|
Author
|
Topic: What version of the Bible do you read?
|
Christs disciple
Advanced Member
Member # 4505
|
posted
I like the KJV for accuracy, the NIV for balanced accuracy and easy understanding, and the Message for just easy understanding.
I'm going to make a poll on whether the Bible might have been corrupted by uninspired translators. This is something that troubles me and makes me want to eventually learn Greek, Roman(?), and Jewish.
--------------------
The Rock ROCKS!!!
Posts: 21 | From: Texas | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged | 
|
|
Bat Elohim
Advanced Member
Member # 3739
|
posted
I like the "Complete Jewish Bible" because it keeps the Hebrew names and is translated better (to me) than the KJV. It is easier for me to read than KJV as well.
But i do have a KJV/NIV parallel bible that i use when I need to study and do research, i use it as well as my CJB. The more translations i search in the better idea i have of what was originally said and meant. Of course, I am trying to learn Hebrew so that I can go right to the source!
--------------------
Numbers 6:24 May ADONAI bless you and keep you. 25 May ADONAI make his face shine on you and show you his favor. 26 May ADONAI lift up his face toward you and give you peace.
Posts: 704 | From: Louisiana | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
susan/fl
Community Member
Member # 527
|
posted
Hi. I have always read the NIV study bible and I have just bought the Life Application Bible in the NLT version. I use the Niv for church and Bible study and it is in my car for my lunch breaks and the new NLT is at home for my evening reading. I also just discovered I have the new King James version that I had gotten as a gift! I am very blessed to have all of these but I still want a King James version for study also.
I love the different wording and the blessings I receive from reading His word. ![[Bible]](graemlins/bible.gif)
Posts: 10 | From: sanford,fl | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
oneyearandcounting
Advanced Member
Member # 4449
|
posted
I read King James mostly. but i also use my study bible that has 4 different translations in one big book.
--------------------
Acts9:18 And straightway there fell from his eyes as it were scales, and he received his sight; and he arose and was baptized.
Posts: 183 | From: winder Ga | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Kristi
Advanced Member
Member # 3396
|
posted
I voted KJV that's the Book for me the B-I-B-L-E! ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
--------------------
YSIC \o/
MsGuidedAngel aka KristiAnn
*~*Kristi Ann's Haven*~*
Posts: 109 | From: Oregon | God Loves You! | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Kris
Community Member
Member # 3757
|
posted
New King James and the NIV
Posts: 10 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
TEXASGRANDMA
Advanced Member
Member # 847
|
posted
We read one chapter a day in the King James Version, The New King James Version, and the Living Word Version. Hubby has had two light strokes and says it is easier for him to read one chapter several times then to read more than one chapter.
--------------------
Luk 21:28 And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.
http://www.indieheaven.com/artists/mm (son-in-law)http://www.myspace.com/mireles
Posts: 4985 | From: Washington State | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Godbehere
Advanced Member
Member # 4187
|
posted
I use the NIV when I read the OT, KJV for the new. Much of the OT just takes me to long to understand in KJV; I spend too much time clarifying things with commentaries, etc.
--------------------
---------
Carl
For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face:now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
Posts: 50 | From: FL | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Miguel
Advanced Member
Member # 47
|
posted
Ps
I also enjoy the MKJV. ![[updown]](graemlins/updown.gif)
--------------------
Romans 9:11-24
Our Eschatology may vary even our Ecclesiology may be disputed among us but our Soteriology most assume a singularity and exclusivity which in biblical term is known as Quote; "The Narrow Way" and Quote!
Posts: 2792 | From: Stockton,Ca | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Miguel
Advanced Member
Member # 47
|
posted
In an another forum that I visit I post this question!
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Brothers and Sisters in Christ, I would like some of your thoughts on this.
Would it be a great blessing to read a Standard Text Edition Bible or a Reference Edition Bible?
Would a child of God benefit better from a Standard Text or Reference Edition?
