What Bible Translation do you think is the best?

[Rockerduck]

I got it in the nasb 77 - I only see thee, etc. in the OT.
I do have 95 nasb also which is ok.

In the 2020 aside from that gender nonsense, John 1:18 is strange. ESV does this too.
The 95 and 77 are the same. but look at 2020-

NASB 95 18No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.

NASB 2020- 18No one has seen God at any time; God the only Son, who is in the arms of the Father, He has explained Him.

I actually contacted Lockman about the 2020 change. They were nice about it and asked me to put what I explained in an email to be considered.
That kinda freaked me out. lol I haven't done it yet.. Shouldn't that be up to the scholars?
The reason for this change was absolutely ridiculous! ( because some twist it) I kid you not.
So yes- stick with the older versions!!

That's true of John 1:18. The NASB 77 and 95 are correct, and also the LSB, which is the 95 text too. Masters Seminary, who created the LSB found it to be right also; because that's what the manuscripts say. The "God" who in the bosom of the Father is Jesus. So the "new" translations adds the Son instead. I was praying once about which bible to use and the Holy Spirit told me bluntly, that all bibles written after 2020-2021 are junk. That means the NASB 2020, and LSB 2024, and the ESV 2021.

 

[MatthewG]

People just need to explore. In the end if you prefer a version use it. At the end of the day, it will always work its way down to. Can you love God and love others?

That’s the main purpose of bibles in the first place; for the most part - teach about God and man and how he dealt with Israel and how his Son saved the world and the bride of Christ when all things would come to end for them in their age ultimately.

(That’s the story in a nutshell including the death, burial and resurrection of Yeshua by the Holy Spirit of Yahavah —- a very key thing in faith and newness of life.)

And how to now live in the age we do by the spirit.

People can be scholars and what not but people still must pick and chose for themselves. That’s my thoughts cause I like to think for myself.

Be blessed.

 

[PS95]

I bought a Nasb 2020 sometime last year it’s a great bible I like the style of writing @PS95

Think it was Christianbooks I got it from on a sale it was olive green and indexed I don’t mind it being index cause it helps reaching places a little better especially if you are pairing it up for studying with say even a Thompson chain Bible you can use the one I got cause it got some references in the Nasb 2020 so you can find more scripture to compile what you already have and compare what’s being said from the old and new.


Bosom isn’t that like the chest? It would be render same as in his arms ? As in near his chest.

Depends on how you look at it I suppose.

Hi Matt- how you been? I do have the 2020 and I'm sure it is still ok for the most part- but I prefer my older ones. I'm old skool and see no need for translators to be politically correct. ---I had no problem with "brothers" and I am female. Making it brothers and sisters decision wasn't about retaining the high distinction NASB has- of being the closest to a literal word for word translation- -which is WHY I prefer the NASB.
I was able to overlook all of that-- but when I spotted John 1:18 that did it for me. --the issue is not about chest or bosom- but the rest of it. It is not word for word and Son is added. --IMO this was uncalled for. Lately- Translators suddenly don't like the word begotten. I've looked deeply into this and the reasoning is OFF-
I do actually think that kjv/nkjv has that particular verse properly translated.
It made me wonder what other changes they made that I wasn't aware of. So I stick with my '77 and '95 and also use NKJV for comparison. I also constantly check my interlinears and strong's etc.
If translators can be swayed by pop culture- that's concerning.
I will buu older translations of leather and good paper 32 gsm or more- and keep them for life- rather than the cheaper faux leather which eventually peels and pages tend to be thinner, so we have to keep replacing them with new ones.
I am far more willing to invest in an older version quality made bible- It is actually less expensive that way too! I will pass them down when I'm gone too. BTW- you can still purchase new 95 NASB's. and the keyword one comes in 77.

But it's funny you replied- because I was just thinking about you-- I had been looking at the Legacy Standard Bibles- ever heard of it? It is the NASB 95 reliable text, but they put YAHWEH all throughout the OT instead of LORD or YHWH. I thought you might like that! They are good quality bibles-- done by 316 publishers.. this was actually John MacArthur's baby- done not too long before he died. Tons of scholars had a hand in it. It's on amazon and christianbook and all of them are here--

Three Sixteen Publishing

We exist to create God-honoring Christian resources, and our name is rooted in three verses of scripture. Each is found in chapter three, verse sixteen of their respective books of the Bible: John 3:16; 2 Timothy 3:16; Colossians 3:16.

