Bible Translations

At the Second Church of Odyssey you'll find different ways of expressing your beliefs, finding prayer support or being encouraged through regular devotionals.
User avatar
TigerintheShadows
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Posts: 4171
Joined: August 2009
Location: Guess. I dare you.

Post by TigerintheShadows »

We use the ESV, and I used to read the NIV until I got an ESV and it grew on me. I really like the ESV because it was translated directly from Greek and Hebrew; I actually had a debate in which this was brought up by a friend who claimed that the Bible apparently went from Hebrew to Greek to Latin to English and therefore could not be always taken literally (said in the same breath as "I believe in the New Testament"). Most of us agreed that she didn't know what she was talking about.
Image
"Death's got an Invisibility Cloak?" "So he can sneak up on people. Sometimes he gets bored of running at them, flapping his arms and shrieking..."
"And now the spinning. Thank you for nothing, you useless reptile."
"It unscrews the other way."
AIO tumblr sideblog
User avatar
Sunshine
Smile for the camera
Posts: 1171
Joined: February 2011
Location: In the Garden with my Master Gardener

Post by Sunshine »

Until recently I was using NIV 1984 version. Not only is that the version that I've grown up using so far, but also Bible Quizzing has been done in that version. This next year, for Bible Quizzing, they were going to switch over NIV 2010 version, but some people are uncomfortable with that recent translation. So we are now memorizing books of the Bible in ESV 2011 version. Our church pastors use ESV version, but we're free to use whatever translation we feel comfortable with. So I bought another Bible recently (for several reasons) in the ESV version. I wasn't sure about using it at first, but I'm getting used to it. I must admit that NIV 1984 version is the one I like best though. I go to a Bible study group for girls, where most of the girls think that KJV is the right version. So when I'm there, I just use one of their KJV Bibles. I find it's harder to understand, but I'm slowly beginning to understand it more easily.

So to sum it all up, I mostly use ESV now, some NIV 1984, and some KJV.
Image
User avatar
Jesus' Princess
Country Girl
Country Girl
Posts: 4973
Joined: April 2011
Location: on the farm

Post by Jesus' Princess »

Sunshine wrote:Until recently I was using NIV 1984 version. Not only is that the version that I've grown up using so far, but also Bible Quizzing has been done in that version. This next year, for Bible Quizzing, they were going to switch over NIV 2010 version, but some people are uncomfortable with that recent translation. So we are now memorizing books of the Bible in ESV 2011 version. Our church pastors use ESV version, but we're free to use whatever translation we feel comfortable with. So I bought another Bible recently (for several reasons) in the ESV version. I wasn't sure about using it at first, but I'm getting used to it. I must admit that NIV 1984 version is the one I like best though. I go to a Bible study group for girls, where most of the girls think that KJV is the right version. So when I'm there, I just use one of their KJV Bibles. I find it's harder to understand, but I'm slowly beginning to understand it more easily.

So to sum it all up, I mostly use ESV now, some NIV 1984, and some KJV.
That same thing happened with our Bible Bee, I really prefer to memorize the NIV 1984 version, it seems to flow nicely, and it's easiest to memorize and understand, but the new version they came out with is inaccurate, and so we're most likely going to be switching over to ESV.
Image
User avatar
jelly
A Truly Great Noob
A Truly Great Noob
Posts: 9278
Joined: May 2008
Location: Western Canada
Contact:

Post by jelly »

Jesus' Princess wrote:That same thing happened with our Bible Bee, I really prefer to memorize the NIV 1984 version, it seems to flow nicely, and it's easiest to memorize and understand, but the new version they came out with is inaccurate...
On what grounds do you make such an assumption?
Fallacy of false continuum. // bookworm
Any cupcake can be made holy through being baptized in the name of the Butter, the Vanilla and the Powdered Sugar. // Kait
User avatar
SoccerLOTR
If posts were pigs...
Posts: 2055
Joined: May 2005
Location: The Woodland Realm

Post by SoccerLOTR »

Idk yet if I say it is completely inaccurate, as some things are just translated a little easier in to modern day English, but there are other things that I don't like, for example, Matthew 1:18-19

NIV-1984: This is how the birth of Jesus Christ came about: His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit. Because Joseph her husband was a righteous man and did not want to expose her to public disgrace, he had in mind to divorce her quietly.

NIV-2010: This is how the birth of Jesus the Messiah came about: His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be pregnant through the Holy Spirit. Because Joseph her husband was faithful to the law, and yet did not want to expose her to public disgrace, he had in mind to divorce her quietly.

All the versions i've read have Joseph was a righteous man...not Joseph was faithful to the law. Yes, he may have been faithful to the law as well as righteous, but I don't like them cutting the word righteous out, as it implies something different. That's just one example of what I don't care for in the new version.
Image
Image
It was good knowing you StrongNChrist; you taught me a lot. I'll meet you someday for real in God's presence.

