I prefer a more formal equivalence myself. But I tell my church to use 2 or 3 good translations (not paraphrases) when they are actually studying a passage precisely because there is no perfect translation. While my #1 translation is the NASB, I use others as well. I particularly like the Full Notes edition of the NET. It gives me insights that I may not have had on my own (because I still struggle with the Greek text).
My favorite since I started has been the NKJV. It helps me because I feel like the text is clear enough, while maintaining the poetic flow of the text.
My first non-KJV Bible was a NASB 77 so I've always had a love for the NASB. I probably use it along with my KJV or NKJV the most but I refer to multiple translations when studying via Logos.
I definitely have more confidence in the more formal translations and rely heavily on the NKJV and NASB 95 versions, for instance, but I do recognize the value of dynamic interpretations as well. The CSB is, as you point out, a very good translation and probably my favorite of the less-formal versions. We are very blessed in the English-speaking world to have so many fine Bible versions available to us.
My primary translations are KJV, NKJV, NLT, CSB, AND LSB. You get more formal ones with some more dynamic ones, and it makes for a great experience. I do really wish that the CSB was a Majority Text translation!
I usually use the ESV just because I'm so familiar with it. However, I think I generally prefer a middle of the road approach like the NIV or CSB. Now I'm getting my feet wet with Greek and would like to be able to read the Greek NT.
Granted, I'm only beginning to learn the biblical languages, but I find it's a lot easier to translate in formal equivalence than functional equivalence aka dynamic equivalence. It's a lot easier to go word by word through a text and translate each word with a gloss or something like that, and then to try to "clean it up" so it sounds like natural English. (At the least I could just use a crib like the NASB! 😉) But I find it's much harder to do a functional or dynamic equivalence because it takes a better understanding of the original biblical language or source language and the receptor language like English. I have to be sufficiently literate in both, say, Koine Greek and my own native American English to be able to "turn a phrase" in a way that's accurate, clear, natural, and often beautiful too. I have to know the technical details of two languages (e.g. structure, syntax), and I have to have a good ear for literary style in English, since a good dynamic translation is best heard as well as read. That seems much more challenging to me. So I don't disparage dynamic or functional equivalence translations as much as I used to before trying to learn the biblical languages! 😊
@@philtheo very true! I think formula equivalents is far easier to translate, functional is more understandable in some ways, but I think it also involves a much deeper understanding of the original languages... Not to mention there is the hazard of reading into the text something that is not there. Also the nasb can be a very comfy crib lol 😂😂
I tend more toward using NASB95 and the 2020 update, but growing up I'd use NIV and I tend to quote from that most often still. I've been getting into a few other translations as well. Some RSV and ESV. I love the translation notes in the NET too.
I’m just a beginner in learning the Greek. When I translate I start out very very very formal and gradually move all the way to paraphrasing. I cross check myself with all the other translations I can get my hands on. Make any further investigative studies and changes if any. As I grow, I review, and working toward final text’s. I want a step-by-step parallel translation book. Hence, complete Greek text (all known), grammatical notated parsing with initial wooden glossing, to a very formal translation, etc.,. A huge task I shall never complete, not just because of my age-60-but so deep of knowing what He is telling me (or all the possible things He will share with me), but remains my remaining life’s goal nevertheless. Personally, I don’t see anyone learning Greek or even just reading the English, not actually expanding and expounding their own interpretations from the formal to dynamic and paraphrasing to their understanding. I believe we do this naturally-even the more so for those who genuinely study and apply Gods Word. I can no longer even read a verse without my mind going to a collective knowledge and still finding something to add or wanting to further study and add. Sometimes this is very annoying. I don’t get far in my “reading a Bible all the way through in a year” thing 😂. E.g. I’ll start John and never get past chapter 1 before I’m instantly transported into Genesis chapter 1, etc., in an endless loop and wanting to dwell deeper on a single concept of even a single word! Then before I know it, that IS what I’m doing…at my desk pulling up references and academic works, etc.,. I just can’t help it.
