Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Which version to memorize | Bible general Archive 3 | Hank | 181578 | ||
Anotherview - I'd have to go along with my colleagues Doc and Kalos and say that merit lies in memorizing a translation more modern than the centuries-old King James Bible, although it saddens me to say so, because the King James is such a lovely rendering in English of the ancient manuscripts. But the aim of language is, above all, to convey the thoughts in the mind of the author to the mind of the reader as efficiently and as accurately as possible, and for most modern readers some of the modern translations are better vehicles for that now than the older models are. The King James once was a fresh new translation, but much has happened to the English language since 1611. Even before then, there was a time when Chaucer's "Canterbury Tales" was easily understood by any literate reader of English, but the "Tales" in the original language of Chaucer is practically unreadable today without extensive training in the English that Chaucer knew. ...... So, having attempted to establish the need to use a modern translation for memorization (and peradventure, for reading and study also), we should address the question, "Which version from among an ever growing number of versions shall we choose?" I confess to a decided bias against the paraphrased versions (some of them call themselves dynamic equivalence versions, but they are all in some measure paraphased versions). Instead of translating as nearly as possible a transparency of the ancient manuscripts, that is, a word-for-word translation (e.g. NASB), the paraphrased (dynamic equivalence, e.g. NIv) versions attempt to convey in their versions a thought-for-thought "equivalence." That is to say, they presume to tell the reader what the author meant by what he said instead of telling him what the author actually did say. This method not only places on the translator an enmormous responsibility to "get it right," but it opens wide the gates of opportunity (if not actual temptation) for the translator to insert his bias, his opinion, and his own doctrinal points of view. Thus, I would never recommend that a paraphrased version be used for serious study and certainly not for memorization. This narrows the field considerably, because so many of the modern versions are nothing more than paraphrases, some wildly so. We then have remaining the NASB, NKJV, ESV and perhaps HCSB (Holman Christian Standard Bible). Of these the NKJV is the only one that follows the traditional text (sometimes referred to as Byzantine Text that largely supports the Textus Receptus) for its translation of the New Testament. The NKJV has preserved much of the flow as well as the poetic and literary qualities of the KJV. The ESV, a remake of the Revised Standard Version, is essentially a literal translation of excellent literary quality written in clear modern English that I find pleasing to read. The NASB is a fine translation, perhaps a shade or two more literal than either the NKJV or the ESV, but falls somewhat behind the NKJV and the ESV in literary quality. As for the HCSB, I'm not particularly keen on it personally, though I have nothing specific to say against it. Some of the turns of phrase just don't "float my boat," but that is merely my subjective feeling about the translation, nothing more. The language is generally contemporary and reasonably clear, but it simply doesn't stir me the way the old King James does, or to a slightly lesser degree, the way the New King James and the English Stanard and New American Standard versions do ...... I'm like Kalos in that I began my memorization efforts back when the KJV was really the only version in town, and I, being even older than Kalos, have traveled much too far down the pike to think of trying to convince my reluctant little gray brain cells that it's time for them to clean house of all the King James verses that they have faithfully filed away for so long a time and begin the formidable task of replacing them with another version. I should be most unwise to ask them to undertake so prodigious an enterprise, for fear that they would rise up in sheer protest and refuse to function at all! ..... I believe the Bible and the Bible says (in the King James Version, by the way), "Thy word have I hid in mine heart that I might not sin against thee" (Psalm 119:11). Therefore it not only behooves the follower of Jesus Christ to store up as much of the word of God as possible in his memory, but it is also one of the exquisite joys of life to be able to recall portions of God's word and reflect upon them in times of laughter or tears, work or play. In good times or bad, sunny days or rainy days, God's precious word is always a treasure beyond measure. ..... I hope that the responses to your question will help you to select a translation for your memory work and spur you to begin a life-long journey of committing portions of God's word to memory. --Hank | ||||||
2 | Which version to memorize | Bible general Archive 3 | anotherview | 181582 | ||
Thanks. One person responded offline and explained that as he changed bibles over the years, he just started memorizing the chapters not yet memorized in the new versions he was studying. If I could think that could work for me, then it would take a load off. Then I would not have to re-do the KJV or NOV (sorry, but I didn't know), or NASB chapters. One of the posters said something that was hugely helpful--I am not just memorizing for my comprehension, but also for any others to whom I might quote it. Also, of the three you mentioned: NASB, NKJV, ESV, I was already considering the first two, strongly. I was not familiar with the ESV, so will look into it (I think my daughter has a copy). **Thanks especially for not discouraging my memorization (as some have done). ****I will keep looking for any new posts. |
||||||
3 | Which version to memorize | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 181596 | ||
Anotherview, To see a video that is an introduction to the English Standard Version, go to: http://www.esv.org/about/video.intro To read the ESV online go to: http://www.gnpcb.org/esv/ For a side by side comparison of the ESV with other versions go to: http://studylight.org/par/ For what it's worth, if I had to choose between the NASB and the ESV, I couldn't do it. In my opinion, they are tied for first place. Grace to you, John |
||||||