Which Jesus do you follow? If Ephesians says to imitate Christ, why do you look so much like the world?~Todd Agnew

Do not be anxious about anything...~Phil 4:6-7

If more of us valued food, cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world.~Tolkien

Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.~J Adams

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.~B Franklin

I died and became a Roman Soldier--It was rather distracting.~Rory (Dr.Who)
User avatar
jelly
A Truly Great Noob
A Truly Great Noob
Posts: 9278
Joined: May 2008
Location: Western Canada
Contact:

Post by jelly »

First of all, it's the NIV 2011, and believe it or not the team that translated it actually knew what they were doing. Their goal was not to undermine or change their version from 1984, but to improve it and make corrections. No translation is perfect. Three different versions of the same text can actually be saying the exact same thing. It is, as you mentioned, all about the wording that can imply different things. For Matthew 1:18-19, the NIV team clearly felt that the original Greek text was better translated as "Joseph was faithful to the law". Since this distinguished team of passionate, Christian experts of language carefully weighed translation options with prayer and much consideration based on experience and knowledge, I can safely say that "Joseph was faithful to the law" is a correct translation of the text.

The fact that you admit to not caring for one 'implication' over another implies that you'd prefer to read into your favorite Biblical text and have it say what you want it to say, and this is one of the biggest travesties of the church today. Instead of attaching our faith to tradition or to comfortable implications, we should attach our faith to the heart of the Word, and we best achieve that by being open-minded when it comes to Biblical translations and studying all the different possible implications before reaching conclusions on proper authoritative interpretation. The Word of God is powerful, and I believe it's horribly naive and dangerous for you to completely dismiss a certain translation that gives us insight into further studying the original text simply because you 'don't like' an implication that doesn't line up with your pre-set ideas of what the text should be saying.
Fallacy of false continuum. // bookworm
Any cupcake can be made holy through being baptized in the name of the Butter, the Vanilla and the Powdered Sugar. // Kait
User avatar
Sherlock
Solicitor Non Grata
Posts: 3401
Joined: May 2005
Location: Bohemia

Post by Sherlock »

Traditional Catholics still use the Vulgate, primarily the preferece is for the Douay-Rheims translation (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douay–Rheims_Bible) which I believe was a Counter-Reformation publication in the late 1500s. I know some Catholics also use the St. Joseph New American Bible, but I'm not that familiar with it. I think the style mirrors the NIV whilst the Douay-Rheims is closer to the KJV in writing style.

Today, a lot of Catholics post-Vatican II are using Protestant translations like the KJV and the NIV due to their widespread popularity. However, they omit the Apocryphal books (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_apocrypha), which the Vulgate translations typically include. Typically translations that include the Apocrypha are labeled "Catholic". According to Wikipedia the hostility towards those books was a result of some Reformation sentiment.
Last edited by Sherlock on Mon Jun 04, 2012 11:03 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
SoccerLOTR
If posts were pigs...
Posts: 2055
Joined: May 2005
Location: The Woodland Realm

Post by SoccerLOTR »

Jelly wrote:First of all, it's the NIV 2011, and believe it or not the team that translated it actually knew what they were doing. Their goal was not to undermine or change their version from 1984, but to improve it and make corrections. No translation is perfect. Three different versions of the same text can actually be saying the exact same thing. It is, as you mentioned, all about the wording that can imply different things. For Matthew 1:18-19, the NIV team clearly felt that the original Greek text was better translated as "Joseph was faithful to the law". Since this distinguished team of passionate, Christian experts of language carefully weighed translation options with prayer and much consideration based on experience and knowledge, I can safely say that "Joseph was faithful to the law" is a correct translation of the text.

The fact that you admit to not caring for one 'implication' over another implies that you'd prefer to read into your favorite Biblical text and have it say what you want it to say, and this is one of the biggest travesties of the church today. Instead of attaching our faith to tradition or to comfortable implications, we should attach our faith to the heart of the Word, and we best achieve that by being open-minded when it comes to Biblical translations and studying all the different possible implications before reaching conclusions on proper authoritative interpretation. The Word of God is powerful, and I believe it's horribly naive and dangerous for you to completely dismiss a certain translation that gives us insight into further studying the original text simply because you 'don't like' an implication that doesn't line up with your pre-set ideas of what the text should be saying.
I agree with the purpose of revising the old NIV, and again, I didn't say it was necessarily inaccurate. But until I learn the actual Greek, I'm going to be careful of what texts I take as accurate. the new NIV is the only version that translates the text in that way--does that mean it is wrong? Not necessarily, but I'm not going to throw out all the implications of the former translation because there is now a new translation. I can certainly take into account the new translation, and I do like reading different translations to get a different view of what the passage is saying...but until someone I trust who knows Greek can explain to me the meaning of the passage straight from the Greek text, I'm not going to say that it is better or more accurate than the former translation. I think it is dangerous to accept a new translation without studying it and comparing it, and asking people who can translate the Greek for you--because there is no "perfect" translation. The NIV is not an exact word-for-word translation, it sometimes does some paraphrasing to make it easier to understand...while well-intentioned, it is the educated opinion of the translators, not necessarily the ONLY way it can be translated. While I may add an NIV 2011 to my library, I'm not going to throw out all other versions in submission to it.
Image
Image
It was good knowing you StrongNChrist; you taught me a lot. I'll meet you someday for real in God's presence.

