oholycheerio

Hello! I am planning to buy a good study-type Bible and Quran, and as there are so many different versions I was wondering if anybody could point me in the right direction to a solid scholarly text of each?

I currently have my grandfather's 1941 KJV, but would like to get a Bible that's a little less fragile and as accurate and informative a translation as possible. I have heard the New Oxford Annotated Bible with Apocrypha is good in this respect... Are there any other recommendations?

I don't know if there are as many versions or differences in accuracy of translation with the Quran, but I currently have The Meaning of the Holy Quran, New Edition with Revised Translation by Abdullah Yusuf Ali. Is this good?

Thanks so much!

Tammuz

I think this is the best Quran translation, as it is done by Islamic scholars.

steve_bnk

New Oxford Annotated Bible plus the companion commetary book. Signifigant commentary on translation approaches and possiible issues in translations along with historical contexts.

steve_bnk

New Oxford Annotated Bible plus the companion commetary book. Signifigant commentary on translation approaches and possiible issues in translations along with historical contexts. Academic approach.

Kasper

Moving to BC&H

motorhead

The translation may be good. I'm not qualified to comment on that.

I didn't like the commentary. Many times he just made general comments on the text instead of specifically addressing what the text stated. Surprise, surprise, most the time this was done with unpleasant verses (and there's many in the Qur'an).

graymouser

The NRSV is probably the superior translation into English of the Christian Bible. However, conservative Christians tend to dislike it (even aside from KJV-only types) for two basic reasons. First, in Isaiah 7:14, it renders the Hebrew word "almah" as "young woman." The Septuagint renders it "parqenos" (parthenos) - which means "virgin" - and it is this translation which is referenced in Matt. 1:23. Second, the NRSV tries to be gender-neutral to a certain degree, for instance writing "adult" instead of "man" or "brothers and sisters" instead of "brothers" where mixed groups are implied. None of this should discourage you from using it as an English text, of course, just giving the well known caveats.

motorhead

Oh, and the New Oxford Annotated Bible with Apocrypha is a great choice.

avi

In my opinion, the most accurate version of the new testament is Sinaiticus. Not everyone would agree with me on this point. Consider, for example, arguably the single most significant biblical passage, the one that totally repudiates judaism, and explains the fundamental essence of christianity, without saying so, the famous pericope adulterae. You won't find John 8:7, with that most famous of all biblical quotes, "let he who is without sin, cast the first stone" in Sinaiticus, though it is found in EVERY ENGLISH bible, no exceptions.

That magnificent sentiment, describing the mythical Jesus, supposed Jewish rabbi, totally impaling judaism, with its many idiotic rules, regulations, and elitism, represents text that was not existent in the fourth century CE, i.e. the time when Sinaiticus was crafted.

Similarly, the long ending in Mark, is absent. The positive aspect of Sinaiticus, as far as I am concerned, apart from its omission of spurious writing, is that not only is it more faithful to the original manuscripts, than more recently created documents, it is possible to actually view the manuscript pages themselves, with an English translation! It is like owning your own copy of this masterpiece. And, of course, the price is right, too.

Quran: very tough. It was only in recent decades, I believe, and maybe in error here, that Muslims consented to issuance of books in translation from the Arabic. So far as I recall, historically, the sentiment was quite firm that no translation could be acomplished, in any language. Arabic ONLY.

Are there doctrinal differences in the Arabic text, between, for example Shia and Sunni, as is the case between Catholics and Protestants (and Mormons and Orthodox and etc, etc.....)? I suppose not, but do not really know for sure....I would be very leery of any English language version not authored by native speakers, but even then, British English is almost a foreign language to North American speakers, and vice versa.

Do we have available something equivalent to Sinaiticus, for the Quran???? By that query, I mean to ask whether or not there exists an internet resource, with writing in Arabic, and with selectable text, viewable, and translated into a language of the viewer's choice. Commentary and explanation would be an extra benefit, but at least, the presentation ought to include, as does Sinaiticus, a photograph of the original plate, showing the defects, the scribbles, the redactions, and the other non-supernatural interferences with the original text....

Chaucer

I would certainly agree that the Sinaiticus is crucial. I am also curious, please, why would the Vaticanus too not be fully as much superior to subsequent versions as well, in your judgement? SFAIK, the two are roughly contemporary and equally more trustworthy than anything later.

I admit I have not yet found a resource based on the Vaticanus similar to the one for Sinaiticus. Is there none and is that why you singled out the Sinaiticus?

Thanks,

Chaucer