What version of the bible do you read and what one do you like best

  • 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.
Sep 6, 2014
7,034
5,435
113
#21
I have read the king James and the New king James Version plus the New International Version . I find the New Internationan eaiser to understand but at the sametime they leave out a lot of information that you would find in the King James and the New King James . So I find myself cross refersioning the NIV with the King James to get God's word they way it should be , My problem is I am stuck on wich on to read . I so would like your opions .
If I may offer a suggestion.....
Look at the original texts from the OT and NT, and see what versions line up best with them.

Also, thank you for your gracious replies in this thread.
 

UnitedWithChrist

Well-known member
Aug 12, 2019
3,739
1,928
113
#22
I like the ESV myself. NASB also seems to be fine. I like the NIV for it's intended purpose, which is a thought-for-thought translation.

I have argued endlessly with KJV Onlyists who insist that you must use the KJV. Anymore nowadays, I just tell them to use it and leave me alone.

I've studied the different textual basis and agree that the modern translations are more reflective of the original text. Additionally, the "long ending" lacks credibility. Therefore, I'm convinced it was a later addition.

However, if someone thinks differently on that issue, I just let them alone. The ones that are most argumentative about it tend to be isolationists who are very self righteous.
 

UnitedWithChrist

Well-known member
Aug 12, 2019
3,739
1,928
113
#23
I like the ESV myself. NASB also seems to be fine. I like the NIV for it's intended purpose, which is a thought-for-thought translation.

I have argued endlessly with KJV Onlyists who insist that you must use the KJV. Anymore nowadays, I just tell them to use it and leave me alone.

I've studied the different textual basis and agree that the modern translations are more reflective of the original text. Additionally, the "long ending" lacks credibility. Therefore, I'm convinced it was a later addition.

However, if someone thinks differently on that issue, I just let them alone. The ones that are most argumentative about it tend to be isolationists who are very self righteous.

When I said "long ending" what I mean is the long ending of Mark 16. Verses 9-20 are a later addition. Some groups won't accept that, though, because they base their theology on it. However, you won't see me handling snakes or drinking poison anytime soon, and some of the goofs that do those things end up in a grave.
 

Adstar

Senior Member
Jul 24, 2016
7,417
3,468
113
#24
I have read the king James and the New king James Version plus the New International Version . I find the New Internationan eaiser to understand but at the sametime they leave out a lot of information that you would find in the King James and the New King James . So I find myself cross refersioning the NIV with the King James to get God's word they way it should be , My problem is I am stuck on wich on to read . I so would like your opions .
I started out reading the New King James Version.. But later transitoned to the King James Version.. I do not trust the New international Version..

So i read and quote the KJV now..
 
Aug 28, 2019
62
42
18
#25
If I may offer a suggestion.....
Look at the original texts from the OT and NT, and see what versions line up best with them.

Also, thank you for your gracious replies in this thread.
Thank you . You are so kind and I will try comparing the texts . Very good idea .
 
Aug 28, 2019
62
42
18
#26
I started out reading the New King James Version.. But later transitoned to the King James Version.. I do not trust the New international Version..

So i read and quote the KJV now..
That is how I am starting to feel about the NIV myself as well . The mor I read the NIV the more I find it not to be messing things . Thank you for your help .
 

danja

Senior Member
Nov 28, 2014
2,067
1,888
113
#27
I read new king james version and new living translation version.
 
Aug 28, 2019
62
42
18
#28
When I said "long ending" what I mean is the long ending of Mark 16. Verses 9-20 are a later addition. Some groups won't accept that, though, because they base their theology on it. However, you won't see me handling snakes or drinking poison anytime soon, and some of the goofs that do those things end up in a grave.
No snakes or drinking poison here . I feel no need to test God . Pluse I am smart enough to not hold a poison snake sand drink poison . I think God gave people brains for a reason . Thank you for sharing your thoughts with me .
 
Aug 28, 2019
62
42
18
#30
NASB = New American Standard Bible

I should have mentioned that. Very sorry :oops:

~Deut
p.s. - there is also the ASV/American Standard Version (a predecessor of the NASB 95'), and the NAB, the New American Bible, which is a modern Roman Catholic Bible that has nothing to do with the NASB translation, just FYI.

