Bible closest to the original?

[Peacemaker]

I am looking for a bible translation closest to the original Greek, Hebrew, Latin, Aramaic. I've been using the NKJV because a priest i know says it's the closest to the Greek but my spiritual father suggested I get the KJV. Is the 1611 KJV good? I've heard that some bibles have different (and even considered heretical) wording, such as "young maiden" instead of "virgin." Are there different kinds of KJV to watch out for or are they all the same?

Thanks for any insight you can offer.

Edit: well I found this link that had a lot of information.
http://newlife.id.au/church-history/7-things-about-the-king-james-bible/
They seem to think the NIV 2011 is good.

 

[scamandrius]

I am looking for a bible translation closest to the original Greek, Hebrew, Latin, Aramaic. I've been using the NKJV because a priest i know says it's the closest to the Greek but my spiritual father suggested I get the KJV. Is the 1611 KJV good? I've heard that some bibles have different (and even considered heretical) wording, such as "young maiden" instead of "virgin." Are there different kinds of KJV to watch out for or are they all the same?

Thanks for any insight you can offer.

Edit: well I found this link that had a lot of information.
http://newlife.id.au/church-history/7-things-about-the-king-james-bible/
They seem to think the NIV 2011 is good.

I've said it before but there is no substitute for reading the Scriptures in the original language.  And I realize that's not possible for everything.  However, let me just clarify a few things about your use of the word "original." 

There is no "original" Latin.  The Vetus Latina (Old Latin) and the Vulgate were both translations of the Greek Septuagint and Greek NT into Latin.  There is no "original" Aramaic, at least none that survives.  The re-creations or reconstructions by scholars rely on A LOT of guesswork.  The original Hebrew was done away with since the adoption of the Masoretic Canon.  Many of the psalms that explicitly refer to Christ and prophecies that were fulfilled by Him were cut by the HEbrew Rabbis at the Synod of Janna in 90 AD.  That is why if you ever read the Latin Vulgate, St. Jerome made two Latin translations: one from the Septuagint and one from the Hebrew.  The differences in Latin are striking.

The KJV is a monument in English Literature and rightfully so. Many of the idiomatic phrases we take for granted have their origin in the KJV, e.g. "writing on the wall", "Skin of the teeth."  There is nothing "wrong" with it (i.e. heretical; it's not going to contain any verses that can be construed to say "Join the Church of England or else") but like any translation it is going to lose something in the translation.  Personally, I'd stick with it.  However, another choice that a lot of people like, including myself, is the Douay-Rheims version which was an English translation of the Latin Vulgate (so, not relying directly on the Hebrew Masoretic text and the Greek NT). IT was produced by ENglish Catholics in the wake of the full adoption of Protestantism by Elizabeth I.  It is still widely preferred. 

 

[Peacemaker]

Thanks for the tip, I'll check it out.

It's amazing to think all our bibles in English are from versions after the reformation. I didn't realize how protestant America is until I became orthodox. Maybe someday I'll learn Greek.

 

[FinnJames]

If you're near a large library they may have an interlinear Old and New Testament. These will give you the Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek texts with each word or phrase glossed into English (or some other language) and probably also a fluent English (or other language) version. But be warned: all glossing and translation is interpretation. So you are going to get how the editor understands the original text, not an exact English (or other language) version of the text.

It is even the case that the Septuagint LXX Greek Old Testament, being a translation from the Hebrew, doesn't say exactly the same thing as the Hebrew OT does. Nor does the Latin Vulgate. And if you have access to a copy of a scholarly Greek NT you'll see that what is printed is a selection made by the editor from many variant readings in handwritten manuscripts. So it really is impossible to say with 100% certainty what the 'original' form was.

As for 'young maiden' being heretical, the problem begins with the Christian writers of the New Testament texts who looked to the Old Testament for prophesy of the Messiah. The Hebrew word echoed by Christian writers of the New Testament is ambiguous and can mean either 'virgin' or 'young woman', but the ambiguity is lost when the word is put into other languages. If I remember correctly, the Vulgate Latin translation becomes unambiguously 'virgin', perhaps someone else can comment on the LXX Greek.

 

[LBK]

If I remember correctly, the Vulgate Latin translation becomes unambiguously 'virgin', perhaps someone else can comment on the LXX Greek.

The LXX Greek parthenos is unambiguously virgin.

 

[scamandrius]

If I remember correctly, the Vulgate Latin translation becomes unambiguously 'virgin', perhaps someone else can comment on the LXX Greek.