@@richiejourney1840 I understand exactly what you're saying! I am so susceptible to plunging down the rabbit hole! Don't tell yourself you're too old, Erasmus didn't learn Greek until he was almost 40! What's 20 years ! Lol , joking aside good for you again for trying to learn Greek but more so than that good for you for trying to apply it in your life!
You'll get a great balance and understanding if you use multiple translations. I recommend one of the NASB's (NASB '95, NASB '2020 or the LSB), as a primary translation cross references with a good medium translation such as the NIV, NRSV or CSB, and the more dynamic translations like the NLT or the GNB.
I would like to see in your video on the NLT, what range of people would you give one to, as their first Bible. I ask because some folk are not skilled readers, and need something easy to understand.
@@Tommy12561 good question, probably (in my opinion) the CSB or the BSB. Both are good representations of sticking right down the middle of the two philosophies.
@ I like it so far. I’d say it’s the most dynamic on my list. According to R. Grant Jones’ translation charts, it seems to bridge the Traditional and Critical texts.
I started with the KJV and then went to NKJ and now I read NIV. I told my self that I would not read the NLT because I heard negative things about it but now I have an NLT I really enjoy it especially the Every Woman's Bible. I would like to see a video on the NLT. I also have other translation ESV, NASB and CSB I also love the footnotes on the CSB and NKJ.
I like these definitions I've heard: formal equivalence translation aims to reproduce the source text in the target text, while dynamic equivalence translation aims for the original intent of the author. I use formal equivalence when reading Greek because it’s easier to get a Greek-to-English gloss word mapping, but when reading pure English, I prefer dynamic equivalence. I personally don't think there is a truly formal equivalence translation due to language idioms. It would confuse many English speakers if Greek idioms were to enter English translations. Young's Literal Translation is the only one that I know of that does a literal translation. I've liked the NIV 1984 because the English "feels" better to me, but I use the NIV 2011 as well. A slight correction, KJV and NIV are dynamic equivalence translation's. I dislike it when some, mostly KJV-only people, insist that all other translations are misguided or "the Bible of the condemned" in extreme ideologies, especially since I started reading Greek and I know that the majority of modern translations are perfectly fine. There are some cases where I feel like some phrase translations could be better, but it’s impossible to map any two languages perfectly into each other. An example is the under-translation of "imperfect" as a repeated or continuing action. Nuances such as this really make me appreciate Greek all the more.
I prefer really good idiomatic translations that can be used for personal reading and Church readings. If something is poetic then I want there to poetry. For me REB or NRSV. I'm not really keen on the ASV/NASB line (clunky) but if you can't stand the King James or its language is too antiquaited to read with comfort then I can see the point in usng that, especially in the US. That said, if I have been working with a Greek text I often develop a hankering for the King James or, at a pinch New King James or even the Revised Version, which is only really available online these days. I also like reading the Vulgate at such times (Latin). After reading in Greek I don't often come back to the 'daily use' Bible version. Of course the King James is well known from my youth and that isn't the case for everyone, so each person will have different needs - it's definitely not for everyone. For the Old Testament I am currently making use of a translation of the Septuagint and on occasion the Greek text.
Hi John, I have a question, Do you ever worry about translations that don’t have italics or more “dynamic” translation philosophy, could have a danger to them. As the translators are making interpretations for you and not allowing the reader to interpret the text for themselves.? I read the NASB and KJV and for me it’s so hard to have someone interpret a text for me as I tend to be distrustful and independent.
@austenlockhart2982 great question! Yes, it is something that makes me cautious, that's why I use multiple translations. If you have the NASB, NKJV, KJV and use those alongside a more dynamic translation you should be golden. You are correct though that dynamic translations can influence the text with bias, however in most cases you are safe if you use the major editions (NLT, NIV, CSB)
Although I like the KJV I really dislike the italics. If it's a translation then no italics are needed - it's not an addition to the text but a translation of it with all English words necessary to the task.
@@SDsc0rch I think that's overstated. Commentary is an opinion on what the text means. It can be close to the text or not at all. Translation, on the other hand, is bound by grammar and the range of possible meanings for words. Is there some subjectivity? Yes. Is there interpretation? Yes. But it's not the same as commentary, unless you're using a paraphrase translation. Translation and commentary are different degrees of interpretation in my view.
