Best Bible Translation: How to find the best one for you

It is very tempting to think of Bible translations as good and bad. But this isn't a helpful way to think. In fact, there are almost no bad bible translations. And as far as English translations are concerned, we should be thankful for the huge number of faithful Translations available today
In this video I'll explain why.

Get a copy of Bill Barrick's Understanding Bible Translation:

Follow me:
00:00 Introduction
01:55 4 things translators think about
06:08 Accuracy
11:18 Relevance
13:06 What's best for you?
15:34 Going beyond the translation

[philtheo]

I'm no biblical scholar like bro Darryl is, but still the more I learn the biblical languages, the less I find I'm tied to any particular translation. Instead I'm free to see value in all good Bible translations as well as to see how even the best translations aren't perfect (but again they can still be excellent for their purposes). 😊

[hadassahk]

I do love your study videos!!! And I have learned so much!

[donaldmartineau]

I study several different Bible translations and find I learn valuable things from them all.

[ejwoods]

I enjoy engaging with many translations. My primary has become the LSB but they’re many cases in which I find the NIV to more accurately convey the meaning. This was a good presentation. I have come to agree with this mind set. For me, at bare minimum you should study with a good formal and dynamic translation: LSB/NIV, ESV/NET or NKJV/CSB, etc.

[singgreekandhebrew]

Thanks Darryl. Sometimes it grieves me to hear certain translations spoken of so negatively, because people are unaware of the points you mentioned. We’re too easily spoiled with resources in English, rather than appreciating what each resource contributes and its intended purposes.

[patienceboyd]

Very thoughtful and charitable explanation of how translations are produced.

[bobbystrother]

When I hear someone criticize a Functional Equivalency translation or insist on a Formal Equivalency version, I wonder to myself whether that person has ever tried to learn any second language.

[mattfuller]

Check out any of Mike Winger’s videos on The Passion Translation. He has several scholars look at the translations of various books. They all say it’s just awful and should be avoided.

[thomaspayne]

I know a person's beliefs will show in a translation (hence why committees are better). However, I think intentionally slanting a translation based on a theological perspective should be avoided at all cost.

[VicRibeiro]

I understand that you don't want to be too outspoken about it, but there ARE translations out there that are not that good. That are in fact, bad.
That will mislead and confuse.

I understand the pursuit of and for accuracy, but on the one hand I believe translators to an extent moved towards translating things with so much interpretation (the more dynamic equivalent translations) that they get to a point where, if asked to retranslate their work into hebrew or greek they will end up with something entirely different than the original.

We should be thankful most of the early translations tried to be more literal, that helps us know more accurately what lay behind their translations.

In my opinion, translations should translate whatever the original contains. Explain things that are obscure or difficult in footnotes or study notes.

[judithgardiner]

I agree with you entirely that generally there is no bad translation . Some may be a bit outdated if they have not had the advantage of access to the most recent textual discoveries or don’t take account of modern developments in the target language - e.g the shift in the use of the word prevent from Elizabethan English to Modern English where it has a completely opposite meaning or the virtually complete cessation in normal parlance of the use of the term “man” or “brother/brethren” (outside some religious or political circles) to mean generic humanity as opposed to a specifically gendered subject whether singular or plural. Others may be a bit wooden if they stick too rigidly to the use of the same English word to translate the same Greek or Hebrew word throughout without sensitivity to context, or if, like Bentley-Hart’s translation of the NT they go too far in trying to maintain the “strangeness” of Ancient Greek to English ears and end up turning what would have been perfectly normal if not necessarily highly literary Greek into frankly bad English. Some on the other hand go to the opposite extreme and smooth out the variations in style between the writers too much and end up producing something that sounds like an Oxford common room or like the Good News Bible (a great translation to use with those not used to the Bible or who can read but don’t much as we used to say in urban mission), a popular daily newspaper.

