04 Sep 2015 News Vatican No comments

Pope Francis to Israeli president: 'the challenge is to unite'

Pope Francis held an audience with Israeli president Reuven Rivlin on Thursday, where they exchanged gifts and discussed efforts to secure peace and to address …

Read more

12 Aug 2016 News No comments

Bangladeshi Catholic editor flees country in fear of her life

Rosaline Costa had faced harassment and threats – when she went to police they would not even file a report Rosaline Costa heard people tell her “be careful" s…

Read more

30 Nov 2014 Q&A No comments

Will we all be gods one day, as Mormons believe?

Full Question My friend, a Mormon, thinks John 10:34 means we will all be gods someday. I know this isn't what it really means, but can you help me explain…

Read more

16 Aug 2016 Articles Comments (2)

Call No Man "Holy Father"!

The last few weeks have been quite eventful for us Catholics. Pope Benedict XVI shocked the world by announcing that he would be stepping down as head of the 1.…

Read more

02 May 2016 USA No comments

Anti-war Priest Daniel Berrigan, dies aged 94

Fr Berrigan, who emerged in the 1960s as a leader of the anti-war movement, became a household name for his political activism Fr Daniel Berrigan, the Americ…

Read more

03 Nov 2014 Q&A Comments (16)

What happened to confirmation names?

Full Question Could you explain the custom of taking a "confirmation name"? It seemed to be required when I was younger but I don't think it is anymore. …

Read more

15 Oct 2015 News Vatican Comments (4)

Archbishop Peta: The ‘smoke of Satan’ has entered synod discussions

A Kazakhstani archbishop has said that the Church must defend Christ's teaching on marriage A archbishop from Kazakhstani has said that the “smoke of Satan" …

Read more

21 Jun 2016 Articles Comments (13)

The Next Step in the Sexual Revolution

Unless you’re a weatherman, it’s hazardous to predict the future. Nobody can say for sure who will win the World Series this year. And who can be sure which tea…

Read more

04 Nov 2014 Q&A No comments

Can I be ordained online to officiate a wedding?

Full Question The Universal Life church offers quick, free ordinations online that allow someone to officiate at a civil wedding. Can a Catholic obtain suc…

Read more
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

Which Translation of the Bible is the Best?

Some people mistakenly think the King James Version of the Bible (KJV), with its eloquent thee’s and thou’s, is the original version.[1]But the Bible was not written in seventeenth-century Old English. More than 1,500 years earlier, the New Testament was written in ancient Greek; and long before that the Old Testament was written in ancient Hebrew, along with some Aramaic and Greek (the Old Testament was later translated into the Greek Septuagint).

As time went on, all these texts were translated into Latin, which is the official language of the Church, as well as popular languages like German, French, and English. Today, the entire Bible has been translated into more than 500 languages, and most languages offer several different translations.

It’s important to remember that there is only one version of the Bible, but there are many different translations of it. How can this be? The art of translation is not as simple as taking a word in one language and then using a dictionary to find the equivalent word in another language. Translators have differing opinions about how words and phrases in a text should be reproduced into another language that has different vocabulary, different rules of grammar, and embodies different cultural attitudes than the language of the text their translating.

Formal equivalence translations

One approach they use is called formal equivalence, and it strives to communicate the original words the author used. The most formally equivalent translations of Scripture would be interlinear Bibles that replace the original words in the biblical text with their modern counterparts. Using an interlinear translation, John 3:16, one of the most famous verses in Scripture, sounds like this: “Thus indeed loved God the world that the Son the only begotten he gave that everyone believing in him not should perish but might have life."

As you can see, interlinear translations sound stilted and can be confusing, because they take words that made sense in one language and transfer them into another language without considering that language’s grammar. Most formally equivalent translations change the order and kinds of words that are used in order to help modern audiences understand the author’s original meaning. The Catholic Revised Standard Version (RSV), which tends to be formally equivalent in its translation, renders the passage in this way: “For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life."