My preferred translation is the King James Bible (KJV). Why? Because I believe that God has preserved His word in SOME of the copies of the original writings (autographs) as He said He would. “The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.” Psalm 12:6, 7 (KJV). I also believe that God has enabled the translators who produced the King James Bible to do an accurate English translation. That is not to say that it is impossible for there to be other accurate English translations. However, there is none other among the approximately 900 modern English Translations. The reasons why are (1) often they use a critical Greek text which is, in fact, a mutilated and depraved Greek text and/or (2) they translate according to their particular theological beliefs and/or (3) they were not inspired by the Holy Spirit. For God says, “Canst thou by searching find out God? canst thou find out the Almighty unto perfection?” Job 11:7. “Great is our Lord, and of great power: his understanding is infinite.” Psalm 147:5. The VERY IDEA that human beings can translate using a thought-for-thought approach shows the pride of mankind in their finite intellect, when God’s intellect is infinite. A prayerful study of the King James Bible will cause us to realise in ourselves the truth which Jesus spoke: “They shall be all taught of God.” John 6:45. Thus, God will lead us to perceive that there are BILLIONS and more of God’s thoughts in the King James Bible, enough to occupy our minds for the ceaseless ages to come. Let us not then be “taught by the precept [the commandment] of men.” Isaiah 29:13. For “thus saith the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh [makes human beings] his arm [his moral strength], and whose heart departeth from the LORD.” Jeremiah 17:5.
@@AndreaSutherland I want you to know Andrea, I'm really glad that you love your Bible. In the King James version is an excellent Bible translation! However with that being said, I do think that some of the things you said are not fully accurate. The critical text editions are not evil, I myself do not necessarily think they are the best (I prefer the majority/Byzantine text) that doesn't mean that they are also the modern translations are very faithful, simply because they follow a different text does not make them unfaithful. But again I'm very glad that you love the King James, it is an excellent translation like I said. The important thing is that you read it! God bless you!
The best is GODS WORDS IN the KING JAMES BIBLE... The worst is every other modern translation which have CHANGED GODS WORDS, trying to PLAY GOD AND BE THEIR OWN GOD. DECIDING WHAT GOD SAID. The sad thing is you trust The Lord Jesus Christ for your Salvation... Yet God said he would preserve "HIS WORDS" Are you really that silly to think that GOD would hand you 225 plus different "translations" That all say something different, attack everything God SAID.. And say here you go, pick which ever one makes you feel the most comfortable.. Which one do you like.. Silly silly, Christians.. Common sense isn't all that common is it?
@@richiejourney1840 Every single person is a sinner. What in the world does that have to do with a believer accepting GODS WORDS as they stand and not trying to play GOD BY CHANGING THEM or accepting multiple different "versions" that do?
@@richiejourney1840 duckduckgo bible translations or modern bible translations and find your own lists.. I am not going to type it up and spend hours doing so. It is not hard to find..
I prefer a more formal equivalence myself. But I tell my church to use 2 or 3 good translations (not paraphrases) when they are actually studying a passage precisely because there is no perfect translation. While my #1 translation is the NASB, I use others as well. I particularly like the Full Notes edition of the NET. It gives me insights that I may not have had on my own (because I still struggle with the Greek text).
@@dougbaker2755 I couldn't agree more. At least three translations at a minimum. I also love how thorough the notes are in the NET
My favorite since I started has been the NKJV. It helps me because I feel like the text is clear enough, while maintaining the poetic flow of the text.
@@Anoticx I love the NKJV as well, especially for its footnotes. Some of the best of any Bible I know of
My first non-KJV Bible was a NASB 77 so I've always had a love for the NASB. I probably use it along with my KJV or NKJV the most but I refer to multiple translations when studying via Logos.
I definitely have more confidence in the more formal translations and rely heavily on the NKJV and NASB 95 versions, for instance, but I do recognize the value of dynamic interpretations as well. The CSB is, as you point out, a very good translation and probably my favorite of the less-formal versions. We are very blessed in the English-speaking world to have so many fine Bible versions available to us.
@@Paladin12572 I agree!
