The question SHOULD BE: What are the manuscripts that God preserved?

Thank you for actually answering the question (and answering rightly) when so many similar videos dance around and offer suggestions based on the reader and what style of reading. It is frustrating to see a title like this then have someone recommend 5-6 different translations.

A great presentation. it's nice to see another Aussie doing this critical analysis.

The most accurate Bible would be in the original languages.

I appreciate you taking the effort to put this video out. I have been wanting to understand the different translations better so I can have a better more accurate understanding. Thank you!

A.W. Tozer said something like, "...the job of the scholar is to get at the meaning of the Text, as originally given. Once that meaning is discovered, the scholar's job is over. He must never sit in judgement on what is written." I am going on memory!

I use to be a KJV only guy, but changed my tune after reading some of the other translations. As long as they are seeking our LORD and Saviour Jesus the Christ. It doesn’t really matter what version you read. From the different versions I have read so far. My preferred translation is the Geneva 1599.

After much research...NEW AMERICAN STANDARD IS BEST BIBLE TRANSLATION!!!!!..by far....the best

Having served in the ministry of Bible Translation, there are three components that translators attempt to balance, accuracy, clarity and naturalness. Is literal accuracy the best of it becomes too difficult to read or easy to read but not as accurate? It is a struggle to fine the right words and phrases to achieve a good balance since many languages do not have direct word for word connections. Proof of the struggle are the 100+ English versions, each with different perspectives or choices. The real tragedy is the thousands of languages with no scripture.

You made the case quite clear. Thank you for your love of God and for your fellowman.

Generally speaking the “most accurate” translation is usually considered the NASB 95 though it’s a bit of a stiff read. If your a divisive person who just wants to argue text all the time (as many people are today) I would suggest the NKJV because it will give you the TR text with non-bias footnotes for both the critical and majority text variants.

Don't a lot of the modern translations change the meaning of repent to "repent from sin" instead of "changing your mind about what you believe" though? In other words, aren't the modern translations completely changing the message of The Gospel by either front or back-loading works? The original King James seems to be the most consistent when it comes to how one is saved and who Jesus is, which are really the most important things for a believer to understand.

Agreed! The Bible is our road map to God. LSB is my current preference. I am also using the Tanakh for the OT. I love using word-for-word translation and love exploring them all.

Great talk on the translations of the Bible. i really like your library.

"We need an accurate Bible". But you just said there are many versions and even the ones you suggested, are your suggestion. So basically, I am left with nothing. Although, I do thank you for the very informative video.

KJV for me.

This is very well done. Thank you for the blessing. I am part Jewish, but a believer in Jesus. I read the Complete Jewish Bible, but back it up with an older NASB. I can read the Hebrew OT and Greek NT, but in discussing scripture with people who do not know these languages, I have to use my CJB and NASB.

The King James Bible is a miracle in and of itself. For 250 years it was all there was for the English speaker. Therefore, at worst it is equal to or better than the rest. Imagine getting to heaven and seeing all the people the KJV has brought to salvation and telling them your Bible was no good.

Excellent! Thank you Sir! 🙏🏻

oh...I meant to mention that accurate and literal aren't necessarily synonymous.

Just look at how Zachariah 13:6 is translated to see the superiority of the KJV. KJV translates it correctly. The other main translations only put the correct translation in a footnote. Reserving for a footnote that the Hebrew actually states, "Between his hands." Why not do what the KJV does and put the correct translation in the actual text?????!!!!!

I use the 1611 King James Version/New King James Version parallel Bible which seems difficult to obtain these days but which I find very useful!

Jason DeBuhn's "Truth in Translation" is the definitive comparison of the most widely distributed bibles. You'd be surprised at the conclusion of the BEST translation... check it out.

Oliver Cromwell said Bible translations should stop because it was a racket among other things and the work was already completed in the King James Holy Bible . And he put hanging as the punishment for disobeying that law. It should still stand, rhere would be a lot less confusion

This one that translates the word sperms=fruits and seeds not legumes.That was that Daniel asked, uncooked food for human made from the Creator.There's no cooking in nature.

Great Video. I’m curious though: What about the Geneva 1960 version? How would that compare to the Interlinear or the NASV? I sincerely would appreciate your opinion on that.

I have 5 different Bibles to get a much deeper study. Look up Chuck Missler"s teachings

Thank you very much for this video, I have had the Interlinear Bible and Exhaustive Strongs Concordance for almost 30 years and have also, all of the bibles you listed, I am sure you have found, such as I, that modern Bibles tend to shy away from a few key words and thus, the true meaning of the word is lost. As much as I love my Strongs Concordance, I have found a flaw inasmuch as it sometimes bases the "meaning" on common use in the Scriptures. I therefore have a couple of other Hebrew & Greek dictionary for cross referencing. Thayers is also numbered to Strongs. A classic word that would FLIP the Christian doctrine 180 degrees is the word "Torment" as in Rev (They will be tormented day and night) Please take the time to research this word. My baseline is that God is PERFECT LOVE and Jesus is Gods PERFECT WORD. Therefore, understanding the TRUE meaning of the Hebrew and Greek words is not only important, it is a MUST.

