Bible Translations

[Baptist4life]

I only use the KJB. This started only 3 years ago and after much argument with my pastor and much study of my own. Using the internet I found that my pastor was right.

Uhoh! Get ready! Incoming!! :tonofbricks:


BTW, welcome!

 

[annsni]

I only use the KJB. This started only 3 years ago and after much argument with my pastor and much study of my own. Using the internet I found that my pastor was right.

Your pastor was right about what? The KJV is an excellent translation, I agree with that. :thumbs:

 

[jaigner]

I only use the KJB. This started only 3 years ago and after much argument with my pastor and much study of my own. Using the internet I found that my pastor was right.

You trust the internet on this matter? Really? From which website did you get your information?

There is absolutely zero evidence that the KJV is any more authoritative or superior. In actuality, though it was the best scholarship of the day and has served the Church well for hundreds of years, it is far from the best translation available today.

 

[jaigner]

I keep a kjv close by because I still think it's a very important translation, but I don't use it daily.

I would not preach from the TNIV, NIV 2011, or any other paraphrase. I have heard good things of the NLT, but have never found the need to buy one.

The TNIV and the NIV 2011 are dynamic translations. They are not paraphrases, not even close. They actually are even further from paraphrasing than the NLT (which, actually, is another great translation.)

 

[gb93433]

I only use the KJB. This started only 3 years ago and after much argument with my pastor and much study of my own. Using the internet I found that my pastor was right.

Your pastor was right about what?

 

[Martin Marprelate]

The TNIV and the NIV 2011 are dynamic translations. They are not paraphrases, not even close.

So they say. At all vents, they are too dynamic for my taste

They actually are even further from paraphrasing than the NLT

In that case, I am relieved that I have not wasted my money on buying a copy.

Steve

 

[jbh28]

So they say. At all vents, they are too dynamic for my taste

In that case, I am relieved that I have not wasted my money on buying a copy.

Steve

Here's a chart that might be helpful

 

[Rippon]

8,000 posts...Wow

The TNIV and the NIV 2011 are dynamic translations.

No,they are not considered in the realm of dynamic-equivalency. They are in the mediating range. They join company with the HCSB,ISV,NET Bible and NAB (not NASB).

I realize that even some fans of the TNIV and 2011 NIV have called them dynamic --but they are mistaken.

 

[Rippon]

Here's a chart that might be helpful

I have outlined in the past what I think are more accurate placements. I won't itemize each and every one.And I'll add a few.

Starting on the left side of the ledger:

NASBU,ESV,NRSV,HCSB,ISV,2011 NIV,NAB,NET Bible, NJB,REB,NLTse,NIrV,GW,NCV,CEV,GNT,Phillips and LB.
The 2011 NIV is in that sweet spot between the NASBU on the left,and the NLTse on the right.

The tightest cluster involves the HCSB,ISV,2011NIV,NAB and NET Bible.

I think the old MLB and Norlie versions would fit around the NRSV and HCSB positions.

 

[Tom Bryant]

I use the NASB because it's more word for word, even at the cost - at times - of a smoother read.