My primary translations are KJV, NKJV, NLT, CSB, AND LSB. You get more formal ones with some more dynamic ones, and it makes for a great experience. I do really wish that the CSB was a Majority Text translation!
@@DanielSteel1999 same here! I really really wish the csb was a majority text translation, if it was it probably would be my go-to.
I usually use the ESV just because I'm so familiar with it. However, I think I generally prefer a middle of the road approach like the NIV or CSB. Now I'm getting my feet wet with Greek and would like to be able to read the Greek NT.
@@nathanielotto258 that's awesome! Those are all great translations! I'm so glad to hear you want to learn Greek!
I grew up on the NIV 84 but I now generally prefer the more literal translations.
Granted, I'm only beginning to learn the biblical languages, but I find it's a lot easier to translate in formal equivalence than functional equivalence aka dynamic equivalence. It's a lot easier to go word by word through a text and translate each word with a gloss or something like that, and then to try to "clean it up" so it sounds like natural English. (At the least I could just use a crib like the NASB! 😉)
But I find it's much harder to do a functional or dynamic equivalence because it takes a better understanding of the original biblical language or source language and the receptor language like English. I have to be sufficiently literate in both, say, Koine Greek and my own native American English to be able to "turn a phrase" in a way that's accurate, clear, natural, and often beautiful too. I have to know the technical details of two languages (e.g. structure, syntax), and I have to have a good ear for literary style in English, since a good dynamic translation is best heard as well as read. That seems much more challenging to me. So I don't disparage dynamic or functional equivalence translations as much as I used to before trying to learn the biblical languages! 😊
@@philtheo very true! I think formula equivalents is far easier to translate, functional is more understandable in some ways, but I think it also involves a much deeper understanding of the original languages... Not to mention there is the hazard of reading into the text something that is not there.
Also the nasb can be a very comfy crib lol 😂😂
I tend to use a spectrum. BSB, NET, CSB, NLT and ESV. Every once in a while NKJV.
@@thedrumssayyes that's great! The more you use the better in my opinion
I tend more toward using NASB95 and the 2020 update, but growing up I'd use NIV and I tend to quote from that most often still. I've been getting into a few other translations as well. Some RSV and ESV. I love the translation notes in the NET too.
@@isaaccline2505 same here! I think that the footnotes in the net are unsurpassed
I’m just a beginner in learning the Greek. When I translate I start out very very very formal and gradually move all the way to paraphrasing. I cross check myself with all the other translations I can get my hands on. Make any further investigative studies and changes if any. As I grow, I review, and working toward final text’s. I want a step-by-step parallel translation book. Hence, complete Greek text (all known), grammatical notated parsing with initial wooden glossing, to a very formal translation, etc.,. A huge task I shall never complete, not just because of my age-60-but so deep of knowing what He is telling me (or all the possible things He will share with me), but remains my remaining life’s goal nevertheless.
Personally, I don’t see anyone learning Greek or even just reading the English, not actually expanding and expounding their own interpretations from the formal to dynamic and paraphrasing to their understanding. I believe we do this naturally-even the more so for those who genuinely study and apply Gods Word. I can no longer even read a verse without my mind going to a collective knowledge and still finding something to add or wanting to further study and add. Sometimes this is very annoying. I don’t get far in my “reading a Bible all the way through in a year” thing 😂. E.g. I’ll start John and never get past chapter 1 before I’m instantly transported into Genesis chapter 1, etc., in an endless loop and wanting to dwell deeper on a single concept of even a single word! Then before I know it, that IS what I’m doing…at my desk pulling up references and academic works, etc.,. I just can’t help it.
@@richiejourney1840 I understand exactly what you're saying! I am so susceptible to plunging down the rabbit hole! Don't tell yourself you're too old, Erasmus didn't learn Greek until he was almost 40! What's 20 years ! Lol , joking aside good for you again for trying to learn Greek but more so than that good for you for trying to apply it in your life!
Hi John Ii enjoy very much your videos.😊
@@davecrawford4377 thank you so much Dave! I'm glad you like them!
I still use the HCSB. They left the "disputed" verses in the text instead of in the footnotes.
