To All Christians: A Question

[Gottle_of_Geer]

What Scriptural translation do you, personally, prefer? Why?

Usually I myself enjoy very much the more recent of the New Living Translations (the older does have a Catholic edition, I might add). Yet though I know in terms of manuscripts used it is inferior, I can’t stop finding myself absorbed in a King James because of the poeticism so evident in it. It tears me to think it adds verses excluded by the originals! I also recently have taken to the New Jerusalem after seeing several quotations from it in The Ragamuffin Gospel by Brennan Manning, and have purchased one for myself.

Hmm … Obviously, I hope to arrive at a point where I no longer need the translations, but when the Greek texts are sufficient, but until that time, I must rely on man’s renderings of the holy Word.
I ask, by the way, out of pure curiosity …

Shalom!

I like:​

• The New English Bible of 1970
• The RSV
• The Authorised Version
• the Wordsworth & White manual edition of the Vulgate NT…
• …the Beuron Abbey manual edition of the Vulgate published by the Württemberg Bible Society in 1969 (?)
• the 1985 Jewish Publication Society TaNaKH
• the edition of the 1881-85-95 Revised Version published by Oxford University; it has tens of thousands of marginal references: very useful
  I try to avoid editions & versions which employ inclusive language - they change the text too much to be useful for study.

 

[The_Truthinator]

the 1985 Jewish Publication Society TaNaKH

I have one of those! There’s always such disagreement between it and the Christian translations … They translate 'elohim very often as “divine beings” in order to avoid facing facts, it seems. But nonetheless, it’s always good to see different perspectives.

Yeah, gender inclusive language does mess with the original text a bit–though, if done correctly, not necessarily the meaning. In any case, NLT and others aren’t study Bibles (especially the old edition!) …

Cool imput, guys.