What is your litmus test for assessing an accurate Bible translation?

[SovereignGraceBaptist]

There are many people who have set doctrinal differences aside as long as they can agree on a specific English translation of the Bible. My Church in Pensacola is KJVO, while I have disagreements with the "onlyism", I agree with our Church doctrine because we adhere strictly to Doctrines of Grace. I wish to gather your opinions on Bible translations. There are many who believe to much paraphrasing makes the saving power void and thus contend for a specific translation. I personally love the ESV, NASB 95, LSB, KJV, NKJV, and Geneva. I know many people who love the ESV, NASB, and KJV, that despise the NIV and NLT. I wouldn't compare the NIV or NLT with "the message" or "passion" translation. What is your opinion on translation. Do you believe it should be as literal as possible or should it possess some paraphrasing?

The point of contention is that some argue that the more that a translation is paraphrased the more the original intent and message is lost in mankind's attempt to draw out the point. There are also those who think that if we don't have a complete perfect translation that it can't be of God thus leading them into onlyism. What is your litmus test for determining the viability or usability of a translation. One of my co-workers was in Peter Ruckmans church for 30 years and is insistent that it must be in "the perfect language of English" and all other forms "are corrupted and unsaving". I understand that we all want to point to an absolute document with no errors but translating is no easy task, the KJV translators had different translations themselves and decisions had to be made. So, what do you look for in the viability of a translation?

 

[Polanus1561]

I have been thinking about this, but if one does not know the original languages, how can one deem a translation to be accurate?

 

[JimmyH]

I look at people such as A.T. Robertson, B.B. Warfield, Vos, and numerous other philologists who embraced the accuracy of the RV. Bill Mounce posted on FB that he likes to consult the NLT to capture nuances he may have missed in the Greek text. Look at the list of translators in the NLT. People like Greg Beale, Douglas Moo, and many other respected theologians.
I began self studying Greek some years ago, and it has been slow going due to my indolence, and isolation from any instructors. I have learned 4 to five hundred words/glosses, and can read some of the text with understanding however. I look at 'Daily Dose of Greek' every morning, and if anything has convinced me that there is NO literal translation of the Bible in English ... or any other target language, it has been that.
There are accurate translations, but no literal translations in my opinion.
Leaving that aside, translations, such as the NIV, NLT, among others that interpret are valuable when they are correct. I have read most of the mainstream English translations cover to cover over the years, and they are all good as far as I'm concerned, though I like some better that others for their literary quality.

 

[Before]

There are also those who think that if we don't have a complete perfect translation that it can't be of God thus leading them into onlyism.

The only problem there is we don’t have the ‘originals’ only copies…some earlier than others.

 

[Polanus1561]

Here is another way to look at literalness. Imagine a Hebrew Christian learns English. His choice of an English bible may very well be a CSB.

 

[En Kristo]

There is no perfect translation. Every version has its warts. Oftentimes the semantic range of English words and Greek words do not intersect well and the translator has to make a hard decision. Sometimes we agree with the decision and sometimes we don't. I was thinking the other day that it would be nice to have a digital version of the Bible that the reader could edit. So, for example, I, for one, would change "the LORD" in the Old Testament to YHWY. "The LORD" is a title; YHWH is a name.

Different translations will work better for some people than others. If a person is well grounded in Greek he might benefit from something like the NASB. A person who has no knowledge of Greek and isn't a particularly skilled reader of English (maybe English as a second language) might benefit more from something like the "Easy To Read Version" or the NIV. Older folks who grew up on the KJV might find it easier to read the version with which they are familiar.

If I were going to pick a version to be put in the pews and read on Sunday mornings, if I had an older congregation I'd probably go with the King James, mainly because I am old and I memorized most of the verses I know from the King James and many others my age think the same. However, if I had a very young congregation with perhaps some immigrants, I might go with the Christian Standard Bible which I slightly prefer over the ESV. For seminary students I would probably use the NASB. There is a reason for having so many different translations.

 

[Jake]

Here are some helpful books to consider:

How to Choose a Translation for All Its Worth: A Guide to Understanding and Using Bible Versions by Gordon Fee -- Fee is a bit more sympathetic to "dynamic equivalent" translations like the NIV and I don't agree with everything in this book, but I think it gives a good summary of the landscape and the issues at hand.

Authorized: The Use and Misuse of the King James Bible by Mark Ward -- Also Mark has a YouTube channel that may be good if you prefer that too. Mark does not focus on the underlying manuscripts so much as he does the translation and how English has changed over the past half millennium and how that affects our use of a Bible from that era.

The King James Version Debate: A Plea for Realism by D.A. Carson -- If you're actually interested in the textual issues and those surrounding the KJV in particular you may benefit from this book, especially coming from the background of your church.

Can We Trust the Gospels? by Peter J. Williams -- A good concise work on understanding how the Bible was transmitted to us and why we can trust it. I've also heard this book is good on a related topic but have not yet read it: Scribes and Scripture: The Amazing Story of How We Got the Bible by John Meade and Peter Gurry

I would also suggest reading the KJV translators preface, as some of these authors commend. They had a great translation philosophy which is at odds with many modern reader's impression of what they were doing.