@@ThePaPappy that's good to know, I definitely would prefer to leave the disputed passages in the text in brackets then put them in the footnotes
Would love to see a video about NLT!
You'll get a great balance and understanding if you use multiple translations. I recommend one of the NASB's (NASB '95, NASB '2020 or the LSB), as a primary translation cross references with a good medium translation such as the NIV, NRSV or CSB, and the more dynamic translations like the NLT or the GNB.
I would like to see in your video on the NLT, what range of people would you give one to, as their first Bible.
I ask because some folk are not skilled readers, and need something easy to understand.
@@genewood9062 that's coming out tomorrow
What one bible version would you say has the best of both of these worlds? Thanks. I'm interested in watching more videos from you.
@@Tommy12561 good question, probably (in my opinion) the CSB or the BSB. Both are good representations of sticking right down the middle of the two philosophies.
I rotate between NKJV, BSB, NASB, MEV, and EHV.
@@tjmaverick1765 stellar selection! I'm not super familiar with the ehv, how do you like it
@ I like it so far. I’d say it’s the most dynamic on my list. According to R. Grant Jones’ translation charts, it seems to bridge the Traditional and Critical texts.
@@tjmaverick1765I love the way that the EHV handles verb tenses.
I started with the KJV and then went to NKJ and now I read NIV. I told my self that I would not read the NLT because I heard negative things about it but now I have an NLT I really enjoy it especially the Every Woman's Bible. I would like to see a video on the NLT. I also have other translation ESV, NASB and CSB I also love the footnotes on the CSB and NKJ.
@@noragarcia252 I made one for the NLT, comes out Monday! I'm so glad you use all those translations! 😁
I like these definitions I've heard: formal equivalence translation aims to reproduce the source text in the target text, while dynamic equivalence translation aims for the original intent of the author.
I use formal equivalence when reading Greek because it’s easier to get a Greek-to-English gloss word mapping, but when reading pure English, I prefer dynamic equivalence. I personally don't think there is a truly formal equivalence translation due to language idioms. It would confuse many English speakers if Greek idioms were to enter English translations. Young's Literal Translation is the only one that I know of that does a literal translation.
I've liked the NIV 1984 because the English "feels" better to me, but I use the NIV 2011 as well. A slight correction, KJV and NIV are dynamic equivalence translation's.
I dislike it when some, mostly KJV-only people, insist that all other translations are misguided or "the Bible of the condemned" in extreme ideologies, especially since I started reading Greek and I know that the majority of modern translations are perfectly fine.
There are some cases where I feel like some phrase translations could be better, but it’s impossible to map any two languages perfectly into each other. An example is the under-translation of "imperfect" as a repeated or continuing action. Nuances such as this really make me appreciate Greek all the more.
I love that definition. Well said!
I prefer really good idiomatic translations that can be used for personal reading and Church readings. If something is poetic then I want there to poetry. For me REB or NRSV. I'm not really keen on the ASV/NASB line (clunky) but if you can't stand the King James or its language is too antiquaited to read with comfort then I can see the point in usng that, especially in the US.
That said, if I have been working with a Greek text I often develop a hankering for the King James or, at a pinch New King James or even the Revised Version, which is only really available online these days. I also like reading the Vulgate at such times (Latin). After reading in Greek I don't often come back to the 'daily use' Bible version. Of course the King James is well known from my youth and that isn't the case for everyone, so each person will have different needs - it's definitely not for everyone.
For the Old Testament I am currently making use of a translation of the Septuagint and on occasion the Greek text.
I use the NKJV and the NLT
@@stevehill353 same here! What a coincidence 😂
Hi John, I have a question,
Do you ever worry about translations that don’t have italics or more “dynamic” translation philosophy, could have a danger to them. As the translators are making interpretations for you and not allowing the reader to interpret the text for themselves.? I read the NASB and KJV and for me it’s so hard to have someone interpret a text for me as I tend to be distrustful and independent.
@austenlockhart2982 great question! Yes, it is something that makes me cautious, that's why I use multiple translations. If you have the NASB, NKJV, KJV and use those alongside a more dynamic translation you should be golden. You are correct though that dynamic translations can influence the text with bias, however in most cases you are safe if you use the major editions (NLT, NIV, CSB)
Although I like the KJV I really dislike the italics. If it's a translation then no italics are needed - it's not an addition to the text but a translation of it with all English words necessary to the task.
