I’m a Hebrew Bible reader, so I’ll use the JPS and NRSVue for that. Then I’ll also consult Robert Alter’s translation especially for the poetic sections of the Hebrew Bible. All 3 are excellent translations and glad that you pointed them out in the video
Gosh, Dan, is there anything you don’t know in your field? You are so full of knowledge! We are so lucky to have you! Thank you so much for sharing with us!!! 💙💙💙
matter of fact, yeah, there was this one time where Dan went onto "The Danny Jones Podcast" and immediately began to give false information regarding his field of study. I know this, because ive seen the video where he gets lambasted for about 2 hours straight on bad information he gave. So uhm... yeah. If i didnt know better id say this comment of yours was meant to be sarcastic, but it wasnt.
He comes out with so much mis-leading and Deceptive information its astonishing , The best English Translation is the Recovery Translation of The Bible
"Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth." ~ 2nd Timothy 2:15 (NIV)
The best translation is when people wake up to the fact that it is just a book, a cross between sketchy recalling of a time from 2000+ years and a storybook. And yes, I have read the bible, from cover to cover.
I have the most recent edition of the New Oxford Annotated Bible, it's absolutely fantastic and even though I'm sure the updates aren't going to be super extensive I'm probably still going to get the new one when it drops.
I enjoy the wonderful work and effort you make regarding biblical issues, Dan. If I may, I would add another for people of study. Near Eastern Christians only read and trust the Aramaic and Hebrew text. They consider anything that isn't in Aramaic/Hebrew to be an interpretation. They use the Aramaic P'sheeta text, not to be confused with the P'sheeto text, which was altered to align with Greek texts that were considered flawed. Some might dismiss this saying: "P'sheeta was written in Syriac and came from Greek because the Greek is older." Not true. "Syriac" is a Greek misnomer for the dialect of Aramaic spoken by those in the land of Syria. Another fact to consider that people of the West don't realize is that once a new copy of scriptures have been made, they burn the old ones. The P'sheeta comes from a line of older Aramaic text through the centuries. They still practice this scribal tradition today. We find older Greek versions because Hellenistic Jews didn't practice that burning tradition. In fact, they struggled to keep Egyptian influences out. I highly recommend the Aramaic P'sheeta text for serious study. I hope this helps others in their studies and path of enlightenment. 💫💜💫 Shlama laakh (Peace to you).
I usually read it for pleasure, so I often read the New Living Bible and the KJV. Both can be criticized for translation errors. But I love the NLB for the easy modern English and the KJV for rhythm and poetry. When I study it, I look at the more accurate translations. I can't read Greek or Hebrew. So when I study a passage, I'll read it in many translations. Reading a modern accurate translation helps make the kjv understandable.
Hopefully they split the New Oxford into multiple volumes. SBL is cool and all but the paper thinness is a nightmare to deal with. Yes it would be more expensive, but two volumes and thicker paper would be a massive quality of life improvement.
I'm looking forward to reviews of the second edition of the SBL Study Bible -- the publishers put improved paper as one of its main selling points 😂 so I'm hopeful it will be legible.
@@ljones269I agree that it’s better to try to read the source text, but unless you know ancient Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, you will always be relying on another fallible person’s interpretation of the text, which was also written by fallible human beings (often via enslaved persons).
@ that’s why you NEED the holy spirit when reading and interpreting the Bible but I’m afraid ppl don’t believe in the Holy Spirit being able to help we rely on our own intellect
Every Jewish person I've talked to about this, when asking what Tanakh to read, has just said "Get the blue one." The first time I was confused. The 10th time I chuckled.
Nov. 10th, 2024. It all comes down to Language. The more one knows of Hebrew and Greek, the wider one's variables in the literature at hand. I too agree with you, on the New Revised version. I myself like: The Oxford Annotated Version, with the Apocrypha. 1977. Also have New Revised Version. Thank you. Julian.
Great suggestions Dan. One thing I’m a bit surprised about is that you didn’t mention the Jewish Annotated New Testament when you were talking about New Testament translations. Sure, it’s a commentary, but from what I’ve heard it has some really good annotations
I use the Nueva Biblia de las Américas, but that's an evangelical one corresponding to the NASB95 in English. The Nueva Versión Internacional has most of the same problems as the NIV and I think a lot of other translations not deriving from the 1602 Reina-Valera are made from English, seriously crippling them. This would include the Nueva Traducción Viviente (counterpart of the New Living Translation), which I've jokingly referred to as the Nueva Traducción Muerta. I have yet to see a Reina-Valera derivative that doesn't translate the Name as "Jehová", which is problematic in its own right (although the KJV does similar a handful of times).
Spanish scholarship is weak, unfortunately. I taught church in Spanish between 2015-2019 and I spent much time looking for critical Bibles in Spanish, but to no avail. They are not up-to-date. In French, it's a bit less problematic. Or maybe I am not familiar with all the Spanish Bibles in existence. Maybe in Europe or South America.
I own the previous edition of Oxford Annotated BIble. It's paper is opaque enough that it isn't a pain to use. I have a Catholic NABRE that is on horribly thin paper so you can read the other side of the page. I know that paper quality isn't what you are really talking about but a good translation should be printed so that it is enjoyable to use.
Fully agree - I also have found that the New Jerusalem Bible (another modern authorised Catholic version of the Bible) that I own is printed on paper that’s too thin and the text on the other side comes through. In the end I settled with the St Joseph Edition of the New Catholic Bible which is available in giant type (essential for my poorish eyesight) and which has great explanatory notes. But I will look out for the new upcoming Oxford edition that Dan recommended.
I've only recently learned of the NET and I'm really liking it so far. Perhaps the SBL would be better, but the base translation typically includes more text in the footnotes than in the verses and does a great quick-n-dirty poor dude's online lookup at places like Bible Gateway. My concern would be that they are still apologetic to a particular theological viewpoint. But they seem to be pretty transparent about their assumptions in their footnotes, so it's still a very useful tool. A good example would be their treatment of Isaiah 7:14; they do have the "young woman" instead of virgin, but they have "will conceive" instead of the "is pregnant" that is actually supported by the Hebrew. (NRSVUE has "is pregnant," but most follow the KJV and other translation traditions with "virgin will conceive.") But while I disagree with their explanation, they do give one, drawing from the same Hebrew adjective being used with Samson's mother in a context that is usually interpreted as "will conceive." But I think that's a back-formation, and the story of Samson's mother works perfectly fine by reading it as she's already pregnant when the angel talks to her. We probably would never have read her story as "will conceive" if Mathew didn't change his quotation of the Septuagint to put the "conceive" into a future tense. The NET footnotes do say that it is possible to read this as "is pregnant" consistently in both passages, as well as other places where the adjective shows up. The main complaint I hear about the NRSVUE, other than KJV-only types who don't understand "why did they take verses out of mah book?!," is that it uses gender-inclusive language where the translators thought the gendered language in the source texts "really meant" all people and not just men. I personally would prefer to not paper over any potential misogyny. I personally have a couple of minor places where I disagree with their translation, but overall they seem to be very faithful to the original.
