I read the KJV, its the most straight forward and powerful version to me, it is the transliteration meaning literally the word of God, while the others are translations, and it is translated from the original hebrew toungues, i can feel the Holy Spirit strong in it.
What Version Of The Holy Bible Do You Read? And Why?
- Thread starter Disciple
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
It's a good transliteration but it's not a good translation.
IE, Greek "baptizo" would become "baptize" in a transliteration. If translated, it would be "immerse".
You transliterate proper names (like Jesus). Jesus translated might be "Messiah" or something, for example.
It really depends on cases. Transliteration is (generally speaking) taking the letter "alpha" in the Greek and then transliterating it into "a" in English.
Translation would look at the whole word and say, "the word means this in English".
Two different approaches. The KVJ is a decent transliteration but a very poor translation, IMO.
The KJV has many errors. A huge reason I don't use it.
I want a translation in the language I speak. I speak American English, NOT Old English. Also a huge reason.
That said, the ESV is simply the best translation I've read. I've only found one translation problem I don't agree with so far (verses many in the NIV and KJV). It reads infinitely easier than any other literal translation (like the NASB), and again, it's highly accurate.
You make a good point there TexUS, you speak American English I speak British English but both are far removed enogh from the KJV.
I've always liked the KJV but I find I can't really use it as wellas somethingmroe modern like the Good news Bible or Gideons. Most of all I like gideons, though I only have the New Testament and Psalms from them.
I've never used the Jerusalem Bible but I have a mind to take a look at it, espeicaially those books which we consider to be Apocryphal like Baruch or Tobit for example.
I've always liked the KJV but I find I can't really use it as wellas somethingmroe modern like the Good news Bible or Gideons. Most of all I like gideons, though I only have the New Testament and Psalms from them.
I've never used the Jerusalem Bible but I have a mind to take a look at it, espeicaially those books which we consider to be Apocryphal like Baruch or Tobit for example.
I used to carry the KJV everywhere I went. I wouldn't say I was ever KJV-only but definitely a KJV=best kind of Christian. I still hold the translation in high regard - it remains the easiest to remember verses in because of the language. It's much more beautiful than the modern translations in that regard. There is a reason it's turning 400 years old and still being used.
With that said, one day I decided to take a look at modern translations. There is much ado about word choice (diction), formal equivalence vs. dynamic equivalence, etc. I used to buy into those arguments until I really began to look at things. Things like frustration at the removal of a "Jesus" or "Christ" there seemed valid, but then I began to realize you might have a case if you examine the verse in a vacuum, but if it's used another 40 times in the same book are they really trying to take the Son out of it? I also don't buy the Jesus argument, because if we translate his name, Jesus isn't the best rendering of the name. It's more likely Yeshua (Yahshua, etc.) if we want to be more precise about using his true name. (Don't get me started on Jehovah.)
Anyway, since the above time I dove into the above study, I picked up an ESV Bible. I settled on this translation for a long while because it retains the tradition of a KJV but is modernized. I've really picked up on the HCSB as of late and it's beginning to supplant the ESV for me. I also use the NASV(NASB), NIV, NIRV and a few other versions along the way. I have a copy of the Geneva Bible (worth it) I sometimes consult as well. All in all, I think any student should go to multiple versions because even the paraphrases have some value at times.
With that said, I think a study in the original languages is worth it as well. A great tool like Strong's and some of the other concordances will get you far. However, I think we have to leave some room in these words. In many cases you end up with a word that sounds very familiar to an English term when its transliterated. That provides an excellent tool. However, there are archaic words in any language and I think we sometimes miss the "deeper" meanings (IE: connotations, denotations, etc.) of words long forgotten. A fascinating example of this is the Hebrew word tsalah in Genesis. For a very, very long time it was rendered rib but it's come to light that the word more likely means curve. It's suggesting that God talked about DNA long before we ever knew about it or could recognize it. You won't find that in any translation, KJV, ESV, HCSB etc. included.
I think going with a Bible that you feel the Spirit leading you to is very important. In my case, I felt like using the King's English limited me when I spoke to folks because I found myself not only explaining it back in the Hebrew/Greek with a concordance but then I'd end up translating the archaic English for the person as well.
