The Wartburg Project

January 31st, 2023

86. What is the most accurate Bible translation?

What is the most accurate Bible translation?

There are many answers to this question posted online, but most of them are not very accurate because they do not use an accurate definition of the word accurate. Many of these lists rank the NASB as the most “accurate” translation, which they define as “closest to a word-for-word translation of the Hebrew or Greek words.” This is not a correct definition of accurate. The most accurate translation of a passage is the one that most accurately conveys the meaning and the emotional tone of the Hebrew and Greek idioms in contemporary English.

We can explore this question by examining various translations of Song of Songs 5:4, which is the passage that is most often cited as the prime example of the weakness of “literal” or word-for-word translation. Bible Gateway is the source of the list of translations.

The Context of Song 5:4

The woman is sleeping at home. She is half awake. She hears her lover knocking at the door. He calls to her to open the door, but she does not want to get up to open the door because she is in bed and does not want to get dressed again. She then realizes that he is still trying to get the door open. It is at this point of the story that the arousal of her feelings which we are discussing in this article occurs. She then changes her mind and gets up to open the door, but it is too late. He is gone.

The Hebrew

וּמֵעַ֖י הָמ֥וּ עָלָֽיו׃

The first word, the noun me‘im, means intestines, belly, or womb. It includes the reproductive areas of both men and women. It is regarded as a seat of emotions, in a way similar to the way that the word heart is used in English.

The second word, the verb hamah, means to make a sound like humming, sighing, or the sound of rain or waves. It also refers to the expression of emotions. The closest English expressions are “gut feeling” or “butterflies in the stomach.” The verb refers to being “moved” with emotion but not to the literal movement of anything.

The third word, the preposition ‘al, has a wide range of meanings. Here because of him seems to be the most appropriate.

If accuracy were measured by the closest agreement to the literal base meaning of these three Hebrew words, the most accurate translation would be my bowels made a sound because of him. I am not aware of any version that uses this word-for-word rendering in its translation.

The Bowels

Many translations, following the lead of the King James, render me‘im as bowels. Although this is a good literal translation, it obviously does not work well in contemporary English, especially in conjunction with the verb moved.

KJVMy beloved put in his hand by the hole of the door, and my bowels were moved for him.
AKJVMy beloved put in his hand by the hole of the door, and my bowels were moved for him.
BRGMy beloved put in his hand by the hole of the door, and my bowels were moved for him.
JUBMy beloved put in his hand by the hole of the door, and my bowels were moved for him.
YLTMy beloved sent his hand from the net-work, And my bowels were moved for him.
DARBYMy beloved put in his hand by the hole [of the door]; And my bowels yearned for him.
DRAMy beloved put his hand through the key hole, and my bowels were moved at his touch.

This list seems to be mostly a case of follow-the-leader. Darby lessens the problem by substituting the verb yearned. DRA increases the problem by adding the idea at his touch.

Wycliffe’s translation falls into the same category, but it is something of an oddity.

WYCMy darling put his hand by an hole (of the door); and my womb trembled at the touching thereof.

[There is a table of abbreviations at the end of the article if anyone wants to check individual translations.]

The Heart

The heart is a good substitution for the bowels. Though anatomically wrong, heart is correct at conveying the meaning to English readers.