@@grumpylibrarian There's a lot of translations that try to be more "gender accurate" with translating mixed groups from being addressed to default masculine (including or excluding women) to specifically including men and women. I don't think they're trying to downplay inherent misogyny as much as they're trying to faithfully communicate what the writers' intentions were -- English also used to be like this, with an unknown person grammatically being referred to as male, even if the unknown person could equally likely be male or female, and there wasn't any type of supposition of the unknown person being more likely to be male than female.
I have a copy of the new testament that has 8 different versions. It's fairly old, but I think it has two uses. The first is to try to look at different versions to get an idea what people think. The more commonly used one is to be able to check eight different bibles to see which one tells you what you want to hear.
That is what the SBL Study Bible is. It's secular. It's rather the Westminster Study Bible that is confessional and not aimed at secular individuals. The SBL is purely academic. The Oxford as well is secular. Oxford University is always critical.
I got the SBL study Bible last Christmas thanks to your recommendation. I will admit I’m a slow reader and I’m only halfway through Genesis due to slacking, but I’ve enjoyed it so far. Could you go more into detail about the NRSV?
@maklelan Thank you for putting out this update to your older video on this topic, Dr. McClellan! I actually bought an SBL on your recommendation and will probably do the same with the Westminster.😊 I had a question re:the JPS translation. Are you aware of/have you interacted with the 2023 JPS Gender-Sensitive translation (RJPS)? It seems interesting from the sample readings provided. Also I spoke with OUP; sadly they have no plans to do a 3rd Edition of the Jewish Study Bible with the RJPS.
Could you do a video on why certain denominations perfer certain versions? I grew up reading mostly the ESV, but there are plenty of other translations that i assume other denominations prefer.
Wilbur Pickering’s translation for the NT and the MEV for the OT. 2 translations of the 2 most consistent and carefully copied textual bases. God has actually preserved his word.
Thank you, sir! This is great info. I own David B Hart's translation and have really enjoyed it thus far. What are your thoughts on Young's Literal and Rotherham's Emphasized Bible?
Hey Dan, I have a super nerdy question. If you were to use all of your criteria in this video to recommend an English translation of the Bible that will be in the public domain as of 2025 (either the translation was published before the year 1930 or the author has not claimed copyright), what translation would you recommend? Obviously, newer translations will be more informed, but if you had to pick one with no corporate strings attached, what would it be?
NRSV has been my favorite for the last few years, though after moving to Catholicism the NAB has grown on me. What do you think of or have you interacted with the NET? Or N.T. Wrights Bible for Everyone?
Ya no… there’s only one good and whole lot of bad and ugly. Let’s just take a quick look at one that most people except the ESV. 1. First of all it’s got the wrong person killing Goliath in second Samuel 21:19 Second of all, it’s missing tons of verses. I’ll just give you one example Matthew 18:11 but if you want to run to a second one, just take a look at John 5:4 Third it decided to drop the word begotten in John 3:16 😮 this would shock the early church to the core So just give me the authorized version that’s the only one I want😅
@dantombs5697 Less than 10% of KJV only pastors could get 100% on a KJV survey. If pastors don't understand the ancient KJV English, neither do you. I'm absolutely certain "begotten" would shock the early church since the early church never heard English in their lives. Of course, the KJV was a great translation in the 1600s. It stinks now. The Word of God is TO BE UNDERSTOOD!!! Why are those verses missing or put in brackets or put in footnotes? You tell me? I can promise you it isn't nefarious reasons.
The NRSVue is especially funny to me: the _New_ *Revised* Standard Version _Updated Edition_ ! 😂 Seriously, I understand they don't want to confuse anyone by changing the name, but at the next major update they should look into rebranding.
The best translation of the Bible is the one you understand best after you research other translations. Some resonant with our Spirit, and it speaks to our hearts. The Bible can say the same things in many ways. It can be said very straightforwardly like the "Sermon on the mount." I understand the very framework of Christianity. The Book of Revelation is a bit more complicated because of some of the symbols similar to Ezekiel. It's a lifelong study 📖 of the Holy Scriptures. The techniques I suggested work for me, but of course, everyone is on a different level of understanding. I'm always learning, always growing. The amazing thing about the Holy Scriptures is that when you write ✍️ the Word down and begin to memorize the Word and speak it, the spoken Word manifest what you say and believe in, faith produces what it was sent out to do. The Word changes things. I love sharing the Word of God with others. It's like giving people bricks to people to throw at the devil. 😈 The Word works when you work it with faith and a clean heart. We must forgive others, or the Father will not hear our prayers. We can even ask the Holy Spirit for help to forgive. Thanks ☺️
Question, and comment: How should we translate צלמות (Ps 23)? Do you support "shadow of death" or do you think that "darkness" is better? Also, to give people an idea of how difficult translation is generally, I have pointed to Ezekiel 37 (Valley of the dry bones): For example, no English reader will recognize that there is a word that permeates this passage (10x), רוח, which shows up as "wind", "spirit" (or "Spirit"), and "breath". I'm not criticizing the translations, but wanting readers to realize how difficult it would be to translate this passage in a way that is both faithful to the text and understandable.
I started using the NRSV when I learned that it's what Bible scholars usually cite in their scholarly publications. I often read the KJV because the language is beautiful, but consult the NRSV when I want to know what it's "really" saying. Ultimately, you haven't read the Bible unless you've read it in the original Greek and Hebrew. But learning to use an interlinear goes a long way toward that. Most questions I have are at the word level.
I had a question. Can you do a video on the KJV Bible and explain why it's no bueno in comparison to this version you explained in the video? That would be interesting to hear about. Thank you.
In the NRSVue it translates Genesis 3:21-24 in a very unusual way. In most translations the man is the only one mentioned as banished from the garden but in the new translation it has both Adam and Eve with no justification for the changes. Now, it makes sense…I mean that is how we all know the story anyway, but why not allow readers to see the peculiar inconsistencies in the narrative for themselves in this translation?
I picked up a copy of that years ago. Latimore is a great Greek scholar, and had some interesting translations in this book, but he does miss from time to time, being apparently not that aware of the (usually small) differences between the 4th Attic he was good at and the Koine the Gospel writers used.
I have the New Oxford Annotated Bible with Apocrypha: New Revised Standard Version 5th edition. It's copyright is 2018 - so, fairly recent publication. Are you saying that they are coming out with a newer edition?
Could someone break down for me what the NRSVue has that the NRSV does not? I have the latter in the New Oxford Annotated Bible and it looks like I will be getting it in the NRSVue, too, but I’m wondering if the updates make it worth the investment, especially in terms of space on my already overflowing bookshelves.