What would cause a child of God to compare verse with verse; Standard or Reference?
KJV Standard Text Edition Bible
KJV Reference Edition Bible
Ps
NO KJV arguments just what you believed to be the best format in deeper learning...!
Thank you,
MAC
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
After placing this poll my self on another forum I keep pondering how would I get bless? By regular standard text or reference style! The more I read the regular text it force me to search and seek more diligently for answers. (Scripture with Scripture)
That is what I have learned and experience thus far.
--------------------
Romans 9:11-24
Our Eschatology may vary even our Ecclesiology may be disputed among us but our Soteriology most assume a singularity and exclusivity which in biblical term is known as Quote; "The Narrow Way" and Quote!
Posts: 2792 | From: Stockton,Ca | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
freaknpv
Advanced Member
Member # 4423
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by Winner B.:
I used King James Version becasue this is a good version of Bible for Bible Study. It was the first translation into English from the original Hebrew and Greek.
Actually the Geneva and Wycliffe Bibles were both translated into english from Hebrew and Greek many years before the KJV 1611
For me though When first saved I read the NIV just trying to get it, then I went to the NKJV then to the KJV, then back to the NKJV, which I use for study and teaching, but I enjoy reading the New Living and the Message Bible.
--------------------
Head in Heaven, Fingers in the Mire
Posts: 25 | From: Cali. | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Winner B.
Community Member
Member # 4399
|
posted
I used King James Version becasue this is a good version of Bible for Bible Study. It was the first translation into English from the original Hebrew and Greek.
The new versions have come up with some dangerous changes to the scriptures. The Lord God gives us stern warnings about changing His Word:
Look at this change in the NIV:
John 3:16, For God so loved the world that He gave his one and only Son...
The authorized King James says,
John 3:16, For God so loved the world that He gave his only begotten Son.
In this instance, the NIV changes the scriptures by saying that Jesus is God's "one and only" Son instead of His only begotten Son. This change causes a contradiction in the word of God because God has more than one son according to both the King James (Genesis 6:2, Job 1:6, John 1:12) and NIV (Genesis 6:2).
In the King James Version God assembled, and moved with His Spirit, a team of some of the world's best scholars to translate His word into the world's most popular language, English.
source:http://www.eaec.org/bibleversions/why_I_read_the_kjv.htm
God bless everyone!
Posts: 11 | From: Philippines | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Endoxos
Advanced Member
Member # 2929
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by want_to_be_challanged:
Does it not say that we must love the sinner and not the sin?
Not to nit-pick, but no Bible says "love the sinner, hate the sin".
quote:
my reason for that is that our Bible is derived from their Bible.
No it's not. The Bibles we use are based of the original language manuscripts, not of the Douay-Rheims version or the Latin Vulgate, nor do we acknowledge the apocrypha, whereas they do.
quote:
like i said in my Poll (Are we studying religion or the Bible?), we as protestants seem to have forgotten where we come from. for those who dont know their history, and i stand to be corrected, but Henry VIII was sort of a 'crusader' for the protestant religion, using it to his advantage so that he could have a divorce - read up on it if you dont believe me! How he did that was by taking the Bible that the Catholics use and "edited" it...
Where we come from? Are we, then, to woship John Paul II as God Himself, as the Catholics do? Or should we go above this silly tradition and worship the Lord God, YHWH, and His Son, Yeshua the Messiah, Jesus Christ? Should we elevate Mary as being "the Mother of God" and "Queen of Heaven" or acknowledge her as a blessed woman? Are we to sacrifice Jesus daily and then eat Him as a wafer, or should we not allow ourselves to be filled by the Holy Spirit daily, and acknowledge His once-and-for-all sacrifice?
Should we return to the apostacy of "The Pope's word upon the throne is infallible", and the Bible is superceded by tradition? Or should we acknowledge that the Word of God is infallible? Let God be true and every man be found a liar.
As to King Henry, don't you think that statement is a little pointless, considering the Catholics have a huge rash of pedophile problems? One man and a variety of wives, compared to hundreds of priests and many many more little boys and girls.
--------------------
My signature is apisdn umop.
Posts: 362 | From: HELP! I'm stuck in a DOS window! | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Old Salt
Advanced Member
Member # 3174
|
posted
Throught my 53 years I used the KJV, then NASB (for 20 years), then NKJV for about 5 years, and now I'm back to the KJV. Kinda went full circle. I really like the KJV and will probably stick with it. I still use the NASB and NKJV for reference and alternate reading. Although I am not a Hebrew or Greek authority, I understand that the NASB is supposed to be the most literal translation.
I have a copy of the NIV but rarely refer to it. My personal opinion is that the NIV's popularity has much to do with having a large publisher, Zondervan, who has been able to pour a lot of money into advertising.
Posts: 31 | From: Linthicum, MD | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Tyme
Advanced Member
Member # 3017
|
posted
I read the NIV.
I have read other translations, KJV, NKJV, and a JV version, as well as other materal and such relating to the bible.
My favorite bible to date is my NIV which my wife bought for me.
But I love the KJV because of the Elizabethan speech, with the "Tho Shalt Not Kill"
I'm with H4HS, as it's easier to memorize the lines, which leads to some fun for me, as I try to find a line I remember from the KJV in my NIV and I'm like "ARRRRGGGHH where is it?"
Tyme.
--------------------
I dream of a world.......
Posts: 527 | From: United States | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
want_to_be_challanged
New Member
Member # 3107
|
posted
Several points to make:
1. NightShade - how can you condemn something like a Bible? does it not say in the "only one" which you call it that you must love each and every one? Does it not say that we must love the sinner and not the sin? where does it say that a homosexual can not praise and worship God and be part of trying to spread his word? i think that is totally unfair and as a personal opinion a little ignorant!!
2. i read anything that is the Bible. i do however seem to be leaning towards the Catholic Bible (i'm not sure the names). my reason for that is that our Bible is derived from their Bible. like i said in my Poll (Are we studying religion or the Bible?), we as protestants seem to have forgotten where we come from. for those who dont know their history, and i stand to be corrected, but Henry VIII was sort of a 'crusader' for the protestant religion, using it to his advantage so that he could have a divorce - read up on it if you dont believe me! How he did that was by taking the Bible that the Catholics use and "edited" it... hence... so either way, i dont mind, i just want to be sure that i am getting my full share of the Bible... as long as there is an acurate NT!! ![[clap2]](graemlins/clap2.gif)
I stand to be corrected or critisised, but think about it...
--------------------
every day you are asked to make a desiscion, do you choose to live or do you choose to be what everyone else wants you to be?
Posts: 6 | From: JHB, South Africa | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Mills
New Member
Member # 3124
|
posted
KJV mainly. If I want to study then I use a Rod Parsley study bible my Granny gave me.
--------------------
*********************************
The light in the eyes of him whose heart is joyful, rejoices the heart of others.
--Proverbs 15:30
Posts: 4 | From: myrtle beach, sc | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Soulbear
unregistered
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by NeFan77:
quote:
Originally posted by NiGHtSHade:
My name is NiGHtShade, and I'm a Southern Baptist preacher. As far as I'm concerned, the KJV is the only version. The Niv was mostly done by a Lesbion, and as God created marriage between man and woman, between Adam and Eve, not between Madam and Eve, I think that she probably took the section out about mariage between man and woman. The verse of 1 John 1:9 is not even in there. It is one of the most important verses in the KJV, if not in others: " If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." So therefore I believe that the KJV is the only Bible.
Your post makes very little sense. You offer no proof of what you say concerning the lesbians working on the NIV.
He is refering to a lesbian who worked on the layout, fonts and graphics. The NIV comittee is aware of her and this person hasn't changed the NIV. The NIV does teach against Homosexuality and it was demonstrated by the head of the NIV on the John Ankerburgh program. The woman who they are referring to has not done translation for the NIV so they have to make a better argument.
IP: Logged |
|
|
Soulbear
unregistered
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by becauseHElives:
"The New Testament (An Expanded Translation) by Kenneth Wuest is a very good translation.
I do not know where you got that info about it being bad or incorrect.
It for sure has less flaus than the King James and I read the King James more than an other,
but I have to continually check everyhing with a concordance cause you never know what someone may try to slip in of a personal oppionion.
When a translator puts his bias on page xii about Ephesians 2:8-9 being an Ephesian heresy and when the translator says that faith alone isn't the clear teaching then I get a little worried. It tells me there is a problem and leaves me wondering whether his theological bent translated the Bible instead of translating the text so that it gives him his theology.
IP: Logged |
|
|
NeFan77
Advanced Member
Member # 2973
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by NiGHtSHade:
My name is NiGHtShade, and I'm a Southern Baptist preacher. As far as I'm concerned, the KJV is the only version. The Niv was mostly done by a Lesbion, and as God created marriage between man and woman, between Adam and Eve, not between Madam and Eve, I think that she probably took the section out about mariage between man and woman. The verse of 1 John 1:9 is not even in there. It is one of the most important verses in the KJV, if not in others: " If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." So therefore I believe that the KJV is the only Bible.
Your post makes very little sense. You offer no proof of what you say concerning the lesbians working on the NIV.
Secondly, my NIV does have 1 John 9 and it reads nearly identical to what you typed:
'If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.'
Also your comments concerning marriage has no bearing on the poll question, thereby making your entire response useless.
Posts: 81 | From: Illinois | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
tryptophan
Community Member
Member # 3094
|
posted
I like the New American Version.
Posts: 7 | From: Missouri | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
becauseHElives
Advanced Member
Member # 87
|
posted
"The New Testament (An Expanded Translation) by Kenneth Wuest is a very good translation.
I do not know where you got that info about it being bad or incorrect.
It for sure has less flaus than the King James and I read the King James more than an other,
but I have to continually check everyhing with a concordance cause you never know what someone may try to slip in of a personal oppionion.
--------------------
Strive to enter in at the strait gate:for many, I say unto you will seek to enter in, and shall not be able. ( Luke 13:24 )
Posts: 4578 | From: Southeast Texas | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Soulbear
unregistered
|
posted
I have a number of Bibles. King James, NIV, NASB, Amplified, Young's Literal Translation, Jay Green's Translation, etc.
I'm told there is only one Amplified Bible (that I heard of) which translates the English from the actual Greek and Hebrew words.
I have a New Testament which I am not sure of. It is called "The New Testament (An Expanded Translation) by Kenneth Wuest which I think may be a bad translation.
CBD sells a Bible with 25 different translations but it just gives about five different renderings of a verse.
IP: Logged |
|
|
helpforhomeschoolers
Advanced Member
Member # 15
|
posted
I own many versions and from time to time I compare them when studying; however, for me I read the KJV; The reason I read the KJV is because it is the only version in my opinion that can be memorized. We are told that we are to write the scriptures in us.
I find it impossible to memorize scripture in colloquial english.
Further, my study of the development of the texts leads me to believe that the KJV is the most reliable English translation availbale and was developed at great cost to the men who sought to bring the scriptures out of the Dark ages and out of the monastacism into the homes of the common man, the other versions use the Greek New Testament developed by Wescott & Hort and I cannot reconcile their philosophies regarding the infallibilty of scripture.
Posts: 4684 | From: Southern Black Hills of South Dakota | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
NiGHtSHade
First Post
Member # 3057
|
posted
My name is NiGHtShade, and I'm a Southern Baptist preacher. As far as I'm concerned, the KJV is the only version. The Niv was mostly done by a Lesbion, and as God created marriage between man and woman, between Adam and Eve, not between Madam and Eve, I think that she probably took the section out about mariage between man and woman. The verse of 1 John 1:9 is not even in there. It is one of the most important verses in the KJV, if not in others: " If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." So therefore I believe that the KJV is the only Bible.
