Favourite Bible Translations

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
S

Scribe

Guest
#41
My favorites so far:
KJV, ESV, NASB, HCSB, (functional equivalents) Tries to translate the Greek words into the best English equivalent without interpreting (but they often do some interpreting based on context anyway)

NIV (Dynamic equivalents) Tries to include the meaning of the Greek as the original readers would have understood it in Greek

AMP (Free/dynamic translations) Adds wording in an attempt to include Greek meaning but definitely goes beyond and interprets, and comments in the attempt) The NLT is a free translation, a paraphrase, commenting and interpreting rather then being faithful to the orginal Greek words.

An Interlinear is a Formal Equivalent, translating Greek words to English but you can't really read the English in that format.

I am currently listening to the audible.com The Hebrew Bible: A Translation with Commentary By Robert Alter and it is educational concerning the Hebrew idioms, poetry and style of the Hebrew. I am enjoying it and I am comprehending the poetry that gets lost in translation more because of this translation. There was a need for this. I would highly recommend it to serious Bible students who don't plan to learn Hebrew where the literature nuances can be appreciated.

Certain rhyming Hebrew words for example that are lost in translation. "The earth was without form and void" Hebrew words tohu and bohu Alter translates "welter and waste" trying to capture the Hebrew style.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
18,748
10,407
113
#42
Context, context, context, not individual greek words out of context.
Don't be a hypocrite. I called "context" on "fruit of the Spirit" and you ignored it. Further, I was not making an assertion regarding Revelation 13:8 that violated context in any way, nor did I make a claim about specific words in the verse. Meanwhile, you have not answered my question: what is the issue with that verse, that you mentioned it?
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
18,748
10,407
113
#43
I'd recommend having a bible study with a group who are using a variety of translations . We did one where we had the Niv , Nasb, nkjv , kjv and a couple of others . This was a revelation to me . The difference was really clear as we went through the new testament. Not even subtle in many places. I wasn't a particular user of the kjv ,prior to this . After seeing how radically the modern translations do not compare to the kjv with ' context ' i started to trust and rely on the kjv . Thats not changed till today . I'm not Kjv only . But the kjv is the most reliable and consistent translation we have. I trust the kjv above all .
According to your explanation above, the only reason you have for preferring the KJV is that it is different than modern translations. Your claim of "most reliable and consistent" is without any basis.
 
S

Scribe

Guest
#44
I'd recommend having a bible study with a group who are using a variety of translations . We did one where we had the Niv , Nasb, nkjv , kjv and a couple of others . This was a revelation to me . The difference was really clear as we went through the new testament. Not even subtle in many places. I wasn't a particular user of the kjv ,prior to this . After seeing how radically the modern translations do not compare to the kjv with ' context ' i started to trust and rely on the kjv . Thats not changed till today . I'm not Kjv only . But the kjv is the most reliable and consistent translation we have. I trust the kjv above all .
This method would not educate you as to why there are differences.

A book about the translations from a scholar of Greek, Hebrew, and the manuscripts in extant would be necessary to understand the differences. Reading the preface of the various translations might be a starting point. Googling the publishers which should have extensive information on how and why they went about their translation efforts.

All of these things must be explored before one can intelligently form an opinion as to which one does a better job of translating from Greek to English for example.

As it turns out there will be cases where a particular English word was translated by the KJV that is better and cases where another English word used by the ESV might be better.

KJV uses candlestick in Rev when candlesticks were not used until the middle ages, so the KJV in those cases are interpreting to their 17th century audience. What John actually saw was an oil feed lampstand, and not a wax candlestick. This does not mean KJV is not an excellent translation, but rather a case in point that it is not perfect.

If you noticed that KJV said candlestick and the ESV said lampstand and if you got all upset and said that ESV was not to be trusted because it did not say candlestick you would be wrong. Candlesticks were not used until the middle ages. Therefore ESV is being true to the Greek word and KJV is commenting, interpreting, modernizing the Greek word for their audience and not being faithful to the original manuscript. Be upset with the KJV translators if you want to be upset with someone but don't be ignorant and don't be zealously ignorant. It hurts the cause of Christ to be religiously zealously ignorant. Christians should be intellectually honest. Truth is not antithetical to the Word of God. It is ok to admit that an oil fed lampstand is the word that the Holy Spirit intended and not a wax candlestick. You have not backslidden by admitting that the KJV could have done better in this example. :)
 

throughfaith

Well-known member
Aug 4, 2020
10,468
1,590
113
#45
According to your explanation above, the only reason you have for preferring the KJV is that it is different than modern translations. Your claim of "most reliable and consistent" is without any basis.
How is comparing several translations through a study of the entire newtestment ,without basis ? have you been drinking? Different ? I meant that the others fail in context where there are differences . Try it. Do the work to see .
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
18,748
10,407
113
#46
“Fruit of the light” is NOT a Pauline expression. It is NOT Paul’s style. There is no such thing as “fruit of the light” anywhere in either Testament.
Meanwhile, "fruit of the Spirit" occurs in only ONE place, so according to your logic, "It is NOT Paul's style" and there is no such thing as "fruit of the Spirit" anywhere (else) in either Testament, so it must NOT be a Pauline expression.

In other words, your assertion holds no water. Please... think through your arguments before posting them.
 