According to their notes "In the more than thirty years since its first publication, hundreds of ancient manuscripts have been studied in exacting detail. The NRSVue is informed by the results of this research. Laboring through this material has deepened scholarly insight into Jewish and Christian sacred texts and advanced understanding of ancient languages. " and "The NRSVue presents approximately 12,000 substantive edits and 20,000 total changes, which include alterations in grammar and punctuation." It sounds like a lot, but considering it is spread across all of the books the difference is probably hard to immediately note. If you don't have an edition then easy choice to pickup the newest, but if you already have the NRSV then its debatable whether the cost is worth it.
@@AndyMcGehee I'd probably use what I have if I liked the paper quality etc, were I you, unless you're wanting to try a different type of Bible. You can use Bible Gateway to compare the NRSVue with one of the Anglicized NRSV editions they have (when the NRSVue came out, it replaced the NRSV, but the Anglicized versions use the old NRSV) to see if you think there's been enough change for you to get an update.
How about a blank book with everything after "In the beginning..." omitted so the reader can inject whatever they want after the opening? That seems to be what's been happening for millennia, so maybe we should just be open about that.
Dan, I think you are incorrect in suggesting that accessability is opposed to faithfullness to the source text. In translation theory one can argue that providing an accessible translation is the best way to be faithful to the source text. Many people do not distinguish between source language and text.
That would normally be the case, but when you get into the Bible you are talking about those differences having huge impacts on religious doctrine. Probably the most obvious example is the whole "virgin vs young woman" situation.
The best translation would be 1 with a word for word translation as well as the full verse translated. Blueletterbible is the best, as it has every word hyperlinked so you can see an exhaustive list of its appearances in the Bible.
Did rulers use ancient Mesopotamian/Babylonian cuneiform tablets (as well as other much more ancient texts tablets from around the world) in creating the Bible & the religion?
I think the biggest question isn’t if there is one holy Bible, it’s why do people love the perversion so much? Why would you follow a Bible that has the wrong person killing Goliath in second Samuel 21:19 why would you follow a Bible that is missing the word be forgotten in John 3:16 and why in the world would anybody wanna Bible that doesn’t have Matthew 18:11?😮
The Blue Jewish for the Tanakh, and the NRSV for the NT. A side note here, non-believer readability leans toward The New English Bible. I have an older copy, hardback, single column, comfortable font. I like it a lot. Nice to hold and read.
Why can we not have an Old Testament, perhaps just the first 5 books and other appropriate writings, which are composed in the true Hebrew script, which is referred to as the archaic Hebrew alphabet, which is the script of the Samaritan torah I want one.
I have a question. In Deuteronomy 10:17, it says "...YHWH your God is the God of gods..." Is this implying that other gods exist? What are these other gods doing? What are their names? Do they have superpowers, too?
Yes. Depends on which one you're talking about. Multiple are mentioned in the Bible but there are many more besides, Chemosh is the best though. What kind of god doesn't have superpowers?
The pentatuch in general contains pieces and stories from theological development over the centuries. From regional gods of nations, frequently confirmed to their borders, to yhwh kind of merging with the high god and taking over leadership (generally associated with the time of the Babylonian exile and needing to extend yhwh worship outside of the former borders people were exiled from), to a lessening of former gods to lesser importance, and then demons, and then with Greek and Roman influence, especially outside the pentatuch in the NT expansion to more of a philosophical concept, ultimate good vs evil, etc.
Other Gods are little g Gods demonic spirits aka demons BAAL for example, the quote on quote golden calf, mentioned by Moses while learning of the commandments on the mountain w/ the most high only true GOD, israelites were worshipping baal , today baal is represented by Balenciaga children traffic and sacrifice, the wickedness happening in this world is not a comic book tale demons ARE REAL! And collecting soul eternity.
The first two Bibles he showed had those included -- you assumed that him not mentioning them specifically meant they weren't there, when his top choices included them as a matter-of-fact. 😂
@seeawn Why did you call them apocrypha? They're just the deutrrocanonical texts and were only removed so that madman Luther could make his new religion work
@@Timidor23 Martin Luther included these books in a separate section Apocrypha. It was the was the same also in KJV and other early protestant bibles
@vvalchanov Well, exactly. They all made a new Bible in protest against the Church Jesus established, letting ego lead them rather than the Holy Spirit.
We just need the Apostles Teaching, The Best Translation of The Bible into The English Language is "The Recovery Version" of the bible from Genesis unto Revelation
I bought the Jewish Publication Society's translation of the Tanakh because the cover looked cooler. I've heard that one, and the blue one, are the two best. However, a Rabbi in Jerusalem told me the $500.00 Tanakh encyclopedia set which includes the Talmud tops them both. Whichever one you go with, keep in mind reading the Tanakh translated by Jewish scholars compared to translated by Christian scholars are wildly different. Putting those factors under the microscope along with any of the New Testament bibles, don't say the same things at all. There's a clear manipulation of translation. Not just translation of words, but context to the intent as well, for what is clearly pushing the virgin birth narrative for the sake of propping up the Christian agenda. The New Testament is just throw -up in the back of your throat gross and if you're reading the Hebrew bible to get an objective sense of what their concept of the Messiah is, there's no way you can end up with Christianity as a religion. I have no idea how it exists. That's the most mind-blowing revelation you'll walk away with. With that being said, this is my first time visiting this channel. Mr. McClellan, I did enjoy your objective discourse leaving religious preference aside. Excellent work, sir!
@@chrislambert9435 Took two seconds of researching that version and text analysis to conclude your statement is erroneous. (Never broke a sweat) My overall point is that using a Jewish scholar translation of the Tanakh makes the entire New Testament obsolete because they do NOT come close to conveying the same messages. Truth be told, if you keep buying Christian translations, you'll never know because all that does find new ways to confirm group think biases. Should you choose to conduct legitimately objective research what you'll find is that Christianity eats itself alive in Matthew chapter 1. By eliminating the virgin birth theory, one can eliminate Christianity as a whole. Therefore, why waste my time going all the way through Revelation, when Christianity literally can't survive the first page of its own texts? (Rhetorical question) I do apologize for sounding brash, but you're claiming something as "the best" when it should be thrown in the trash. it just upsets me because I feel like you wasted perfectly good beer money.
@@JasonPuckett-w9y The Translation into English from the Greek in Matthew chapter 1 as found in the New Testament Recovery Version Translation is a very good Translation. Please explain with "more matter, less art" why not ?
