Which is the most accurate translation of the Bible?

This is a bit of tricky question.  Which is the most accurate translation?

Purists scoff at The Message Bible, and (in my experience) exclusively read from the New American Standard, or some criticize the New International Version as too "politically correct", while others go around reading the New King James Version or English Standard Bible perfectly content. 

So which translation is superior?  Well, that depends on what you're looking for.

As I mentioned from an earlier post, translating (much less translating from a bunch of dead languages) is a hard thing to do.  Translators are constantly battling literal over metaphorical meanings, and what ends up happening is that some versions reflect the translators' decisions.  Generally, this scale of literal vs metaphorical goes like this:

NASB>HCSB>NIV>NLT>MSG

In order to highlight the differences between the translations, let's take a look at John 3:16 and see how the different versions render it:

New American Standard Bible
For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
For God loved the world in this way: He gave His One and Only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish but have eternal life.

New International Version
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

New Living Translation
For God loved the world so much that he gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.

The Message Bible
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.

Pretty much the same, right?  Now, check this passage:

New American Standard Bible
Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
The people here were more open-minded than those in Thessalonica, since they welcomed the message with eagerness and examined the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so.

New International Version
Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.

New Living Translation
And the people of Berea were more open-minded than those in Thessalonica, and they listened eagerly to Paul's message. They searched the Scriptures day after day to see if Paul and Silas were teaching the truth.

The Message Bible
They were treated a lot better there than in Thessalonica. The Jews received Paul’s message with enthusiasm and met with him daily, examining the Scriptures to see if they supported what he said.

So, NLT and NASB say "Noble", HCSB and NLT say "open-minded", and MSG says something along the lines of "they were treated better, so they must be cool, right?"

It is in these moments that I turn to the original Greek and figure out why all of these Ph.D's disagree on the translation.  Apprently, the word used literally means "Born of high rank" (eugenes) or someone whose character is noble.  Since I'm pretty sure that Luke wasn't commenting on the socio-economic status of the Bereans, we can assume that he was describing their character.  What made their character so noble? They listened to Paul, kept an open mind, but tempered their enthusiasm with checking what he said against what the scriptures said.

So which rendering do you prefer? Noble? Open-minded?  Generous?  I'm in favor of "open-minded", because the literal meaning doesn't always convey the subtleties of the figurative meaning.

Now I have a bigger question for you: which translation is flat-out wrong? 

I don't think any of them are; some might emphasize certain elements above others, but they pretty much retain the same message: the Bereans treated Paul well, actually listened to him, and made sure that what he was saying wasn't just rabble-rousing, but true to what the Scriptures also said.

Next week we'll talk about the so-called "lost books/passages" of the Bible.  See you there.