Bible Translations

[mets65]

I'm sure this has been asked and discussed many many times before, but I was just wondering what Translations everyone here prefers.

I personally use the NASB as my main translation and study bible but I also use the HCSB and the KJV to supplement my studies. I'm not really a big fan of the NIV but I keep one around just in case I need to consult another version.

 

[R. Lawson]

I often use the NIV, NLTse, and the nKJV. I use a lot more, but I narrowed down the list.

 

[BobinKy]

I'm sure this has been asked and discussed many many times before, but I was just wondering what Translations everyone here prefers.

I use the following, in the order listed:

NIV 1984
NRSV
KJB​

My plan is to dig into scripture. On many passages, I think the KJB goes deeper than the others. Just like gardening, I prefer more than one tool. But too many tools clutter up the work.

...Bob

 

[R. Lawson]

I use the following, in the order listed:

NIV 1984
NRSV
KJB​

My plan is to dig into scripture. On many passages, I think the KJB goes deeper than the others. Just like gardening, I prefer more than one tool. But too many tools clutter up the work.

...Bob

Do you prefer the NRSV over the ESV? I do.

I use the KJV often, too. How does it go deeper? The KJV sounds awesome and is easy to memorize.:thumbsup:

 

[BobinKy]

Do you prefer the NRSV over the ESV? I do.

I use the KJV often, too. How does it go deeper? The KJV sounds awesome and is easy to memorize.:thumbsup:

Yes, I prefer the NRSV over the ESV. Despite its popularity in some churches, the ESV does not offer anything for me that the NRSV does not deliver.

I use four printed concordances:

NIV 1984 -- Strongest NIV Exhaustive Concordance (Zondervan)
NRSV -- NRSV Concordance Unabridged (Zondervan)
KJB -- Cruden's Complete Concordance; Strongest Strong's Exhaustive Concordance

Cruden's is my favorite concordance to use. It is not exhaustive, but I like the size and word definitions with the entries. The NRSV concordance is out of print and can only be purchased on the used book market. The NRSV concordance has a nice topical index in the back. I prefer to use print concordances over searching online or with software. It slows down the search process and my eyes scan versus that I would not notice if I searched online or with software.

I like to read aloud scripture as I study. I read somewhere that the KJB was made to be read aloud. The linguistic quality is the best, in my humble opinion. By going deeper, I guess I mean by the time I get to the KJB reading of a passage (I usually start with the NIV 1984, then the NRSV), I am familiar with the passage and the passage has deeper meaning than the other translations. Maybe if I started with the KJB and read it three times, I would find the same deep meaning. However, by starting with the other translations I get through any archaic words and grammar and am ready for depth.

I hope this explains my comments. Thanks for asking.

...Bob

 

[convicted1]

KJV and ESV here. I love them both!!

 

[R. Lawson]

Yes, I prefer the NRSV over the ESV. Despite its popularity in some churches, the ESV does not offer anything for me that the NRSV does not deliver.

Agreed!

I use four printed concordances:

NIV 1984 -- Strongest NIV Exhaustive Concordance (Zondervan)
NRSV -- NRSV Concordance Unabridged (Zondervan)
KJB -- Cruden's Complete Concordance; Strongest Strong's Exhaustive Concordance

Cruden's is my favorite concordance to use. It is not exhaustive, but I like the size and word definitions with the entries. The NRSV concordance is out of print and can only be purchased on the used book market. The NRSV concordance has a nice topical index in the back. I prefer to use print concordances over searching online or with software. It slows down the search process and my eyes scan versus that I would not notice if I searched online or with software.

I like to read aloud scripture as I study. I read somewhere that the KJB was made to be read aloud. The linguistic quality is the best, in my humble opinion. By going deeper, I guess I mean by the time I get to the KJB reading of a passage (I usually start with the NIV 1984, then the NRSV), I am familiar with the passage and the passage has deeper meaning than the other translations. Maybe if I started with the KJB and read it three times, I would find the same deep meaning. However, by starting with the other translations I get through any archaic words and grammar and am ready for depth.

I hope this explains my comments. Thanks for asking.

...Bob

This makes perfect sense.:thumbsup:

Robb

 

[JTornado1]

I prefer the Modern Language Bible aka New Berkeley Version.

 

[R. Lawson]

I prefer the Modern Language Bible aka New Berkeley Version.

Me too, though I wish a large print edition were available.:tear:

 

[jbh28]

ESV - Main reading Bible, Bible I bring to Church, Study
NASB - Study
KJV - Study, Use when I teach at church

 

[annsni]

ESV is my main devotion and bringing to church Bible. I also use the NASB quite a bit and the NIV is the Bible our church has chosen to use for now so I have that available as well.

 

[franklinmonroe]

I prefer the Modern Language Bible aka New Berkeley Version.

I "use" too many to list, but the MLB is also one of my top five favorites.

 

[TC]

I use the NIV/TNIV, KJV, ESV, NASB, and ASV 1901.

 

[Robert Snow]

This list is subject to change at any moment, but:

NIV
NKJV
NLT
KJV

and recently,

NET

 

[Amy.G]

NKJV
KJV

I'm that comes as no surprise. :tongue3:

 

[Jim1999]

The KJV is my key Bible, but I do read from about 8 other versions. One of my favourites is The New Testament in Modern English by J.B Phillips.

Cheers,

Jim

 

[Rippon]

The KJV is my key Bible, but I do read from about 8 other versions. One of my favourites is The New Testament in Modern English by J.B Phillips.

He certainly had a refreshing way to express things. His take on Romans 12:2 is quite good.

 

[Rippon]

I prefer the Modern Language Bible aka New Berkeley Version.

It is my second favorite. I wish there was a slight revision. It really needs to be in the top 10 lists. It's a neglected gem.

 

[Jim1999]

Yes, I like to read it especially in daily devotions. It brings fresh thoughts to mind.

He was an excellent pastor and teacher in England, but he was somewhat liberal in theology. It doesn't show in the book. He was quite fundamental on Christ and being twice born, but deviated in other areas as many Church of England pastors did in the 50's and 60's.

Cheers,

Jim

 

[sdonahue1]

I have recently returned almost exclusively to the KJV from what I call the 'quagmire' of the modern versions. If there would be other options for me, I find the new CEB to be exciting reading, but I keep a pen with me to cancel out ridiculous politically correct terms(The Human One for Son of Man) and inclusive language. I have never trusted the NIV; the NASB has been revised so many times that I question its accuracy. I find theGW translation to be one of two that correctly translates John 3:16. I guess if I had to choose another it would be HCSB or ESV.