@cpnlsn88 I actually like the italics. I think it shows transparency. However that's just my opinion
@@austenlockhart2982 not necessarily. Although I prefer italics, I don't necessarily think the lack of them is bad.
I use the CSB
@@davecrawford4377 the CSB is really taking off from what I've seen! Great translation!
True believers read the ASV.😮
@@CaribouDataScience what do you mean by this?
every translation is a commentary
@@SDsc0rch to some extent you are correct 👍
@@SDsc0rch I think that's overstated. Commentary is an opinion on what the text means. It can be close to the text or not at all. Translation, on the other hand, is bound by grammar and the range of possible meanings for words. Is there some subjectivity? Yes. Is there interpretation? Yes. But it's not the same as commentary, unless you're using a paraphrase translation. Translation and commentary are different degrees of interpretation in my view.
My first Quran was translated, and then I found an English version and it was not perfect….
My preferred translation is the King James Bible (KJV). Why? Because I believe that God has preserved His word in SOME of the copies of the original writings (autographs) as He said He would. “The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.” Psalm 12:6, 7 (KJV). I also believe that God has enabled the translators who produced the King James Bible to do an accurate English translation. That is not to say that it is impossible for there to be other accurate English translations. However, there is none other among the approximately 900 modern English Translations. The reasons why are (1) often they use a critical Greek text which is, in fact, a mutilated and depraved Greek text and/or (2) they translate according to their particular theological beliefs and/or (3) they were not inspired by the Holy Spirit. For God says, “Canst thou by searching find out God? canst thou find out the Almighty unto perfection?” Job 11:7. “Great is our Lord, and of great power: his understanding is infinite.” Psalm 147:5. The VERY IDEA that human beings can translate using a thought-for-thought approach shows the pride of mankind in their finite intellect, when God’s intellect is infinite. A prayerful study of the King James Bible will cause us to realise in ourselves the truth which Jesus spoke: “They shall be all taught of God.” John 6:45. Thus, God will lead us to perceive that there are BILLIONS and more of God’s thoughts in the King James Bible, enough to occupy our minds for the ceaseless ages to come. Let us not then be “taught by the precept [the commandment] of men.” Isaiah 29:13. For “thus saith the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh [makes human beings] his arm [his moral strength], and whose heart departeth from the LORD.” Jeremiah 17:5.
@@AndreaSutherland I want you to know Andrea, I'm really glad that you love your Bible. In the King James version is an excellent Bible translation!
However with that being said, I do think that some of the things you said are not fully accurate. The critical text editions are not evil, I myself do not necessarily think they are the best (I prefer the majority/Byzantine text) that doesn't mean that they are also the modern translations are very faithful, simply because they follow a different text does not make them unfaithful. But again I'm very glad that you love the King James, it is an excellent translation like I said. The important thing is that you read it! God bless you!
The best is GODS WORDS IN the KING JAMES BIBLE... The worst is every other modern translation which have CHANGED GODS WORDS, trying to PLAY GOD AND BE THEIR OWN GOD. DECIDING WHAT GOD SAID.
The sad thing is you trust The Lord Jesus Christ for your Salvation... Yet God said he would preserve "HIS WORDS" Are you really that silly to think that GOD would hand you 225 plus different "translations" That all say something different, attack everything God SAID.. And say here you go, pick which ever one makes you feel the most comfortable.. Which one do you like..
Silly silly, Christians.. Common sense isn't all that common is it?
If you say so fellow sinner…
Would you provide that list of 225 translations? I have no where near that many available to me.
@@richiejourney1840 Every single person is a sinner. What in the world does that have to do with a believer accepting GODS WORDS as they stand and not trying to play GOD BY CHANGING THEM or accepting multiple different "versions" that do?
@@richiejourney1840 duckduckgo bible translations or modern bible translations and find your own lists.. I am not going to type it up and spend hours doing so. It is not hard to find..
@@richiejourney1840 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_English_Bible_translations