Most accurate modern translation?

[jessicaleks93]

What's the most accurate modern English translation of the bible? I'm currently reading KJV as I believe that to be the most accurate but I'd also like another bible that's just easier and modern English but accurate

EDIT - thank you everyone I've gone with NASB, in addition to my KJV.
Second Edit - Just to be clear folks I wanted a modern english version just for fun, and an easy read alongside the KJV, not in place of, I can read the KJV perfectly fine and I have no disputes over the KJV's accuracy, I believe KJV is most accurate and therefore will always be the study bible, the main one for me. But happy to discuss other translations too
I started this thread after reading things about ESV having certain parts missing? And some other things about other modern translations, so wanted to be sure, and I've gone with NASB as mostly suggested and researched NASB too, looks to be good.

 

[Grailhunter]

What's the most accurate modern English translation of the bible? I'm currently reading KJV as I believe that to be the most accurate but I'd also like another bible that's just easier and modern English but accurate

New American Standard Study Bible NASB

The King James Version is the most error ridden Bible in print.

 

[SavedInHim]

What's the most accurate modern English translation of the bible? I'm currently reading KJV as I believe that to be the most accurate but I'd also like another bible that's just easier and modern English but accurate

New King James Version and Modern English Version are both good. They're based on the Textus Receptus like the King James but have corrected many of the mistakes in the King James and have more modern English. If you feel the KJV is the most accurate, that's probably the way to go.

 

[marks]

What's the most accurate modern English translation of the bible? I'm currently reading KJV as I believe that to be the most accurate but I'd also like another bible that's just easier and modern English but accurate

I like to use the King James, and the LITV, translated by J.P. Green. I like the NLT (second edition) when a passage seems particularly confusing, to help set some of the thoughts in order, then go back to the KJV for it's accuracy.

Much love!

 

[Ronald Nolette]

What's the most accurate modern English translation of the bible? I'm currently reading KJV as I believe that to be the most accurate but I'd also like another bible that's just easier and modern English but accurate

NASB i s very good

 

[Rockerduck]

New American Standard Study Bible NASB

The King James Version is the most error ridden Bible in print.

The KJB did not have errors. some translation words were corrected and old english words.. But still the same. In fact, even the NKJB didn't translate the "ye" correctly. Its plural and put the singular "you" in its place.

 

[Grailhunter]

The KJB did not have errors. some translation words were corrected and old english words.. But still the same. In fact, even the NKJB didn't translate the "ye" correctly. Its plural and put the singular "you" in its place.

LOL This is an old topic on this forum. For sure and certain the KJB is the most error ridden Bible in print. You can go back through the threads about the KJB and see the long list of errors.

On the other hand I like the KJB, just not for scriptural accuracy.
It is beautiful, you can read the scriptures and it sounds like a poem. Historically the table top illustrated family KJB’s are the most beautiful. I collect the old KJB’s and some are valuable….because of their type setting errors….like the Adulterer's Bible…..the Vinegars Bible……the Murmurers Bible…..the Wife Hater’s Bible….etc.

 

[jessicaleks93]

I like to use the King James, and the LITV, translated by J.P. Green. I like the NLT (second edition) when a passage seems particularly confusing, to help set some of the thoughts in order, then go back to the KJV for it's accuracy.

Much love!

Thank you

 

[GTW27]

The Holy Bible Revised Standard Version Self-Pronouncing Edition Concordance Copyright 1962 by The World Publishing Company.
When preaching in The Spirit as per The Lord's will, this is pretty accurate but sometimes the King James is more accurate.

 

[Grailhunter]

The Holy Bible Revised Standard Version Self-Pronouncing Edition Concordance Copyright 1962 by The World Publishing Company.
When preaching in The Spirit as per The Lord's will, this is pretty accurate but sometimes the King James is more accurate.

Boy that is some bad advice. Absolute fact, the King James is the most inaccurate Bible in print.

 

[MA2444]

What's the most accurate modern English translation of the bible? I'm currently reading KJV as I believe that to be the most accurate but I'd also like another bible that's just easier and modern English but accurate

I think the KJV is very accurate also. I was weaned on a KJV So the Shakesperian language dont bother me, I'm used to it.

I accidently found another version that spealls things out very clearly in modern language. It called the New Living Translation (NLT).

