Which Bible Translations?
This is a brief guide to help readers choose a good bible translation. There are over one hundred different English language translations of the Bible. Getting the right translation(s) is important for serious scriptural study – part and parcel of a thorough education in knowing God, understanding spiritual life, and learning about history, culture, cosmology, prophecy, and eschatology.
I recommended the following translations:-
- New American Standard Bible (NASB ’95), 1995. Best balance of original text literality, modern scholarship, unbiased translation, updated language, and readability.
- Legacy Standard Bible (LSB), 2021. A carefully revised and updated version of the NASB95.
- New King James Version (NKJV), 1982. Balance of scholarship, language, and preservation of the literary cadences of the King James Version (original 1611).
Why Translation Matters
If you have a high view of scripture, then God is actually communicating things to us through the inspired lives and freewill writings of real people. With this in mind, we read in Deuteronomy 4:2 and Revelations 22:18-19, God clearly saying do not add to my words or take away from them. He is very explicit about that. Don’t change what I say. So, we can state with some confidence, that a good bible translation is one that carefully preserves God’s actual words. Naturally, they may be translated from the original languages (ancient Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek) into modern English or German or Spanish, but every effort must be made to faithfully represent the original words. It is not OK to start changing, omitting, or adding words to better align with modern attitudes and ideas. That would be a direct violation of God’s will and quite certain to compromise what he’s trying to communicate to us. Sometimes good translators do this unintentionally. Sometimes bad translators do this intentionally.
Translation Methods & Preferences
Generally, modern Bible translations are produced by a committee of scholars, clergy, and teachers who assemble over long periods to decide how to represent the original texts. There are two main scriptural translation philosophies:-
(1) Formal Equivalence. Word-for-word translation. Preserves the literal fidelity of the original inspired texts whilst maintaining good literary form. This method emphasizes lexical and structural authenticity, which is invariably essential to comprehending deeper meaning and doctrine.
(2) Dynamic Equivalence. Sense-for-sense translation. Paraphrasing, basically. Reproduces the text using modern language and cultural expressions to communicate the basic message of each verse. Frequently re-writes the original inspired texts.
Popular Bibles like the New International Version (NIV) mainly employ dynamic equivalence as their translation method. Whilst this makes for a simpler read, it can be at the expense of the original textual content and meaning. For the casual reader, simply wanting to acquaint themselves with the general gist of biblical narratives, this may be quite unimportant. For serious students of scripture wanting accurate exposition of the original material (exegesis), dynamic equivalence presents too many unnecessary obstacles. Hence, the main translations I use are the NASB95, LSB and NKJV, all of which use formal equivalence. Good translations such as these help to confer knowledge of the original ancient words, idioms, and meanings, which are essential to grasp key points of doctrine, law, conduct, intent, dialog, and metaphysics.
Most days, I use the NASB95 and LSB. For me, they achieve a seasoned balance of literality, scholarship, and flow. They are solid. I am very fond of the NKJV too though, especially as I grew up with the King James text pretty close-by and have a naturally Anglo-centric relationship with its rich language.
I have noted that the ESV (English Standard Version) articulates certain points exceptionally well, deploying crisp and accurate interpretation of the original text. Unfortunately, it also suffers from many politically-motivated decisions that intentionally change biblical meaning (the word of God) to suit their purposes. Like passages on sin in Leviticus 5:17 and Hebrews 9:7, a passage about Hades in Matthew 16:18, and multiple serious gender issues as in Malachi 2:16, 1 Timothy 4:7, and Genesis 3:16. As we have said, changing the text to appease modern sensibilities is a very grave problem. It misleads the majority of readers who are apt to simply trust the translation in their hands.
For this and many other reasons, over time, it is wise to become acquainted with the strengths, weaknesses, and leanings of multiple bible translations.
Side note. If I am studying a particularly significant passage, I may examine the text of multiple translations side-by-side on the same single screen, so I can examine the different renderings in the NASB95, LSB, NKJV, and ESV.
Here’s an example of a fourway side-by-side comparison at biblegateway.com
What About The King James Version (KJV)?
The King James Version of the Bible (1611 & 1769) is a formal equivalence rendering of the original sacred writings, quite remarkable for its time. It provides everything necessary to gain a rounded comprehension of general biblical content. However, as the translated text itself is now over 400 years old, the interpretation of certain passages and concepts is outdated in places. Scholarly knowledge, paleography, textual criticism, and access to historical data have developed considerably over the last few hundred years. For new and younger readers, the King James’ use of 16th and 17th century language (thee, thy, thou, sheweth, verily etc.) may appear somewhat archaic and occasionally difficult to understand. Whilst other readers both savor the classical language and find interpretive value in some of the inherent linguistic distinctions – such as between the singular you (thou) and plural you (ye). Regardless, the King James Version of the Bible holds a unique position in religious and literary history that attests to its fundamental fidelity.
Translations To Avoid
Some translations stray too far from the original material to be trusted, like the NRSV/NRSVUE (New Revised Standard Version & Updated Edition), CEB (Contemporary English Bible), CEV (Common English Version), and MSG (The Message). The main problems being their socialist-leaning liberal politics, anti-supernaturalistic worldview, and consequent loose language. These prejudicial interpretative filters mangle the original scriptural meanings. Even the apparently peripheral decision to replace original scriptural gendered language with gender-neutral terms, actually results in many textual obfuscations, sometimes even changing actual meanings altogether. This is unnecessary and unacceptable to any conscientious bible student. Far better to study clean, unbiased, straight translations like the NASB95, LSB, and NKJV.
Source Texts
What do translators use as their original source materials? Scholars study and compare multiple versions of ancient documents to establish authenticity, consistency, and content. This is called textual criticism. Textual criticism of the Old Testament (first set of 39 Hebrew books of the Bible) focuses on comparing manuscript versions of the Masoretic text with early works such as the Septuagint, the Latin Vulgate, the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Syriac Peshitta, various Jewish Aramaic Targums, and latterly, the Qumran Caves Scrolls (aka the Dead Sea Scrolls). The New Testament material (second set of 27 Greek books of the Bible) has been preserved in many manuscripts. The three major sources used for translating the New Testament are (i) the modern Critical Text, (ii) the Majority Text (aka Byzantine), and (iii) the Textus Receptus. Many scholars agree that attaining an authentic view of original scriptural meanings requires judicious consultation of all the sources.
Summary
Stick with either the NASB95, LSB, or NKJV. I believe they are the best at representing the original scriptures. You can’t go wrong with any of them.
Useful Online Resources
https://www.blueletterbible.org/