/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.20280379]

What is the most accurate translation of the Bible in English objectively speaking? Ignoring readability and subjective "beauty", which translation is the closest to the original biblical texts/manuscripts?

Examining literature:
>Shakespeare quoted from the Geneva Bible
>Many older works in English literature quote from the KJV
>Modern books often favor quoting from the RSV, NIV, KJV, and ESV

[Anonymous No.20280396]

Objectively:
The Septuagint
The Vulgate
The Duoay Rheims
.
.
.
.
KJV
.
.
.
NKJV

[Anonymous No.20280399]

Depends on if you believe the Received Text or the Critical Text manuscripts are true.

>Received Text
KJV obviously

>Critical Text
Probably NRSV or something.

[Anonymous No.20280408]

>>20280399
What's the difference between them? I saw people briefly mentioning that some kind of old testament manuscript was written with the modern Hebrew alphabet instead of the Paleo-Hebrew alphabet, which indicated it was fake

[Anonymous No.20280424]

>>20280408
If you’re going to base your authority on Hebrew canon, why ask for the entire bible? Why not just read the Torah? I’ll never understand why people care about Hebrew canon when talking about Christianity and the New Testament. The apostles and Jesus himself read the books from the Septuagint, which includes the apocrypha. The books in original Greek. The Latin vulgate is the direct translation thereof, by st Jerome in 400s. The duoay rheims is the direct English translation.

[Anonymous No.20280437]

>>20280424
>I’ll never understand why people care about Hebrew canon when talking about Christianity and the New Testament.
Big hmmm

[Anonymous No.20280449]

>>20280437
presentist retard

[Anonymous No.20280452]

>>20280437
And they were reading the apocryphal books in Jesus’ day but they removed them because they had prophecies pointing directly at Jesus confirming him as messiah.
I’d prefer to read the texts that the apostles themselves read and spread rather than a sect of people that rejected Jesus read.

It’s like being a Muslim and looking for a version of the Qur’an that dismisses Muhammad’s divinity or something.

[Anonymous No.20280469]

>>20280424
It is emphasized in Christianity to read the Hebrew texts. Additionally, Jesud spoke Aramaic, which is linguistically similar to Hebrew. I prefer the Septuagint personality though

[Anonymous No.20280536]

>>20280379
> most accurate translation of the Bible in English objectively speaking
It’s one of those new projects that never gets recommended and that all the Christians hate because they (the texts) are autistic about language and sources which means entire doctrines fall apart (as when you stop putting Satan in as a character) or beloved verses get axed because they’re later construction added by frauds (such as Jesus and the woman being stoned incident).

If you’re genuinely interested in what the earliest texts said you’re going into a rabbit hole that will include textual analysis which will again tear down what people think is the original texts and intent.

[Anonymous No.20280554]

>>20280536
If you’ve said this much already, why not elaborate more?

[Anonymous No.20280564]

>>20280379
Robert Alter's translation.

You'll get tons of commentaries on Hebrew word-play between Adam and clay, snake's wit and nakedness, etc.

[Anonymous No.20280602]

>>20280564
Isn't he Jewish though?

[Anonymous No.20280954]

>>20280602
>Implying that by just mere glimpsing over a text translated by a jew, its vile corruption would spring forth off a text onto you, as if the author himself fucked you in your eye-sockets with his circumcised dick.

[Anonymous No.20281208]

>>20280954
yes
>>20280379
nasb

[Anonymous No.20281370]

>>20280452
>And they were reading the apocryphal books in Jesus’ day but they removed them because they had prophecies pointing directly at Jesus confirming him as messiah.
>Source: My ass

[Anonymous No.20281525]

>>20280424
You have no idea what you're talking about or you're a Kike/Demon deliberately sewing confusions. The Latin Vulgate REJECTS the Septuagint, and you claim it's a "direct translation".
>Jesus and the Apostles uses it
You are probably a Demon.

[Anonymous No.20281530]

>>20281525
Sowing*

[Anonymous No.20282389]

>>20281525
>>20281530
The main issue with the KJV is that it changes words for doctrinal issues rather than accuracy. For example, in 1 Cor 11:27, the KJV uses the word "and" when the word in Greek clearly means "or".
See: https://biblehub.com/interlinear/1_corinthians/11-27.htm
and: https://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/11-27.htm

[Anonymous No.20282463]

>>20280602
The bible is literally jewish

[Anonymous No.20282519]

>>20282463
Talmudic (modern) Judaism is different than Old Testament and New Testament Judaism in the Bible. Often, Talmudic Judaism is referred to as Pharisaic Judaism because it derived from the Pharisees, whom Jesus rebuked.

[Anonymous No.20282535]

>>20282389
>Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
>1 Corinthians 11:27 KJVAAE
https://bible.com/bible/546/1co.11.27.KJVAAE
Bread is not flour. Cup is not liquid. Both are allegorizing Christ.

[Anonymous No.20282577]

>>20282535
Did you even read my reply? In 1 Cor 11:27, the KJV says "eat this bread, and drink this cup", while the Greek uses the word "or" instead of "and". For example, the NASB says "eats the bread or drinks the cup". Communion/the Eucharist is of course literal - that isn't the issue here. The issue refers to whether both are necessary when receiving communion/the Eucharist, or if one is enough.

[Anonymous No.20282603]

>>20282577
It's not about Literal Bread or a Literal Cup. And/Or does not matter when you allegorize it properly.
Whosoever shall call upon the Lord and Whosoever shall call upon the Lord =
Whosoever shall call upon the Lord or Whosoever shall call upon the Lord

[Anonymous No.20282757]

>>20280379
For the Heebie Bib/Old Testament, Everett Fox's translations are as literal as you'll find, maintaining root meanings where possible and the grammatical order in a lot of cases. For the New Testament, I think David Bentley Hart's translation is about as literal I've seen.