The Recovery Version: (Mt 1:22) Now all this has happened so that what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet might be fulfilled, saying, (Mt 1:23) "Behold, the virgin shall be with child and shall bear a son, and they shall call His name Emmanuel” (which is translated, God with us). Whomever the author is, he's mangling Isaiah 7:14 (Is 7:14) Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin will conceive and will bear a son, and she will call his name Immanuel. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The Jewish Publication Society Version of Tanahk: (Is 7:14) Assuredly, my Lord will give you a sign of His own accord! Look, the young woman is with child and about to give birth to a son. Let her name him Immanuel _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1. Isaiah uses the Hebrew word "almah" which simply means "young woman" generally of child baring age. The only word in the Hebrew language that conveys virginity is "betulah." 2. The woman in question (in Judaism) is Isaiah's wife who is already pregnant to the point its visible to everyone around. 3. The entire prophecy was to convey to King Ahaz that by the time his son was old enough to know the difference from good and evil God will have taken care of the enemies that were plotting to take over the kingdom. 4. At no point or in any way is it conveyed a future "will conceive" 700 yrs down the road. 5. Christianity claims "Jesus" fulfilled 100% of Jewish prophecy, but there's a very good reason Jews believe he didn't fulfill a single prophecy, because he didn't and there's nothing in Judaism that says anything about a virgin birth, crucifixion, resurrection or a return. This is all Greek mythology rewritten. 6. The Jewish Messiah is 100% a human king who restores Israelites back to Israel, brings peace upon the world, rebuilds the temple, etc.... _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ This is the shortest version I could throw together and that's just a quick glimpse into two versus of the New Testament, but the whole thing is made up trash. Also, just for fun: Statistically, Christianity leads all world religions in divorce rates. Doesn't seem like Jesus or the Holy Ghost or whomever they pray to is helping much. LOL
@@JasonPuckett-w9y Yep, I agree about the marriage issues, in a church that I used to go to, a member there just got Married a Forth time (all previous were divorced) Shocking I thought ! What did the Leaders say; They said; "we cant control them" In the UK the Control & Coercion Laws are strong and were made against religious groups ! !
The NRSV is a revision if the RSV. The RSV is a revision of the Revised Version, itself a revision of the venerated King James (itself a revision of what went before). The Revised Version was not that successful a translation which I think is a real shame but it spawned the RSV and the New English Bible, and th (somewhat out of favour Revised English Bible). People realised that the King James needed some work both in translation and in textual basis but at the first attempt people started to get excited about the KJV and turned on the new offering. But then the unloved RV generated this long list of English language Bibles that we use today. Interestingly the KJV is still published today - indeed Donald Trump has an offering of it - but you won't even find the RV second hand. I am manically looking into every second hand bookshop just in case someone clears out an attic..... You never know.....
![Digital Circus Episode 4 [TRAILER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/abZtsmMUbJo/mqdefault.jpg)
Thank you for all you do, Dr. Dan.
Lovely! I have been using NRSV and JPS for years now. It is nice to get them affirmed. Thank you, Mr. Dan!
I’m a Hebrew Bible reader, so I’ll use the JPS and NRSVue for that. Then I’ll also consult Robert Alter’s translation especially for the poetic sections of the Hebrew Bible. All 3 are excellent translations and glad that you pointed them out in the video
The Best Translation of The Bible into The English Language is "The Recovery Version" of the bible from Genesis unto Revelation
Gosh, Dan, is there anything you don’t know in your field? You are so full of knowledge! We are so lucky to have you! Thank you so much for sharing with us!!! 💙💙💙
matter of fact, yeah, there was this one time where Dan went onto "The Danny Jones Podcast" and immediately began to give false information regarding his field of study. I know this, because ive seen the video where he gets lambasted for about 2 hours straight on bad information he gave. So uhm... yeah. If i didnt know better id say this comment of yours was meant to be sarcastic, but it wasnt.
@ and yours was just meant to be . . . . ?
The Best Translation of The Bible into The English Language is "The Recovery Version" of the bible from Genesis unto Revelation
@@kimshuler7272 Informative?
He comes out with so much mis-leading and Deceptive information its astonishing , The best English Translation is the Recovery Translation of The Bible
"Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth."
~ 2nd Timothy 2:15 (NIV)
The best translation is when people wake up to the fact that it is just a book, a cross between sketchy recalling of a time from 2000+ years and a storybook. And yes, I have read the bible, from cover to cover.
What was your favorite book?
I have the most recent edition of the New Oxford Annotated Bible, it's absolutely fantastic and even though I'm sure the updates aren't going to be super extensive I'm probably still going to get the new one when it drops.
The Best Translation of The Bible into The English Language is "The Recovery Version" of the bible from Genesis unto Revelation
@@chrislambert9435 LOL
I enjoy the wonderful work and effort you make regarding biblical issues, Dan. If I may, I would add another for people of study. Near Eastern Christians only read and trust the Aramaic and Hebrew text. They consider anything that isn't in Aramaic/Hebrew to be an interpretation. They use the Aramaic P'sheeta text, not to be confused with the P'sheeto text, which was altered to align with Greek texts that were considered flawed. Some might dismiss this saying: "P'sheeta was written in Syriac and came from Greek because the Greek is older." Not true. "Syriac" is a Greek misnomer for the dialect of Aramaic spoken by those in the land of Syria.
Another fact to consider that people of the West don't realize is that once a new copy of scriptures have been made, they burn the old ones. The P'sheeta comes from a line of older Aramaic text through the centuries. They still practice this scribal tradition today. We find older Greek versions because Hellenistic Jews didn't practice that burning tradition. In fact, they struggled to keep Egyptian influences out. I highly recommend the Aramaic P'sheeta text for serious study. I hope this helps others in their studies and path of enlightenment. 💫💜💫 Shlama laakh (Peace to you).
❤❤❤thank you Dan!!
I usually read it for pleasure, so I often read the New Living Bible and the KJV. Both can be criticized for translation errors. But I love the NLB for the easy modern English and the KJV for rhythm and poetry.
When I study it, I look at the more accurate translations. I can't read Greek or Hebrew. So when I study a passage, I'll read it in many translations. Reading a modern accurate translation helps make the kjv understandable.
Why not bypass the KJV and use the better translations?
@Azho64 um...that's in my comment
🙏 ❤
The Best Translation of The Bible into The English Language is "The Recovery Version" of the bible from Genesis unto Revelation
I've got an older Oxford NRSV I picked up at my local used book store. Currently thinking about investing in the updated version.
Great response Dan, and since you did missionary work in Latin America, what is your recommended Spanish edition of the Christian bible?
Thank you, Dan. Can you tell us what an equivalent or comparable Spanish translation might be?
According to Good Omens, it's the "Bugger All This" version!😅
Is that from the books?
I don’t remember it from the show.
❤❤❤❤❤❤thanks Dan!!
Hopefully they split the New Oxford into multiple volumes. SBL is cool and all but the paper thinness is a nightmare to deal with. Yes it would be more expensive, but two volumes and thicker paper would be a massive quality of life improvement.
A good translation can be ruined if it is a pain to read.
Agreed!
This is what continually prevents me from buying it.
The Best Translation of The Bible into The English Language is "The Recovery Version" of the bible from Genesis unto Revelation
I'm looking forward to reviews of the second edition of the SBL Study Bible -- the publishers put improved paper as one of its main selling points 😂 so I'm hopeful it will be legible.
I think I'd prefer to just watch your videos, your analyses are always informative and reasoned.
Same here... It's somehow refreshing to hear an un-biased read of the scriptures... An honest read..
