• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

My Top Five -- What Are Yours?

R

Rippon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Mr. E said:
I have begun to study NT greek and have found the ESV to be a sound translation, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

What do you mean by a "sound translation"? The translation is theologically sound. It fixes a couple of things that the RSV had, but is it really a translation as such? It differs so little from the RSV.It was more like a touch-up, than a true translation.

Don't you think the English style is a bit antiquated?I know you like the KJV, it was #2 for you. But should a 'modern translation' sound dated?Is it important to use a lot of biblish for a translation to pass muster with you?
 
M

Mr. E

New Member
Rippon said:
What do you mean by a "sound translation"? The translation is theologically sound. It fixes a couple of things that the RSV had, but is it really a translation as such? It differs so little from the RSV.It was more like a touch-up, than a true translation.

Don't you think the English style is a bit antiquated?I know you like the KJV, it was #2 for you. But should a 'modern translation' sound dated?Is it important to use a lot of biblish for a translation to pass muster with you?
Click to expand...

Thanks for making me feel welcome!:thumbs:
 
G

go2church

Active Member
Site Supporter
TNIV
NRSV
NLT
NIV
ESV

First thing is a translation has to be a modern language. I prefer the gender accurate language of both the TNIV. NRSV and the NLT. Also the TNIV is tremendous improvement over the NIV which was a good middle of the road translation.
 
R

Rippon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
go2church said:
TNIV
NRSV
NLT
NIV
ESV

First thing is a translation has to be a modern language. I prefer the gender accurate language of both the TNIV. NRSV and the NLT. Also the TNIV is tremendous improvement over the NIV which was a good middle of the road translation.
Click to expand...

I agree with just about everything you have said. But where is the HCSB? And why did you list the ESV?
 
E

EaglewingIS4031

New Member
If you only want to include MV's then: (In order of preference)

1. HCSB
2. NASB
3. ESV
4. NKJV
5. NIV


if it is a list of personal favorites put the AV in the # 5 slot and bump the NIV to # 6
 
F

franklinmonroe

Active Member
Rippon said:
... If I am losing hope for a NKJB update, then what am I to say regarding the MLB? It was in 1969 -- 39 years ago that this remarkable translation came to the attention of the public. I really respect this version. It has many admirable qualities. If the NIV hadn't come on the scene a few years later, the MLB could have been more widely received.
Click to expand...
I cannot comment on several of these 'popular' modern versions, since I have read almost nothing in the ESV, HCSB, TNIV, or the NLTse. Although, I have read the NT through in the first NLT edition, and the entire NIV Bible. I have just recently obtained a copy of the NRSV, so I do plan to read a couple of these next year. There are many wonderful older or 'obscure' versions. I might currently list the five below (but I confess I have only read the KJV in its entirety) --
1. MLB
2. NET (eclectic-based NT)
3. ALT (literal MT-based NT only)
4. CLV (literal Weymouth-based NT only)
5. KJV (literal TR-based NT)​
It is plain that I favor the more literal translations; I used the NASB for a number of years (and I still like it) but discovered the ALT and CLV also fill this niche, perhaps better. I was not impressed with the NKJV as I read it through the NT.
 
G

go2church

Active Member
Site Supporter
Rippon said:
I agree with just about everything you have said. But where is the HCSB? And why did you list the ESV?
Click to expand...

I don't use the HCSB, prefer translations that are not controlled by a single denomintion, in this case the SBC. The ESV because it maintains much of the syle and rythme of the KJV while being easier to read and in most cases more accurate. Though it a bit archaic in some of it language, it is a good improvement. Also, even though it doesn't use gender accurate language, it at least puts a footnote for the reader in most cases
 
M

Mexdeaf

New Member
go2church said:
I don't use the HCSB, prefer translations that are not controlled by a single denomintion, in this case the SBC. The ESV because it maintains much of the syle and rythme of the KJV while being easier to read and in most cases more accurate. Though it a bit archaic in some of it language, it is a good improvement. Also, even though it doesn't use gender accurate language, it at least puts a footnote for the reader in most cases
Click to expand...
'

Although the SBC may 'control' the translation, it is not an "SBC translation" per se.

From the HCSB FAQ site:

Is the Holman CSB® just a Southern Baptist Bible?
  • Members of the translation team represent 17 different Protestant denominations around the world, as well as several non-denominational churches.
  • Each team member personally affirms the inerrancy of Scripture.
  • The General Editor of the Holman CSB® is a member of a non-denominational church.
  • Only about one-half of the translation team is Baptist.
 
T

TCGreek

New Member
Rippon said:
As usual, you're the one guy who has a similar feel for English Bible translations as I have. We're on the same page -- just different paragraphs.
Click to expand...

We think alike on these issues, my good brother. :thumbs:
 
G

go2church

Active Member
Site Supporter
Mexdeaf said:
'

Although the SBC may 'control' the translation, it is not an "SBC translation" per se.

From the HCSB FAQ site:

Is the Holman CSB® just a Southern Baptist Bible?
  • Members of the translation team represent 17 different Protestant denominations around the world, as well as several non-denominational churches.
  • Each team member personally affirms the inerrancy of Scripture.
  • The General Editor of the Holman CSB® is a member of a non-denominational church.
  • Only about one-half of the translation team is Baptist.
Click to expand...
It is very much a SBC controlled translation, but I'm not going to beat that dead horse again. Thanks for the info, you gave me another reason not to use the HCSB, every member affirms inerrancy, which means what exactly!?!
 
T

TomVols

New Member
ESV
NASB
TNIV
NLT
NET

If I could throw in a paraphrase, Phillips NT would be on the list. NKJV gets an honorable mention despite using inferior mss. HCSB would be honorable mention. So would NIV.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top