316publishing.com

 

[PS95]

That's true of John 1:18. The NASB 77 and 95 are correct, and also the LSB, which is the 95 text too. Masters Seminary, who created the LSB found it to be right also; because that's what the manuscripts say. The "God" who in the bosom of the Father is Jesus. So the "new" translations adds the Son instead. I was praying once about which bible to use and the Holy Spirit told me bluntly, that all bibles written after 2020-2021 are junk. That means the NASB 2020, and LSB 2024, and the ESV 2021.

So funny you just brought up the LSB! I just told Matt about those since he's always trying to say the name- I thought he would like those. I'm glad MacArthur did that. It's a good legacy. I too have prayed about which bible was best. The 2020 made me too uncomfortable.

 

[PS95]

People just need to explore. In the end if you prefer a version use it. At the end of the day, it will always work its way down to. Can you love God and love others?

That’s the main purpose of bibles in the first place; for the most part - teach about God and man and how he dealt with Israel and how his Son saved the world and the bride of Christ when all things would come to end for them in their age ultimately.

(That’s the story in a nutshell including the death, burial and resurrection of Yeshua by the Holy Spirit of Yahavah —- a very key thing in faith and newness of life.)

And how to now live in the age we do by the spirit.

People can be scholars and what not but people still must pick and chose for themselves. That’s my thoughts cause I like to think for myself.

Be blessed.

I agree totally with you Matt!--- But there isn't anything wrong with wanting your translation to be best it can be.
I wouldn't toss my 2020 in the trash or anything. I agree with you too that we can have tons of bible knowledge and not be walking the walk. Amen!

 

[MatthewG]

Hi Matt- how you been? I do have the 2020 and I'm sure it is still ok for the most part- but I prefer my older ones. I'm old skool and see no need for translators to be politically correct. ---I had no problem with "brothers" and I am female. Making it brothers and sisters decision wasn't about retaining the high distinction NASB has- of being the closest to a literal word for word translation- -which is WHY I prefer the NASB.
I was able to overlook all of that-- but when I spotted John 1:18 that did it for me. --the issue is not about chest or bosom- but the rest of it. It is not word for word and Son is added. --IMO this was uncalled for. Lately- Translators suddenly don't like the word begotten. I've looked deeply into this and the reasoning is OFF-

I understand that sometimes I come across things that seem off too reading it. I still like the writing style of it either way. It’s just a preference. I misread the first time but I see what you mean concerning just that one singular verse itself.

I don’t think there any reason for me to downplay it for myself cause I still like it.

I do actually think that kjv/nkjv has that particular verse properly translated.
It made me wonder what other changes they made that I wasn't aware of. So I stick with my '77 and '95 and also use NKJV for comparison. I also constantly check my interlinears and strong's etc.
If translators can be swayed by pop culture- that's concerning.

Ok

I will buu older translations of leather and good paper 32 gsm or more- and keep them for life- rather than the cheaper faux leather which eventually peels and pages tend to be thinner, so we have to keep replacing them with new ones.

Yeah I have the ones I got I don’t want anymore.

I am far more willing to invest in an older version quality made bible- It is actually less expensive that way too! I will pass them down when I'm gone too. BTW- you can still purchase new 95 NASB's. and the keyword one comes in 77.

Oh okay.

But it's funny you replied- because I was just thinking about you-- I had been looking at the Legacy Standard Bibles- ever heard of it? It is the NASB 95 reliable text, but they put YAHWEH all throughout the OT instead of LORD or YHWH. I thought you might like that! They are good quality bibles-- done by 316 publishers.. this was actually John MacArthur's baby- done not too long before he died. Tons of scholars had a hand in it. It's on amazon and christianbook and all of them are here--

Three Sixteen Publishing

We exist to create God-honoring Christian resources, and our name is rooted in three verses of scripture. Each is found in chapter three, verse sixteen of their respective books of the Bible: John 3:16; 2 Timothy 3:16; Colossians 3:16.