😂 says all his followers, rather a man read GODS WORDS TO THEM rather than reading it with GOD in the HOLY SPIRIT, THEMSELVES. comical . Ironically
@@ljones269I agree that it’s better to try to read the source text, but unless you know ancient Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, you will always be relying on another fallible person’s interpretation of the text, which was also written by fallible human beings (often via enslaved persons).
@ that’s why you NEED the holy spirit when reading and interpreting the Bible but I’m afraid ppl don’t believe in the Holy Spirit being able to help we rely on our own intellect
@@ljones269 you can’t measure the Holy Spirit. You have to assume you or someone else has it, and you could be wrong.
Every Jewish person I've talked to about this, when asking what Tanakh to read, has just said "Get the blue one."
The first time I was confused. The 10th time I chuckled.
I’ve never heard this, but I’m guessing JPS Tanakh? 😄
Thank you!!!
Thank you, Dan, for your insights. Would you recommend some translations in other languages, like Spanish and Portuguese?
Nov. 10th, 2024. It all comes down to Language. The more one knows of Hebrew and Greek, the wider one's variables in the literature at hand. I too agree with you, on the New Revised version. I myself like: The Oxford Annotated Version, with the Apocrypha. 1977. Also have New Revised Version. Thank you. Julian.
But Jesus spoke in Aramaic. Why are you translating a translation?
The Best Translation of The Bible into The English Language is "The Recovery Version" of the bible from Genesis unto Revelation
Great suggestions Dan. One thing I’m a bit surprised about is that you didn’t mention the Jewish Annotated New Testament when you were talking about New Testament translations. Sure, it’s a commentary, but from what I’ve heard it has some really good annotations
Hello Dan! Since you published a couple of Spanish videos a while ago, could you give us some pointers about Spanish Bible translations?
I use the Nueva Biblia de las Américas, but that's an evangelical one corresponding to the NASB95 in English.
The Nueva Versión Internacional has most of the same problems as the NIV and I think a lot of other translations not deriving from the 1602 Reina-Valera are made from English, seriously crippling them. This would include the Nueva Traducción Viviente (counterpart of the New Living Translation), which I've jokingly referred to as the Nueva Traducción Muerta.
I have yet to see a Reina-Valera derivative that doesn't translate the Name as "Jehová", which is problematic in its own right (although the KJV does similar a handful of times).
Spanish scholarship is weak, unfortunately. I taught church in Spanish between 2015-2019 and I spent much time looking for critical Bibles in Spanish, but to no avail. They are not up-to-date. In French, it's a bit less problematic. Or maybe I am not familiar with all the Spanish Bibles in existence. Maybe in Europe or South America.
@@fnjesusfreak
Ugh, that's awful -- it's too bad there aren't more Spanish translations based on the Hebrew and Greek rather than the English.
@@MM-jf1me Right? Spanish, thankfully, has _some_, and some even correspond to English versions (NVI to NIV, NBLA to NASB95).
I own the previous edition of Oxford Annotated BIble. It's paper is opaque enough that it isn't a pain to use. I have a Catholic NABRE that is on horribly thin paper so you can read the other side of the page. I know that paper quality isn't what you are really talking about but a good translation should be printed so that it is enjoyable to use.
Fully agree - I also have found that the New Jerusalem Bible (another modern authorised Catholic version of the Bible) that I own is printed on paper that’s too thin and the text on the other side comes through.
In the end I settled with the St Joseph Edition of the New Catholic Bible which is available in giant type (essential for my poorish eyesight) and which has great explanatory notes.
But I will look out for the new upcoming Oxford edition that Dan recommended.
The Best Translation of The Bible into The English Language is "The Recovery Version" of the bible from Genesis unto Revelation
By any chance do you know what would be the equivalent of the NRSV for Spanish?
I wish I'd known about this newer edition! I just bought an NRSVue.
At this point you should just do a tier list of popular translations. I'd love to hear your thoughts on the NET
I've only recently learned of the NET and I'm really liking it so far. Perhaps the SBL would be better, but the base translation typically includes more text in the footnotes than in the verses and does a great quick-n-dirty poor dude's online lookup at places like Bible Gateway.
My concern would be that they are still apologetic to a particular theological viewpoint. But they seem to be pretty transparent about their assumptions in their footnotes, so it's still a very useful tool. A good example would be their treatment of Isaiah 7:14; they do have the "young woman" instead of virgin, but they have "will conceive" instead of the "is pregnant" that is actually supported by the Hebrew. (NRSVUE has "is pregnant," but most follow the KJV and other translation traditions with "virgin will conceive.") But while I disagree with their explanation, they do give one, drawing from the same Hebrew adjective being used with Samson's mother in a context that is usually interpreted as "will conceive." But I think that's a back-formation, and the story of Samson's mother works perfectly fine by reading it as she's already pregnant when the angel talks to her. We probably would never have read her story as "will conceive" if Mathew didn't change his quotation of the Septuagint to put the "conceive" into a future tense. The NET footnotes do say that it is possible to read this as "is pregnant" consistently in both passages, as well as other places where the adjective shows up.
The main complaint I hear about the NRSVUE, other than KJV-only types who don't understand "why did they take verses out of mah book?!," is that it uses gender-inclusive language where the translators thought the gendered language in the source texts "really meant" all people and not just men. I personally would prefer to not paper over any potential misogyny. I personally have a couple of minor places where I disagree with their translation, but overall they seem to be very faithful to the original.
The Best Translation of The Bible into The English Language is "The Recovery Version" of the bible from Genesis unto Revelation
@@grumpylibrarian
There's a lot of translations that try to be more "gender accurate" with translating mixed groups from being addressed to default masculine (including or excluding women) to specifically including men and women. I don't think they're trying to downplay inherent misogyny as much as they're trying to faithfully communicate what the writers' intentions were -- English also used to be like this, with an unknown person grammatically being referred to as male, even if the unknown person could equally likely be male or female, and there wasn't any type of supposition of the unknown person being more likely to be male than female.
I have a copy of the new testament that has 8 different versions. It's fairly old, but I think it has two uses. The first is to try to look at different versions to get an idea what people think. The more commonly used one is to be able to check eight different bibles to see which one tells you what you want to hear.
Thanks Dan!
What would you recommend for us secularists who are interested in the history and "Backstory"?
I think his takes on the NRSV would probably provide that.
‘A History of the Bible’ by Jon Barton is a good read.
😂😂😂😂😂
That is what the SBL Study Bible is. It's secular. It's rather the Westminster Study Bible that is confessional and not aimed at secular individuals. The SBL is purely academic. The Oxford as well is secular. Oxford University is always critical.
Wikipedia. I can't vouch for its accuracy, but it's cheap and hyperlinked to source materials and non-biblical topics, too.
Thanks, Dan.
Are there any translations that render the musical portions into verse instead of prose and do a halfdecent job?
I got the SBL study Bible last Christmas thanks to your recommendation. I will admit I’m a slow reader and I’m only halfway through Genesis due to slacking, but I’ve enjoyed it so far. Could you go more into detail about the NRSV?
