{"id":2108,"date":"2020-06-01T16:58:00","date_gmt":"2020-06-01T22:58:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/integritysyndicate.com\/?p=2108"},"modified":"2023-07-27T00:35:47","modified_gmt":"2023-07-27T06:35:47","slug":"best-english-translations","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/integritysyndicate.com\/best-english-translations\/","title":{"rendered":"Best English Bible Translations"},"content":{"rendered":"\t\t
This site outlines the Best English Translations of the Bible in terms of accuracy and readability. Topics such as bias in translation and editorial decisions are also addressed. Finally, preferred Bible Study resources including websites, apps, and advanced software resources, are provided.\u00a0<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
https:\/\/aicnt.org<\/a><\/p> The\u00a0AICNT<\/i><\/a>\u00a0(AI Critical New Testament), is a critical English translation rendered in 2023, which provides an accurate and unbiased AI-generated translation based on the standard critical Greek text used for modern Bible translations. The optimized GPT-4 rendering is combined with extensive footnotes for documenting significant variants in the manuscript tradition.<\/p> This version of the New Testament is tailored for readers desiring a literal and transparent translation that aligns with the earliest known Greek New Testament manuscripts. This translation overcomes the shortcomings often found in popular translations, which can be influenced by the personal beliefs of translators and that incorporate readings from later textual traditions.<\/p> The\u00a0AICNT<\/i>, derived directly from the critical Greek Text, has been entirely translated using OpenAI\u2019s ChatGPT-4, the most sophisticated Large Language Model (LLM) available at the time of this publication. Leveraging its extensive knowledge base and cutting-edge architecture, GPT-4 is capable of translating ancient languages with remarkable accuracy. The system adheres to the specific instructions it is given.<\/p> Utilizing the chat completion mode of OpenAI\u2019s API with GPT-4, the system message that defines the behavior of the AI Model was developed to give an accurate, reliable, and unbiased output with the following objectives:<\/p> To achieve the above objectives, the translation was rendered through the GPT-4 API. All that is given is the system message (specific instructions), the API settings, and the raw text. No text was incorporated that wasn\u2019t generated from the GPT-4 LLM.<\/p> For more about the AI Critical New Testament, see https:\/\/aicnt.org<\/a>.<\/p><\/div>\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t Below is a chart of English translations of decreasing accuracy, with respect to the Critical Text (NA27) from left to right. This data is taken from the Comprehensive New Testament, \u00a9 Cornerstone Publications, 2008. The AI Critical New Testament (AICNT)<\/a> is 100% based on the Nestle-Aland 28th edition (NA-28), which is the most recent version of the critical text.<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t \u00a0<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t Readability is also an important consideration.\u00a0It\u00a0is the ease with which a reader can understand a written text. In natural language, the readability of text depends on its content (the complexity of its vocabulary and syntax). Data for readability is taken from the Comprehensive New Testament (COM) \u00a9 Cornerstone Publications 2008 which utilized Readability Studio version 1.2.0.0 \u00a92007 to calculate the reading level of the COM compared to twenty translations in their comparison study calculated according to the Coleman-Liau scoring system. Several translations are shown below, with diminishing readability from left to right.<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t All English translations exhibit some bias. These are the ways in which bias is introduced into a translation:<\/p> Amazon Link:\u00a0https:\/\/amzn.to\/38PDy6Q<\/a><\/p> The Comprehensive New Testament (COM) represents the textual choices of the Critical Greek Text (Nestle-Aland 27th edition)\u00a0in a readable\u00a0English format. This New Testament was created especially for Bible studies and has the highest accuracy as compared to the critical Greek text. Over 15,000 variations in ancient manuscripts are translated in the footnotes.\u00a0Variants of the Greek texts are generally classified into two groups: The \u201cAlexandrian\u201d group represents the oldest surviving manuscripts, and\u00a0the \u201cByzantine\u201d group represents the majority of manuscripts. Uncertain readings are clearly marked in brackets.