Which Bible Translation Is Best For You?

Is there an absolute "best" Bible translation and should we tell folks that they should "only" be reading a particular Bible translation?  The answer to both questions is:  No!   The "best" translation for you depends upon how you are using your Bible.  And, up front, let me say that I believe folks should have several different Bible translations available.  Why do I say that?  Glad you asked.

If you are doing an indepth study of a Bible passage or book, I would suggest you use an NASB, NKJV, or KJV Bible.  Those are better for that purpose because they are word-for-word translations from early manuscripts.  Keep in mind that no copies of the original manuscripts, called autographs, exist today. 

However because there are over 25,000 copies of early manuscripts or manuscript fragments existing today (Dead Sea Scrolls, Qumran Cave Scrolls, etc.) we can be 99% sure that what we have in our Bibles today is accurate.

We know that the original Old Testament books (autographs) were written in Hebrew and Aramaic and the New Testament books were written in Greek.   By the 2nd century BC, Greek was the common language, the primary language for most people in Israel.  Thus the whole Bible was translated into Greek, called the Septuagint,  in Alexandria, Egypt.

Then, Pope Damascus I commissioned the scholar Jerome to do a Latin translation of the Bible.  And in 405 AD Jerome produced the Latin Vulgate, the Bible translated into Latin for the Roman Catholic church.

So, when and how did we get our English translations of the Bible?   That began in the early 16th century and as you can see from the chart below, a common thread found in all these English Bible translations is their manuscript source, the Masoretic Text.  What is the Masoretic Text?

The Hebrew text of the Old Testament is called the Masoretic Text because in its present form it is based upon the Masora - the Hebrew textual tradition of the Jewish scholars known as the Masoretes (or Masorites).  The Masoretes were rabbis who made it their special work to correct the faults that had crept into the text of the Old Testament during the Babylonian captivity, and to prevent, for the future, its being corrupted by any alteration. 

They first separated the apocryphal (books) from the canonical books, and divided the latter into twenty-two books, being the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet.  Then they divided each book into sections and verses.  There is a great difference of opinion as to when the Masoretic Text was written, but it was probably accomplished in the 10th -11th century. 

(https://www.gotquestions.org/Masoretic-Text.html)

From the information in the chart below, we see that the King James Bible was not the first English language translation.  As a matter of fact, when it came out in 1611 there was great resistance from the Geneva Bible proponents who claimed their translation was the legitimate English language Bible.  And, even though many KJV Only advocates swear on the KJV 1611 translation - the most common King James Bible available today is not the KJV 1611, but the KJV 1769:

In 1769 the Oxford University Press published an edition of the King James version in which many small changes were made. These changes were of five kinds: 1. Greater and more regular use of italics; 2. minor changes in the text; 3. the adoption of modern spelling; 4. changes in the marginal notes and references; and, 5. correction of printers' errors.

This edition soon came to be known as "The Oxford Standard" edition, because it was widely accepted as a standard text by commentators and other publishers. The editions of the King James version published in our century generally reproduce this Oxford edition of 1769, with or without the marginal notes.

The following information (at the URL link shown) is given so that the reader may gain an accurate impression of how far the modern editions differ from the original King James version of 1611.  

(http://www.bible-researcher.com/canon10.html)

Chronological order of English Bibles, listing the most common translations:

	Coverdale Bible  Early Modern English  Year: 1535 Source Manuscripts: Masoretic Text, the Greek New Testament of Erasmus, Vulgate, and German and Swiss-German Bibles (Luther Bible, Zürich Bible and Leo Jud's Bible)	Comment: First complete Bible printed in English (Early Modern English)
	Matthew's Bible Early Modern English Year: 1537 Source Manuscripts: Masoretic Text, the Greek New Testament of Erasmus, the Vulgate, the Luther Bible, and a French version.
	Great Bible Early Modern English Year: 1539 Source Manuscripts: Masoretic Text, Greek New Testament of Erasmus, the Vulgate, and the Luther Bible.
	Geneva Bible Early Modern English Year: 1557 (NT) Year: 1560 (full Bible) Source Manuscripts: Masoretic Text, Textus Receptus	Comment: First English Bible with whole of Old Testament translated direct from Hebrew texts
	Bishops' Bible Early Modern English Year: 1568 Source Manuscripts: Masoretic Text, Textus Receptus, Geneva Bible	Comments: Under Queen Elizabeth I, the archbishop of Canterbury took on the task of coming up with an alternative to the Geneva Bible. The Geneva Bible was the source for the Bishops’ Bible, although the offending anti-episcopal notes were removed.
	King James Version Early Modern English Year: 1611 Source Manuscripts: Masoretic Text, Textus Receptus, Tyndale 1526 NT, some Erasmus manuscripts, and Bezae 1598 Textus Receptus
	New American Standard Bible Modern English Year: 1971 Source Manuscripts: Masoretic Text, Nestle-Aland Text
	New International Version Modern English Year: 1978 Source Manuscripts: Masoretic Text, Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament (based on Westcott-Hort, Weiss and Tischendorf, 1862).
	New King James Version Modern English Year: 1982 Source Manuscripts: Masoretic Text (Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, 1983), Textus Receptus