S

Scribe

Guest
#47
How is comparing several translations through a study of the entire newtestment ,without basis ? have you been drinking? Different ? I meant that the others fail in context where there are differences . Try it. Do the work to see .
This method would not educate you as to why there are differences.
 

throughfaith

Well-known member
Aug 4, 2020
10,468
1,590
113
#48
Don't be a hypocrite. I called "context" on "fruit of the Spirit" and you ignored it. Further, I was not making an assertion regarding Revelation 13:8 that violated context in any way, nor did I make a claim about specific words in the verse. Meanwhile, you have not answered my question: what is the issue with that verse, that you mentioned it?
Saying " fruit of the LIGHT ' and Fruit of the Spirit is vastly different . I.ll stick to believing the ' fruit ' of God the Holy Spirit ,thanks.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
18,748
10,407
113
#49
How is comparing several translations through a study of the entire newtestment ,without basis ? have you been drinking? Different ? I meant that the others fail in context where there are differences . Try it. Do the work to see .
The KJV fails in context in Ephesians 5:9. I've been drinking coffee, not KJV-only Kool-Aid.
 

CS1

Well-known member
May 23, 2012
8,898
2,742
113
#50
I primarily use the NIV for study and daily reading because of its popularity. But I also use the ESV and NKJV because they are the translations of some very wonderful study Bibles
I am curious to know some favourite Bible translations of other Christians and why they chose them.
love KJV use the NKJV and pre 1984 NIV
 

throughfaith

Well-known member
Aug 4, 2020
10,468
1,590
113
#51
Meanwhile, "fruit of the Spirit" occurs in only ONE place, so according to your logic, "It is NOT Paul's style" and there is no such thing as "fruit of the Spirit" anywhere (else) in either Testament, so it must NOT be a Pauline expression.

In other words, your assertion holds no water. Please... think through your arguments before posting them.
It explains the difference and where the error is coming from . Alexandria.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
18,748
10,407
113
#52
Saying " fruit of the LIGHT ' and Fruit of the Spirit is vastly different .
Yes, they are different. So what? Does the difference by itself tell you which is correct? No. Given that verse 8 is talking about "walking in the light" is "fruit of the light" inherently wrong somehow? No. Is "fruit of the Spirit" more coherent with "walking in the light" than "fruit of the light"? No.

Is this a salvific issue? No.
 

throughfaith

Well-known member
Aug 4, 2020
10,468
1,590
113
#53
Yes, they are different. So what? Does the difference by itself tell you which is correct? No. Given that verse 8 is talking about "walking in the light" is "fruit of the light" inherently wrong somehow? No. Is "fruit of the Spirit" more coherent with "walking in the light" than "fruit of the light"? No.

Is this a salvific issue? No.
Tell that to new agers who will use that verse to support their ideas .
 

throughfaith

Well-known member
Aug 4, 2020
10,468
1,590
113
#54
Yes, they are different. So what? Does the difference by itself tell you which is correct? No. Given that verse 8 is talking about "walking in the light" is "fruit of the light" inherently wrong somehow? No. Is "fruit of the Spirit" more coherent with "walking in the light" than "fruit of the light"? No.

Is this a salvific issue? No.
It removes the Holy Spirit from the letter . Is this a minor thing? Its only God after all ??
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
18,748
10,407
113
#55
It explains the difference and where the error is coming from . Alexandria.
Ah... now we get to the root of the issue: a genetic fallacy piled on a non sequitur.

If you prefer the KJV, fine for you. If you want to post silly arguments in favour of it, I will happily shred them.
 
S

Scribe

Guest
#56
How is comparing several translations through a study of the entire newtestment ,without basis ? have you been drinking? Different ? I meant that the others fail in context where there are differences . Try it. Do the work to see .
This method would not educate you as to why there are differences.

You could not judge which one was correct by simply noticing differences.

You would have to read and "trust" the explanations of Hebrew and Greek Scholars who translate from those languages to English, or you will have to learn those languages yourself and analyze the manuscripts yourself.
 

throughfaith

Well-known member
Aug 4, 2020
10,468
1,590
113
#57
Ah... now we get to the root of the issue: a genetic fallacy piled on a non sequitur.

If you prefer the KJV, fine for you. If you want to post silly arguments in favour of it, I will happily shred them.
Well your shredding the Holy Spirit from the book of ephesians. No big deal .. it doesn't matter .
 

throughfaith

Well-known member
Aug 4, 2020
10,468
1,590
113
#58
Ah... now we get to the root of the issue: a genetic fallacy piled on a non sequitur.

If you prefer the KJV, fine for you. If you want to post silly arguments in favour of it, I will happily shred them.
Well let's look at another . This came up in our study.
2 Corinthians 3:16 KJV

“Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away.”

OTHERS

Nevertheless when one turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away.
NASB
but whenever a person turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away.
NLT
But whenever someone turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away

But whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away.

The context is ISRAEL / Jews . Not ' anyone ' .
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
18,748
10,407
113
#59
It removes the Holy Spirit from the letter . Is this a minor thing?
No, it doesn't. The Holy Spirit is mentioned clearly in Ephesians 1:13, 2:18, 2:22, 4:3, 4:4, 4:30, 6:17, and somewhat less clearly in a couple of other places.

Before you embarrass yourself further, check the evidence for yourself.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
18,748
10,407
113
#60
Well your shredding the Holy Spirit from the book of ephesians. No big deal .. it doesn't matter .
See my previous post, and stop being utterly ridiculous. I didn't write the NASB anyway, so your personal accusation is out of line.