With that said, one day I decided to take a look at modern translations. There is much ado about word choice (diction), formal equivalence vs. dynamic equivalence, etc. I used to buy into those arguments until I really began to look at things. Things like frustration at the removal of a "Jesus" or "Christ" there seemed valid, but then I began to realize you might have a case if you examine the verse in a vacuum, but if it's used another 40 times in the same book are they really trying to take the Son out of it? I also don't buy the Jesus argument, because if we translate his name, Jesus isn't the best rendering of the name. It's more likely Yeshua (Yahshua, etc.) if we want to be more precise about using his true name. (Don't get me started on Jehovah.)
Anyway, since the above time I dove into the above study, I picked up an ESV Bible. I settled on this translation for a long while because it retains the tradition of a KJV but is modernized. I've really picked up on the HCSB as of late and it's beginning to supplant the ESV for me. I also use the NASV(NASB), NIV, NIRV and a few other versions along the way. I have a copy of the Geneva Bible (worth it) I sometimes consult as well. All in all, I think any student should go to multiple versions because even the paraphrases have some value at times.
With that said, I think a study in the original languages is worth it as well. A great tool like Strong's and some of the other concordances will get you far. However, I think we have to leave some room in these words. In many cases you end up with a word that sounds very familiar to an English term when its transliterated. That provides an excellent tool. However, there are archaic words in any language and I think we sometimes miss the "deeper" meanings (IE: connotations, denotations, etc.) of words long forgotten. A fascinating example of this is the Hebrew word tsalah in Genesis. For a very, very long time it was rendered rib but it's come to light that the word more likely means curve. It's suggesting that God talked about DNA long before we ever knew about it or could recognize it. You won't find that in any translation, KJV, ESV, HCSB etc. included.
I think going with a Bible that you feel the Spirit leading you to is very important. In my case, I felt like using the King's English limited me when I spoke to folks because I found myself not only explaining it back in the Hebrew/Greek with a concordance but then I'd end up translating the archaic English for the person as well.
Selene
New Member
Hi Templar,
I have the Jerusalem Bible. If you get the one with the footnotes and references, it's even better. It has more footnotes and references than the New American Bible. Personally, I prefer the Douay-Rhimes or the New American Bible.
In Christ,
Selene
I'm interested in buying a Jerusalem Bible but I've also head of the New jerusalem Bible, what is tyhe difference?
The Jerusalem Bible was originally written in 1966 and the New Jerusalem Bible came about in 1985. I've only read it in the bookstore or perhaps online once or twice, but this little guide I have says it has a high school reading level. I would agree with this hitting some passages. Essentially it is a Catholic Bible/translation (it includes the Apocrypha). I think the original criticism was that the Jerusalem Bible (JB) was translated from a French Bible and then compared to the original languages. Most notable is that the Bible renders Isaiah 7:14 as "young woman" and that it uses gender-inclusive language. I like some of the renderings of key passages, and it transliterates some names of God (IE: Elyon and El Shaddai) as opposed to just saying Lord or God. It uses Yahweh for the name of God - which I much prefer YHVH but I know some folks regard the former as the correct translation.
According to this information, it's very popular for non-American Catholics.
I hope that helps. I tried to be fair there.
According to this information, it's very popular for non-American Catholics.
I hope that helps. I tried to be fair there.
I use the New Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition, mainly for convenience. It's the largest print Bible with the Apocrypha in a reasonable size to carry that I could find.
Iread the KJV, because i do, not for any reason in particular, since i really dont need it, since Jesus sent the Holy Spirit to teach us, " My sheep hear my voice"., " Lord im listening".
In His Love
In His Love
The Jerusalem Bible is actually a nice easy flowing read in modern English. It is quite accurate in translation. It contains a couple of books not found in other old testaments. Nothing in them to really harm or take away from the rest of the accepted books. A person could get dogmatic and form doctrine from them , but the same can be done with accepted versions like the beloved King James .
The Tyndale bible came out before the KJV and a lot of people were burned at the stake because of it. It is strongly felt that the KJV was a result of much of the work done by William Tyndale , which is hard to prove , because Tyndale himself and most of his copies were burned by the folks who eventually came up with the Jerusalem bible. Tyndale worked directly from Hebrew and Greek texts. The KJV translators relied heavily on the work done by Tyndale. Dont say that out loud or somebody will be sure to get upset.
Which just goes to show that bible translations have sure started a lot of fires in history.
In modern day we have all the various translations available , and the opportunity to learn Greek and Hebrew if we want.
Or we can start fires. Burning bibles makes for hot fires they say. History provides a lot of heat
Here is a link to all the chapters in the bible. It is default NIV just to get you started. Pick the chapter you want to read and then you have about 23 English versions to bounce around with if you want and over 60 other languages that I cannot pronounce.