\u00a0At the bottom of each page is a parallel textual apparatus that presents the textual choices of 20 English Bible versions for each verse of the New Testament. This is the largest parallel textual apparatus for\u00a0Bible versions available when published. The COM also offers superior readability as compared to ESV and\u00a0NASB translations below. The COM is translated with a traditional Trinitarian theological perspective.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p> Wikipedia:\u00a0https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/English_Standard_Version<\/a><\/p> About ESV Website:\u00a0https:\/\/www.esv.org\/translation<\/a><\/p> Online ESV Bible:\u00a0\u00a0https:\/\/www.esv.org\/Luke+1<\/a><\/p> ESV Print Editions:\u00a0https:\/\/www.crossway.org\/bibles<\/a><\/p> The ESV (2001)\u00a0streams from historical English translations beginning with Tyndale\u00a0(1526) and continuing with KJV\u00a0(1611), ASV (1901), and RSV (1952, 1971). The 1971 RSV was the starting point for the ESV translation. The ESV is an \u201cessentially literal\u201d translation, and its emphasis is on \u201cword-for-word\u201d correspondence, as opposed to\u00a0some Bible versions that have followed a \u201cthought-for-thought\u201d emphasizing \u201cdynamic equivalence\u201d rather than the \u201cessentially literal\u201d meaning of the original. This is\u00a0better than \u201cthought-for-thought\u201d translation, as \u201cword for word\u201d\u00a0is more inclined to reflect the interpretive opinions of the translator. The ESV\u00a0does incur biases in the translation, which correspond to a team that\u00a0\u201cshares a common commitment \u2026 to Christian orthodoxy.\u201d Additionally, editorial liberty is taken in rendering repetitious words in Greek corresponding to \u201cand,\u201d but,\u201d and \u201cfor\u201d as well as the addition of interpretive section headings. The most obvious biases are toward Trinitarian theology,\u00a0which is also attested by the dedication, which reads, \u201cSo to our triune God and to his people we offer what\u00a0we have done.\u201d<\/p> The ESV Old Testament is based on the Masoretic text of the Hebrew Bible as found in\u00a0Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia<\/em>\u00a0(5th ed., 1997), and the New Testament on the Greek text in the 2014 editions of the\u00a0Greek New Testament<\/em>\u00a0(5th corrected ed.), published by the United Bible Societies (UBS), and\u00a0Novum Testamentum Graece<\/em>\u00a0(28th ed., 2012), edited by Nestle and Aland.\u00a0In some cases, the ESV follows\u00a0a Greek text different from the critical text (UBS5\/NA28) and is thus lower in accuracy than the critical text as compared to COM. The ESV offers a good balance between literal meaning and readability. The ESV\u00a0is slightly less literal than NASB but has noticeably improved readability.\u00a0<\/p> Wikipedia:\u00a0https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/New_American_Standard_Bible<\/a><\/p> website: https:\/\/www.lockman.org\/nasb-bible-info<\/a><\/p> The claim by the publisher is that the NASB does not\u00a0attempt to interpret Scripture through translation and that NASB adheres to the principles of a formal equivalence translation. They aimed at \u201ca\u00a0most exacting and demanding method of translation\u201d striving for\u00a0word-for-word translation that is both accurate and clear. This method more closely follows the word and sentence patterns of the biblical authors in order to enable the reader to study Scripture in its most literal format. In some cases, changes were made in the main text in the direction of a more current English idiom, with the more literal rendering indicated in the footnotes. Although the translation is highly readable, the score for readability is not as high as\u00a0for COM\u00a0or ESV, the reading is woodier.\u00a0Although the NASB is a highly literal translation, it is translated with a traditional Trinitarian bias and includes excessive capitalization as\u00a0well as suggestive section headings that further biases the reader.\u00a0<\/p> Wikipedia:\u00a0https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/American_Standard_Version<\/a><\/p> Amazon Link:\u00a0https:\/\/amzn.to\/30Qg25o<\/a><\/p> The ASV, published in 1901 as the \u201cAmerican Revision,\u201d is rooted in the work begun in 1870 to revise the 1611 King James Version (KJV).\u00a0The ASV, a product of both British and American scholarship, has been highly regarded for its scholarship and accuracy. The ASV text exhibits what some perceived as excessive literalism and, correspondingly, it scores low on readability. ASV\u00a0uses many words that are unfamiliar to modern ears and incorporates difficult sentence structure.\u00a0The ASV is one of the oldest English translations that have a high level of accuracy compared to the Greek critical\u00a0text based on modern textual criticism. The ASV improved some verses in the KJV and in other places it omitted the dubious verses from the main text that were\u00a0erroneously included in the KJV.