@maklelan Thank you for putting out this update to your older video on this topic, Dr. McClellan! I actually bought an SBL on your recommendation and will probably do the same with the Westminster.😊
I had a question re:the JPS translation. Are you aware of/have you interacted with the 2023 JPS Gender-Sensitive translation (RJPS)? It seems interesting from the sample readings provided. Also I spoke with OUP; sadly they have no plans to do a 3rd Edition of the Jewish Study Bible with the RJPS.
Do they have an age sensitive one?
The Best Translation of The Bible into The English Language is "The Recovery Version" of the bible from Genesis unto Revelation
Could you do a video on why certain denominations perfer certain versions? I grew up reading mostly the ESV, but there are plenty of other translations that i assume other denominations prefer.
Tradition
My faith uses the KJV due to history, culture, and consistency, but it's not hard to find members who think it's more than that.
Wilbur Pickering’s translation for the NT and the MEV for the OT. 2 translations of the 2 most consistent and carefully copied textual bases. God has actually preserved his word.
Thank you, sir! This is great info. I own David B Hart's translation and have really enjoyed it thus far. What are your thoughts on Young's Literal and Rotherham's Emphasized Bible?
Nice to see the RSV line getting some love!
Hey Dan, I have a super nerdy question. If you were to use all of your criteria in this video to recommend an English translation of the Bible that will be in the public domain as of 2025 (either the translation was published before the year 1930 or the author has not claimed copyright), what translation would you recommend? Obviously, newer translations will be more informed, but if you had to pick one with no corporate strings attached, what would it be?
The Best Translation of The Bible into The English Language is "The Recovery Version" of the bible from Genesis unto Revelation
How about The Harper Collins Study Bible? Will you also recommend it?
NRSV has been my favorite for the last few years, though after moving to Catholicism the NAB has grown on me. What do you think of or have you interacted with the NET? Or N.T. Wrights Bible for Everyone?
Except for a few questionable versions and paraphrases, the best Bible is the one you actually read regularly.
Ya no… there’s only one good and whole lot of bad and ugly. Let’s just take a quick look at one that most people except the ESV.
1. First of all it’s got the wrong person killing Goliath in second Samuel 21:19
Second of all, it’s missing tons of verses. I’ll just give you one example Matthew 18:11 but if you want to run to a second one, just take a look at John 5:4
Third it decided to drop the word begotten in John 3:16 😮 this would shock the early church to the core
So just give me the authorized version that’s the only one I want😅
@dantombs5697
Less than 10% of KJV only pastors could get 100% on a KJV survey. If pastors don't understand the ancient KJV English, neither do you.
I'm absolutely certain "begotten" would shock the early church since the early church never heard English in their lives.
Of course, the KJV was a great translation in the 1600s. It stinks now. The Word of God is TO BE UNDERSTOOD!!!
Why are those verses missing or put in brackets or put in footnotes? You tell me? I can promise you it isn't nefarious reasons.
I’ve enjoyed the JPS Tanakh and the Lamsa translation of the Peshita.
I feel like names for bible translations couldn't be more confusing. I appreciate the info though!
The NRSVue is especially funny to me: the _New_ *Revised* Standard Version _Updated Edition_ ! 😂 Seriously, I understand they don't want to confuse anyone by changing the name, but at the next major update they should look into rebranding.
@@MM-jf1me yeah, it sounds triple redundant. I get the reasoning. It's just kind of awkward and overwhelming, such a long name.
The best translation of the Bible is the one you understand best after you research other translations. Some resonant with our Spirit, and it speaks to our hearts. The Bible can say the same things in many ways. It can be said very straightforwardly like the "Sermon on the mount." I understand the very framework of Christianity. The Book of Revelation is a bit more complicated because of some of the symbols similar to Ezekiel. It's a lifelong study 📖 of the Holy Scriptures. The techniques I suggested work for me, but of course, everyone is on a different level of understanding. I'm always learning, always growing. The amazing thing about the Holy Scriptures is that when you write ✍️ the Word down and begin to memorize the Word and speak it, the spoken Word manifest what you say and believe in, faith produces what it was sent out to do. The Word changes things. I love sharing the Word of God with others. It's like giving people bricks to people to throw at the devil. 😈 The Word works when you work it with faith and a clean heart. We must forgive others, or the Father will not hear our prayers. We can even ask the Holy Spirit for help to forgive. Thanks ☺️
Question, and comment: How should we translate צלמות (Ps 23)? Do you support "shadow of death" or do you think that "darkness" is better? Also, to give people an idea of how difficult translation is generally, I have pointed to Ezekiel 37 (Valley of the dry bones): For example, no English reader will recognize that there is a word that permeates this passage (10x), רוח, which shows up as "wind", "spirit" (or "Spirit"), and "breath". I'm not criticizing the translations, but wanting readers to realize how difficult it would be to translate this passage in a way that is both faithful to the text and understandable.
The Best Translation of The Bible into The English Language is "The Recovery Version" of the bible from Genesis unto Revelation
Legacy Standard Bible (LSB) is my personal favorite, but what do you think of it?
I have been very happy with the NIV Study Bible.
I started using the NRSV when I learned that it's what Bible scholars usually cite in their scholarly publications.
I often read the KJV because the language is beautiful, but consult the NRSV when I want to know what it's "really" saying.
Ultimately, you haven't read the Bible unless you've read it in the original Greek and Hebrew. But learning to use an interlinear goes a long way toward that. Most questions I have are at the word level.
I like NRSV. I prefer to read interlinear with another translation, so usually do NRSV & NIV. Is there a better combo to read with NRSV?
I had a question. Can you do a video on the KJV Bible and explain why it's no bueno in comparison to this version you explained in the video? That would be interesting to hear about. Thank you.
Oh hey… I just bought the NRSVue
It's quickly becoming a favorite of mine. I was worried it would be a tad "over-scholarly" and dense but I find it very accessible.
Do you know if it exists in Spanish?😅
In the NRSVue it translates Genesis 3:21-24 in a very unusual way. In most translations the man is the only one mentioned as banished from the garden but in the new translation it has both Adam and Eve with no justification for the changes. Now, it makes sense…I mean that is how we all know the story anyway, but why not allow readers to see the peculiar inconsistencies in the narrative for themselves in this translation?
Hey Dan, do you have a resources available that compiles all of the literature you recommend/discuss/cite from your videos?
The bible❤
What do you think of Richard Lattimore's translation of the NT?
The Best Translation of The Bible into The English Language is "The Recovery Version" of the bible from Genesis unto Revelation
I picked up a copy of that years ago. Latimore is a great Greek scholar, and had some interesting translations in this book, but he does miss from time to time, being apparently not that aware of the (usually small) differences between the 4th Attic he was good at and the Koine the Gospel writers used.
@@SpectatorAlius interesting, thanks for the response!
