Translations

[James]

Brothers and Sisters,

I would like to ask you all which translations of the bible you believe are fairly accurate or reliable. Even a short response as to which one(s) and why.

I have been mostly relying on the NWT and especially at the meetings that's the only one you'll see. But looking at other translations we run across different key words which can put the verse(s) in a whole new light.
I do look at the KJV for comparison as that is the one I grew up on in catholicism, but I always 'cringe' at the archaic language.

I thankest thou kindly :icon_rolleyes:

James

[SlaveForJah]

Hello James,

I usually use the NWT, at least most often. Bible Gateway is helpful. For some reason I usually look up scriptures on Bible Gateway in the Young's Literal Translation, the Darby, the New International Version, The Message Bible (though not for accuracy), and the American Standard. I like Young's because it retains the use of Jehovah. I feel the Divine Name is important, and It's purge has served to be quite detrimental. So, those are the ones I look up usually.

SlaveForJah

[scriptures]

Brothers and Sisters,

I would like to ask you all which translations of the bible you believe are fairly accurate or reliable. Even a short response as to which one(s) and why.

I have been mostly relying on the NWT and especially at the meetings that's the only one you'll see. But looking at other translations we run across different key words which can put the verse(s) in a whole new light.
I do look at the KJV for comparison as that is the one I grew up on in catholicism, but I always 'cringe' at the archaic language.

I thankest thou kindly :icon_rolleyes:

James[/b]

I am use to NWT. Interlinear of the WTS for Greek scriptures, I found this very useful and accurate. For Hebrew scriptures I use Interlinear by Green. But I do compare with other non WTS Bibles. Download e-sword, it is very useful. Lately I am using the "The Scriptures" by ISR, I love seeing God's name in Hebrew characters.

But basically for doctrinal matters I rely so much on the interlinears.

[Candace]

Hi James,

Not that I'm claiming it's accurate or reliable, but I like the NIV for the reason it's easy to understand. First I read/listen to a chapter in the NWT, then I read/listen to it in the NIV at the Bible Gateway site SFJ mentioned. For some reason my brain seems to "get it" better with this translation, and I just mentally substitute Jehovah's name where it's missing.

I also like using the Bible Gateway for comparing different translations, if there's a certain scripture I want to investigate.

[FaithfulJW]

Brothers and Sisters,

I would like to ask you all which translations of the bible you believe are fairly accurate or reliable. Even a short response as to which one(s) and why.

I have been mostly relying on the NWT and especially at the meetings that's the only one you'll see. But looking at other translations we run across different key words which can put the verse(s) in a whole new light.
I do look at the KJV for comparison as that is the one I grew up on in catholicism, but I always 'cringe' at the archaic language.

I thankest thou kindly :icon_rolleyes:

James[/b]


I like my GREEK AND HEBREW INTERLINER by J. P. Green. It has McClintoc and Strongs referance numbers above each word, under each word is the english transliteration. Along the outside margin is Greens Translation. It uses Jehovah's name some 6000 times in the Hebrew.
FaithfulJW :buja_w_oblokach:

[Jeshurun]

It's just so happens that I am currently working on an essay on this subject.

There are basically two streams of Bibles in the world, the Received Text (Textus Recepticus) and the Catholic Douay (Vulgate). The Authorized King James Version of 1611 is based on the Received Text. All Bibles before 1900 that are from the received text are fairly accurate and reliable. The worst corruptions have occurred since then, and the occultists Westcott and Hort were a huge part of it. Since we know there is a huge apostasy coming from the Watchtower, it would stand to reason that they planned ahead and gave us a translation that would make it easier to dupe the friends into accepting the New Age Religion that's coming. There are hundreds of changes that diminish Jesus, and Jehovah, and distort the issues of Salvation, Judgment, etc.

This is an extremely vital subject and something we all need to get an education about. I will be posting more information about this as soon as I get it all together.

Jesh

[James]

I would like to take this opportunity to thank SlaveforJah, Candace, Scriptures and FaithfulJW for your helpful input!!
I have tried e-sword before but was disenchanted with it, maybe it's me and I'll give it another try.
Thanks also for 'turning me on to Bible Gateway'.

I have mostly relied on the NWT (must have about 10 of them + the WT library cd-rom) and I compare with the 'The Guideposts Parallel Bible', which has the KJV, NIV, TLB and RSV side by side.

Jeshurun, we all know that Satan has been trying his darndest to corrupt, subvert, and destroy Gods' word- the bible. And if it smells of conspiracy, that you would be on top of it!! I do look forward to your research.

I agree that it is an important topic. Just look at what John 1:1 has caused from the different translations.

At the very least, I would like to see some feedback as to which translations are best to be avoided.

As always, agape
James

[scriptures]

[font="Times New Roman"]

[James]

I have a question...

While listening to an article from the march 1,2008 WT, two times they quoted a scripture (once was John 3:16) from a different translation. In both instances, they used the king james version.
Although I couldn't find it right away, I recall someone posting about using a different translation at the KH, and the glares they received.

So, does anyone know why the wts still 'cherry picks' from other translations?
Are they inferring that some verses are more accurate or descriptive in other translations than the beloved NWT?

agape,
James

[Jinnvisible]

So, does anyone know why the wts still 'cherry picks' from other translations? Are they inferring that some verses are more accurate or descriptive in other translations than the beloved NWT? agape, James[/b]

<span style="font-family:Times New Roman">The King James Version was the preferred version by many before the NWT, in some part due to its prolificacy no doubt.