The ** you do not have permission to see this link ** is a more readable version of the King James, removing many of the archaic terms and modernizing the syntax. Both the KJV and the NKJV are “literal” translations.
The ** you do not have permission to see this link ** has since filled the place of the NASB as a “literal” but readable translation. It seems to have replaced the NASB for many who prefer a translation on the “literal” end of the continuum.
The ** you do not have permission to see this link ** is by far the most “dynamic” of the most popular modern translations. When first released, the NLT sold very well, and for at time it looked as though it might overtake the NIV as the most popular dynamic translation. In recent years the NLT has faded while the NIV’s sales remain strong.
The ** you do not have permission to see this link ** or NET Bible is an internet-based version, although it is also available in book form. The NET contains extensive notes on the translation. While other modern versions may undergo a major revision every decade or so, the NET Bible is continually updated and revised as needed.
The ** you do not have permission to see this link ** is the most popular version among non-evangelical Bible scholars. Evangelicals tend to stay away from this translation, as the translation team included many who were not committed to the authority of the biblical text. However, they were competent scholars in the biblical languages.
** you do not have permission to see this link **
I’m a KJV guy but not for theological or translation reasons – it’s the moment when the English language was firing on all cylinders. (Along with Shakespeare and Burton’s Anatomy of Melancholy.) Removing the archaisms just takes out a lot of the fun!
For actual study in general I agree the NRSV is probably the way to go.
For what it’s worth ** you do not have permission to see this link ** by a professional translator claiming that the NIV deliberately mistranslates apparently to fit a previously held theological agenda, with dozens of examples.
Robert said
I don’t know about the Kindle/Nook versions. The King James Version is indeed important for its history and the King’s English, but it is definitely not recommended for scholarly study. Perhaps its one advantage is that it allows one to see if the second person pronoun in the underlying Hebrew or Greek is singular (thee) or plural (ye). I like the NET but generally prefer the NRSV as a little more literal. For a modern English translation of the Greek LXX, the NETS is very good.
The top 3 results in an amazon Kindle search shows
NRSV with Apocrypha 346 ratings 4.5
NRSV 289 ratings 4.5
The New Oxford Annotated Bible with Apocrypha NRSV 1,095 ratings 4.5
Stephen said
I’m a KJV guy but not for theological or translation reasons – it’s the moment when the English language was firing on all cylinders. (Along with Shakespeare and Burton’s Anatomy of Melancholy.) Removing the archaisms just takes out a lot of the fun!For actual study in general I agree the NRSV is probably the way to go.
For what it’s worth ** you do not have permission to see this link ** by a professional translator claiming that the NIV deliberately mistranslates apparently to fit a previously held theological agenda, with dozens of examples.
The article was informative. Thank you for sharing.
Stephen said
Glad to be of use to the conversation. I would also point out that the other articles at ** you do not have permission to see this link **. All stuffed with links and bibliographies.
I will see if I really need to add the content of the alternative Exodus tradition to a second edition of my book, Historical Accuracy by Steve Campbell.
qid=1617811412&sr=8-1
Lionel Windsor, PhD (Theology)
** you do not have permission to see this link **
Question the new alternative readings of Romans. Go with the longstanding, traditional readings of Romans.
Paul turns to address a particular person.
“But if you call yourself a Jew”
RSV, NRSV, JB, NIV, CSB, ESV, NET, NASB 2020
“But if you are called a Jew”
NASB 1977 & 1995, NKJV
Steve Campbell, author of the book, Historical Accuracy
I have a preference for the NASB.
The New American Bible (NAB), my Catholic Study Bible,
shows “Now, if you call yourself a Jew…”
The NABRE has the same.
I was going to replace my NAB with an NASB first choice and Catholic Study Bible (NABRE) second.
Lionel Windsor, PhD (Theology)
Reflexive: But if you call yourself a Jew [Invalid translation]
Passive: But if you are called a Jew [Valid translation]
Steve Campbell, author of the book, Historical Accuracy
So, I’ll have to see if my parents left me an NASB Study Bible.
My books are in storage until who knows when.
I disagree that the NRSV and the NABRE are the bibles of choice.
See: ** you do not have permission to see this link **
Steefen said
Bart in a Recent Post Replied:In my courses we use the HarperCollins Study Bible, which I like best. Another good option is the Oxford Annotated Bible.
Steefen
Thank you.
Both are NRSV.
Now, let’s see one or two posts by Bart regard the NRSV:
** you do not have permission to see this link **
and
** you do not have permission to see this link **
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)