What is the best modern translation of the bible?

A lot of people take the advertisements about the improved accuracy of newer translations at face value without ever really examining the original languages themselves. The newer translations might introduce one token improvement for every several to dozen divergent renderings that degrade the quality of the translation. It can be concluded that the early modern translators did a remarkable job for the resources they had available, as well as the older medieval Wycliffe Bible.

Matthew 1:18
Τοῦ δὲ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἡ γέννησις οὕτως ἦν. Μνηστευθείσης τῆς μητρὸς αὐτοῦ Μαρίας τῷ Ἰωσήφ, πρὶν ἢ συνελθεῖν αὐτοὺς, εὑρέθη ἐν γαστρὶ ἔχουσα ἐk Πνεύματος Ἁγίου.

Interlinear
- Now of Jesus Christ the birth thus came about: Having been pledged the mother of Him Mary - to Joseph, before rather coming together of them, she was found in womb having [a child] out of [the] Spirit Holy.
biblehub.com/text/matthew/1-18.htm

Vulgate
Christi autem generatio sic erat: cum esset desponsata mater ejus Maria Joseph, antequam convenirent inventa est in utero habens de Spiritu Sancto.

Wycliffe Updated
But the generation of Christ was thus. When Mary, the mother of Jesus, was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found having of the Holy Ghost in the womb.

Some translations now render 'espoused' or 'betrothed' as "engaged" and 'with child' as "pregnant".
Similarly at Matt. 1:25 nearly all older translations said "And knew her not till she brought forth [her first born son/a son]". But modern translations have taken to rendering it a bunch of more divergent ways from the original language such as "did not have marital/sexual relations, know her sexually, kept her a virgin, had not intercourse, consummate the marriage" etc.

The Wycliffe Bible follows the Vulgate even more literally than the Douay-Rheims.

Wycliffe - 1 Samuel 24:3
And he came to the folds of sheep, that offered themselves to the way-goer. And there was a cave, into which Saul entered, that he would purge his womb; forsooth David and his men were hid in the inner part of the den.

Vulgate
Et venit ad caulas ovium, quae se offerebant vianti: eratque ibi spelunca, quam ingressus est Saul ut purgaret ventrem: porro David et viri ejus in interiore parte speluncae latebant.

Douay-Rheims
And he came to the sheepcotes which were in his way. And there was a cave, into which Saul went, to ease nature: now David and his men lay hid in the inner part of the cave.

NRSV neutered male pronouns for the sake of inclusivity, to the detriment of the original language

yes, saying nonsexist things in English is an insult on speakers of Ancient Hebrew and Ancient Greek. how horrifying

Any thoughts on the Orthodox Study Bible, particularly the translation of the Septuagint?

Haven't examined it in depth but it looks like it follows the NKJV in the OT also, editing whatever differences the Septuagint might have.

There is also a 2012 LXX translation available here which is an update of the Brenton translation.
ebible.org/

>Some translations now render 'espoused' or 'betrothed' as "engaged" and 'with child' as "pregnant".
>Similarly at Matt. 1:25 nearly all older translations said "And knew her not till she brought forth [her first born son/a son]". But modern translations have taken to rendering it a bunch of more divergent ways from the original language such as "did not have marital/sexual relations, know her sexually, kept her a virgin, had not intercourse, consummate the marriage" etc.
Those are all fine translations though. The difference in meaning in each case is negligible, arguably nonexistent.

If you might know of some verses with crucial differences between versions it would be helpful.

>A snide remark about "sexism" without understanding the linguistic significance of gendered pronouns in translation

Attached: 1549344055201.jpg (894x894, 368K)

Well that seems obvious enough, but why would I settle for a less stellar anemic sterilization of the text when a translation is more epic and eloquent when done in a more precise manner.

Oh, I thought your post was about the accuracy of the various translations. I also personally lean more toward word-for-word translations, but that's just because I'm a fag who likes it when things sound old.

They are a greater deviation from the original "knew". For 1:18 it would be most accurately rendered as "she was found having in womb from Holy Spirit."

I disagree. The goal of a translation, or at least most translations, is not to preserve the exact wording (if you really want that, just learn to read the original) but to preserve the meaning. Since "found having in womb" and "pregnant" mean the exact same thing, they're equally accurate. And in this case I think the more literal translation is aesthetically worse. "She was found having in womb from Holy Spirit" is just awkward.

Tao Lin is currently working on his new improved translation that incorporates 9/11 events, cannabis and UFOs.

On the contrary, the job of the translation is to translate. Interpretation is the function of exegesis. Literal translation can render a text in its fullness and faithfully, leaving as little out as possible of the layers of meaning and not introducing things that aren't there.

The subtlety of "knew" echoes its use in Genesis ("And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain").

One must also observe how all the classical churches also sought to make the translations on which their doctrine would be based on in a literal manner, often going against the more normal conventions of their languages.

i'm just here to read stories

Attached: New_living_translation_logo.png (181x279, 68K)

Literal translation can lead to inaccuracies when dealing with idioms though

Only a monolingual would post something like this.

Maybe but for the most part that isn't the case. You have a greater risk of people acquiring an erroneous belief from a reading with a freer translation.

You mean monolinguals need things to be dumbed down for them?