Which translation?

[NoahsDad]

KJV with Strongs exhaustive concordance
Also a study bible called the companion bible by Dr E.W Bulinger very informative it even has a coppy of the origional translation pages called The Mossaretic texts.Mossarah meaning "from my mind to yours" which seals the meaning behind the verse and hte feeling of the words spoken
Prety kool stuff

 

[Baptistrw]

Which translation of the bible do you use and why?

KJV and NKJV to clear up the confusing parts of the KJV, like in the places where the language has changed and leaves the meaning of certain passages unclear.

 

[Slepsog4]

I grew up on the old KJV and the old ASV (American Standard Version, 1901). I have been using the NEW King James Version consistently for over 20 years. I find it readable and compatible with the old KJV. Most of my tools which are geared to the KJV fit the NKJV well.

I have used the Revised Standard Version (RSV) as well as the New International Version (NIV) for different periods of time.
I have been using the English Standard Version (ESV) more and more lately.

I have about 20 different English versions in my library as well as Greek and Hebrew tools.

There is a difficult balance to be struck between accuracy and readability. The stiffer the translation the exacting it is in literalness. The easier the translation the less exacting it is. The latter lends itself to more interpretation on the part of the translators.

The Message and the old Living Bible were not translations, they are paraphrases. The NIV is called a dynamic equivalent version which some believe is nothing more than a scientific paraphrase.

The old ASV is the most woodenly literal version ever in popular use. Young's Literal which is available online is also very wooden. These are very close to being equal to an interlinear translation.

The KJV, though dated, is a good translation. Some of its unique qualities actually help its exactness.

The thee, thou, and ye pronouns are actually very helpful.


THOU = personal pronoun, subjective case, singular in number
THEE = personal pronoun, objective case, singular in number
(thy, thine)

YE = personal pronoun, subjective case, plural in number
YOU = personal pronoun, objective case, plural in number
(your, yours)

These distinctions are clear in the Greek but obscured in modern English which uses YOU in all four cases.

 

[sonofjay817]

all translations of the bible are tested against the septuagant, the vulgate, and dead sea scrolls, and other aintant sause documents, the king james bible is a word by word translation, a group of 47 scholars divided into 6 teams was apointed to undertake the task of puting it together, 3 teams worked on the old testament 2 teams worked on the new testament and 1 team worked on the Apocripha. it was published in 1611 Ad, the reason it is called the autharised version isnt because of its acuracy but because it was the translation autherised for the printers to print. it used the 1602 translation of the bishops bible as the basis of there revision and won the acceptance over the bishops bible as the autharised version, though the bishops bible witch was used as a guide in translating the king james wasnt as scolarly acurate as the geneva bible witch was the first compleate bible to be translated into english
the king james bible shouldnt be accepted for its acuracy because of its age for the same reason newer translations shouldnt be considered more acurate for being newer or more up to date. they are all tested and challenged correctly only when they are compared to the most reliable manuscript sauces of the aintant texts (that being the origanal documents witch there are none of )
there are manny translations of the bible in english witch when compared to these sauses are just as reliable as the king james version, some considered even more so, and manny have been tested and seen to be not as reliable.
in actualaty history shows that in bible translation the most authorative translations are the antiant texts witch all translations are compared to in order to test there acuracy.

Your spelling leaves much to be desired, but the content of what you said was brilliant and I agree completely! Good job! You get the Discernment Award for the day.

I would like to add that, although the KJV is a quality translation, it can be a stumbling block for many and cause them to avoid reading the Bible altogether. I've talked to great Christian people who are KJV only people and I think they do harm in that they tell people the KJV is the only real Bible. The problem is, language changes over time. That being the case, if a translation is not updated, what once was an accurate translation can become confusing, cryptic, and possibly even inaccurate over time as word meanings change. The KJV is almost five hundred years old. Jesus did not talk with thee's and thou's although many pious sounding church people pray this way which always amuses me. This is the way Shakespeare talked and it was in the 1600's.

People laud the KJV for being beautiful and flowery and that's well and good, but remember, God's first priority is for us to understand His Word, not be enamored by the language style. In New Testament days, there was two versions of Greek; Koine Greek (the version used by the common man) and Classical Greek (considered more refined and used more by the cultured class). I think its telling that the New Testament was written in the Koine. I would compare King James English to Classical Greek in our modern setting in that only those accustomed to it are comfortable with it. It stokes people's ego to be able to understand it and it alienates those who can't. If people want to use it, there's nothing wrong with that, but it's wrong to try to force others to. That being said, we must be careful we get a quality translation. I like the NASV and the Amplifed Version. I'm not to keen on paraphrases like the Message. I suppose they can be ok as long as someone reads them more like a manmade story book based on the Bible and not like the inerrant Word of God because they're way to subjective in my opinion to be considered that.

 

[sonofjay817]

THOU = personal pronoun, subjective case, singular in number
THEE = personal pronoun, objective case, singular in number
(thy, thine)

YE = personal pronoun, subjective case, plural in number
YOU = personal pronoun, objective case, plural in number
(your, yours)

These distinctions are clear in the Greek but obscured in modern English which uses YOU in all four cases.[/quote]

Ok, I did not realize this. Thanks. That's interesting.

 

[EconGrad]

I use the English Standard Version for Bible study (because it is a word for word translation). It is also the translation largely adopted by the denomination I fellowship with (LCMS).

If I wanted an older translation I'd use the Geneva Bible as it predates the KJV and is a more accurate translation done without interference from a King.

For easier reading, I like to use the Holman Bible.

 

[twistedlinen]

I use NIV cause it's the first version of my first bible.. and there's this sense of serenity within me.. hehe.. but I also use ESV, NLT and Tagalog version once in a while when having bible study.. ^_^

 

[farouk]

King James is pretty good.

