Redpill me on this English translation of the bible. Is it truly the most accurate translation? if not, then what is the most accurate english translation? are there any translations that i should stay away from?
>>67446526
I wouldn't really consider any pre-Dead-Sea-Scrolls bibles to be the most accurate.
>>67446526
bump
KJV
>>67447985
why
>>67446526
>>67447985
>>67448106
don't reply to kjvfags they can't even understand modern english
>>67448189
AND THEN THERE'S THIS MOTHERFUCKER
>>67448189
The only Bible that restores God's personal name in every location in both the Hebrew and Greek scriptures. over 7000 times.
>>67448352
whats wrong with those translations
It's incredibly accurate but more so than that, the King James Bible is a beautiful text in its own right.
>>67448106
Great prosa, biggest cultural influence and a very good translation. Differences between translations aren't as big. If you want to STUDY the literal words it's not the best though
>>67448352
Look at flag I didn't read it to hear the story
>>67448587
It's full of errors, gloss's and spurious texts.
>>67446526
You want to use the NIV anon. That is what the scholars use. Accuracy, and easy understanding both provided.
All I know is that it is much more plain-spoken and less high-flown than KJV, and that it was the Bible Shakespeare had growing up and was an influence on him.
>>67448806
i assume this is a troll post.
Geneva is just a prototype KJV with Calvinist marginal notes. KJV is the most accurate and presented without too many marginal notes.
ALL of the translations that came after KJV contain some serious perversions of doctrine. It just gets worse and worse the more modern you get. ESV is particularly dangerous because it SEEMS like the KJV but it certainly isn't.
Watch this documentary about modern Bible versions. You don't have to completely agree with Pastor Anderson (I don't agree with everything he says), but he presents a compelling argument:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFtI_mVOXbQ
>>67449003
It's the one I used brother and I aced three high level theology classes at Old Dominion.
>>67448545
"restores" as in put Jehovah in randomly in place of god. The Jehovah's witnesses cant even pronounce their name correctly much less translate the bible. A true restoration would put elohim/ yhvh elohim in its proper place.
What would Jesus think about modern churches?
>>67449208
>>67448806
NIV is basically the most evil and satanic Bible translation you could possibly read. You might as well buy a copy of The Satanic Bible.
>>67448550
There are better literal (NAB, NASB), dynamic and mixed (NRSV) translations that use modern English.
My main beef though is that we have since unearthed older copies of the bible that the KJV was based on, which has shown us that the KJV perpetuates some errors.
New World a shit, it's a poor literal translation, except when it departs from the literal words and changes them to fit the Witnesses' beliefs.
>>67449450
Please explain. Mind you, I was instructed by 3 devout Presbyterian pastors to use this translation.
>>67448713
Papist detected.
>>67449422
The same he tought about them back then. He's all knowing family
>>67449712
NIV is the evangelical version of the New World translation: it uses "literal" methodology to paraphrase key sentences to change their meaning to suit their beliefs.
Even fundamentalists nowadays dislike the NIV for these blatant errors, so they had the ESV translation done, which is fundamentalist but at least accurate enough for bible study.
NRSV > RSV = NAB > NASB = ESV > literally the satanic bible > TNIV > NIV > KJV > NWT
>>67449712
Neutral gender pronouns to appeal to feminists.
Whole verses moved to footnotes.
Deliberate mistranslations to support Evangelical theology.
>>67450353
And what exactly did he think about them then? From what I've read he wasn't a fan.
>>67446526
The Douay–Rheims Bible (pronounced /ˌduːeJ/ or /ˌdaʊ.eJ ˈriːmz/[1]) (also known as the Rheims–Douai Bible or Douai Bible, and abbreviated as D–R and DV) is a translation of the Bible from the Latin Vulgate into English made by members of the English College, Douai, in the service of the Catholic Church.[2] The New Testament portion was published in Reims, France, in 1582, in one volume with extensive commentary and notes. The Old Testament portion was published in two volumes thirty years later by the University of Douai. The first volume, covering Genesis through Job, was published in 1609; the second, covering Psalms to 2 Machabees plus the apocrypha of the Vulgate was published in 1610. Marginal notes took up the bulk of the volumes and had a strong polemical and patristic character. They offered insights on issues of translation, and on the Hebrew and Greek source texts of the Vulgate.
Don't be a plebeian apostate loser.