You can check one out at Bible Gateway passage: Proverbs 19 - New Living Translation

There's no registration needed and it's free. They also have a zillion other translations there. Ome of them you can click play and have it narrated to you as you read along.

 

[GTW27]

Boy that is some bad advice. Absolute fact, the King James is the most inaccurate Bible in print.

Blessings Grailhunter! She would like my favorite version but yeh there some things in the King James.

 

[MA2444]

Boy that is some bad advice. Absolute fact, the King James is the most inaccurate Bible in print.

What does that even mean? That God wasn't able to get a good translation made back then (1600's?)? That's sort of short changing God, isnt it?

I think you nay KJV people just done like the Shakesperian language.

What's the most accurate modern English translation of the bible? I'm currently reading KJV as I believe that to be the most accurate but I'd also like another bible that's just easier and modern English but accurate

Some of the other posts made me think about something else too. I had the Lord supernaturally change an NIV Bible that I had into a NKJV. That's a good testimony of mine and I have two witnesses that both can bear witness to that Bible was bought as a NIV bible. One witness bought it for me to match his translation so we could study on the phone when his wife wouldn't let him out, lol. And the other witness/friend walks in one day and says, NIV? Bad translation because it has many verses that are omitted out of it. And we bible studied for about an hour where he looked up verses in the NIV and when I compared to my KJV, they were missing! So there's more to the testimony but those two Brothers in Christ can verify and bear witness to what happened! They can verify it.

I never prayed about it before that, I never even thought about it if it was a "good" translation or not. God just did it.Then it was an NKJV and so I have to assume that this is the Lord's endorsement of the NKJV! (BibleGateway has that version too!

 

[RedFan]

Are you looking for accuracy in translation of the original words or accuracy in translation of the original meaning? Some people prefer the latter. My personal preference is for the former.

In my view, translations that attempt to bring the original words into modern cultural context are troublesome. For example, the word ἀδελφός (“brother”) is translated in the NIV as “brother or sister” when spoken by Peter in Matt. 18:21 and by Jesus in Matt. 18:35. I have no doubt that the gospel message is broader than the gender-discriminating usage originally recorded. But isn’t that for us to figure out, without the assistance of the translator? A marginal note would have been preferable here to a dogmatic change of the original words. For once the translator starts going down that road, doctrinal slants can creep in. That’s the case, for example, with translating ἀδελφός in Matt. 18:21 gender neutrally as “member of the Church” (NRSV) – a phrase that suggests who Peter thought his “brothers” really were.

 

[Peterlag]

What's the most accurate modern English translation of the bible? I'm currently reading KJV as I believe that to be the most accurate but I'd also like another bible that's just easier and modern English but accurate

I never saw an accurate modern English translation. Most if not all seem to be written by the churches of today and they write them based on what their group now believes. The oldest Bibles are always the best. My problem is they are so hard to read. I'm referring to the ones before the KJV.

 

[MA2444]

I have no doubt that the gospel message is broader than the gender-discriminating usage originally recorded. But isn’t that for us to figure out, without the assistance of the translator?

But isnt the translator the Holy Spirit? You seemed slightly unclear on this to me...

Because the Holy Spirit is our translator as far as I'm concerned. He's our tracher,helper and guide, our helper. That prolly means that all the bible translations are good enough for one to seek out God with if their heart is in the right place and seeking.

Yes, some translations are better than others. But they all work with the power of the Holy Spirit.

 

[RedFan]

But isnt the translator the Holy Spirit? You seemed slightly unclear on this to me...

Because the Holy Spirit is our translator as far as I'm concerned. He's our tracher,helper and guide, our helper. That prolly means that all the bible translations are good enough for one to seek out God with if their heart is in the right place and seeking.

Yes, some translations are better than others. But they all work with the power of the Holy Spirit.

Not every English (or French, or German, etc.) translation is an inspired one.

 

[Grailhunter]

@GTW27 @MA2444 @RedFan
You guys are right….what are you looking for in a translation?
For some the amplified versions are good. NASB is more true to the words and if you have a little knowledge of the era and language it is your best bet. But if you are doing a serous study then you do not need someone else's option. So many false beliefs out there that are someone’s option.

But again the KJV is the most error ridden Bible in print and it is near to hateful to give it to a new Christian....First they have to learn to read the language of the KJV then they have to learn the truth some where else.
A SHORT LIST OF ERRORS, MODIFICATIONS, ADDITIONS THAT APPEAR IN THE KJV FOR THE NEW TESTAMENT ONLY … MANY MORE IN THE OLD TESTAMENT.