Well if you think about it the King James Bible was predominantly the main one for several hundred years and served Christianity just fine, there wasn't all this questioning of Bible versions that you see today, which in my opinion has only divided everyone and the churches, you go in the average Christian church today and everyone has different versions with them and you can't even all read together anymore

Depends on which manuscripts are used. There is the Masoretic text which the KJV goes by and there is the Alexandrian texts which all modern translations use. The NASV is most accurate to the Alexandrian.

I lost respect for NASB's pretentious claim of being the most accurate translation when they only put the correct translation of Zachariah 13:6 in a footnote.

Faith minisrtry the NASB is an erroneous translation, they say it's the most accurate translation, it might be accurate to the erroneous Alexandrian texts, but it's not accurate to the true Greek texts. The most accurate translation, is the NKJV. And if you knew the Bible, you would know it.

King James version.

412 years of KJV beauty ,of poetic majesty, and Antioch Masonic accuracy as opposed to modern translations coming out every decade for copyright profits

The question should be, "Which translation convicts the soul the most and draws one to a closer walk with Christ?" The view of morality and purity is viewed differently among readers of different translations, and this is a problem.

I just discovered that the verse I John 5:7 in the King James version is missing in many others: "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one." Now I am suspicious of versions that omit this critical truth.

What is your opinion of the NET Bible, edited by Daniel Wallace of Dallas Theological Seminary?

I think the KJV 1611 It really doesn't matter it's the word of God that came to us and we should be joyful that it did that the Jews reject Jesus as their messiah

The Holy Spirit is the best translation of the scriptures

So the issue you have is a modern version can not violate the copyright of another modern bible under copyright. Thus is a version renders a verse perfectly, it is by default the only "bible" which can do so.

That's like asking which brand of porridge the three bears were eating.

Being accurate verbally or even dynamically does not mean that a translation is accurate in meaning. The culture, idioms, legends and presumptions of the time must be fully understood in order to avoid giving false translations.

If you don't see Yahweh, Gehenna, Hades, Tartarus or Sheol in your Bible it's not a good translation. Some words need to be kept in the original language so as not to be confused with modern ideas.

I have Septuagint for Old Testament. I read New Testament from Douay Rheims.

The epistle of jude is an obvious place holder for enoch, at least first enoch although the other 2 enochs are more mysterious. The nephilim who were the watchers are not only mentioned in jude and gen 6 but also deuteronomy 32:8 and possibly job

ALL English translations have mistakes.,

ESV or NASB.

The King James Bible is the most accurate

The Bible and the Spirit which God gives each believer.

The real question is, why are there so many translations? We are told over and over the bible is the unalloyed word of God. If that is so, how can there be different versions? What's more likely is that the various bibles are not the word of God, but the words of humans. That would explain it.

If the nasb uses nestle. I set it aside. Only use is for occasional reference.

The KJV is the accurate version, but the NIV has brought a lot of people closer to our Lord. Many churches in our area use the NIV, as it is very easy to understand. I was raised with the KJV. Now this may sound a bit off, but when I discovered the NIV, it really took it to a level that I could understand a lot easier. Yes, there are differences, but isn't bringing people closer to God the most important thing?

The Ethiopian Bible

Unfortunately none of these bibles have the original sacred name of our Creator and or his Son. And nobody seems to find this odd. How can believers be so blind?

CSB from Southern Baptist Convention is most accurate, and I've reviewed them all. I use the study version. I use the word "accurate" lightly since all versions are derived from King James version, which King James modified the original version of Geneva Bible.

You may want to lose the huge shield icon from your videos -- blocking your own content is not helpful.

NASB is still the most accurate, but not perfect. Take a look at The Emphasized Bible by C.B. Rotherham. It is accurate, but difficult to read.

Right or wrong good to know and remember that the kjv is the legal version of the Bible.

First of all, why do you have so many versions of the Bible and why is the Bible a collection of writings that were written over a period of many centuries by VARIOUS AUTHORS?

The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures is the most accurate Bible on this planet earth, and they are free.