316publishing.com

I’m not interested in that guys work at all.

 

[Rockerduck]

So funny you just brought up the LSB! I just told Matt about those since he's always trying to say the name- I thought he would like those. I'm glad MacArthur did that. It's a good legacy. I too have prayed about which bible was best. The 2020 made me too uncomfortable.

Right. The NLT 1996 was good, but they changed it in 2015. It always puzzled me why publishers want to change. The NKJ has not updated. I actually scoured the internet for 1977 bibles and found study bibles of all sorts using the 77 texts. Chain references and Scofield 1977.

 

[PS95]

I understand that sometimes I come across things that seem off too reading it. I still like the writing style of it either way. It’s just a preference. I misread the first time but I see what you mean concerning just that one singular verse itself.

I don’t think there any reason for me to downplay it for myself cause I still like it.

Ok

Yeah I have the ones I got I don’t want anymore.

Oh okay.


I’m not interested in that guys work at all.

It's not his work- its the nasb 1995- the scholars only Yahweh where it should have been-- or I should say where YHWH was- It was his idea and he oversaw it. I don't agree with him on a lot either- eschatology, his version of osas , and I'm no 5 pt Calvinist- BUT I can't say he wasn't a good strong teacher on discipleship. He was excellent on it from everything I've read.
Too many pastors today are terrible there. It matters- that's the "walk" we were talking about.

 

[Rockerduck]

It's not his work- its the nasb 1995- the scholars only Yahweh where it should have been-- or I should say where YHWH was- It was his idea and he oversaw it. I don't agree with him on a lot either- eschatology, his version of osas , and I'm no 5 pt Calvinist- BUT I can't say he wasn't a good strong teacher on discipleship. He was excellent on it from everything I've read.
Too many pastors today are terrible there. It matters- that's the "walk" we were talking about.

I carried the LSB to a bible study and its awkward reading it out loud to old KJV guys. Yahweh is correct as the Jewish influence in England had YHWY replaced with LORD. So, politics had a role, as well as inserting servant in, instead of slave. In the KJV, every instance of servant is supposed to be slave.

 

[PS95]

Right. The NLT 1996 was good, but they changed it in 2015. It always puzzled me why publishers want to change. The NKJ has not updated. I actually scoured the internet for 1977 bibles and found study bibles of all sorts using the 77 texts. Chain references and Scofield 1977.

96 nlt? really? I have a pleather one that's peeling- from 05. No pleather ever again for me..
I think it could be either younger and younger scholars OR the older ones are falling to pop culture with the gender stuff..
John1:18 reason was just plain sad. I think I will send the email. It should be fixed. Some Jw is gonna knock on a door of an unsuspecting newbie and shown the interlinear- if Jws can knock your faith in your bible- they have one foot down your throat and offer you theirs...

When I realized all of this I started buying multiple copies of the older versions to give to people, my kids and my g-kids for when they are old enough.

 

[PS95]

I carried the LSB to a bible study and its awkward reading it out loud to old KJV guys. Yahweh is correct as the Jewish influence in England had YHWY replaced with LORD. So, politics had a role, as well as inserting servant in, instead of slave. In the KJV, every instance of servant is supposed to be slave.

being raised jw I had plenty of knowledge on the tetragrammaton. But the JW bible inserts Jehovah in the NT over 200 times where it was not used once in the Greek. What's crazy is that the teach that the Jews topped using the name before Christ due to being afraid of misusing it--(which is true) so then they(jws) go and add it to the NT when the Jews were not using it!? No sense there.- Nowhere does it say-- hey look you need to use this name. Not even Jesus who taught us to use Father if we are born anew. He never taught us any name and He never prayed using any name but Father. What a blessing to call Him abba!
AND Jesus is the only name needed to be saved.(Acts) and every knee will bow. (PHIL)
Aside from that the jws have a totally different gospel of 1914 and teach that when you die physically you paid your own sin debt and will be raised sinless-or righteous--- so they can have a 2nd chance on earth to earn life.
They also teach they will never be judged by what they do in this life because when you physically die- sins go poof...
Sorry I didn't mean to type that much!

Slave vs servant didn't bother me so much since I see no real difference in definition. I do believe that was about racism which of course is lame.