As a matter of perspective all of these discrepancies do not originate from the King James Version of the scriptures…many of them were adopted from the Jewish Vulgate Translation, the William Tyndale Bible and the Geneva Bible. At times the translators of the KJV played the Amplified Bible thing LOL where they would add words that they thought clarified the meaning of the verse….usually driven by the beliefs of the 1600's.

To start with the two “biggies” is the word fornication and Comma Johannine Addition. The word fornication is one of those words that are not in the actual scriptures….the word has a sorted history. The main problem with fornication is that its primary definition revolves around the belief that if two single people have sex it is a sin. When for thousands of years two single people having sex is how they formed a marriage.

The words wed or wedding or a requirement thereof does not appear in the scriptures, Old or New Testament. The Protestants were the first to make a church wedding a requirement for marriage in the mid 1500’s

So people think that couples that are not married and living together are living in sin…shacking up….and their kids are bastards. How much sin this word has caused over the years is hard to tell ….condemnation and gossiping. Hot coals on the accuser's head. How will that turn out for them on Judgment Day if the unjustly accused turned away from Christianity and their souls were lost?

The other.....1st John 5:7–8
The infamous Comma Johannine Addition
The original scriptures read as follows... (Quoting 6 through 8, so it can be read in context)

“6. This is the one who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ; not with the water only, but with the water and with the blood. 7. And it is the Spirit who bears witness, because the Spirit is the truth. 8. And it is the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.”

This was replaced with what came to be called the Comma Johanneum Addition.

6: This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. 7: For there are three that bear record in Heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. 8: And there are three that bear witness in Earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.
In all fairness the KJV inherited this error, it was once a theological statement that was in the margin notes of a hand written copy that supported the one God formula for the Trinity.

(1) Matthew 9:13
KJV: But go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy and not sacrifice.’ For I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance.”
Discrepancy: The KJV added “to repentance”..ie come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance.”

(2) Matthew 17:21
KJV: Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting.
Discrepancy: This verse is an addition and not found in earlier manuscripts.

(3) Matthew 18:11
KJV: For the Son of Man has come to save that which was lost.
Discrepancy: This verse is an addition and not found in earlier manuscripts. But a longer version of this appears in Luke 19:10.

(4) Matthew 20:16​

KJV: …. for many be called, but few chosen.
Discrepancy: An addition and a duplication of Matthew 22:14 and not found in earlier manuscripts.

(5) Matthew 23:14
KJV: Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation.
Discrepancy: This verse is an addition….not found in earlier manuscripts. And is an expansion of similar verses in Mark and Luke.

(6) Mark 7:16
KJV: If any man have ears to hear, let him hear.
Discrepancy: This verse is nearly identical with verses 4:9 and 4:23. But this verse is an addition….not found in earlier manuscripts.

(7) Mark 9:44 - 46
KJV: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. .. (Both verses identical to each other, and to 9:48, which is still in the main text)
Discrepancy: Both verses 44 and 46 are duplications of verse 48. These verses are additions and not found in earlier manuscripts.

(8) Mark 11:26
KJV: But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.
Discrepancy: This verse is very similar to Matthew 6:15 but this verse is an addition….not found in earlier manuscripts.

(9) Mark 15:28
KJV: And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, "And he was numbered with the transgressors."
Discrepancy: This verse is similar to Luke 22:37. But this verse is an addition….not found in earlier manuscripts. It does not appear in any manuscript until the 6th century.

(10) Mark 16: 9-20
KJV Eleven verses added to the ending of the Gospel of mark.
Discrepancy: The KJV adds eleven verses to the end of the Gospel of Mark. Not found in earlier manuscripts.

(11) Luke 4:4
KJV: And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.
Discrepancy: The KJV added the words; but by every word of God.

(12) Luke 4:8​

KJV: And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.
NASB: Jesus replied to him, “It is written: ‘YOU SHALL WORSHIP THE LORD YOUR GOD AND SERVE HIM ONLY.’”
Discrepancy: This is an addition and a reworking of the scriptures. Also get behind me, Satan, does not appear in the earlier manuscripts.

(13) Luke 17:36
KJV: Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
Discrepancy: This verse is obviously a rewording of Matthew 24:40. This verse is an addition….not found in earlier manuscripts.

