Best Bible Version for Scholars for Synoptic Problem?

[Adam]

Bad news. Berean Literal Bible is failing the tests. I had already noted that the word order does not match the interlinear. Yes, you can't get pleasant English and have that. But you can have, or at least try to have, passable English and avoid using just one English word to translate several Greek words. Here are critical verbs Berean fails:
The verb "ask" gets a work-out in John 4 (woman at the well), stemming from two Greek verbs, "aitesas" at 4.10 and from "eroton" (superscripted "o" = "oo") at John 4.31.
The verb "say" in the English comes from "elegen" at John 5.19, but from "eipen" at 6.35
The verb "send" comes from "pempsasin" at John 1.22 but from "apesteilan" just before it an 1.19 (thereby indicating a different source).
Some attempt was made to rationalize the verb "see", as by having "emblepsas" translated by "having looked at" at Jn 1.36 and 1.42 while the root "blepei' is simply "see" at 1.29 and 5.19. So far so good. However, "eidan" at Jn 1.39 is "saw", same English verb. The main Greek word for the verb "see" unfortunately is "horao". Three strikes and you're out. At least the Berean Literal uses "have beheld" for yet another similar verb, "tetheamai" or "theasamenos".
The hunt goes on, unfulfilled.
EDITED TO ADD:
The verb "go" at John 11.11, 14.12, and 14.28 is "poreuoumai", but comes from "hypageu", mostly, such as at John 11.31 and 13.3.

[Adam]

Gee,
Does someone at Biblehub read my posts?
My skepticism about the two Berean translations has been noted and now neither is featured among the parallel versions? Someone who knows something about how the American Bible Society works can explain what might be going on?

[Adam]

Biblehub may read me, but ChristianBooks apparently does not. It still offers just the Berean Study Bible and not the Berean Literal.
My guess is that the Berean Literal is in process and over-ruling the earlier Berean Study Bible where they conflict. Biblehub opted out of carrying both (or either) while the conflict persists.
Does anyone know, or know whom to ask at either Biblehub or Christianbooks?
Meanwhile I'm stuck, as Berean Literal seemed my best bet to date, and now it's available neither in print nor on line. I can hardly suffer through 16th Century words in Young's Literal like "suffer" for permit or allow.
In the meantime you'll have to take my word for it that I'm finding even more evidence of multiplicity of early sources that prove John the Baptist was historical.

[Adam]

More Biblehub "news".
Berean is back up in the Parallel versions, both the Berean Study and the Berean Literal.
But now the apparatus to move from verse-to-verse seems gone. I can move to the next chapter, the next book, the next version, but the next verse (beyond say fifteen displayed) is not there?
I guess Biblehub routinely tinkers. If it's unsatisfactory one day, then try the next day?
Apparently if they acted because of me they did not change Matthew 3:11 to be consistently in the two Berean versions "mightier" rather than "more powerful", the latter being paradoxically less literal though featured in the Berean Literal. As I said earlier, there may be good reasons of consistency whereby "More powerful" may be needed here because "powerful" is used elsewhere for the related Greek word where it is not comparative.

[Adam]

Sad to say, on Biblehub the two Berean versions (with the Literal essential to my purposes) have disappeared again.
Fortunately the switch verses feature works again.

[Adam]

And the Berean Study and Berean Literal are back again!

[MrMacSon]

Adam, How does issues around versions of the Bible address the Synoptic Problem?

[Adam]

The Synoptic Problem basically addresses whether the four gospels influenced each other directly (I hold firmly that they do not) or whether such great similarity comes from copying the same sources. Ordinary English translations can't well address this because they don't consistently use the same Engilish words to translate original Greek words. Some versions do commit themselves to consistent translation from Greek to English, but rarely commit themselves to using the same word order (English sense depends on proper word order, declensions and conjugations do the job in Greek even without "right" word order). To this point the best translation is the English Standard Version. But it translates up to three Greek words with the same English word (for example, "to see"). It does not call itself a "literal" translation. I know, however, of at least three extant literal versions that commit themselves always to translate a particular Greek word with one and only one English word. The first was the Young's Literal Bible, from the late 19th Century with 16th Century translations like "suffer" for "permit". In 1926 came another old-fashioned literal translation in the Concordant Literal New Testament (Sixth Edition 1978), appropriately enough from sectarians who virtually worship every word God used in creating the Bible. It's almost unknown, probably because it's only a New Testament, even though that's all the Bible that is in Greek, which is all that's relevant to the Synoptic Problem. It apparently has not been updated to modern English, judging by my 1983 printing, though it's better than the Youngs.
The present situation is hopeful on two fronts. A project called The Literal Bible seems too exacting to be of any use, I gave a sample of it in this thread. That leaves (but available only on the internet when Biblehub chooses to occasionally include it among the Parallel choices) the Berean Literal Bible. Hopefully it does also stick to one and only one English word per Greek word. Printed text is available as the Berean Study Bible, omitting superfluous words not needed by other than scholars of the Synoptic Problem! Word order remains a problem, which only an interlinear can solve.
Another avenue is a reverse interlinear, apparently available only with the English Standard Version (available for $60, not yet received). The text is given in the excellent English it uses, but beneath each word is the Greek equivalent. That should solve the problem of numerous words (particularly verbs) like "to see" that are translations of up to three Greek words.
But only a regular interlinear can solve the problem of word order. Fortunately the Jehovah's witnesses sell several versions. But for my purposes of being able to display my results to "prove" my point about the Synoptic Problem, I currently regard the English Standard Version reverse interlinear as most helpful.

[outhouse]

Ordinary English translations can't well address this because they don't consistently use the same Engilish words to translate original Greek words.

.

Factually false.

It does not take exact translation when the majority of the translations are accurate enough to see the obvious plagiarized content not in dispute with any credibility.

The Synoptic Problem basically addresses whether the four gospels influenced each other directly (I hold firmly that they do not)

This is your own fantasy.

Academia has moved past this apologetic rhetoric, and only those with extreme bias chase this rainbow.

[Adam]

Not enough here to be worthy of a reply, unless someone else seconds your post.