The LXX Greek parthenos is unambiguously virgin.

+1

The debate of course surrounds the Hebrew word, almah, which means virgin or young woman.  Modern scholars say the translators of the Septuagint were wrong conveniently forgetting (probably they're thinking that no one is as smart as they are especially from the ancient world) that the people who spoke these languages did so every day and not in a pure academic setting.

 

[xOrthodox4Christx]

There is no original Hebrew, Greek or Latin. There is also no good English translation of those texts. I think the NKJV is good in terms of categorizing the textual variants. But the text itself is deficient.

 

[xOrthodox4Christx]

If I remember correctly, the Vulgate Latin translation becomes unambiguously 'virgin', perhaps someone else can comment on the LXX Greek.

The LXX Greek parthenos is unambiguously virgin.

+1

The debate of course surrounds the Hebrew word, almah, which means virgin or young woman.  Modern scholars say the translators of the Septuagint were wrong conveniently forgetting (probably they're thinking that no one is as smart as they are especially from the ancient world) that the people who spoke these languages did so every day and not in a pure academic setting.

Or, they interpret it differently than scholars do today. Translation is just another form of interpretation.

 

[Cyrillic]

If I remember correctly, the Vulgate Latin translation becomes unambiguously 'virgin', perhaps someone else can comment on the LXX Greek.

The LXX Greek parthenos is unambiguously virgin.

'Young woman' and 'virgin' were synonyms back in the day. A married woman, even if she was young, wouldn't have been called a neanis in Greek or almah in Hebrew. Young, unmarried women that weren't virgins weren't tolerated, and there certainly wouldn't be a word for the phenomenon that wasn't offensive. It's only the last few decades that introduced the confusion, which has been fully exploited by the sophistry of the rabbis.

 

[LBK]

If I remember correctly, the Vulgate Latin translation becomes unambiguously 'virgin', perhaps someone else can comment on the LXX Greek.

The LXX Greek parthenos is unambiguously virgin.

'Young woman' and 'virgin' were synonyms back in the day. A married woman, even if she was young, wouldn't have been called a neanis in Greek or almah in Hebrew. Young, unmarried women that weren't virgins weren't tolerated, and there certainly wouldn't be a word for it that wasn't offensive. It's only the last few decades that introduced the confusion, which has been fully exploited by the sophistry of the rabbis.

To add to the above, the Church gives the title virgin and virgin-martyr to female saints, lay and monastic, who remained celibate and unmarried, whether they were young or old at the time of their repose or martyrdom.

 

[scamandrius]

If I remember correctly, the Vulgate Latin translation becomes unambiguously 'virgin', perhaps someone else can comment on the LXX Greek.

The LXX Greek parthenos is unambiguously virgin.

+1

The debate of course surrounds the Hebrew word, almah, which means virgin or young woman.  Modern scholars say the translators of the Septuagint were wrong conveniently forgetting (probably they're thinking that no one is as smart as they are especially from the ancient world) that the people who spoke these languages did so every day and not in a pure academic setting.

Or, they interpret it differently than scholars do today. Translation is just another form of interpretation.

Again there is a big difference between people who speak the languages every day of their lives and modern scholars who only study words strictly in written texts in a purely academic setting. 

 

[eddybear]

Edit: posted stuff then read article in OP and realised my comments were superfluous

 

[Peacemaker]

Very interesting posts. My roommate has a 1611 KJV, there is no way I could use that. The English spelling of words is so different from what we use today it would just end up being a distraction for me. I do like the NKJV, maybe what I'll do is get the Orthodox new testament only and in a separate book have the Septuagint translated from the Greek.

 

[eddybear]

Very interesting posts. My roommate has a 1611 KJV, there is no way I could use that. The English spelling of words is so different from what we use today it would just end up being a distraction for me. I do like the NKJV, maybe what I'll do is get the Orthodox new testament only and in a separate book have the Septuagint translated from the Greek.

You could get the Orthodox Study Bible, which has the NKJV New Testament, and an OT based on the LXX.

 

[Jude1:3]

http://www.amazon.com/EOB-Orthodox-Testament-Patriarchal-extensive/dp/148191765X/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1439174914&sr=1-2&keywords=Eastern+orthodox+Bible

and


http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1494913402/ref=as_li_qf_sp_asin_il_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=1494913402&linkCode=as2&tag=orthodoxchr0a-20&linkId=EY35ITRZR37UQAX4