DR/DV
More on NIV translation non-sense:
http://shamelesspopery.com/the-niv-on-tradition-and-teachings/
http://shamelesspopery.com/more-sketchy-translations-by-the-niv/
>>67450973
This nigga gets it
All the poetry of the King James, without all the shit translation errors and removed books, with the added benefit of being older than the King James Version
>>67450973
>from the Latin Vulgate
rome pls go
>>67449347
The personal name of god, "Jehovah", the latinized form of Yahweh is used everywhere the Tetragrammaton was used. For the uneducated the tetragrammaton is the Hebrew name of God transliterated in four letters as YHWH or JHVH and articulated as Yahweh or Jehovah.
>>67452868
I never got translating into english as Jehovah
It'd make since if we still pronounced J as a sort of Y sound, but we don't so it just sounds like it's being made up.
niv f.a.m.
thred/
>>67453212
It's the same convention that "Jesus" comes from. The translation that yields "Yahweh" would render Jesus's name "Yeshua".
Yeshua יֵשוּעַ -> Ἰησοῦς (Iesous) -> Jesus
>>67446526
Stay away from all of them, they've been sullied by mankinds influence when translating and in scribing them. Only trust the ethereal tabs from God himself... oh wait, god isn't real. My bad guys
What's the best German translation, I don't trust the recommendations of my local cuck protestants.
>>67454268
Elberfelder bevor 1905 ist absolut wortgetreu .Luther 1912 und Einheitsübersetzung sind sehr gut aber Sinnübersetzungen
>>67453950
actually "Yeshua" is a theoretical Aramaic version of his name that could have been used.
The Greek Ἰησοῦς (which is all we know) is pronounced more as Ee-soos, similar to the Spanish pronunciation. Interestingly enough, in the semetic arabic language (which would be most similar to aramaic of the time in naming conventions) his name is Isa, which is much closer to the greek Ἰησοῦς than to the theoretical "Yeshua"
forgive any spelling/grammatical errors, it is very late for me.
>>67454535
Thanks friend, any thoughts on Studienbibeln?
>>67455108
>Studienbibeln
No please elaborate.
To add to my former post depends on what you're looking for
>my local cuck protestants
May I ask your stance in Christianity?
As a catholic I just use NAB.
Not to turn this into a Christian general thread but I hope you guys donate to the poor. I haven't for a long time and I'm just trying to start now. I'm going to try to do $20 monthly minimum (probably up to $40 if I'm doing well for a month) once I have a reliable income.
>>67446526
The KJV is the only legitimate english language version of the bible.
Avoid the other translations, especially the newer translations that like to "humanize" things by changing the words and even the meanings.
>>67455391
Stuff like the Stuttgarter Erklärungsbibel, theological and historical annotations.
>>67455514
Church recommends you pay 5% directly for alms, and 5% for the church collection for a tithe, not a rule or anything, just recommends it.
>>67446526
>are there any translations that i should stay away from?
All of them, unless you want to read poorly written bullshit about magic
>>67455743
Sorry no. Sounds interesting though. Will look into it. I have an Einheitsübersetzung with probably mostly the same annotations. They're usefull sometimes
So,
>Vulgate
is the best, but who knows Latin, in this day and age?
>Douay–Rheims Bible
was directly translated from the vulgate version without any humanization or false translations and has extra
books.
>KJV
if you want to read the most accepted version.
>NIV
is the one to read if you are an illiterate fag who can't into Le-Olde-English
If you really want to get to know the real, super-soul, supreme being that made everyone and everything, just stay away from ANY scriptures, of ANY religion, or you could read them all and come to hate them all equally.
Spanish
>>67456888
There is a KJV version of the apocrypha, in case you want to maximize the shittiness of your bible
(street pun unintended)
>At 1 Samuel 24:3, The Living Bible has "Saul went into the cave to go to the bathroom", using a contemporary North American euphemism where the original Hebrew (also a euphemism) literally translates as "to cover his feet". In the British edition of The Living Bible, this wording was changed to "to relieve himself", which is also found in most other non-literal English translations.[9] As a result of its translation of this passage, this version is sometimes known as "The Bathroom Bible".[10]
>>67457358
pun appreciated and accepted.
Also,
i have read first 5 books of the old testament.
the fuck is with
>the pillar of smoke and fire?
literally a cylindrical UFO screwing the jews into following it all around the mid-east desert?
the jews have always been schizophrenic, have they?