For study , the NASB (New American Standard Bible) also called ASV (American Standard Version) is often used by scholars and has tons of cross references listed at the bottom of each chapter. It is a very good translation when accuracy is desired.
http://www.biblegate...IV-Bible/#books
Fire away
The Tyndale bible came out before the KJV and a lot of people were burned at the stake because of it. It is strongly felt that the KJV was a result of much of the work done by William Tyndale , which is hard to prove , because Tyndale himself and most of his copies were burned by the folks who eventually came up with the Jerusalem bible. Tyndale worked directly from Hebrew and Greek texts. The KJV translators relied heavily on the work done by Tyndale. Dont say that out loud or somebody will be sure to get upset.
Which just goes to show that bible translations have sure started a lot of fires in history.
In modern day we have all the various translations available , and the opportunity to learn Greek and Hebrew if we want.
Or we can start fires. Burning bibles makes for hot fires they say. History provides a lot of heat
Here is a link to all the chapters in the bible. It is default NIV just to get you started. Pick the chapter you want to read and then you have about 23 English versions to bounce around with if you want and over 60 other languages that I cannot pronounce.
For study , the NASB (New American Standard Bible) also called ASV (American Standard Version) is often used by scholars and has tons of cross references listed at the bottom of each chapter. It is a very good translation when accuracy is desired.
http://www.biblegate...IV-Bible/#books
Fire away
I once saw someone on here quote from the Wytcliff Bible, which surprised me because I thought they were all burned so there couldn't be any existing manuscripts let alone a versioon which has been put in mdoern Enlgish. So is there really a modern translation of Wytcliff's Bible.
Also, I know that wytcliff's translation came straight from the Vulgate becaus there wasn't anything else back then and I think so did Tyndale, but what mdoern translations of the vulgate are there now in English and how do they generally compare with Bibles that come from the Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic originals.
Also, I know that wytcliff's translation came straight from the Vulgate becaus there wasn't anything else back then and I think so did Tyndale, but what mdoern translations of the vulgate are there now in English and how do they generally compare with Bibles that come from the Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic originals.
A huge number of scholars and theologians are switching from that to the ESV now. Same level of accuracy (I'd even say a bit better), but a whole lot easier to read.
The ESV is the hottest "new" translation we've had since the NIV, IMO.
http://www.esvstudybible.org/#endorsements
John Piper, Mark Driscoll, tons of others- switched to ESV
When I first started reading and attending studies I used the NIV back in the late 70s early 80s. Because I started with it I find myself to this day quoting proverbs in the NIV choice of words. In fact I prefer its translation of Proverbs. Old English in some places just caused some confusion, but I soon realized that arguments over bibles is a type of vanity. Like arguing over the best auto maker.
To me comparing different translations is similar to reading the 4 Gospels. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John each taught the same message but used different words and style.
We all have probably been in conversation with someone that doesn't completely understand you. What do we do we find different words or descriptions to clarify.
Today I always carry an old palm T3, and sometimes carry an old NIV that has been every where with me. In the Palm I have
ASV,
NASV,
ESV,
Darbys NT,
KJV,
NKJV,
NIV,
TNIV,
World English,
Youngs literal translation,
Easton's bible dictionary,
Encyclopedia of bible facts,
Matthew Henrys commentary,
New dictionary of thelogy,
The works of Josephus,
and Strongs KJV in both Hebrew and Greek.
I bought it from Laridian http://www.laridian.com/
Their software can be bought in pieces and can be used on a number of PC based phones ect.
My Palm synchronizes with the PC based platform with all the changes I make. You can also dump the PC based interface onto a USB device and carry it to anyother PC with full functionality. Very handy.
You can add notes with hot links to other verses, highlight verses with 7 different colors, or also use the book marks. I can have three tabs running on my Palm screen and switch between them, like three different bibles, or two with the strongs # as the third is what I like. As you change books or verses the other two synchronize so you only have to hit the tab to view the same verses. Its cheep and complete for my type of needs.