I have the New Oxford Annotated Bible with Apocrypha: New Revised Standard Version 5th edition. It's copyright is 2018 - so, fairly recent publication. Are you saying that they are coming out with a newer edition?
Yes, in a year or two. the 5th edition has the NRSV, not the NRSVue
great stuff the New English Bible with the Apochrypha i used for my studies
Cual seria la mejor traduccion en español?
What do you think of Charles B. Williams' NT?
Could someone break down for me what the NRSVue has that the NRSV does not? I have the latter in the New Oxford Annotated Bible and it looks like I will be getting it in the NRSVue, too, but I’m wondering if the updates make it worth the investment, especially in terms of space on my already overflowing bookshelves.
According to their notes "In the more than thirty years since its first publication, hundreds of ancient manuscripts have been studied in exacting detail. The NRSVue is informed by the results of this research. Laboring through this material has deepened scholarly insight into Jewish and Christian sacred texts and advanced understanding of ancient languages. " and "The NRSVue presents approximately 12,000 substantive edits and 20,000 total changes, which include alterations in grammar and punctuation."
It sounds like a lot, but considering it is spread across all of the books the difference is probably hard to immediately note. If you don't have an edition then easy choice to pickup the newest, but if you already have the NRSV then its debatable whether the cost is worth it.
@@Wertbag99Ah, much appreciated.
@@AndyMcGehee
I'd probably use what I have if I liked the paper quality etc, were I you, unless you're wanting to try a different type of Bible. You can use Bible Gateway to compare the NRSVue with one of the Anglicized NRSV editions they have (when the NRSVue came out, it replaced the NRSV, but the Anglicized versions use the old NRSV) to see if you think there's been enough change for you to get an update.
Best translation? For the majority, whichever tells them what they want to hear.
Just like RUclips "pastors"
How about a blank book with everything after "In the beginning..." omitted so the reader can inject whatever they want after the opening? That seems to be what's been happening for millennia, so maybe we should just be open about that.
Neva heard of it ion think. Unless that book where it's nothing but dots? Or the book that has sheets with no words
😂👍
The Best Translation of The Bible into The English Language is "The Recovery Version" of the bible from Genesis unto Revelation
Dan, I think you are incorrect in suggesting that accessability is opposed to faithfullness to the source text. In translation theory one can argue that providing an accessible translation is the best way to be faithful to the source text. Many people do not distinguish between source language and text.
That would normally be the case, but when you get into the Bible you are talking about those differences having huge impacts on religious doctrine. Probably the most obvious example is the whole "virgin vs young woman" situation.
@@keith6706 I disagree, that is not a matter of translation method but of prioritising language and scholarship above dogma.
The Best Translation of The Bible into The English Language is "The Recovery Version" of the bible from Genesis unto Revelation
@@chrislambert9435 no that is a terrible translation not meeting academic standards.
@@hoog19 more matter, less art ?
The best translation would be 1 with a word for word translation as well as the full verse translated.
Blueletterbible is the best, as it has every word hyperlinked so you can see an exhaustive list of its appearances in the Bible.
You mean, like Jay P. Green's interlinear?
Any experience with/ thoughts of the REB?
Any thoughts on the best Spanish translation?
I wish there was a wiki like Bible that can have multiple layers of translation and translation explanation.
What about the Legacy Standard Bible?
Thoughts on the Amplified Bible
Oh my goodness, that’s the one I chose!
DAVID BENTLEY HART MENTIONED 🔥🔥🔥💪💪🗣🗣🗣
Hey you should check out inspiring philosophy if you haven’t already; seems like picking apart what he says might be of your caliber
Dan has already had a back-and-forth with IP. Eventually, Dan blocked IP for various reasons.
😂
Unfortunately IP presents himself as very knowledgeable in an area where he is not an expert.
whats this? NRSVue? whats with christians and they keep adding letters to the end of the acronym?
The Veggietales Bible has got to be one of the better ones.
Did rulers use ancient Mesopotamian/Babylonian cuneiform tablets (as well as other much more ancient texts tablets from around the world) in creating the Bible & the religion?
I'm disappointed you didn't recommend the Cotton Patch Bible ;)
I heard Chuck Missler once say that he’d finally found his favourite version of the Bible. It was the large print version 🤣🤣
The Best Translation of The Bible into The English Language is "The Recovery Version" of the bible from Genesis unto Revelation
The Helleluyah Scriptures is one of very few which calls the Almighty by His right name (and the Savior.)
"Which Bible is the best?"
"The one in published in!"
In all seriousness, very pleased to see you address this question in detail! Thank you!
The Best Translation of The Bible into The English Language is "The Recovery Version" of the bible from Genesis unto Revelation
I like the New Interpreters Bible that uses the NRSV. But I have a regular bible that is NRSVue. CEB study bible is good for a devotional study bible
Bart Ehrman also recommends the NRSV
What's your take on the New Jerusalem Bible?
I think the biggest question isn’t if there is one holy Bible, it’s why do people love the perversion so much?
Why would you follow a Bible that has the wrong person killing Goliath in second Samuel 21:19 why would you follow a Bible that is missing the word be forgotten in John 3:16 and why in the world would anybody wanna Bible that doesn’t have Matthew 18:11?😮
For me, it is King James. The original revisions were 1629-1894. It was revised again until 1982. I like to read the New KJV, also.
Y'know the KJV has edited and changed the original texts, altering the Bible, right?
Who is the "target audience" or who should be?
😂❤
The Best Translation of The Bible into The English Language is "The Recovery Version" of the bible from Genesis unto Revelation
The Car Bible is clearly the best translation!
The Best Translation of The Bible into The English Language is "The Recovery Version" of the bible from Genesis unto Revelation
SBL is my go to.
Harper-Collins
Nice haircut!
The Blue Jewish for the Tanakh, and the NRSV for the NT. A side note here, non-believer readability leans toward The New English Bible. I have an older copy, hardback, single column, comfortable font. I like it a lot. Nice to hold and read.
The Best Translation of The Bible into The English Language is "The Recovery Version" of the bible from Genesis unto Revelation
Crazy stuff. People tying themselves into knots, and bending over backwards to understand a book about a god that (very probably) doesn't exist.
All translations are commentary.
Even eyewitness accounts are commentary, and usually flawed.
Yes, they are. The Best Translation of The Bible into The English Language is "The Recovery Version" of the bible from Genesis unto Revelation
What do you think abt the QUEEN JAMES BIBLE?😂😂
Why can we not have an Old Testament, perhaps just the first 5 books and other appropriate writings, which are composed in the true Hebrew script, which is referred to as the archaic Hebrew alphabet, which is the script of the Samaritan torah
I want one.
I have a question. In Deuteronomy 10:17, it says "...YHWH your God is the God of gods..." Is this implying that other gods exist? What are these other gods doing? What are their names? Do they have superpowers, too?
It could also imply that we are gods.
Yes.
Depends on which one you're talking about.
Multiple are mentioned in the Bible but there are many more besides, Chemosh is the best though.
