Ganymede

Can anyone tell me which version of the bible is generally held by scholars to be the most accurate translation from the original Greek?

Thanks in advance.

G

Peter Kirby

Scholars frown on using a translation to make fine points on the meaning of the text. But the RSV seems to be popular for making quotations in English.

best,
Peter Kirby

the_cave

Hard to say, since even scholars differ over what the meaning of the Greek is!

If you REALLY wanted the best translation, you should buy the 20+ volume Anchor Bible Commentary--which has not only an excellent translation, but more annotations than you could ever imagine, sure to flesh out all kinds of nuances in the words.

Barring that, I actually might recommend believe it or not the New American Bible, the "official" bible of the American Catholic Church (now that they've dropped the JB and Good News as alternate translations for readings in church.) It's an excellent translation as these things go, and usually comes with a decent textual commentary, far more neutral-minded than you might expect. The 1970 translation (out of print) is sometimes refreshingly original, especially in the NT. The 1986 revision is less so, but uses significantly gender-inclusive language in the Psalms and NT. I prefer the 1986 revision myself.

Don't confuse this with the NSAB, which is an conservative Protestant translation--however, the 1995 revision has qualities all its own, and it is generally regarded as a fairly "literal" translation of the Hebrew and Greek.

Lastly, check out the New Jerusalem Bible. It's still a little free overall, but generally faithful to the original language, and a good compromise between conflicting considerations. There is an edition with very extensive notes, though many were written in the 60's.

You might also want to get a Greek-English interlinear translation, usually available with either the NIV or the NRSV translation (older out-of-print versions will have the RSV). Each has shortcomings, but there will be a literal word-by-word translation provided underneath the Greek text, which can be quite interesting, if often esoteric.

Finally, I would agree that the RSV is pretty good, but all language addressed to God (The Lord in the OT; the resurrected Christ and God the Father in the NT) uses "thou art" language, for no reason other than tradition and piety. It does not reflect an aspect of the original language.

Magus55

King James bible is considered to be the most accurate translation from the original greek and hebrew.

not a theist

Though it is usually quite literal in its translation, it suffers from the fact that the manuscripts used were themselves of rather poor quality. Modern versions usually use better manuscripts and since textual criticism is much more advanced now probably represent an earlier version of the text than the KJV does.

keyser_soze

Please, oh great scholar of the word[sarcasm on maximum setting] tell us how you come to support this statement[waits expectantly as 100 others ready the forks to shred this one].

Egoinos

Depends who you ask. If you have a look at the commentaries out there, some use one version, some use another, some chuck the whole lot out and translate it themselves.

My college insists we use the RSV though, they say its the most literal one, though you can just about get away with using the NRSV or the NJB as well. So long as you don't turn up with the New Living, Message, or King James, they don't mind overmuch.

I have heard that its best to go for the Jewish Publication Society's translation of the OT though. But as that came from someone obsessed by Judaism, that mightn't be the view of scholars

CX

By whom and on what basis? Are you familiar with the history and formation of the KJV? I'm not inclined to give a tutorial here, but would do so if enough people showed an interest. Essentially your statement is completely false.

CX

BTW to answer your question, there is no one English version which is best. Different translation comittees operate on different principles. Since there is not a one to one correspondence between one language and another, decisions have to be be made with regard to overall philosophy some versions operate under a "literal" sort of word for word approach while others use and conceptual approach. There is some nuance and meaning lost regardless. The best solution apart from learning biblical languages and using a good critical text (like NA27) is to have several different versions and compare them. A number of reasonably good modern translations exist. As long as you avoid ineherently inferior and unreliable translations (KJV, NKJV, The Living Bible etc.) you will probably get a good feeling for the text. I tend to favor the RSV, but usually refer to the Critical Greek text first and an english translation second. It is also helpful to have a good concordance and perhaps and interlinear and lexicon.

CX

I find that rather odd. One ought to be careful not to equate "literal" with necessarily best reflecting the original text. Very often literal translations are wooden and artless and lose a significant amount of the nuance and meaning of the original text. Including poetic style, idiom, plays on words etc. Consider the following french idiom:

Chaqun a son gout

The literal translation is "Each one to his taste". Which gives a general impression of meaning, but loses much of the nuance of a conceptual translation such as, "To each his own".