No please don't feel sorry . Now I know what it is . Thank you for the answer back . Wow my head is spining . I had not known how many diffrent types of Bibles there are out there . This is some thing I really need to talk to my pastor about . Thank you for all your help
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
24,555
13,320
113
#31
p.s. - there is also the ASV/American Standard Version (a predecessor of the NASB 95'), and the NAB, the New American Bible, which is a modern Roman Catholic Bible that has nothing to do with the NASB translation, just FYI.
I learned something! My day is complete. :)
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
24,555
13,320
113
#32
No please don't feel sorry . Now I know what it is . Thank you for the answer back . Wow my head is spining . I had not known how many diffrent types of Bibles there are out there . This is some thing I really need to talk to my pastor about . Thank you for all your help
You might be interested in taking a look at BibleGateway.com. You can compare a verse across twenty or thirty different English versions, plus minor variants of several.
 

fredoheaven

Senior Member
Nov 17, 2015
3,992
927
113
#33
I like the ESV myself. NASB also seems to be fine. I like the NIV for it's intended purpose, which is a thought-for-thought translation.

I have argued endlessly with KJV Onlyists who insist that you must use the KJV. Anymore nowadays, I just tell them to use it and leave me alone.

I've studied the different textual basis and agree that the modern translations are more reflective of the original text. Additionally, the "long ending" lacks credibility. Therefore, I'm convinced it was a later addition.

However, if someone thinks differently on that issue, I just let them alone. The ones that are most argumentative about it tend to be isolationists who are very self righteous.
I see it differently than the longer ending of Mark is by far has a solid backup of Greek manuscripts, an ancient translation of Greek predating Vaticanus and Sinaiticus. and has many backings of the early church fathers. "However, if someone thinks differently on that issue, I just let them alone" unless one persists.
 

fredoheaven

Senior Member
Nov 17, 2015
3,992
927
113
#34
When I said "long ending" what I mean is the long ending of Mark 16. Verses 9-20 are a later addition. Some groups won't accept that, though, because they base their theology on it. However, you won't see me handling snakes or drinking poison anytime soon, and some of the goofs that do those things end up in a grave.
Umm, why a "later addition"? why not an "omission"?

Thanks
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
24,555
13,320
113
#35
That is how I am starting to feel about the NIV myself as well . The mor I read the NIV the more I find it not to be messing things . Thank you for your help .
Again, I ask you... on what basis do you consider the NIV to be "missing" anything? Why would you not consider the KJV to contain "additions"?

I do have a good reason for pressing you on this. :)
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
24,555
13,320
113
#36
Umm, why a "later addition"? why not an "omission"?

Thanks
This is the crux of the issue... what do we consider to be the objective standard for the content of Scripture. Most people who began with the KJV consider it to be the standard, but that is usually nothing more than familiarity bias.
 

UnitedWithChrist

Well-known member
Aug 12, 2019
3,739
1,928
113
#37
Umm, why a "later addition"? why not an "omission"?

Thanks
The earliest manuscripts do not contain these verses..therefore, this is an indication they were added later.

Additionally, Mark's book was meant to lead to the question, who is this man?

It is likely that the person who added these verses meant to harmonize Mark with the other gospels.

Additionally, I don't think the verses about drinking poison and picking up snakes were inspired, neither was Jesus appearing in a different form. The latter is used by Jehovah's Witnesses to deny the bodily resurrection.
 

UnitedWithChrist

Well-known member
Aug 12, 2019
3,739
1,928
113
#38
I see it differently than the longer ending of Mark is by far has a solid backup of Greek manuscripts, an ancient translation of Greek predating Vaticanus and Sinaiticus. and has many backings of the early church fathers. "However, if someone thinks differently on that issue, I just let them alone" unless one persists.
You can hold those views if you want. I don't think the facts bear it out. You might check the NET Study Bible for details on manuscript evidence. This study bible is very handy in that regard as it includes translation notes and makes comments about how the underlying Greek text varies from the Textus Receptus.
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
36,530
13,094
113
#40
If I feel the NIV is reading diffrent to the point that some information did not sound right I would go to the King James . Example . When I was reading the NIV about the death of Christ it did not say anything abouth the two theifs hanging next to Jesus .
in NIV of Matthew 27 they are called 'rebels' -- but it's not like it doesn't say anything about them lol.
ESV, NASB and NKJV say 'robbers' while KJV says 'thieves'