Graybeard Outdoors banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,494 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Which version of the Bible do you use ,and why?
Is anyone better than the others? -King James-NIV-New American Standard-


Willy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
234 Posts
MGW,

I use, read & study from many translations and paraphrases.
I enjoy many things about each of them.
Best?
I do not know.
The KJV does not quite speak "my language"....but, I still read it. Just less often.
The other versions have their obvious differences.
I would hate to have to give any of them up......
Except for those that I believe are cultic and sorely mis-translated by such groups.

So there you have it!
Christian book stores love to see me walk thru their front door!

JonJon
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,405 Posts
I agree with Jon.
There are benefits of each--and some things I don't care for, but let's concentrate on the positives-- .
It is much like conversation. One can say one thing in a group and some will not understand---has nothing too do with intelligence.
Saying the same thing differently can make a difference.
Some say tell it like it is--and honesty is important--and still some will take a different style of telling it like it is.
Much is the same with bibles---read many and some things become clear-----OF course the Holy Spirit has a way with words also- ;).
Blessings
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
305 Posts
I like the New American Standard and the New International Version. It is my understanding that great care has been taken with them to ensure that they are as close to the original texts as possible. Also they are written in current English and are easy to read.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
23,845 Posts
I use the original KJV, and it only. Why? Because I trust it. Some don't and that's ok. Some say it is too hard to read, but so is the manual on a new television, until you spend some time with it. For me it is not, and I let the Word do it's own talking. Use what you want, and be careful that the version you have picked is trustworthy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
234 Posts
Dee said:
I use the original KJV, and it only. Why? Because I trust it. Some don't and that's ok. Some say it is too hard to read, but so is the manual on a new television, until you spend some time with it. For me it is not, and I let the Word do it's own talking. Use what you want, and be careful that the version you have picked is trustworthy.
Dee,

Really Appreciate your statement: "For me it is not, And Let The Word Do It's Own Talking."
Excellent....
It is not how much time we spend in the Word...
Rather it is how much of the Word (Jesus) has gotten a hold of us.
"Listening" to the Almighty will do alot more for us than fixin' that T.V. Set... or..... trying to find that "perfect" version.

JonJon

Just for grins though....are you also saying that if I start reading more of the KJV....
then my ability to understand how to operate my VCR,CD,DVD, & T.V. will increase...? ;D
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,426 Posts
I personally have trouble with the King James, I have to think about the words almost like translating a different language. I normally use a NKJ study Bible, and carry a NASB in my case. The NASB is supposed to be more word-for-word. We shouldn't get hung up on a specific version because we have the Holy Spirit to guide us. After all, what we now know as the Bible was originally written in 3 languages. If God felt that a specific language was important, He would have insured that it would have been completely written in that language, unlike the Muslims who insist that the Koran can only be accurate in Arabic.

By the way, for the KJV-only crowd, find a copy of the 1611 original version and have fun!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,494 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Thanks for the replies guys.
I was wondering if any one version was better than another.
I use the NASB ,but heard that there is a better version now called the New English Version.
Anyone know anything about this one?


Willy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,971 Posts
quote author=woodchukhntr link=topic=130667.msg1098484663#msg1098484663 date=1195674394]
If God felt that a specific language was important, He would have insured that it would have been completely written in that language, unlike the
[/quote]

One is SUPPOSED TO HAVE TO THNIK, while reading the bible, THINKING is not a vile attribute.

What you are saying, probably without trying, is that God is happy there are probably hundreds of dogmas, with some becoming heathen like the JWs, and Mormons.
God does not rule with an iron fist , which is why fre will is the order of the day, or those sects corupting the Bible would suffer the fate of Sodom, but the "I'm OK , you're OK" concerning the butchering of the Bible is probably NOT, NOT, NOT a happy thought to the Father.

Bob
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
234 Posts
m-g Willy,

A couple of months ago I spent a couple of hours in a Christian book store....
With a man who knows Hebrew and Greek....and...
the book store manager in my opinion was "UP" on the New English Version.
Both were pleased with the NEV and the "scholar" purchased a copy to teach from.

Sooo. What does that mean? Dunno!
But, I did stay at a Holiday Inn not too long ago!

Seriously, I can not fluently read any of the original languages.....
and like you probably, we have to trust others for our info....
The complete scoop is probably still unknown by "us masses" for a while yet.
And therefor, I'm asking the same question you've asked....and..
The responses are good so far concerning the NEV.