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_Bible_translations

In 2005, my good friend, high school classmate, and high school walking buddy, James Henson, sent me an e-mail about a new Bible translation. At least it was new to me. He wrote:

Bill, Again, thank you for your ministry; I'm sure I don't say that near enough.  May God continue to bless you and your family, and most of all, your ministry!

Let me ask one question of you.  I am shopping for a new Bible in giant-print since my eyes are in very bad condition.  I have many versions, but I wanted to get your input as to which translation is sound scripturally. 

I have read some of the arguments for and against many of the current versions on the market.  I wanted to ask what you think of the NKJV, and a translation called: HCSB. (Holman Christian Standard Bible).  Please let me know what you think about each.   Yours in Christ,  James Henson

For my personal study, I still like the NASB which is a Formal Equivalence, i.e., word-for-word translation.  However, in my writings, I will use different versions - most often NIV, NKJV, and sometimes the KJV.  When looking at a particular verse, and sharing it in my writings, at times a different translation will convey the point I am trying to make more clearly than the NASB.  But, as I said, for my own personal study, I prefer the NASB.

On my bookshelves, I have many different translations - including the Jehovah's Witness's New World Translation; the Book of Mormons; and I have the Qur'an written in both English and Arabic.   I have the New American Roman Catholic Edition published in 1950 with a Douay-Rheims Old Testament and a Confraternity Edition New Testament and I have the new 1990 edition of the New American Roman Catholic Study Bible.   And, of course, with our new technology I have access to many more Bible translations via the internet. 

My go-to source for Bible translations for side-by-side comparisons and to copy/paste into my writings is the Blue Letter Bible web site  (http://www.blbclassic.org/index.cfm) which has the following translations available:  King James Version, New King James Version, New Living Translation, New International Version, English Standard Version, Holman Christian Standard Bible, New American Standard Bible, New English Translation, Revised Standard Version, American Standard Version, Young's Literal Translation, Darby Translation, Webster's Bible, Hebrew Names Version, Reina-Valera 1960, Latin Vulgate, Westminster Leningrad Codex, Septuagint, Morphological Greek New Testament, and Textus Receptus.

My second choice for personal study is the NKJV which also fall into the Formal Equivalence category.  For the past twenty-nine years I have been using a Harper's NASB Study Bible - which is just about worn out.  I love it; but, unfortunately, the Lockman Foundation took it out of print years ago.  They have their own version of a study Bible, but it is a NKJV.  It looks pretty good and I may have to switch over - but hesitate because of the years of notes in my NASB.  In the meantime I keep repairing my Harper's NASB - and hope I can keep it going until we get raptured.

At the request of my Friend and classmate, James Henson, I did research the Holman Bible.  On their web page "Introduction to the Holman Christian Standard Bible"  ( http://www.bible-researcher.com/csb.html ), I found that it gives a good description of the Holman Bible and a list of the editors and theologians involved in the project. 

The list of people involved is impressive, with a lot of Dallas Theological Seminary, Wheaton Seminary, etc., theologians in the list of credits.  You might want to read the full article on this web page.  But, on a personal level, the following comment from that article did not make me feel warm and fuzzy:

1. Each generation needs a fresh translation of the Bible in its own language.   My question:  WHY?

The Bible is the world's most important book, confronting each individual and each culture with issues that affect life, both now and forever.  Since each new generation must be introduced to God's Word in its own language, there will always be a need for new translations such as the Holman Christian Standard Bible. 

The majority of Bible translations on the market today are revisions of translations from previous generations. The Holman CSB is a new translation for today's generation.

I personally feel that there are some great translations of the Bible already available - which are quite sufficient for teaching any generation about God's word.  I do not believe we should be trying to make the Bible fit each generation's language.  Can you imagine a Rap Bible?

The thought of a different Bible for each generation takes me back to a thought I have long pondered:   When I see Women's Bible, Men's Bibles, African-American Bible - yes, there is an African-American Bible in the local Berean Christian bookstore - with a black Jesus.  Not to offend my African-American Friends; but, Jesus was a Jew - possibly with darker skin, but a Jew - not a Caucasian nor an African-American. 