(14) Luke 23:17​

KJV: For of necessity he must release one unto them at the feast.
Discrepancy: The same verse or a very similar verse appears in Matthew 27:15 and Mark 15:6. But in Luke they are additions. Not appearing in older manuscripts.

(15) Luke 24:40
KJV: And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them his hands and his feet.
Discrepancy: This verse is an addition and does not occur in older manuscripts.

Continued......

 

[Grailhunter]

(16) John 8:1-11

KJV: The story of the Adulterous Woman brought before Christ​

Reason: This is an addition and no part of it appears in older manuscripts.​

​

(17) John 9:4​

KJV: I must work the works of Him who sent Me while it is day; the night is coming when no one can work.​

Discrepancy: Should be; We must work the works of Him who sent Me….​

​

(18) Acts 8:37​

KJV: And Philip said, "If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest." And he [the Eunuch] answered and said, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."​

Discrepancy: This verse is an addition to the scriptures….not found in earlier manuscripts.

(19) Acts 9:5–6
KJV: And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do.
Discrepancy: The bolded part of this scripture is an addition and does not appear in the older manuscripts.

(20) Acts 15:34​

KJV: Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still.
Discrepancy: This verse is an addition….not found in earlier manuscripts and is worded differently between newer manuscript. The bolded area is a modification to the scripture and does not appear in older manuscript.

(21) Acts 13:42

KJV: And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath.​

NASB: As Paul and Barnabas were going out, the people kept begging that these things might be spoken to them the next Sabbath.
Reasons: A modification to the scripture, removing the names of Paul and Barnabas and changing the present and past tense and adding the Gentiles into the scripture. Not in older manuscripts.

(22) Acts 15:34​

KJV: Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still.
Discrepancy: This verse is an addition….not found in earlier manuscripts and is worded differently between newer manuscript.

(23) Acts 24:6–8​

KJV: Who also hath gone about to profane the temple: whom we took, and would have judged according to our law. But the chief captain Lysias came upon us, and with great violence took him away out of our hands, Commanding his accusers to come unto thee: by examining of whom thyself mayest take knowledge of all these things, whereof we accuse him.
Discrepancy: This verse has been completely reworded but why? The meaning was not changed.

(24) Acts 28:29​

KJV: And when he had said these words, the Jews departed, and had great reasoning among themselves.
Discrepany: This verse is an addition and does not appear in the older manuscripts.

(25 Romans 13:9
KJV: For the commandments, “You shall not commit adultery,” “You shall not murder,” “You shall not steal,” “You shall not bear false witness,” “You shall not covet,” and if there is any other commandment, are all summed up in this saying, namely, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”
Discrepancy: Although “You shall not bear false witness” was part of the Commandments…it was not part of this verse….it was added.

(26) Romans 16:24
KJV: The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.
Reason: This verse occurs twice in the KJV in this chapter; once as the conclusion to verse 20 and again as verse. But both are an addition to the scriptures not occurring in older manuscripts.

(27) Colossians 1:14
KJV: In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
Discrepancy: The KJV added the words “through his blood” to this scripture. Not in the earlier manuscripts.

(28) 1st Timothy 6:5
KJV: useless wranglings of men of corrupt minds and destitute of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a means of gain. From such withdraw yourself.
Discrepancy: “From such withdraw yourself” the KJV added this to the scripture. Does not appear in earlier manuscripts.

(29) 1st Peter 1:22
KJV: Ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit.
Discrepancy: “through the Spirit” was added by the KJV. Does not appear in the earlier manuscripts.

(30) Revelation 5:14
KJV: And the four beasts said, Amen. And the four and twenty elders fell down and worshipped him that liveth for ever and ever.
Discrepany: Should read; And the four living creatures kept saying, “Amen.” And the elders fell down and worshiped. Him who lives for the ages and the ages.
The words “And the four and twenty” where added to the scripture and it does not appear in the earlier manuscripts. Part of this is a mis-translation.

(31) Revelation 21:24
KJV: And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it.
Discrepancy: Should read; The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring glory and honor of the nations of them into it.

 

[RLT63]

The KJB did not have errors. some translation words were corrected and old english words.. But still the same. In fact, even the NKJB didn't translate the "ye" correctly. Its plural and put the singular "you" in its place.

Yea. It should have been y’all