milly - "Loving the translation comparing. I actually really like using different translations because sometimes they shed a completely new light on a passage that is really familiar, but generally I do use the NIV. The translation that people here use is one done in the 1900s and the language is pretty hard (even for native speakers - anything would be hard for me grin). I do come across a lot of missionaries who are die hard KJVers and I really struggle to understand why. Anyone like to enlighten me??"
(sorry for the mass quotes this morning - it's just easier for me to remember what you've all written)
I agree, using different translations is the best way to get a full picture of what's going on.
The NIV version (the 1984 version - I know that the latest version is much better) for me, is a clumsy, Americanized translation - a lot of the passages have been made more complicated (as they admittedwhen they simplified loads and loads of them in the new translation) than they need to be, and I think that detracts fro mwhat they are saying.
My favourite "everyday" translation is actually the Good News Version - and the one I recommend to adults buying children their first "proper" bible.
It's in simple, straight-forward, modern english, and doesn't miss great chunks out (although it does condense them - especially in the lineage passages - it doesn't go "oojit, suchand such's father who was doobrie's father, and then doobrie was born, and he was oojit2's father etc" - it just says something like "from Arbaham to David, this was the list of ancestors. then from this time to this, the list is ...etc" much easier.
The KJV has a beautiful poetry that can be found in the likes of Shakespeare. It was written in everyday English at the time, but (if you watch/read any of the histories that are going around at the moment), a lot of the translation was done deliberately poetically, so that the language would appeal to ordinary people, to make it feel awesome and inspiring.
There are also a few translations in there where the King is given priority (where the Greek might use a Higer Power as an example) but that was mainly because the Scholars who translated it didn't want their heads chopped off by undermining the King's divine majesty [cshock]
there are examples of writing in the margins of the translating pages, where they're translated a passage exactly and the "editor" has come along and made it more poetical.
That's one of the reasons why it's stayed with us so long - it has this simplicity that is real and genuine and human - perfect for every class of people.
It's only this century, where the everyday language we speak has changed so much, that the thees and thous seem out of date, seem ridiculous. Then you can say that it only now appeals to scholars, or the kind of people that laugh at foreign-language films in arty theatres. Obviously, that's not true, but many people said that it doesn't speak their language anymore, so they changed it.
Obviously, there are dangers translating to modern english directly from KJV (which is what the NKJV tried to do, and mucked it up someat chronic- old words with new words just doesn't work- it jars and ruins the flow).
You've got to keep the original meaning, and make it feel more relevant to the world we're in today.
of course, you also run the risk of making it too politically correct - ie missing out the whole context of the history behind it, so it's such a difficult task.
The Greek texts are the best record we have of the true evetns, so of course we go from there.
There are loads of times where the KJV (and new translations) texts have translated the Greek word for "people, generally of both sexes" to "men", because that's what the word for "people, generally of both sexes" was in those days, but it's not now, so the 20th century tranlators have gone "oh, look at that, the KJV is all patriarchal and forgetting about women" when in actual fact, the general accepted meaning of the word "men" has changed this century (and really, only properly within the last 20-30 years)
and the word they used for Adam and Eve and their "labours" - even in the latest NIV translation, they put "adam toils on the field" and "Eve's going to havea really painful labour and birth". in actual fact, for both meanings, the same Greek word is used - so surely it would make more sense for the word used to be "hard work" or "labour" for both Adam in the field and Eve giving birth!
Essay, sorry. [cblush]