The Greek word in question (from the Septuagint) is, poikilos (pronounced poy-kee-los) which means motley, that is various in character-diverse, manifold. It can also mean variety. Unless this garment was able to adjust it's length it had to have been of many colors or as some interpretations have it, many bands. Folks, please do your own research. I have the Septuagint on E-Sword. I also have Westcott and Hort's Greek New Testament on Bible Analyzer. I also have Westcott and Hort's book "The Original Greek" on Google Books. All of these are free materials. I don't fault the gentleman that put a lot of hard work and study into this video. But he's trusting what others have written. Please read and study for yourself.

How do you feel about the First American Standard version having the personal name of God, Jehovah, replaced in every scripture it appeared in the Hebrew text, some 6,000 times. But then under pressure from different councils because of the trinity doctrine they removed it upon revision and reverted to the practice of the authorized KJ version and removed Gods personal name from his own Holy book, useing the titles of Lord or God in capital letters instead for all 6,000 times it appeaed in scripture? How do you think Jehovah himself felt about having his name removed from the Bible. And how are people supposed to come to know him if they don't even know his name? Just a thought. But everywhere the tetragramiton appears in scripture, Gods Name should be there. How can you draw close to anyone if you don't even know their name? Where all Worship and all credit and praise is given to Gods son Jesus Christ and not to his Father Jehovah God. Reading a Bible with Gods name restored to every place it originally appeared in the Hebrew text like the NWT gives one a whole new appreciation for Who God truly is, his love for his people in ancient times, why he was hurt so badly when they turned to the worship of Other false Gods, and shows how valuable the ransom sacrifice of his only begotten son was, and the position of the son to the father. Imagine, all these translations leave the names of all the false dieties like Baal. Dagon, Tamuz, and Marduk in the Bible, but the remove the personal name of almighty God Jehovah from his own book. 🙄

Where does the Young's literal fall on the scale?

One more opinion. The Alexandrian-based bibles, in my opinion, utilize much older Greek texts. I really like them. The ESV is especially readable.

According to the latest Dr Michael Heiser, the foremost Greek and Hebrew scholar ever...the ESV is the most accurate and understood. I grew up KJV and yall need to understand it has a lot of flaws. Ones you aren't told.

Did you still answer why the Roman Catholic Bible is different than the ones Protestants use? God is peaking to me through His Word but one shouldn’t ignore the historical fact ancient humans “voted” on which books to include. So, right wingers who argue that he BIBLE is the literal word of God that is not open to interpretation is just false.

none if we are going on matching it to real earth and human history. The bible has a 6300 year old universe with stories that are proven to never have happened

Have you seen the Cepher, the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, the Ethiopian Bible, the Catholic Bible, the Book of Yahweh Bible

I put away my NIV as it is more of a paraphrased Bible and now the NKJV is my favorite.

Word for word nearest equivalency is not the same thing as accuracy. If someone does not understand an idiom, a pun, an allusion, a rhyme, or an alliteration, then full accuracy has not been achieved in conveying the meaning. There are many literary and verbal devices that convey meaning. These cannot be measured by evaluating formal equivalence. "Literalness" is not the same concept as "accuracy". Believe it or not, a dynamic approach for a given sentence can sometimes be more accurate than a formal equivalent translation. By the way, the KJV was an excellent translation, but many might be surprised to find that Paul never once actually wrote, "God forbid!" This phrase was a dynamic equivalent used to convey the impact of the Greek idiom that was used. He actually wrote something more literally translated as "not let it become." The English equivalent doesn't have the proper impact, so the KJV translators used a non-literal translation to achieve better accuracy in understanding Paul's strong opposition to what he was refuting. The excellent translation from 400 years ago sometimes used a dynamic equivalence approach. Their goal was accuracy.

Many new Bible translations leave out the word “Begotten.” Everywhere it’s applied to the name of Christ, or the being, or the person of Christ. In all the New Testament, those translators don’t believe His Diety, in the sense of the Virgin Birth. And these new bibles are but a springboard for their modernism, “their ultra modernistic concepts.” They rip the word “Begotten” out of the texts where it applies to Christ. Jesus is not the only son of God, but He is the Only Begotten Son of God. THOSE NEW BIBLES ARE UTTERLY UNRELIABLE FROM START TO FINISH!

Which is the most accurate? Question is, which is the perfect Bible? The 1611 is God’s perfect book. All other versions come from the Vatican and should be trashed. I make no apologies about my statement.

No such thing as a most accurate bible translation. The question is which translation method is the best?