Which Jesus do you follow? If Ephesians says to imitate Christ, why do you look so much like the world?~Todd Agnew

Do not be anxious about anything...~Phil 4:6-7

If more of us valued food, cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world.~Tolkien

Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.~J Adams

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.~B Franklin

I died and became a Roman Soldier--It was rather distracting.~Rory (Dr.Who)
User avatar
jelly
A Truly Great Noob
A Truly Great Noob
Posts: 9278
Joined: May 2008
Location: Western Canada
Contact:

Post by jelly »

SoccerLOTR wrote:While I may add an NIV 2011 to my library, I'm not going to throw out all other versions in submission to it.
What could have possibly led you to such a compromise? You either have a terribly inaccurate understanding of the NIV 2011 translation, or you still don't really understand the point. There's nothing whatsoever to be found in the NIV 2011 that would assume to directly contradict any other reliable translation, so it's not an 'either/or'. Let's take the passage you used earlier as an example. The NIV 1984 informs us that Joseph was a righteous man. The 2011 informs us that he was faithful to the law. Before the time of Christ, the Law was basically the highest standard for living a God-fearing life of righteousness. The fact that Joseph lived a life of faithfulness to the law meant that he was righteous indeed. I'm not educated in ancient Greek, but I can only assume that the original text communicated the idea that Joseph was faithful to the law and therefore righteous, or righteous because he was faithful to the law.. both of which essentially mean the same thing.
SoccerLOTR wrote:...but until someone I trust who knows Greek can explain to me the meaning of the passage straight from the Greek text, I'm not going to say that it is better or more accurate than the former translation.
The translators in charge of the NIV consisted of a whole team of trusted experts of ancient Greek. While unfortunately you may not have the luxury of conscripting any one of them as a personal tutor, you have the next best thing: Not just one, but two 'accurate' translations, giving you a bigger picture and a broader understanding of the original meaning.

You appear to be contradicting yourself when you speak of desiring a clearer understanding of the original meaning, yet you choose to 'distrust' any variations of the same original meaning that aren't identical to whatever specific variation you grew up with. You need to start looking at the bigger picture, which is basically essential to properly understanding the authority of the Bible in the first place.
Fallacy of false continuum. // bookworm
Any cupcake can be made holy through being baptized in the name of the Butter, the Vanilla and the Powdered Sugar. // Kait
User avatar
SoccerLOTR
If posts were pigs...
Posts: 2055
Joined: May 2005
Location: The Woodland Realm

Post by SoccerLOTR »

Dude, calm down. I don't just trust/use ONE translation that I "grew up with". I think you are jumping to assumptions about my thoughts here...I haven't crossed it off, but I need more learning about it before I accept it in its entirety. You are right in saying (sort of) that I don't have a good understanding of the NIV 2011--I've read very little of it so far. I'm going to read more before I say for certain whether it is a good translation (i.e. doesn't contradict what I know of God). Some of it is more different than versions with which I am familiar, so I am cautious...It doesn't have to be identical, but I don't want a version for myself that cuts out meaning for the sake of easier understanding, as some versions have done.
Call me paranoid or whatever...I am simply careful (possibly overly so) about what and who I trust. I'd advise you to be careful as well, though it sounds like you've already done some research, which is good.
Image
Image
It was good knowing you StrongNChrist; you taught me a lot. I'll meet you someday for real in God's presence.

Which Jesus do you follow? If Ephesians says to imitate Christ, why do you look so much like the world?~Todd Agnew

Do not be anxious about anything...~Phil 4:6-7

If more of us valued food, cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world.~Tolkien

Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.~J Adams

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.~B Franklin

I died and became a Roman Soldier--It was rather distracting.~Rory (Dr.Who)
User avatar
Christian A.
Animatronic
Posts: 1063
Joined: April 2011
Location: Copley, Ohio
Contact:

Post by Christian A. »

One of the big controversies about the NIV 2011 is the gender-neutral/inclusive language used throughout. What are your opinions on those changes, Jelly or SoccerLOTR?
Post Reply