/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>825027

I have no idea, but have been looking to learn Spanish as well. Have a bamp.

Looks like we're back up.

Reina Valera Antigua was the best but harder to understand. It's not perfect but pretty much a trusted standard and more accurate than all the others I've seen,(Biblia de Scío, Félix Torres Amat, Nácar-Colunga, Navarra etc.) The other translations are butchered to a larger degree like getting tenses and case wrong. If you needed something easier like for door to door preaching the 1960 revision might have been a better choice. There still hasn't been any equivalent to something like the Douay-Rheims, Brenton LXX, or even RSV and ESV that I know of.

Also yeah it would probably be easier to compare alongside the KJV. You would need to learn the archaic pronouns; for English that is (also Spanish vosotros). There's even a version of the Old Reina Valera revised by Mexican Fundamentalist Baptists to agree more with the KJV. Otherwise I think there's a Spanish NIV.

>>825059

Reina Valera is a protestant Bible, made in the late 1500s and early 1600s. Bible studies and linguistics have advance a lot since, and it's not a particularly good translation. It can also induce errors, since the language is archaic and usually lacks notes. A random example (first that came out, but there are many more like it): in Ecc 12:3, where it says "grinders", most Bibles translate it as grinding stone or grinding mill, or maybe people with that job. The Reina-Valera uses the word "muelas" which can mean a grinding stone, but most often is used to refer to a molar tooth.

Many protestant denominations also base their own tailor-made translations from the Reina-Valera. Honestly, the only people who like the Reina-Valera are the Spanish equivalent of the "KJV only-ist". I wouldn't recommend it.

Torres Amat is translated from the Vulgate, that's why its translations are sometimes a bit different. It includes good notes, though if the aim is to learn Spanish, notes may be not too important.

Navarra is a pretty good translation. It's selling point is having the Spanish text side by side with the Latin, and notes with citations and references to the Early Church Fathers.

There are two Bibles I'd recommend if the aim is to learn Spanish:

-Sagrada Biblia; the version by the CEE (Spanish Episcopal Conference)

-Biblia de la Iglesia en América (usually abbreviated as BIA)

One's in European Spanish, the other in American Spanish. They're not too dissimilar, but depending on how you learned Spanish, you may prefer one over the other. Both have a clear language and are good translations of the original Hebrew and Greek. They're widely accepted and used in liturgy, so you can be sure they're not the personal version of some weird fringe group.

Since the aim is to learn Spanish, and not Bible studies, you probably should prioritize Bibles with a clear, modern language . Leave ultra-accurate Aramaic translations and lengthy academic notes for your English Bibles.

>>825064

"Vosotros" is nothing but archaic. Some regions no longer use it, but in many others it's as common as "you" is in English.