The Bible is a Jehovah book (Isaiah 43:10-12)

i love this kind of video it wont matter which one you use if you believe Jesus is god or part of a trinity or when you die you go to heaven or hell and you don't believe that there will be a resurrection instead of trying to say wich bible is best how about you teach whats actually in it and thus be helpful cos it doesn't matter what one you use if you still don't follow whats in it

None can deny that we’re saved by faith. I’m not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God unto salvation, to everyone that believeth, to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is revealed the righteousness of God from faith unto faith: even as it is written, the just, or the righteous shall live by faith. (ROMANS 1:16-17). It is NEVER a case of salvation by faith only! Unfortunately, some of the modern translations of the bible have mistranslated (ROMANS 1:17) and have put into the scripture there, “their own denominational doctrine” that we are saved by “faith only.” This is not in the original text! And any translation that so renders (ROMANS 1:17) has done so erroneously. WE’RE SSVED BY FAITH, BUT NOT BY FAITH ONLY! By works we’re justified, and not by faith only. As we read in (JAMES 2:24)

Don't want to assume but you didn't mention how the New American Standard is translated from Roman Catholic manuscripts that were copies of Alexandrian texts found in Alexandria, Egypt. Of which there is zero record in God's word of any church ministry there. You also didn't mention how the KJV was translated from copies of manuscripts found in Antioch, Corinth. Which there is clearly a record of the church ministry there. And also where the disciples were first called Christians.

Accuracy to the time of the writing and language of those people would be a Accurate Version .... Readability isn't as important as Accuracy... Flesh and Blood Beings From Another Place Made Us ... That is the Only Possible Conclusion .. So Accuracy is Very Very Important.. Because it's Not A Novel ... it's A Bibliography

Why some have problems with Reasoned eclecticism. I John 5:7 is found in a majority of the Latin, but not the Greek so out it goes. Good will towards men Doxology in Matthew Without cause God manifest in the flesh Are a majority in the Greek but not in the Latin, so out they go The PA and Mark 16:9-20 are a majority in both the Greek and Latin so out they go. Even the “not yet” found in the two of the earliest(P66.P75) in John 7:8 some throw out. If as an orthodox Christian you don't see a problem, what would you see as a problem?

Keep to kjv for verbal inspiration which modern ones lack Jesus spoke in parables so they wouldnt understand The elect are drawn to Christ Without understanding scripture..that comes afterwards!

Is Jesus dying everyday or He died once for ever....

Which bible is the most accurate? The one that helps nimrod build his tower. And.....its gone

The bad news is: A translation ceases to be the word of G-d. Not that the Greek was ever the word of G-d.

Yeah just give me the king James Bible. It was able to figure out in second Samuel 21:19 that David kill goliath.... The new American standard or any of the newer versions fail.

New World Translation is the most accurate and least biased English translation available.

Are you interested in which Bible translations were the biggest sellers in 2022? Than check out my latest video here: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/rbynZtikrLuwko0.html

Quick answer: KJV. It is the only version that is the closest to the Greek and Latin translation and it is the oldest of all the versions. But more importantly, to understand the Bible, one need the Holy Spirit to give the understanding. Man without the Holy Spirit can not FULLY understand the Bible. The Bible is spiritual. It was given to the writers thru the Spirit of the Lord. So to understand…one needs the Spirit of the Lord. Two examples: 1. When Pharaoh had the dream of the famine that was soon to come, he did not understand the dream. But when Joseph was asked to interpret it, he acknowledge that it was the Spirit of the Lord that would give the understanding. 2. When Nebuchadnezzar had the dream of the empires in the form of a man, he didn’t understand it. But it was Daniel, who thru the Spirit of the Lord, gave him the understanding of the dream.

1611 KJV is the Gold Standard...Hands Down! 47 of the BEST HEBREW and Greek Scholars were divided into six groups. Three for the OT, Two for the NT, and One for the Apocrypha...Assembled at Oxford, Cambridge, and Westminster.

NASB came out in 1971 not 1995 by lockman foundation actually started this work in 1954 by 54 of the best scholars both Hebrew and Greek. The 1995 is only and up dated version it has it's fault's Been studying the scriptures for over 40 years I'll take the 1971 version over the 1995 The KJV is my second choice

Stick with the King James - God's word preserved for the English speaking people. Psa 12:6-7 "The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.7 Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever."

Subsrcibed!

Authorized KJV..... end of story.

Learn Koine Greek.

I like the New World Translation, it's easier to understand. And it does not contradict like the King James Version does.

KJV 1611

The 1599 GENEVA BIBLE is my favorite, with the Tyndale 1537 New Testament is 2nd.

None

If you didn't come to the conclusion that the King James is 100% accurate English translation you willfully ignored truth.

BLAH BLAH .You should know our KJV Authorized translation is the one we should use.

re. Gen 37:3 - Yosef's coat of many colors. I'm looking at the Hebrew here for פַּס (which is פַּסִּֽים (plural) in the text): 1. a word to indicate decorative needlework on valuable garments 2. a tunic of pieces of various colors 3. a tunic reaching to ankles So we are not sure what the Hebrew word means. In this case it wasn't a matter of choosing the LXX over the MT (Masoretic text).