KJ21My beloved put in his hand by the hole of the door, and my heart was moved for him.
ASVMy beloved put in his hand by the hole of the door, And my heart was moved for him.
AMPCMy beloved put in his hand by the hole of the door, and my heart was moved for him.
GWMy beloved put his hand through the keyhole. My heart throbbed for him.
NOGMy beloved put his hand through the keyhole. My heart throbbed for him.
WEBMy beloved thrust his hand in through the latch opening. My heart pounded for him.
NIRVMy love put his hand through the opening. My heart began to pound for him.
NIVMy beloved thrust his hand through the latch-opening; my heart began to pound for him.
NIVUKMy beloved thrust his hand through the latch-opening; my heart began to pound for him.
OJBDodi (my beloved) thrust his hand through the latchopening, my heart began pounding for him.
NCBMy beloved thrust his hand through the opening in the door, and my heart began to tremble.
ESVMy beloved put his hand to the latch, and my heart was thrilled within me.
ESVUKMy beloved put his hand to the latch, and my heart was thrilled within me.
NLTMy lover tried to unlatch the door, and my heart thrilled within me.
RSVMy beloved put his hand to the latch, and my heart was thrilled within me.
RSVCEMy beloved put his hand to the latch, and my heart was thrilled within me.
GNVMy well-beloved put in his hand by the hole of the door, and mine heart was affectioned toward him.
MEVMy beloved put his hand by the latch, and my heart yearned for him.
NKJVMy beloved put his hand By the latch of the door, And my heart yearned for him.
TLVMy lover extended his hand through the opening —my heart yearned for him.
NLVMy love put his hand through the opening, and joy filled my heart.

Numerically, the substitution of heart for bowels is a big winner as the choice of the most translations, even among descendants of the King James. The verbs used range from the more emotional (moved, thrilled, yearned) to the more physical (pounded, throbbed, trembled). Can any of these rendering be said to be more or less accurate than the others, except that the rendering within me has chosen a different reading of the Hebrew text.

The OJB retains a transliteration of the Hebrew word for lover (Dodi).

A comparison of the following two readings is interesting. They try to interpret the woman’s bodily reaction, but they reach the exact opposite conclusion about what it was.

CJBThe man I love put his hand through the hole by the door-latch, and my heart began pounding at the thought of him.
CEVThen my darling's hand reached to open the latch, and my heart stood still.

The CEB is a bit of an oddity.

CEBMy love put his hand in through the latch hole, and my body ached for him.

The Feelings

The first three renderings (bowels, womb, heart) retain an anatomical reference. The next option focuses on the feelings felt by the woman rather than on the place in her body where she felt them. Some of these renderings deal with feelings in general without trying to specify one particular feeling. Some take a stab at what feeling was involved. The context suggests that a sudden longing to see her lover, plus a feeling of guilt for failing to go to the door, were the feelings involved.

Feelings in General

NASBMy beloved extended his hand through the opening. And my feelings were stirred for him.
NASB1995My beloved extended his hand through the opening, And my feelings were aroused for him.
AMPMy beloved extended his hand through the opening [of the door], And my feelings were aroused for him.
CSBMy love thrust his hand through the opening, and my feelings were stirred for him.
HCSBMy love thrust his hand through the opening, and my feelings were stirred for him.
ISVMy beloved reached out his hand for the latch. My feelings for him were aroused.
NETMy lover thrust his hand through the hole, and my feelings were stirred for him.
EHVMy lover thrust his hand through the opening in the door. My feelings were aroused for him.

Since people’s ratings of the NASB were the starting point for this article, it seems worthwhile to comment briefly on the versions of the NASB. Unlike the NIV which seems to want to limit the market to one version of NIV, namely the 2011 version, the NASB allows several versions to remain on the market: the 1977 version, the 1995, and the 2020. In addition, the Legacy Standard Bible (LSB) (2021) is an effort to roll back certain aspects of the 2020 version to make it more like earlier versions. Interestingly, none of the recent versions of the NASB, which allegedly is the exemplar for accurate, word-for-word translation, follow a literal translation of bowels in the main text. Rating the NASB as the most “accurate” because it is more of a word-for-word translation may be more reflective of the original version than of any of the official updates.

Specific Feelings

GNTMy lover put his hand to the door, and I was thrilled that he was near.
ERVBut my lover put his hand through the opening, and I felt sorry for him.
ICBMy lover put his hand through the door opening. I felt excited inside.
EXBMy lover put his hand through the ·opening [L hole], and I felt ·excited inside [aroused; warmed].
NCVMy lover put his hand through the opening, and I felt excited inside.
MSGBut my lover wouldn’t take no for an answer, and the longer he knocked, the more excited I became.