JonJon
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,405 Posts
There are basically two forms of translation.
One is word for word---if you understand that words define and there is not actually a word for word most of the time.
The NIV uses a different approach. The NIV is not so much a paraphrase but it uses the same tecnique. It takes a more scholarly approach using and translating phrases--which is a sound method if you think about it.
The thing I enjoy about different versions is that it refreshes the reading. You can assume you have read a verse in say, the KJV, and actually not have read it--if I am understood---but in a new version I find myself reading because I do not know how it may be phrased in the new version.
Just my take on it anyway.
Blessings
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
23,845 Posts
JonJon said:
Dee said:
I use the original KJV, and it only. Why? Because I trust it. Some don't and that's ok. Some say it is too hard to read, but so is the manual on a new television, until you spend some time with it. For me it is not, and I let the Word do it's own talking. Use what you want, and be careful that the version you have picked is trustworthy.
Dee,

Really Appreciate your statement: "For me it is not, And Let The Word Do It's Own Talking."
Excellent....
It is not how much time we spend in the Word...
Rather it is how much of the Word (Jesus) has gotten a hold of us.

The more time we spend in the WORD, the more WORD (Jesus) has gotten hold of us, has it not?[/color]

"Listening" to the Almighty will do alot more for us than fixin' that T.V. Set... or..... trying to find that "perfect" version.

Besides now-a-days, it's usually cheaper to by a new TV.[/color]
JonJon

Just for grins though....are you also saying that if I start reading more of the KJV....
then my ability to understand how to operate my VCR,CD,DVD, & T.V. will increase...? ;D

It would depend on which Book you read out of JonJon. I would suggest Proverbs. ;)[/color]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
234 Posts
Dee said:
JonJon said:
Dee said:
I use the original KJV, and it only. Why? Because I trust it. Some don't and that's ok. Some say it is too hard to read, but so is the manual on a new television, until you spend some time with it. For me it is not, and I let the Word do it's own talking. Use what you want, and be careful that the version you have picked is trustworthy.
Dee,

Really Appreciate your statement: "For me it is not, And Let The Word Do It's Own Talking."
Excellent....
It is not how much time we spend in the Word...
Rather it is how much of the Word (Jesus) has gotten a hold of us.

The more time we spend in the WORD, the more WORD (Jesus) has gotten hold of us, has it not?[/color]
Yes, assuming that it is not just an exercise.[/color]

"Listening" to the Almighty will do alot more for us than fixin' that T.V. Set... or..... trying to find that "perfect" version.

Besides now-a-days, it's usually cheaper to by a new TV.[/color]
"Ten-Roger" on the new T.V.[/color]
JonJon

Just for grins though....are you also saying that if I start reading more of the KJV....
then my ability to understand how to operate my VCR,CD,DVD, & T.V. will increase...? ;D

It would depend on which Book you read out of JonJon. I would suggest Proverbs. ;)[/color]
Proverbs is good thing, especially in the "King James".[/color]
JonJon
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44,135 Posts
Like Dee;

I prefer the KJV..the majesty of the speech, plus the test of time work well in it's favor. For many of us who as a child, memorized verses, did so from the KJV and thus easier to recall and locate in the KJV.
Verses used publically are most often from the KJV, and thus easier to ascertain if the usage was in context..

My home church uses the NKJV..I believe as a help to those struggling with the KJV's Elisabethan language terms.
I do consider the NKJV as the closest to the KVJ of all the newer interpretations.

As far as linguists go..they have their "opinions" also, that is why some fine linguists favor one version while some favor another..

if we want to study hard enough, we can be our own linguist..by using interlinears.

Many of the "newer" versions I do not care for personally, because many rely heavily upon Wescott & Hort, a pair who in my opinion, are not the consummate
scholars they claimed to be..

One reason for the newer versions is "copyright" business..royalties to be made from each copy sold..

The KJV for obvious reasons, is not subject to copyright.

I really find it difficult to ascertain how, if a translator has held as close as possible to the original ms., they can "copyright" God's word...

If any other author lifts just a few sentences from someone else..it's called "plagarism " !...LOL
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
My wife and I have been known to sit down and do devotions together, though not nearly as frequently as we should. When we do, we both have New King James versions to read from. I find the language to be fairly easy to read and I don't have any issues with it's accuracy. I often find myself opening my New American Standard Bible when reading though. In researching translations, I came to the conclusion that the NASB was intended to be and succeeded at being a quality literal translation. My NASB is a Thompson Chain Reference Bible. I find the chains to be very helpful in understanding the scripture better. I also read from the NIV infrequently.

6The (A)words of the LORD are pure words;
As silver (B)tried in a furnace on the earth, refined seven times.
7You, O LORD, will keep them;
You will (C)preserve him from this generation forever.
Psalm 12:6-7
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,183 Posts
I'm KJV only. The reason why is because if you do a little studying you will find that there are two distinct lines of manuscripts that we get our Bibles from. One came from Alexandria Egypt, the other line came from Antioch Syria.

There are over 5000 manuscripts that are word for word translation of the KJV. They all came from Antioch Syria.

There are 40 or so manuscripts that came from Alexandria that disagree in over 4000 places just in the gospels alone. The two most used are the Siniaticus and Vaticanicus(these may not be correct spelling)and are the basis of all modern versions. One was found in a catholic monastery and was being used as kindling starter for the stove, and the other was found in the library of the Vatican.
They were used because they were said to be "much older and more reliable" by "scholars".

Here is a couple of examples in how they differ. The most significant verse in the Bible on the trinity is 1John 5:7. The KJV says "For there are three that bear record in Heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost and these three are one:" The NIV, NASB, NRSV, HCSB, NLT, and almost all other translations are missing this verse.

Another very important verse on the deity of Christ is 1Timothy 3:16. The KJV says "And without controversy, great is the mystery of godliness: GOD was manifest in the flesh..." Most modern versions say "great is the mystery of godliness which was manifested in the flesh".

The KJV's language does take a little getting used to but I agree with Dee once you use it and get used to it you won't want to read anything else. The language sets it apart from all other literature. If someone quotes the KJV, then those listening know immediately that the Bible is being quoted.

So, for me its nothing but the KJV. (A great website to study further is www.av1611.com and also you can go to www.jamesknox.com and download 20 mp3 studies by Bro. James Knox. click on archived sermons-- these and all of Bro. James sermons are excellent!!)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44,135 Posts
JonD;

That is exactly why I prefer the KJV..but I will allow for the NKJV for persons that struggle with the KJV verbage..especially if they recognize that the shortcoming is theirs..not the KJV's.
The Messers Wescott & Hort traveled to the Mideast and tried to make a name for themselves as scholars..by "discovering older manuscripts". This had them rummaging from Southern Europe through the middle east.
They "discovered" three of them:

1) They rooted one out of the library of the Vatican in Rome. ( the Vaticanus)

2) Found one near Alexandria, Egypt. ( The Alexandrian)

3) Rescued one from the trash burner at St. Catherine's Monastery at the foot of Mt. Sinai. ( The Sinaticus)

The one from the Vatican was ignored for many centuries by the copyists at Rome, and of course ..some folks trust nothing out of the Vatican.

The one found in Alexandria was (if their estimate were correct) rewritten while Bishop Clement of Alexandria, was in charge of churches of that area.
Clement has been viewed by many church historians as being somewhat like a first century edition of David Koresh.

At the time Wescott & Hort "rescued" the Sinaticus off the floor of the monastery where the monks & scribes had discarded it; evidently deciding that it was somewhere seriously
flawed and not worth recopying.

Wescott & Hort brought back their "newly discovered" missives and many folks that (IMO) were uncomfortable with the virgin birth & diety of Christ gladly adopted them as "authentic".

They argued that these three ms that didn't even agree completely with each other..were "older & more authentic" than the 3,000 or so ms of the Received Text.

The 3,000 ms of the Received Text were chiefly from the Syriac but they also came from other, early Christianized areas. How these "scholars" allowed just 3 ms of dubious
origins to overule the thousands of ms from the Received Text...only they can answer.

You pointed out some true examples of the changes made..small..but very significant changes !

Two recommended books:

A)WHICH BIBLE by David Otis Fuller, DD

B)TRUE or FALSE by David Otis Fuller, DD

Both published by: Grand Rapids International publications
Grand Rapids, Michigan 49501
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
23,845 Posts
Ironglow. Excellent post, and informative.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top