 

[markalan]

It is ironic that the ESV (and other newer translations) omit "every word of God" from Luke 4:4

ESV: And Jesus answered him, “It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone."

KJV: And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.

 

[PeterAndroz]

It is ironic that the ESV (and other newer translations) omit "every word of God" from Luke 4:4

ESV: And Jesus answered him, “It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone."

KJV: And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.

Yes, KJV is my go to with the >M<KJV to help with some difficult words

The Modern KJV Project | Please support us.

Help us faithfully complete the modern KJV (King James Version of the Holy Bible) for today's English speaker.

www.modernkjv.com

Working on producing the modern KJV Bible in 2026
for today’s English readers​

Greetings in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ! Please support us as we serve God to produce the modern KJV (King James Version of the Holy Bible) in our day and age. Our goal is to modernize the language of the KJV while retaining the same meaning as the original for 100% of the Bible. We hope that this will help modern English speakers better understand the word of God.

 

[PS95]

It is ironic that the ESV (and other newer translations) omit "every word of God" from Luke 4:4

ESV: And Jesus answered him, “It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone."

KJV: And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.

It's in Matthew 4:4

 

[PeterAndroz]

It's in Matthew 4:4

Then why take it out of Luke 4:4 ?
KJV has it in both :)

 

[PS95]

Then why take it out of Luke 4:4 ?
KJV has it in both :)
View attachment 85052
View attachment 85053

You say taken out- but it simply wasn't there in the manuscripts they used in Luke - only in Matthew. You say that as if they were being dishonest and wanted to hide that from you. Instead of blindly accusing people and especially your "brothers" in the Lord- how about realizing that manuscripts vary?
Should I say that KJV "added" the Comma? I don't say that. I understand it was in the margins of the manuscripts used, correct?

You should read your bible more- every word does matter and we will be accountable for our every word. To insinuate that brothers in Christ purposefully changed the bible is a serious accusation. Remember, even calling your brother a fool puts you in danger of hell fire.

But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
Matthew 5:22 KJV

 

[PeterAndroz]

You say taken out- but it simply wasn't there in the manuscripts they used in Luke - only in Matthew. You say that as if they were being dishonest and wanted to hide that from you. Instead of blindly accusing people and especially your "brothers" in the Lord- how about realizing that manuscripts vary?
Should I say that KJV "added" the Comma? I don't say that. I understand it was in the margins of the manuscripts used, correct?

You should read your bible more- every word does matter and we will be accountable for our every word. To insinuate that brothers in Christ purposefully changed the bible is a serious accusation. Remember, even calling your brother a fool puts you in danger of hell fire.

But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
Matthew 5:22 KJV

All of Luke 4:4 is in these Bibles :)
King James Bible
And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.
New King James Version
But Jesus answered him, saying, “It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.’ ”
Berean Annotated Bible
But Jesus (YHWH saves) answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone [on bread alone, but on every word of God.].’
International Standard Version
Jesus answered him, "It is written, 'One must not live on bread alone, but on every word of God.'"
Webster's Bible Translation
And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.
Majority Standard Bible
But Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word of God.’”
World English Bible
Jesus answered him, saying, “It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.’”
Young's Literal Translation
And Jesus answered him, saying, 'It hath been written, that, not on bread only shall man live, but on every saying of God.'
Smith's Literal Translation
And Jesus answered to him saying, It has been written, That not by bread alone shall man live, but by every word of God.
Literal Standard Version
And Jesus answered him, saying, “It has been written, that, Not on bread only will man live, but on every saying of God.”
Douay-Rheims Bible
And Jesus answered him: It is written, that Man liveth not by bread alone, but by every word of God.
Catholic Public Domain Version
And Jesus answered him, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.’ ”
Lamsa Bible
Jesus answered and said to him, It is written, That it is not by bread alone that man can live, but by every word of God.
Aramaic Bible in Plain English
Yeshua answered and said to him, “It is written: a man does not live by bread alone, but by every utterance of God.”
Anderson New Testament
And Jesus answered him, and said: It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.
Godbey New Testament
And Jesus responded to him, saying; It has been written, That man shall not live upon bread alone, but upon every word of God.
Haweis New Testament
And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.”
Geneva Bible of 1587
But Iesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not liue by bread only, but by euery word of God.
Bishops' Bible of 1568
And Iesus aunswered hym, saying: It is written, that man shall not lyue by bread only, but by euery word of god.
Coverdale Bible of 1535
And Iesus answered & sayde vnto hi: It is wrytten: Man shal not lyue by bred onely, but by euery worde of God.
Tyndale Bible of 1526
And Iesus answered hym sayinge: It is writte: man shall not live by breed only but by every worde of God.

