HIV

>> No.19606997

>>19606432
>What's the best English translation of the Bible?
The one that suits your purpose. Sometimes, I read the Bible in Latin, sometimes in Greek, sometimes in Aramaic, sometimes in Hebrew, and sometimes in English. If you want to read the Bible for fun, choose one that you like the sound of or is easy-to-read. One that I've enjoyed is the NABRE. It's Catholic and has commentary, meaning you'll get the Apocrypha and some notes. I usually use the ESV because it is the default option on the website I use, which is really good for my purposes.
Not all sites have the NABRE. Bible Gateway does, and you can get a print version. If you are reading only in English or some other modern language, I highly recommend Bible Gateway. They have a very nice annotation system I used to use.

>> No.19607172

>>19606432
The KJV is a masterpiece and should be regarded as a classic in its own right.

>> No.19607184

i tried getting into that autistic shit of "the most accurate bible" but there's really no difference. If you seriously want to study it youre going to do it in greek. Just pick whatever you find most readable.

>> No.19607260

>>19606432
For what purpose?
>Accuracy/Serious academic study
NRSV
>Literary/historical value
KJV
>General purpose newbie bible
ESV or NKJV

>> No.19607297
File: 105 KB, 690x659, pope francis laughing.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19607297

>>19606432
Douay-Rheims
protestant translations are heretical

>> No.19607796

>>19606432
There is no "best", there is only one Bible in English, Authorized King James Bible.

>> No.19607992
File: 54 KB, 657x527, 1635829767211.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19607992

>>19606446
>NWT
Literally removes I am from Exodus

>> No.19608171

So which is the most accurate, without removed passages and without Protestant influence?

>> No.19608177

>>19607297
>give us this day our supersubstantial bread
nice "translation" bro

>> No.19609276

>>19606499
And possibly Shakespeare!

>> No.19609422

The King James Bible is the most accurate translation on the face of the Earth, being divinely inspired and 100% accurate to the words of the original book writers.

>> No.19609473

>>19606432
The KJV is the best and a cut above all the other translations in English, but also get a cheap version of the ESV Study Bible because it's the most complete study Bible among the ones I own (JB and New Oxford RSV). Sometimes I do not understand the subtext of the KJV and the ESV usually clears that up more often than not. The other study Bibles are also useful but if I had to buy one, other than the KJV, I'd get the ESV.

>> No.19609483

>>19606432
Best: KJV
Best comprehendable today: NKJV

>> No.19609504

Does the NKJV only modernize the thees and thous, or does it also rephrase things substantially? I never got into the NKJV because Thomas Nelson holds copyrights over it. Now I don't like the idea of copyrights over Bible translations although I understand the need, but claming copyrights over a fan-edit of the KJV isn't very nice. On top of that, Thomas Nelson doesn't seem to use the Cambridge version of the KJV which is the one most commonly known and used, but a different version that has been revised in certain places. Generally speaking I always got a bad feeling off Thomas Nelson.

>> No.19609522

>>19609473
>The KJ"""V""" is the best and a cut above all the other translations in English
This, but there is no "V", it is the only legitimate Bible in any language.
>but also get a cheap version of the ESV Study Bible
Wrong, get a Bible commentary instead. The Moody is a good single volume and certainly better than the ESV Study "Bible".
>>19609504
There are places where it rephrases substantially and many places where it simply uses poor words because they thought it made more sense than the literal one.

>> No.19609537

>>19608177
What's wrong with it? "Daily" is a mistranslation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_6:11

Surprising that NRSV, which is the academic standard and tries to be as accurate as possible, keeps "daily"