There’s also a difference between translations primarily intended for personal use and private reading, those intended for study like the NASB or NET which will want to stay closer to the textual word order and those that are also intended for public liturgical reading which will need to be a bit more literary and flow well when read aloud ( I love the original Jerusalem Bible and the Revised English Bible for this and of course some of the cadences of the KJV are beautiful in the same way Shakespeare is). Others like JB Philips’ NT (much respected by FF Bruce), Robert Alter’s magnificent Hebrew Bible, NT Wright’s “for everyone” versions or even The Message are just individual endeavours reflecting their own conclusions or aiming at a particular audience -and all the more interesting for that, often provoking fresh questions or insights when a standard text like the NIV has become a bit over familiar with use. We are so blessed to have such variety and should make the most of it to grasp the many sided, multi-coloured richness of the Word we have been given.

There are only a few I would encourage people to steer clear of for regular use as opposed to occasional reading for interest - oddities like the Amplified Bible or poor paraphrases like the original Living Bible (Saul going into a cave to go to the bathroom anyone?) or the Passion ( which pretends to be much more than it is) or translations by sects such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses which aim to bolster one particular theological stance. I personally own many, many versions, Catholic and Protestant, with notes and without and benefit from all of them as I develop my own original language skills and have a go at doing my own!
.

[EndTimeMagi]

I want the original idioms as is, word for word, with footnotes offering an idea behind them. I don't want footnotes put in the text as holy scripture.

[peterpapoutsis]

World English Bible translation Ecumenical Edition 2022 is fantastic

[dooglitas]

First, let me state that I have been following your channel for some time now and have enjoyed your insights and the valuable information you provide. Also, I have studied the Greek NT for a long time and speak Spanish and have studied several other languages and have knowledge of the translation process. All that being said, I would like to say that I disagree with your position about good and bad translations. Personally, I think that the plethora of translations has actually caused a great deal of confusion and has served to weaken the church and many people's faith. I disagree with the idea that translators need to make so many decisions based on their audience and purpose and theological bias. The idea of translations not being good or bad is an idea that is a product of the postmodern times we live in, wherein good and bad and right an wrong are considered a matter of personal opinion.

I grew up in the time before there were so many translations. Most evangelicals read the KJV. The Amplified Bible Bible became popular during the late '60s and '70s. It was a helpful tool, but not many people used it as their regular reading translation. I think that translators who tailor translations for various purposes are disregarding the doctrine of the inspiration of scripture and are disrespecting God's word to mankind. I have watched over the decades as the evangelical churches and their pastors have succumbed to the spirit of this world and have become possessed by the philosophy of this age and forsaken orthodox biblical doctrine and are leading millions of Christians astray. I think that the advent of all this multitude of translations and the postmodern philosophy guiding the translation process of many of the translators has played a huge part in this modern apostasy. I find it extremely disheartening to have watched this all happen over my lifetime.

[ourendtimewalk]

The christian life is a life in which we are to follow PRINCIPLES. There are many ways to explain PRINCIPLES and achieve an understanding in someone's mind. People who are fighting over a particular bible translation didn't understand that, in my opinion.

A quite red apple fell on the floor
A reddish apple fell on the floor
An almost completely red apple fell on the floor
A red apple fell on the floor

All those statements are close from each others. The general idea is clear. A normal person would get it. :)

[joannsmith]

Most peoples only want a Bible that reaffirms their theology. They aren’t searching for the truth—just a Bible that agrees with their preconceived ideas. Sad!

[MarkHoffmanVH]

One thing I check is whether Jewish (non-Christian) scholars are part of the translation team. That indicates a commitment to a kind of 'objectivity' that stands apart from overtly Christian theological presuppositions.

[markmarkster]

Before joining Biblical Mastery, I relied on multiple translations and interlinears in order to gain multiple understandings of a passage. Agree that some translations are more consistent in giving a giving a sense of the meaning of the original text. Yet even the paraphrases will sometimes bring out the sense more clearly than the scholarly translations. So grateful for courses like Biblical Mastery for being able to see the reasoning behind the translations

[Flames]

Some things i disagree today we do not do as they did in days of old becuse in bc there is no western world. But i do not agree we need to change the bible to meet the people we are talking to. But i think we need to start with who Jesus was talking to. And who His disciples were talking to . Did they change how they talked. to others after He went to the right hand .

[robertrudisill]

Here's a simple rule on this matter. If it adds to OR takes away (and many of them do) do not use it.
IF God in Deuteronomy and Jesus in Revelation state "If you add to or take away it is an abomination" (paraphrase) Why you YOU use said book?! Do your due diligence against the linear.