Dynamic equivalence translations

Another approach to translation is dynamic equivalence, which strives to communicate the original idea the author intended to convey, even if it does not use his original words. Some translators prefer this approach, because the author’s original words may not have the same meaning or not be as recognizable today and so newer words are used to better communicate his original idea. This can be seen in translations that render the Greek word dikaiosis “considered righteous" instead of the traditional term “justified," as in James 2:24: “a man is justified [or in other translations, ‘considered righteous’] by works and not by faith alone."

The Message is another example of this approach, especially since it is not technically a translation of the Bible. It is more of a paraphrase that summarizes what the translator, in this case Eugene H. Peterson, thinks the Bible means or what he thinks Jesus would say to people today. In his translation, John 3:16 reads: “This is how much God loved the world: He gave his Son, his one and only Son. And this is why: so that no one need be destroyed; by believing in him, anyone can have a whole and lasting life." Matthew 6:11 is another striking example. The RSV renders it, “Give us this day our daily bread," butThe Message renders it, “Keep us alive with three square meals."

Dynamically equivalent and paraphrased translations may be easier for a modern person to understand, but there is a danger that the reader will encounter only the interpretations of the translator and not the words of the sacred author. This can lead to faulty interpretations of the text due to the translation’s misleading language. For example, in John 3:16, the Greek phrase zoen aionion literally means “life eternal" or “eternal life." The Message’s translation “whole and lasting life" could cause readers to think faith in God’s son will make them live for a long time but not forever.

Not even equivalent translations!

Sometimes a translator’s theology will cause him to mistranslate a text in order to justify his beliefs. This is evident in the New World Translation of the Bible that Jehovah’s Witnesses use. The first verse of John’s Gospel does not say, as it does in the RSV, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." Instead it says, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god." That’s because Jehovah’s Witnesses deny the deity of Christ and think he is just “a god" or a glorious creation of the one almighty God Jehovah. (For more on how to answer their arguments, see my booklet 20 Answers: Jehovah’s Witnesses).

Although Catholics should be wary of non-Catholic translations of Scripture (especially since they usually lack the deuterocanonical books of the Old Testament), there is no single translation of the Bible that all Christians must accept to the exclusion of others. An audience of people at Mass may appreciate a more dynamically equivalent translation of Scripture, such as the New American Bible, that refrains from using complex or outdated words that could obscure the author’s meaning. Someone studying Scripture, on the other hand, may appreciate a formally equivalent translation such as the RSV that use uses words that best reproduce what the sacred author was trying to say in his own language.

Perhaps the most on-point answer to the question “Which translation of the Bible is the best?" comes from the founder of Catholic Answers, Karl Keating: “The one you will read."

Written By Trent Horn



  1. Patrick Gannon Reply

    The article fails to mention that we have no originals for any part of the bible. There are many copies, translations, copies of translations and translations of copies, scattered throughout the centuries, but no originals at all. Among the manuscripts we have, there are many errors. The scribes who copied them were not necessarily educated. Other scribes intentionally modified the language to get their theology across. We just can’t depend on the the bible to be accurate. Bart Ehrman’s “Misquoting Jesus” is one of several good books on the subject of textual criticism.
    I would agree with the author that the best bible is the one you read. In my experience few Christians, and fewer Catholics read the entire bible. One problem is that a rather high percentage of those who do read it, end up as agnostics or atheists.

  2. Gary Beach Reply

    Not entirely accurate Patrick.

    Our old Testament comes from the Jewish Tanakh.
    Jesus was Jewish, and as far as I know, his issues with the priests of the day was their enforcement, not in the written word.

    1. Patrick Gannon Reply

      What did I say that was inaccurate? I said we have no originals for any of the bible – do you have evidence to the contrary? I’m sure there are scholars who would be delighted to get their hands on any scrap of original text from the bible.
      Whether Jesus was a physical person, or a cosmic Jewish god (who was anticipated at the time), is open to debate, but the probabilities are far greater that Jesus was mythical than historical. Read Carrier’s “Historicity of Jesus.”

Leave a Reply

  1. most read post
  2. Most Commented
  3. Choose Categories