“Excitement” is the main choice. “Feel sorry for” is bit of an outlier.

Inmost Part

Translations using the concept inmost are a straddle between a more anatomical and a more figurative understanding of the concept.

LEBMy beloved thrust his hand into the opening, and my inmost yearned for him.
NABREMy lover put his hand in through the opening: my innermost being trembled because of him.
NRSVAMy beloved thrust his hand into the opening, and my inmost being yearned for him.
NRSVACEMy beloved thrust his hand into the opening, and my inmost being yearned for him.
NRSVCEMy beloved thrust his hand into the opening, and my inmost being yearned for him.
NRSVUEMy beloved thrust his hand into the opening, and my inmost being yearned for him.
VOICEMy love put his hand on the latch; my insides began to throb for him.

Conclusion

It is impossible to declare one translation to be the most accurate in its rendering of the Hebrew phrase me‘im hemu ‘alav. It is possible to declare some translations to be inaccurate, but since there may be many accurate translations, it is not possible to declare one to be the most accurate.

If it is impossible to make such a blanket judgment of accuracy for one short three-word phrase, how much more is it impossible to do so for a whole translation. Such a rating would require many thousands of individual decisions and a computer weighing of all of them. Then one would have to do this for dozens of translations in order to say which is the most accurate. It is hard enough to say which is the most accurate translation of one verse, yet alone of a whole Bible.

It is also impossible to say which is the best Bible. Best for what use? If you are a student of biblical Hebrew looking for a Bible translation to help you do your homework assignment (a resource classical students used to call a jimmy or a pony), the best Bible is obviously an interlinear, word-for-word translation. If you want to pick a translation for congregational or personal reading, you want to pick a translation which has the best balance between reflecting the Hebrew and Greek text and providing clarity and readability for contemporary readers of all ages, who have varying degrees of familiarity with the Bible. Bible Gateway created a chart which offers their opinion on the placement of a number of the translations which are posted on its site on such a spectrum.

We can agree with Bible Gateway’s general placement of translations on this chart, but not necessarily with the exact order and placement of all the translations. We would, for example, slide the NASB, EHV, and NIV somewhat to the right.

In ranking translations we prefer to focus on the concept of balance.

For all-purpose use in the church, translators should seek a balance between the old and the new. Translations should make an attempt to avoid to radical a break from translations which their readers have known and loved in the past.

They should seek a balance between the poles of so-called literal and dynamic equivalent theories of translation. A translator should not adhere too closely to any one theory of translation because literalistic, word-for-word translations sometimes convey the wrong meaning, or they do not communicate clearly in the receiving language. Overly free translations deprive the reader of some of the key expressions, imagery, and style of the original biblical texts.

Translators should strive for a balance between preserving the original meaning of the text and producing English which sounds natural, but the preservation of meaning takes priority.

The Bible contains many types of literature and different levels of language, from the very simple to the very difficult. For this reason, the translator should not be too committed to producing one level of English but should try to reproduce the tone or “flavor” of the original. Informal conversation should follow a more informal style than a royal proclamation or a divine decree.

A translation should preserve not only the meaning but also the emotional impact of the original. Gentle passages should sound gentle. Harsh passages should sound harsh. Strong language should not be watered down. Emotional outbursts should be preserved in the
translation.

A translation should practice a balanced weighing of textual variants on a case-by-case basis, rather than favoring a handful of manuscripts.

A translation should reflect the connection of the Old and New Testaments, especially in regard to Messianic prophecy.

These are a few of the aspects of a translation’s balance to consider in deciding which translation is the best for you to use as your main translation. There should be some objectivity in this decision, but personal preference and which translation you enjoy reading the most are also factors to consider.

Bible Gateway's List of Translations