\u00a0 These variants were then relegated\u00a0to footnotes.\u00a0 Although the ASV had Unitarian representation on the translation committee, it reflects the typical orthodox Trinitarian biases, since translational decisions were made based on the committee majority. The ASV has been used for many years by Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses, as it uses \u201cJehovah\u201d as the Divine Name. The ASV has been the basis of\u00a0six subsequent English versions, including the Revised Standard Version (RSV), first published in 1952 and then updated in 1971, and the\u00a0Revised English Version (REV) 2013-2021 used by Biblical Unitarians.<\/p> Revised Standard Version (RSV), 1952\u00a0& 1971<\/p> New Revised Standard Version (NRSV), 1989<\/p> New American Bible (NAB), 1970<\/p> New English Translation (NET), 2006 & 2019<\/p> \u00a0<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t A number of\u00a0verses in the King James Version of the New Testament are not found in modern Bible translations. Scholars generally regard these now omitted\u00a0verses as\u00a0verses that were added\u00a0to the Greek texts. The criterion for the editorial decision for excluding these passages was based on whether the tangible evidence indicated the passage was likely in the original New Testament text or was a later addition. This is in keeping with the principle of critical editing, as articulated by what Rev.\u00a0Samuel T. Bloomfield\u00a0wrote in 1832, \u201cSurely, nothing dubious ought to be admitted into ‘the sure word’ of ‘The Book of Life’.\u201d\u00a0The KJV contains 26 verses and passages\u00a0that are omitted or boxed in modern translations which are\u00a0not likely original. These verses include Matthew 17:21,\u00a018:11, 20:16(b), 23:14, Mark 6:11(b), 7:16, 9:44, 9:46, 11,26, 15:28,\u00a015:28, 16:9-20,\u00a0Luke\u00a04:8(b), 9:55-56 17:36, 23:17, John 5:3-4, John 7:53-8:11, Acts 8:37, 9:5-6, 13:42, 15:34,\u00a023:9(b), 24:6-8, 28:29, Rom 16:24, and the\u00a0Comma Johanneum of\u00a01 John 5:7-8. With respect to the long ending of Mark (16:9-20),\u00a0there is strong reason to doubt that\u00a0the words were part of the original text of the Gospels, as Philip Shaff stated, \u201cAccording to the judgement of the best\u00a0critics, these two important sections are additions to the original text from the apostolic tradition.\u201d\u00a0The KJV also exhibits orthodox\u00a0corruptions\u00a0in which verses were changed supporting Trinitarian theological suppositions. Twelve examples of theologically motivated\u00a0corruption in the KJV include Matthew 24:36,\u00a0Mark 1:1, John 6:69, Acts 7:59, Acts 20:28, Colossians 2:2, 1 Timothy 3:16, Hebrews 2:16, Jude 1:25, 1 John 5:7-8, Revelation 1:8, and\u00a0Revelation 1:10-11.<\/p> The source New Testament Greek texts used to produce the KJV were mainly dependent on manuscripts of the late Byzantine text-type. With the later identification of much earlier manuscripts, most modern textual scholars value the evidence of manuscripts that belong to the Alexandrian family as better witnesses to the original text of the biblical authors, without giving it\u00a0automatic preference.\u00a0The 16th Century Greek text\u00a0Novum Instrumentum omne<\/em> compiled by Desiderius Erasmus,\u00a0later known as the Textus Receptus, was a major influence over the King James Version. Erasmus was a Catholic priest, who remained a member of the Catholic Church all his life. He also enjoyed the nickname \u201cPrince of the Humanists.\u201d\u00a0\u00a0His third edition of 1522\u00a0was based on less than a dozen Greek manuscripts dating from the 12th to 16th centuries yet\u00a0served as the source text of the KJV translation.\u00a0The later manuscripts of the Textus Receptus exhibited the cumulative effect of scribal changes over at least a millennium and\u00a0vary widely, with the earliest manuscripts dated within the first five\u00a0centuries after Christ.\u00a0<\/p> For more, see KJVisCorrupt.com<\/a><\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t The Hebrew Text that has served as the basis for most translations of the Old Testament into English is a Masoretic<\/a> recension\u00a0based almost entirely on the Leningrad Codex, which dates from 1008 A.D. In comparison to the textual evidence that we have for the New Testament Greek text, this is a very late manuscript. This is well after the Greek Septuagint<\/a> was translated (3rd century before Christ), the Aramaic Peshitta<\/a> (1st and 2nd Centuries A.D.), or the Latin Vulgate<\/a> (4th Century A.D.). According to Christian tradition, the non-Christian Jews began making changes in the Old Testament text to undercut the Christian use of Old Testament prophecies concerning the coming of Christ.