And, when I see churches offering Women's Bible study, Men's Bible study, Young People's Bible Study, Newly Wed Bible Study, Divorced Folks Bible Study, Alcoholic Bible study, etc. - I often wonder rhetorically if God actually created different Bibles for all these different groups of people.  Actually, we all know this is man still trying to improve what God has authored, God's Written Word.

Personally, I am a strong advocate for Family Bible Study (maybe we need a Family Study Bible) - where you have Grandma, Grandpa, Mom and Dad, and the kiddies, young and older - all studying the Bible together.  But, churches today seem to be more specialized.  They want to offer different Bible studies for every category - except the "Family Together" category. 

About fifteen years ago, Dory and I attended a Christmas party at a Filipino-American church in Temecula, near San Diego.  The guest speaker, a Caucasian family counselor, made a great comment, telling us, "When churches are supposed to be bringing families together - why do they split the family the moment they enter the church?  Mom and dad, you go this way.  Children, you go this way.  Grandma and Grandpa, you must go another way."   Boy, did I relate to his message.

With all this said, let me offer you several very good videos and video playlists about the Bible and Bible translations.  I would suggest you archive these video discussions so that you can watch them at your leisure or as part of your personal study time:

What Prompted Translators To Issue The New King James Version Of The Bible? -  The John Ankerberg Show - 2002

In 2002, Dr. John Ankerberg hosted a debate on the King James Only controversy.  Which translation of the Bible is best for Christians to use: the 1611 King James, the New King James, the NIV, the New American Standard Bible, or some other translation?  Are all translations truly the word of God, or only the 1611 King James?

This is an important debate in which the general editors and scholars of the new translations meet face-to-face with some of their critics and those who hold that only the King James Version should be used.  The show ran almost three hours - but this YouTube playlist breaks it up into short video segments to make it more convenient for viewing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGaeb0mA0IY&list=PL0EE0E14EA7B25055&index=3

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Benefits of Essential Literal Bible Translation - Wayne Grudem, PhD. - Published on Apr 11, 2015 - The Gospel Coalition (January 2015) - Lecture by Dr. Wayne Grudem, Research Professor of Theology and Biblical Studies, Phoenix Seminary. This video is from the January 2015 "The Bible: The Bible: Canon, Texts, and Translations" Conference hosted by The Gospel Coalition, Arizona Regional Chapter, at Phoenix Seminary.

Dr. Grudem's book, "Systematic Theology," is widely used as a theology textbook in seminaries around the world.  It has sold over 500,000 copies and has been translated into eight other languages, with at least eight more foreign translations now in process.   His book, "Bible Doctrine" (which I have in my library) is a condensation of the book Systematic Theology.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOlV32Y3C9o&t=37s

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

What's the Big Deal with King James Onlyism? Part 1 - James White's Rebuttal to Dr. Sam Gipp, Strong "King James Only" Proponent.

Uploaded on Feb 29, 2012 - James White is the director of Alpha and Omega Ministries, a Christian apologetics organization based in Phoenix, Arizona.  As a professor he has taught Greek, Systematic Theology, and various topics in the field of apologetics.  He has authored or contributed to more than twenty four books. 

He is an accomplished debater, having engaged in more than one-hundred forty moderated, public debates around the world with leading proponents of Roman Catholicism, Islam, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and Mormonism, as well as critics such as Bart Ehrman, John Dominic Crossan, Marcus Borg, and John Shelby Spong.  He is an elder of the Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNGa_dRTNMo

What's the Big Deal with King James Onlyism? Part 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWoMNlLviU4

What's the Big Deal with King James Onlyism? Part 3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNWe4oTyql8

What's the Big Deal with King James Onlyism? Part 4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FLgZwaEoufY

What's the Big Deal with King James Onlyism? Part 5
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNSj559el0U

While I realize this is a lot to lay on you all at once - it is important for several reasons:

First, the more that every Christian believer knows about our Christian Bible and how it was given to us - the more you can feel secure in its message of forgiveness, salvation, and eternal security in Jesus Christ.

Second, the more you know about our Bible - the less likely that you will get trapped into a situation where you are told that "THIS" is the only Bible you should study - and "THIS" is the only church where you can find salvation - and other legalistic "ONLYs" - which man has created to support his varying theologies.  The church which Jesus Christ instituted on the Day of Pentecost 33 AD is the full body of believers worldwide. 

One day we will ALL be joining together in heaven for one big eternal worship service.  But, until then, we should be gathering with like minded Christian believers in our local churches - supporting one another, teaching and studying His Word, and sharing His Word with non-believers in our own circle of influence, our FRANs (Friends, Relatives, Associates, Neighbors) and our communities.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill