What Bible translation do you use?

KJV is the ONLY inspired Bible. . .oh wait, forgot myself there for a second. =)

I tend to use NKJV (John Macarther Study Bible) as my main study/memorization version since that is the translation my local congregation uses. I also own KJV (grew up on this), NIV, ESV, and I believe there is a Living Bible hiding in the apartment somewhere.
 
lol

I actually enjoy the way The Living Bible puts things sometimes. On my computer parallel Bible I have the NLT and TLB right next to each other.

I just looked at my computer parallel - I have HCSB - NLT - TLB - MSG - AMP - NCV - TEV - ESV - GW - CEV up to compare.

On the full window carousel I have NIV - NASB - KJV - HCSB Reverse Interlinear - and Interlinear OT/NT

I have others - but these are the ones I have one touch access or view side by side.
 
Icthus - I couldn't tell if you were joking or not. Yes - there are different versions in the original. What I was introduced to as the best were:

Greek - Aland and Metzger.

Hebrew - Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia.
 
Abba San said:
Icthus - I couldn't tell if you were joking or not. Yes - there are different versions in the original. What I was introduced to as the best were:

Greek - Aland and Metzger.

Hebrew - Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia.
Click to expand...

Not so much kidding as continuing a theme.

There are many versions and all are good. There is no best.
 
In over 39 years of using, and wearing out Bibles I have used everything King Jimmie, New King Jimmie, Parallel versions, The living Bible, The Message, NIV, ratted around even in the Jewish scriptures translated directly into English. The one I prefer is the one that allows me to understand a passage, and or share it. For on line work nothing beats, http://www.biblegateway.com/
 
NIV (print) and Amplified (on the 'droid) because they are the ones I read. And online and in my signature, biblegateway. That way if you would prefer to read my links in some other translation, you can click a button.
 
So...after doing some reading I found the ESV reminding me a LOT of the NKJV...and the reading of it felt the same to me which left my a little disapointed...then I checked out the HCSB and liked it a lot...but not a lot of free offline apps for that one... I enjoyed the NET, but no one here really recommended that one... And The Message just feels weird...kinda like reading a kids storybook... 2 more I plan only looking into is AMP and NASB...
 
Last edited:
I love The Message!
Yo dawg, in da start they was the WORD, and the word be with da Big G!...

Or something like that. I do think it's great for its intended audience, though I'd argue it's more difficult for me to understand than most translations. :)
 
I'm glad someone else enjoys the Message, too. It rephrases verses I am so familiar with and it makes me stop and think about how I am applying it in my life. That is why I read it in my devotional (not Bible study) time.

An example: most of us have heard Romans 12:1 many, many times

Therefore, I urge you, brothers, in view of God's mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God--this is your spiritual act of worship. Romans 12:1 (NIV)
Click to expand...

Now, here is how the Message paraphrases that verse

So here's what I want you to do, God helping you: Take your everyday, ordinary life—your sleeping, eating, going-to-work, and walking-around life—and place it before God as an offering. Embracing what God does for you is the best thing you can do for him. Romans 12:1 (MSG)
Click to expand...

It is not a translation of the Greek - but a paraphrase of what Paul was trying to get across to the believers in Rome 2,000 years ago - in contemporary English. It is refreshing to me.
 
I'm not really sure, but believe mine is NIV. However why does it matter? Just something that is easy to understand will do. After all, if it teaches new and radical ideas, it ain't a Christian Bible anymore (referring to the cults who have their own).
 
It isn't new and radical though...

If people already understand words like "man" or "brother" to include both sexes, then why does changing the wording matter?

This part made me giggle.
Before the new translation even hit stores, it drew opposition from the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, an organization that believes women should submit to their husbands in the home and only men can hold some leadership roles in the church.
Click to expand...

The CBMW might as well "ask" their women to cover themselves in black robes and never speak in public unless spoken to... oh wait!

>_> ...gogo NIV!
 
Last edited:
Interesting I didn't know about CBMW, thanks for the heads-up. There is some great resources there for my family. Love what they stand for!
 
I use a King James 1611 only. I will reference other versions and commentaries for insight into verses but where they disagree or cause problems with the King James Bible I will always defer to the KJB.

Studying the two streams that bring us our translations (Textus Receptus vs the Textus Vaticanus and the Textus Sinaiticus) and the groups of people involved in those streams is very enlightening.

The lucifer/morning star controversy, the removal of verses (especially Acts 8:37) and just the huge number of translations available from the Vaticanus/Sinaiticus stream are all huge warning signs for me.

The Bible we use is important because it determines our doctrine. Bibles that are different are not the same. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. If we try to change the Word, we are trying to change God.

However, The way of a fool is right in his own eyes. One group will stand before Christ, describing all the wonderful works they did for Him and in His name only to hear I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
 
Wolfeman said:
The Bible we use is important because it determines our doctrine. Bibles that are different are not the same. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. If we try to change the Word, we are trying to change God.
Click to expand...
I can use the KJV to arrive at bad doctrine the same as I can use the NIV. A handful of disputed verses are not going to make much difference.
 
I can use the KJV to arrive at bad doctrine the same as I can use the NIV. A handful of disputed verses are not going to make much difference.
Click to expand...

/agree.

There's enough evidence that the KJV uses altered manuscripts. Additionally, direct translations make as many mistakes as interpreted translations.

For general reading, pick whichever you want. For in-depth study as to intention and what it's *really* trying to say, pick up 4 different translations and get a Strong's (or similar) Greek/Hebrew book, too. It's interesting the things that we claim are in the Bible that don't exist in the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek.... you have to look at context as much as the word.

Is lead a metal, or a action? Is wind air movement, or the act of turning something? Is fish a noun or verb? In the same way, there are limitations of the written word in other languages.

We, as infallible as we may think we are (or the Bible translators), are bound to mess a few things up. No translation is 100% exactly right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top