<\/p> The Septuagint<\/a>, the Greek version of the Old Testament writings used during New Testament times and in the early church, should be trusted more than the Masoretic<\/a> Hebrew Tests that most English Translations are based on. This is for the following reasons:<\/p> Metropolitan Hilarion (Alfeyev) notes in Doctrine and Teaching of the Orthodox Church<\/em>:<\/p> \u2026the basis of the Old Testament text in the Orthodox tradition is the Septuagint, a Greek translation by the \u201cseventy interpreters\u201d made in the third to second centuries BCE for the Alexandrian Hebrews and the Jewish diaspora. The authority of the Septuagint is based on three factors. First of all, though the Greek text is not the original language of the Old Testament books, the Septuagint does reflect the state of the original text as it would have been found in the third to second centuries BCE, while the current Hebrew text of the Bible, which is called the \u201cMasoretic,\u201d was edited up until the eighth century CE. Second, some of the citations taken from the Old Testament and found in the New mainly use the Septuagint text. Third, the Septuagint was used by both the Greek Fathers of the Church, and Orthodox liturgical services (in other words, this text became part of the Orthodox church Tradition). Taking into account the three factors enumerated above, St. Philaret of Moscow considers it possible to maintain that \u201cin the Orthodox teaching of Holy Scripture it is necessary to attribute a dogmatic merit to the Translation \u2026\u00a0in some cases placing it on equal level with the original and even elevating it above the Hebrew text, as is generally accepted in the most recent editions (Orthodox Christianity, Volume II: Doctrine and Teaching of the Orthodox Church, (New York: St. Vladimir Seminary Press, 2012) p. 34).<\/em><\/p> Wikipedia Link:\u00a0https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/New_English_Translation_of_the_Septuagint<\/a><\/p> Amazon Link:\u00a0https:\/\/amzn.to\/312ZrM0<\/a><\/p> The New English Translation of the Septuagint (NETS) is a modern translation of the Septuagint (LXX), which is the scriptures used by Greek-speaking Christians and Jews of antiquity.\u00a0The NETS translators selected the best critical editions of the Septuagint, primarily the larger G\u00f6ttingen Septuagint, and\u00a0used the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) as the base text. NETS translators sought to retain the NRSV to the extent that the Greek text\u00a0directs or permits while also removing gender-inclusive language that was not warranted by the underlying source texts. It was hoped the relationship between the NETS and the NRSV would mirror the relationship between the LXX and its underlying Hebrew text, making it easy for readers to study the discrepancies between the two textual traditions without extensive study of the original languages.<\/p> Publisher Link:\u00a0https:\/\/lexhampress.com\/product\/188040\/the-lexham-english-septuagint-2nd-ed<\/a><\/p> Amazon Link:\u00a0https:\/\/amzn.to\/3vNWT2r<\/a><\/p> The\u00a0Lexham English Septuagint\u00a0<\/em>(LES) is a newer translation of the Septuagint beautifully typeset in a comfortable, single-column format.\u00a0The LES provides a literal, readable, and transparent English edition for modern readers. Retaining the familiar forms of personal names and places, the LES gives readers the ability to read it alongside their favored English Bible. The LES maintains the meaning of the original text (Swete’s edition), making the Septuagint accessible to readers today.<\/p> Wikipedia Link:\u00a0https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Lamsa_Bible<\/a><\/p> Amazon Link:\u00a0https:\/\/amzn.to\/3tAfEnM<\/a><\/p>Accuracy of English Translations<\/h2>
What Does Accuracy Mean?<\/h2>
Readability<\/h2>
Biases Exhibited in Bible Translations<\/h2>
Second Best Translation of the New Testament<\/u><\/h2>
Comprehensive New Testament (COM)<\/h3>
Cornerstone Publications (2008)<\/h4>
Best Widely Used Translations<\/u><\/h2>
English Standard Version (ESV)<\/h3>
Crossway (2001, 2007, 2011, & 2016)<\/h4>
New American Standard Bible (NASB)\u00a0<\/h3>
The Lockman Foundation (1971, 1977, 1995, & 2020)<\/h4>
Best Version\u00a0Not Under Copyright Restrictions<\/u><\/h2>
American Standard Version (ASV)<\/h3>
Thomas Nelson &\u00a0Sons, 1901<\/h4>
Other Select Versions with an\u00a0Accuracy Threshold >80%<\/u><\/h2>
The King James Version (KJV) is Corrupt<\/u><\/h2>
Old Testament Translations from Other Languages<\/u><\/h2>
New English Translation of the Septuagint (NETS)<\/h3>
Oxford University Press\u00a0(2007)<\/h4>
The Lexham English Septuagint (LES)<\/h3>
Lexham Press\u00a0(2020)<\/h4>
Holy Bible from the Ancient Eastern Text of the Aramaic\u00a0Peshitta (Lamsa Bible)<\/h3>
Harper One\u00a0(1933 &\u00a01985)<\/h4>