Top Ten Best-Selling Bible Translations Compared to Ten Years Ago (2021 Update)

[RipponRedeaux]

I still use a KJV.

Still? Using that word makes it seem as if you are itching to try out a different version.

 

[Salty]

Well they are all in error. As is the added words in italics in the KJV and NKJV. The NASB, ESV and CSB correctly omit those added words. The 14th and the 15th the first day of the feast are not the same day. And most Christians think Christ must be crucified on the 14th of all things. This is not a small issue. Most Christians read it typically as if this error is not there.

Lets look at Acts 9:37

And it came to pass in those days, that she was sick, and died: whom when they had washed, they laid in an upper chamber.

SO why did they "laid in an upper chamber" ???.

Lets add in that italicized word that I left out

And it came to pass in those days, that she was sick, and died: whom when they had washed, they laid her in an upper chamber.

Makes me think of that phrase "it looses something in the translation"

 

[37818]

Lets look at Acts 9:37

And it came to pass in those days, that she was sick, and died: whom when they had washed, they laid in an upper chamber.

SO why did they "laid in an upper chamber" ???.

Lets add in that italicized word that I left out

And it came to pass in those days, that she was sick, and died: whom when they had washed, they laid her in an upper chamber.

Makes me think of that phrase "it looses something in the translation"

I am not understanding what the problem is. It is what was done.
The text is being translated, ". . . they laid in an upper chamber." The added word "her" is who.

 

[37818]

Still? Using that word makes it seem as if you are itching to try out a different version.

Well, the MLV is not all as good as the publisher thinks. But it is an on going attempt at being the best.

 

[Just_Ahead]

Bulk sales ARE excluded in NDB Bookscan reports.

Jerome, so what about bulk sales? Any thoughts?

 

[RipponRedeaux]

Currently the best modern translation is the NKJV.

In your humble opinion.

 

[Yeshua1]

In your humble opinion.

That or the Lsb when it fully comes out!@

 

[37818]

In your humble opinion.

Well there is the lesser known Modern Literal Version, which the publisher claims it to be the best Bible translation. As good as it maybe, I strongly disagree with the publisher.
Modern Literal Version Bible Official Site

 

[37818]

Luke 2:2

NKJV, "This census first took place while Quirinius was governing Syria."

MLV, "This census happened first, Quirinius being governor of Syria."

The NKJV correctly translates the verb as a verb not as a noun.

 

[Yeshua1]

Well there is the lesser known Modern Literal Version, which the publisher claims it to be the best Bible translation. As good as it maybe, I strongly disagree with the publisher.
Modern Literal Version Bible Official Site

Is that the one translated by those at Oral Roberts and Yale?

 

[Salty]

What is the best translation?

The one that works best for you

 

[RipponRedeaux]

What is the best translation?

The one that works best for you

I enjoy my NIV-NLT-NET-MLB-Goodspeed-Weymouth-NJM-REB-Norlie-CEB very much.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

What is the best translation?

The one that works best for you

My favourite (I guess that's what you're asking) is the NKJV.
I like it for three reasons:
1. It is Formal Equivalence rather than Dynamic Equivalence.
2. I believe that the Received Text is likely to be correct in more places than the Critical Text.
3. Because it is so similar to the KJV, it is possible to use Young's Analytical Concordance with it, and to read older writers who used the KJV with greater ease.

My church uses the NIV (1984) and is likely to change in due course the the ESV. I regret that, but I find I can preach OK from either of those so I'm not going to split the church over Bible versions.

 

[SovereignGrace]

My favourite (I guess that's what you're asking) is the NKJV.
I like it for three reasons:
1. It is Formal Equivalence rather than Dynamic Equivalence.
2. I believe that the Received Text is likely to be correct in more places than the Critical Text.
3. Because it is so similar to the KJV, it is possible to use Young's Analytical Concordance with it, and to read older writers who used the KJV with greater ease.

My church uses the NIV (1984) and is likely to change in due course the the ESV. I regret that, but I find I can preach OK from either of those so I'm not going to split the church over Bible versions.

I know you’re British, but the New AMERICAN Standard Bible would put a spring in your step.

 

[RipponRedeaux]

I enjoy my NIV-NLT-NET-MLB-Goodspeed-Weymouth-NJM-REB-Norlie-CEB very much.

I can't believe that I left out the NASB.

 

[RipponRedeaux]

so I'm not going to split the church over Bible versions.

Good, so if your church went from the 1984 to the present NIV you would not want to split the church over Bible versions.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Good, so if your church went from the 1984 to the present NIV you would not want to split the church over Bible versions.

I think that the church leadership is in agreement with me that we do not want to move to the 'new' NIV.

 

[RipponRedeaux]

I think that the church leadership is in agreement with me that we do not want to move to the 'new' NIV.

The 'new' one will be eleven years old in November. It first appeared on-line in November 2010.

 

[Yeshua1]

I think that the church leadership is in agreement with me that we do not want to move to the 'new' NIV.

The 1984 Niv was very good, and the Nkjv and Nas 1977/1995 are also excellent, but afraid the Nas 2020 went route of the 2011 Niv, made worse a fine translation!

 

[RipponRedeaux]

The 1984 Niv was very good, and the Nkjv and Nas 1977/1995 are also excellent, but afraid the Nas 2020 went route of the 2011 Niv, made worse a fine translation!

Why do you speak like Yoda?