What kind of god doesn't have superpowers?
The pentatuch in general contains pieces and stories from theological development over the centuries. From regional gods of nations, frequently confirmed to their borders, to yhwh kind of merging with the high god and taking over leadership (generally associated with the time of the Babylonian exile and needing to extend yhwh worship outside of the former borders people were exiled from), to a lessening of former gods to lesser importance, and then demons, and then with Greek and Roman influence, especially outside the pentatuch in the NT expansion to more of a philosophical concept, ultimate good vs evil, etc.
Other Gods are little g Gods demonic spirits aka demons BAAL for example, the quote on quote golden calf, mentioned by Moses while learning of the commandments on the mountain w/ the most high only true GOD, israelites were worshipping baal , today baal is represented by Balenciaga children traffic and sacrifice, the wickedness happening in this world is not a comic book tale demons ARE REAL! And collecting soul eternity.
Several of them are listed in the bible itself, Asherah, ba’al Hadad, Chemosh, Shachar.
Nothing about the Deuterocanonical books? A claimed Bible missing those books is a Reader's Digest version of the Bible!
The first two Bibles he showed had those included -- you assumed that him not mentioning them specifically meant they weren't there, when his top choices included them as a matter-of-fact. 😂
Wouldn't every Protestant Bible be eliminated because they are missing 7 books from the original Catholic Bible?
many study bibles include the apocrypha or this missing books from the protestant bible
@seeawn Why did you call them apocrypha? They're just the deutrrocanonical texts and were only removed so that madman Luther could make his new religion work
@@Timidor23
Martin Luther included these books in a separate section Apocrypha. It was the was the same also in KJV and other early protestant bibles
@vvalchanov Well, exactly. They all made a new Bible in protest against the Church Jesus established, letting ego lead them rather than the Holy Spirit.
We just need the Apostles Teaching, The Best Translation of The Bible into The English Language is "The Recovery Version" of the bible from Genesis unto Revelation
I bought the Jewish Publication Society's translation of the Tanakh because the cover looked cooler. I've heard that one, and the blue one, are the two best. However, a Rabbi in Jerusalem told me the $500.00 Tanakh encyclopedia set which includes the Talmud tops them both.
Whichever one you go with, keep in mind reading the Tanakh translated by Jewish scholars compared to translated by Christian scholars are wildly different.
Putting those factors under the microscope along with any of the New Testament bibles, don't say the same things at all. There's a clear manipulation of translation. Not just translation of words, but context to the intent as well, for what is clearly pushing the virgin birth narrative for the sake of propping up the Christian agenda. The New Testament is just throw -up in the back of your throat gross and if you're reading the Hebrew bible to get an objective sense of what their concept of the Messiah is, there's no way you can end up with Christianity as a religion. I have no idea how it exists. That's the most mind-blowing revelation you'll walk away with.
With that being said, this is my first time visiting this channel. Mr. McClellan, I did enjoy your objective discourse leaving religious preference aside. Excellent work, sir!
The Best Translation of The Bible into The English Language is "The Recovery Version" of the bible from Genesis unto Revelation
@@chrislambert9435
Took two seconds of researching that version and text analysis to conclude your statement is erroneous. (Never broke a sweat)
My overall point is that using a Jewish scholar translation of the Tanakh makes the entire New Testament obsolete because they do NOT come close to conveying the same messages.
Truth be told, if you keep buying Christian translations, you'll never know because all that does find new ways to confirm group think biases.
Should you choose to conduct legitimately objective research what you'll find is that Christianity eats itself alive in Matthew chapter 1. By eliminating the virgin birth theory, one can eliminate Christianity as a whole. Therefore, why waste my time going all the way through Revelation, when Christianity literally can't survive the first page of its own texts? (Rhetorical question)
I do apologize for sounding brash, but you're claiming something as "the best" when it should be thrown in the trash.
it just upsets me because I feel like you wasted perfectly good beer money.
@@JasonPuckett-w9y The Translation into English from the Greek in Matthew chapter 1 as found in the New Testament Recovery Version Translation is a very good Translation. Please explain with "more matter, less art" why not ?
The Recovery Version:
(Mt 1:22) Now all this has happened so that what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet might be fulfilled, saying,
(Mt 1:23) "Behold, the virgin shall be with child and shall bear a son, and they shall call His name Emmanuel” (which is translated, God with us).
Whomever the author is, he's mangling Isaiah 7:14
(Is 7:14) Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin will conceive and will bear a son, and she will call his name Immanuel.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
The Jewish Publication Society Version of Tanahk:
(Is 7:14) Assuredly, my Lord will give you a sign of His own accord! Look, the young woman is with child and about to give birth to a son. Let her name him Immanuel
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1. Isaiah uses the Hebrew word "almah" which simply means "young woman" generally of child baring age. The only word in the Hebrew language that conveys virginity is "betulah."
2. The woman in question (in Judaism) is Isaiah's wife who is already pregnant to the point its visible to everyone around.
3. The entire prophecy was to convey to King Ahaz that by the time his son was old enough to know the difference from good and evil God will have taken care of the enemies that were plotting to take over the kingdom.
4. At no point or in any way is it conveyed a future "will conceive" 700 yrs down the road.
5. Christianity claims "Jesus" fulfilled 100% of Jewish prophecy, but there's a very good reason Jews believe he didn't fulfill a single prophecy, because he didn't and there's nothing in Judaism that says anything about a virgin birth, crucifixion, resurrection or a return. This is all Greek mythology rewritten.
6. The Jewish Messiah is 100% a human king who restores Israelites back to Israel, brings peace upon the world, rebuilds the temple, etc....
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
This is the shortest version I could throw together and that's just a quick glimpse into two versus of the New Testament, but the whole thing is made up trash.
Also, just for fun: Statistically, Christianity leads all world religions in divorce rates. Doesn't seem like Jesus or the Holy Ghost or whomever they pray to is helping much. LOL
@@JasonPuckett-w9y Yep, I agree about the marriage issues, in a church that I used to go to, a member there just got Married a Forth time (all previous were divorced) Shocking I thought ! What did the Leaders say; They said; "we cant control them" In the UK the Control & Coercion Laws are strong and were made against religious groups ! !
1. Douay Rheims
2.Douay Rheims
3. Douay Rheims
lol lol lol
The NRSV is a revision if the RSV. The RSV is a revision of the Revised Version, itself a revision of the venerated King James (itself a revision of what went before).
The Revised Version was not that successful a translation which I think is a real shame but it spawned the RSV and the New English Bible, and th (somewhat out of favour Revised English Bible).
People realised that the King James needed some work both in translation and in textual basis but at the first attempt people started to get excited about the KJV and turned on the new offering. But then the unloved RV generated this long list of English language Bibles that we use today.
Interestingly the KJV is still published today - indeed Donald Trump has an offering of it - but you won't even find the RV second hand. I am manically looking into every second hand bookshop just in case someone clears out an attic..... You never know.....