 

[PS95]

All of Luke 4:4 is in these Bibles :)
King James Bible
And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.
New King James Version
But Jesus answered him, saying, “It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.’ ”
Berean Annotated Bible
But Jesus (YHWH saves) answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone [on bread alone, but on every word of God.].’
International Standard Version
Jesus answered him, "It is written, 'One must not live on bread alone, but on every word of God.'"
Webster's Bible Translation
And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.
Majority Standard Bible
But Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word of God.’”
World English Bible
Jesus answered him, saying, “It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.’”
Young's Literal Translation
And Jesus answered him, saying, 'It hath been written, that, not on bread only shall man live, but on every saying of God.'
Smith's Literal Translation
And Jesus answered to him saying, It has been written, That not by bread alone shall man live, but by every word of God.
Literal Standard Version
And Jesus answered him, saying, “It has been written, that, Not on bread only will man live, but on every saying of God.”
Douay-Rheims Bible
And Jesus answered him: It is written, that Man liveth not by bread alone, but by every word of God.
Catholic Public Domain Version
And Jesus answered him, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.’ ”
Lamsa Bible
Jesus answered and said to him, It is written, That it is not by bread alone that man can live, but by every word of God.
Aramaic Bible in Plain English
Yeshua answered and said to him, “It is written: a man does not live by bread alone, but by every utterance of God.”
Anderson New Testament
And Jesus answered him, and said: It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.
Godbey New Testament
And Jesus responded to him, saying; It has been written, That man shall not live upon bread alone, but upon every word of God.
Haweis New Testament
And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.”
Geneva Bible of 1587
But Iesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not liue by bread only, but by euery word of God.
Bishops' Bible of 1568
And Iesus aunswered hym, saying: It is written, that man shall not lyue by bread only, but by euery word of god.
Coverdale Bible of 1535
And Iesus answered & sayde vnto hi: It is wrytten: Man shal not lyue by bred onely, but by euery worde of God.
Tyndale Bible of 1526
And Iesus answered hym sayinge: It is writte: man shall not live by breed only but by every worde of God.

Yes of course I understand that, and I can give you a long list where it is not in Luke only in Matthew.
Do you understand there are manuscripts that vary or not?
It's not like this is a new problem. It IS a problem but it is what it is-
It is precisely why I use NASB 95 and NKJV- I also check interlinears and even took some Greek.
There is not much of a difference in the vast majority of the text- there a few differences that don't change a thing.
Understand that the Geneva and the Tyndale and several others on your list don't even agree with the KJV!

 

[PeterAndroz]

Yes of course I understand that, and I can give you a long list where it is not in Luke only in Matthew.
Do you understand there are manuscripts that vary or not?
It's not like this is a new problem. It IS a problem but it is what it is-
It is precisely why I use NASB 95 and NKJV- I also check interlinears and even took some Greek.
There is not much of a difference in the vast majority of the text- there a few differences that don't change a thing.
Understand that the Geneva and the Tyndale and several others on your list don't even agree with the KJV!

The more I look/listen into the which Bible argument the more I stay with KJV
This might be of interest to you or not.

KJV Code

kjvcode.com

 

[markalan]

It's in Matthew 4:4

Jesus was quoting Deuteronomy 8:3 so it seems more likely to me that the manuscripts which included "every word of God" in Luke 4:4 are the more reliable.

KJV: And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live.

ESV: And he humbled you and let you hunger and fed you with manna, which you did not know, nor did your fathers know, that he might make you know that man does not live by bread alone, but man lives by every word that comes from the mouth of the LORD.

Mat 4:4 and Luke 4:4 ... things that make you go hmmm