Long story short its a tool, in just the same way I believe we are all tools in the hands of Jesus. When Jesus chooses to use me I want Him to be able to find everything He needs, I don't want Him using a wrench in place of a hammer simply because I didn't take the time to study and provide one. I look at Paul the same way. He was educated to the highest standard of education of his day. He was a tool box that was heading in the wrong direction. Full of the knowledge of the scriptures, the customs and probably the cultures and practices of other religions all around him. But on the road to Damascus the Lord caused all that information in Paul to be put to use for Him. Never walking with Jesus as a disciple Paul will always be remembered as, a chosen vessel. Acts 9:15 Paul was a walking tool box that simply needed the Lord to show him the truth, the real meaning about all that information inside of him.
Dt 11:18-19
[sup]18[/sup] “Therefore you shall lay up these words of mine in your heart and in your soul, and bind them as a sign on your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes. [sup]19[/sup] You shall teach them to your children, speaking of them when you sit in your house, when you walk by the way, when you lie down, and when you rise up. [sup]20[/sup] And you shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates, [sup]21[/sup] that your days and the days of your children may be multiplied in the land of which the LORD swore to your fathers to give them, like the days of the heavens above the earth.
[sup]22[/sup] “For if you carefully keep all these commandments which I command you to do—to love the LORD your God, to walk in all His ways, and to hold fast to Him— [sup]23[/sup] then the LORD will drive out all these nations from before you, and you will dispossess greater and mightier nations than yourselves.
To me comparing different translations is similar to reading the 4 Gospels. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John each taught the same message but used different words and style.
We all have probably been in conversation with someone that doesn't completely understand you. What do we do we find different words or descriptions to clarify.
Today I always carry an old palm T3, and sometimes carry an old NIV that has been every where with me. In the Palm I have
ASV,
NASV,
ESV,
Darbys NT,
KJV,
NKJV,
NIV,
TNIV,
World English,
Youngs literal translation,
Easton's bible dictionary,
Encyclopedia of bible facts,
Matthew Henrys commentary,
New dictionary of thelogy,
The works of Josephus,
and Strongs KJV in both Hebrew and Greek.
I bought it from Laridian http://www.laridian.com/
Their software can be bought in pieces and can be used on a number of PC based phones ect.
My Palm synchronizes with the PC based platform with all the changes I make. You can also dump the PC based interface onto a USB device and carry it to anyother PC with full functionality. Very handy.
You can add notes with hot links to other verses, highlight verses with 7 different colors, or also use the book marks. I can have three tabs running on my Palm screen and switch between them, like three different bibles, or two with the strongs # as the third is what I like. As you change books or verses the other two synchronize so you only have to hit the tab to view the same verses. Its cheep and complete for my type of needs.
Long story short its a tool, in just the same way I believe we are all tools in the hands of Jesus. When Jesus chooses to use me I want Him to be able to find everything He needs, I don't want Him using a wrench in place of a hammer simply because I didn't take the time to study and provide one. I look at Paul the same way. He was educated to the highest standard of education of his day. He was a tool box that was heading in the wrong direction. Full of the knowledge of the scriptures, the customs and probably the cultures and practices of other religions all around him. But on the road to Damascus the Lord caused all that information in Paul to be put to use for Him. Never walking with Jesus as a disciple Paul will always be remembered as, a chosen vessel. Acts 9:15 Paul was a walking tool box that simply needed the Lord to show him the truth, the real meaning about all that information inside of him.
Dt 11:18-19
[sup]18[/sup] “Therefore you shall lay up these words of mine in your heart and in your soul, and bind them as a sign on your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes. [sup]19[/sup] You shall teach them to your children, speaking of them when you sit in your house, when you walk by the way, when you lie down, and when you rise up. [sup]20[/sup] And you shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates, [sup]21[/sup] that your days and the days of your children may be multiplied in the land of which the LORD swore to your fathers to give them, like the days of the heavens above the earth.
[sup]22[/sup] “For if you carefully keep all these commandments which I command you to do—to love the LORD your God, to walk in all His ways, and to hold fast to Him— [sup]23[/sup] then the LORD will drive out all these nations from before you, and you will dispossess greater and mightier nations than yourselves.
I used the NASB. In learning about it I have found that it has the closest translations to the original texts and does not "flower-up" or add/change material like the NIV.
As a side note, if there is a scripture that I want to see in multiple Bible versions at once, I go to Bible.cc and plug it in.
It gives the different Bible translations listed one after another.
It is really shocking to see sometimes how different that translations can be for a specific scripture.
As a side note, if there is a scripture that I want to see in multiple Bible versions at once, I go to Bible.cc and plug it in.
It gives the different Bible translations listed one after another.
It is really shocking to see sometimes how different that translations can be for a specific scripture.
Similar threads
