In its original language the bible was inspired and was word for word, the word of God, to the smallest letter and to the smallest stroke of each letter. According to Jesus: one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law. (Matthew 5:18) It is the job of the bible translator to enable people to read in another language as closely as possible what God said in Hebrew or Greek.
The translators should remember that God, who inspired the bible in Hebrew and Greek, also created these languages either in Eden or at Babel. Therefore it is no accident that God used the expressions that He did, as when He created the languages of Hebrew and Greek, He created them for the purpose of containing His word. Therefore that we in English have an alternative way of saying something, does not necessarily justify the translators using this alternative way, as meaning may be lost.
Therefore the word of God should not be altered any more than is necessary for the reader to be able to understand the meaning. The bible translator cannot possibly know all the reasons why God said what He did in the way He did; it may be to convey comment as well as meaning, such as referring to sodomites as dogs, or it may simply be poetic.
To take an example of unnecessary alteration I will look at the words of the bride in Song of Solomon 1:6 where the King James translation is: Look not upon me, because I am black, because the sun hath looked upon me. The New King James bible translates the underlined portion as because the sun has tanned me. The old King James words ‘looked upon’, are the ones originally used by God. They are beautifully poetic and easily understood by the English reader. Therefore there is no reason to change them. In this change they have completely destroyed the beautiful poetry. Bible translators have no right to alter God's word in such a way.
People become inspired when they hear directly what God says. People become bored when they only hear what the bible translators think God means. In the same way that a bride longs to hear the bridegroom's voice, rather than just hearing what someone thinks the bridegroom means, so God wants us to hear His voice, so that we can have faith in Him, and love Him and follow Him.
If bible translators think that all that matters is for people to learn enough facts to answer a bible quiz then they have fallen short of the glory of God. Intellectual correctness may be no more than an illusion if we cannot feel the difference between reading a translation close to the original way that God spoke and one that is further away from it.
Jesus told the Pharisees: Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life. (John 5:39,40) Hearing God's voice directly through the Scriptures should be the result of coming to Jesus, but this becomes difficult if the translators have tampered with the word.
There was once a time when the Roman Catholic hierarchy would not let the people hear God's words directly, but only the words of Roman Catholic teachers. Now some paraphrase bibles such as the Living Bible have taken upon themselves the similar role of intermediaries. Such versions change the word of God much more than the three versions I have just mentioned. For example, Matthew 9:11, which should read: And when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto his disciples, Why eateth your Master with publicans and sinners? (King James Version) has been tampered with in the Living Bible so that it reads: "The Pharisees were indignant. 'Why does your teacher associate with men like that?'" The Living Bible has subtracted some of the words which God inspired to be written, namely the words "tax collectors and sinners". And it has added others, namely the word ‘indignant’. The Living Bible is thus not what God says, but what some intermediary thinks that God means. It should not be called a bible, or read as such. It should only be called ‘Bible Explanatory Notes’. How, when Jesus says that every jot and tittle of every letter is chosen by God, can the Living Bible, so called, change whole words.
Even minor changes such as the omission of ‘Behold’, diminish the effect of God's word. God said: diminish not a word. (Jeremiah 26:2) An example of this is found in Matthew 1:20, which should read: But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying . . . (King James Version) The New International Version, however deletes the word ‘behold’, and simply translates it as: But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said . . . The word ‘behold’ adds an element of surprise and wonder which is lost in the New International Version.
In the preface to the New International Version they make the appalling statement that because they think readers will not understand the meaning of one of God's names, namely ‘the Lord of Hosts’, they have rendered this name as ‘the Lord Almighty’. The translators say that they thought that the reader would not understand that the word ‘hosts’ referred to hosts of armies of Israel. Thus they have exalted themselves to be intermediaries between God and man, and in such a role, have deleted those words of God which they think man will not understand. How can mere man take it upon himself to change the holy name of God. But surely the word ‘hosts’ refers to hosts of angels, not Israel’s armies, so the translators are completely wrong.
I normally read the older King James version because I believe it more faithfully captures the poetry and sense of the original. The margin of the New King James version often gives the literal translation of some phrases used in the body of their text. Often I wish that they had put the literal translation in the body of the text and their interpretation in the margin as an explanatory note.
Perhaps a colour-coded system of explanatory notes would facilitate a more literal translation of the bible. Alternatively, poetic repitition, as in the book of Job, may bring out the fuller meaning of the Hebrew in a way which is less laborious to read than the multiplication of adverbs and adjectives, such as in the Amplified Version.
I cannot comment particularly on the accuracy of translations, as I do not know Hebrew or Greek. However I would like to note, as an additional word of warning, that the scribes and Pharisees who searched the Scriptures so as to be doctrinally correct never attained the true doctrine. This highlights another danger when translators take liberties in altering the word of God - they may guess the wrong intention of God when He used the original words.