How about in the same friggin’ translation, friend?
The four Gospels each give different accounts of, for example, the resurrection of Christ.
Any time you have a body of work being translated, there are always several ways to translate the same thing. Thus why someone like cmkeller has an advatange over me: he can probably read the original text (as in, it typed up and such) in Hebrew, whereas I’d have to rely on a translation from Greek or Hebrew or Latin or such. A translation is going to lose a lot of the nuances of the language.
One point to consider in favor of the King James Version is that it’s been a touchstone of English literature for four hundred years now. It’s quite an exceptional literary effort in its own right, it’s the version read and used as a source by practically every English writer since it was originally published, and it’s been an significant influence on style in both prose and verse for four centuries. Most subsequent translations have either sacrificed style to accuracy of translation (not a criticism, mind you), or have paraphrased freely in an attempt to convey the meaning better to a modern reader (without, IMHO, rising to anything like the level of excellence in style of the KJV).
Which is why I strongly disagree with this:
As for not reading Shakespeare easily, I wouldn’t consider that an impediment to reading the King James Version. Despite earlier comments, the language and style of the KJV is much easier to read and understand for the average modern American reader than Shakespeare’s plays. There’s a variety of reasons for this; one is that readers today seem to have a mental block against understanding anything written in verse. Another is that there are far more topical allusions to contemporary events and personages in Shakespeare than in the Bible; there are Biblical passages for which some level of historical knowledge is useful, but nearly any edition of the KJV you pick up will have sufficient explanatory notes. Shakespeare, on the other hand, while writing for an audience that included the entire spectrum of society from the ignorant to the highly educated and knowledgeable, sprinkled in the Elizabethan/Jacobean equivalent of Monica Lewinsky jokes, jokes you’d almost automatically get if you lived where and when he did, but wouldn’t otherwise. Finally, while the language of the KJV sometimes seems high-flown, formal, and old-fashioned to the modern reader, it’s far more straightforward and direct than that of most of Shakespeare. After all, the whole point of the KJV was to produce an English translation that made use of the latest scholarship in presenting the word of God in a manner that anyone who could read (still a minority of the population at that time) could understand.
There is another important difference: the frequency of The Lord’s Name. There are 4 verses, including Ps. 83:18, that almost all bibles spell out the name ‘Jehovah’ (or Yahweh or however it is translated into your language). Some bible versions have a few more instances of Jehovah, while the New World Translation has something like over 7000 references to the name Jehovah.
'Way back up there, CMKeller said, << ). My personal favorite is the Artscroll Stone Edition Tanakh (as well as the Artscroll Stone Edition Chumash, which is the Five Books of Moses only, but in greater detail), but there are many others out there as well. >.
The Artscroll edition is certainly the one favored by Orthodox Jews. However, my friend (modern Orthodox rabbi) dislikes it, because the translation is sometimes skewed to make various points that support various midrash or orthodox interpretations.
If you’re trying to get the flavor of the original Hebrew text, I suggest the recent Fox translation (unfortunately, only Torah – first five books – has been issued.) For instance, Hebrew repeats verbs for emphasis; most versions translate by adding “very” or “behold!” or somesuch: “He looked up and lo! he saw a camel.” Fox keeps to the original almost literally: “He looked up and saw, yes, saw, a camel.”
Otherwise, I’d suggest the best Jewish translation is from the Jewish Publication Society (JPS).
One thing to note, is you might want to look at a “Study” bible. I have a Ryrie Study bible (New American Standard) and it is invaluable for explaining verses and notes.