 

[Slepsog4]

Why is it that the more education a person gets, the simpler he wants his translation of the Bible?

Small towns with small churches with the average educational level being High School diploma or less often prefer heavily the KJV.

Cities with larger churches with the average education level being a college degree or more prefer the NIV.

 

[Derek]

I started with the NIV but I like to read from the NKJV at times. I was surprised to find that some key things are left out of the NIV bible. Like for example, Romans 8 verse 2. Compare the NKJV with the NIV translation and youll see that the NKJV has a little something extra on the end. For me it changed the entire verse.

 

[Slepsog4]

Romans 8:1-2

NKJV --[FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]1 [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit.[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica] 2 [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death.

[/FONT]NIV --[FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]1 [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus,[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica] 2 [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death.

The phrases "[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit" found in the NKJV (vs. 1) are missing in the NIV. And the order of words has been rearranged in vs. 2.

The difference in the vs. 1 is because of textual variants in the Greek manuscripts. There are 3 primary sources for translation work: The N/U Greek Text (Nestle/United Bible Society), the TR (Textus Receptus), and M (Majority Text). The TR is what the KJV and NKJV are essentially translated from. The NIV is primarily based on the NU. Unfortunately the NU places an overwhelming emphasis on two primary manuscripts, the Codex Vatincanus and the Codex Sinaiticus. Oddly, these two even differ from each other frequently. The Majority Text is built on all of the available evidence and the clear majority of Greek manuscripts agree with the TR as it is rendered in the KJV/NKJV.

Also the Greek texts supports the word order of the NKJV in verse 2. This is an example of the NIV monkeying with the grammar.
[/FONT]

 

[Derek]

Yah, I mean Im not going to knock any translation and i think there is something valueable to obtain from every one of them but that difference in the NKJV really shed some light on a syudy I was doing. So I guess the main thing is, explore different translations to help fill you up with Gods knowledge.

 

[Baptistrw]

Yah, I mean Im not going to knock any translation and i think there is something valueable to obtain from every one of them but that difference in the NKJV really shed some light on a syudy I was doing. So I guess the main thing is, explore different translations to help fill you up with Gods knowledge.

Some of the modern translations translate things with a "dynamic equivalence" which is a "thought for thought" rather than a "word for word". The problem with this method is that the Bible is verbally inspired, which means every word of the autographs was inspired. Some of these Bibles make for good commentaries, but I would recommend a Bible that is "word for word" as the chief one for study.

 

[sonofjay817]

Some of the modern translations translate things with a "dynamic equivalence" which is a "thought for thought" rather than a "word for word". The problem with this method is that the Bible is verbally inspired, which means every word of the autographs was inspired. Some of these Bibles make for good commentaries, but I would recommend a Bible that is "word for word" as the chief one for study.

I understand what you mean and I agree with the more literal the translation the better. However, the fact is, even the most wooden translation has some degree of dynamically equivalent translation. There are times an intelligible translation cannot be made word for word. I suppose this is why its good to sometimes look at different translations and even do some original language studies to get more insight into a passage.

 

[erika83]

I use ESV (English Standard Version), it's a word to word translation but also readable, not using old english words like "thee"

 

[alysaur]

I use the NKJV, its what I always use and have always used since I was a kid. When I went to Bible college I learned to use and reference other versions also, this helps me understand fully along with reading commentaries.

My favorite bible I have is my Nelson's NKJV Study Bible. ITS AMAZING!!!!!! I really love my Greek/Hebrew Study bible too, its KJV.

 

[Baptistrw]

I use the NKJV, its what I always use and have always used since I was a kid. When I went to Bible college I learned to use and reference other versions also, this helps me understand fully along with reading commentaries.

My favorite bible I have is my Nelson's NKJV Study Bible. ITS AMAZING!!!!!! I really love my Greek/Hebrew Study bible too, its KJV.

I have that Bible too and I love it I like the extras inserted throughout it.

 

[Narn]

Some of the modern translations translate things with a "dynamic equivalence" which is a "thought for thought" rather than a "word for word". The problem with this method is that the Bible is verbally inspired, which means every word of the autographs was inspired. Some of these Bibles make for good commentaries, but I would recommend a Bible that is "word for word" as the chief one for study.

I agree with you on this, I did alot of study on translations and there are a few out that I believe fall into the correct category for good English translations. I come from an KJV only background I forsook that when I saw the fallacy of locking into one version. Though you must be careful not to get a wrong version.
I use NASB mostly I still KJV and I have NIV I reference from time to time in study. I want to get an ESV to check it out sometime. But I would stick very close to literally translated versions and not read alot of the modern translations. Modern should be used like you would use a commentary and not taken as inspriation and not used in a preaching or teaching aspect.

 

[Baptistrw]

I agree with you on this, I did alot of study on translations and there are a few out that I believe fall into the correct category for good English translations. I come from an KJV only background I forsook that when I saw the fallacy of locking into one version. Though you must be careful not to get a wrong version.
I use NASB mostly I still KJV and I have NIV I reference from time to time in study. I want to get an ESV to check it out sometime. But I would stick very close to literally translated versions and not read alot of the modern translations. Modern should be used like you would use a commentary and not taken as inspriation and not used in a preaching or teaching aspect.

I only preach from the KJV because of it being recognized almost universally, and it's authority. "Thou shalt not kill" sounds alot more authoritative than "you shall not kill", if you know what I mean.

 

[Narn]

My Church switched to NASB this year from the KJV because it has todays language in it but it is a great translation. yet like any other translation it has its flaws.
I personally went to it primarly cause I could comprehend it better.