Posts: 1 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
LiteralD
Advanced Member
Member # 2922
|
posted
I read a NIV Student Study bible. I dont read it beacause I dont know alot about the bible I read it because I like how the bible given me little bible study plans that have very good headings and studies. My bible also has alot of historical information which really helps when reading and understanding the bible.
Go Bless and keep reading.
--------------------
In God's Army
Posts: 25 | From: London, Ontario CANADA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
One of His sheep
Advanced Member
Member # 3076
|
posted
I see on the poll that the NIV is getting rave reviews. While reading ANY Bible is beneficial, perhaps a little history in where these Bible translations came from would be in order.
I believe that God has preserved His Word down through the ages through the Byzantine Text or the Majority Text (called Textus Receptus)on which the KJV and NKJV is based upon. All of the other translations (NIV, NASB, RSV, etc.) are based on the Egyptian text and Minority text, which has a few corrupted text. All Bible translations are close to the originals and are useful for study and witnessing, if you know where they differ from the Textus Receptus. The NKJV is a good Bible and one that I use in church and as a witnessing Bible. I memorize scripture using the KJV.
Using a different Bible is not a litmus test for Christianity as some in the KJV movement use it. They can be quite fanatical about it. I belonged to one of those for a couple of years. We liked the church but they were so ridged about His Word that they had lost the love of Jesus. Which is what Christianity is all about; love God and love others. That's why I write my books and tracts, as a witness to others.
Bob
--------------------
Unique Christian Adventure books
http://www.aimhigherbooks.com
Posts: 31 | From: California | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Pamela Good
First Post
Member # 3073
|
posted
I read the "King James Version". I was raised Baptist, and my granddaddy was a preacher. He preached from the KJV. Basicly my whole family reads KJV. I realize it isn't the easiest to understand, that is why we have church and preachers. There calling from God, was to preach his word to the church to help us understand.
~Pamela~
--------------------
"No mistake you may have ever made is bigger than God's power to fix it"
Posts: 1 | From: Virginia | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Daniel S
Advanced Member
Member # 1714
|
posted
There are several translations I use for study, but I enjoy the NASB for its detail. I generally read from the NKJV from the pulpit because it is easy for those in the pews with KJV or NIV to follow along with it (that advice came from a SBC pastor I worked with in Southern Ohio).
--------------------
The Lord bless you indeed.
http://www.First-EMC.org (shameless self promotion)
Posts: 436 | From: on the Ohio River | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Endoxos
Advanced Member
Member # 2929
|
posted
My regular Bible is a NASB (for ease of understanding), however I use the KJV (IMHO, better manuscript, and more accurate language), Bible in Basic English (often when nutshelling things or need to find something where I can't recall the specific wording, but I can remember the jist of it), Hebrew Names Version (my personal belief, but it is better to call people and things by their given names, instead of a transliteration [ie if a Japanese-speaking person can manage it, I'd rather be called "Muh-liss-uh" {Melissa} than "Moo-ree-sah", and in a crowd, it'd be much easier to ensure they were talking to me, instead of "Muri-san" {Mr. or Mrs. Murry}]), and a variety of Hebrew and Greek Manuscripts (to determine the truth for myself when the need arises).
--------------------
My signature is apisdn umop.
Posts: 362 | From: HELP! I'm stuck in a DOS window! | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Waterdog
Advanced Member
Member # 24
|
posted
I usually read the Young's Literal Translation, but I sometimes read the NKJV, sometimes the NIV, sometimes the ASV, sometimes the Hebrew Names Version, sometimes the Literal Translation of the Holy Bible, sometimes the KJV.
--------------------
So let us go forth to Him outside the camp (Heb 13:11-14)
 
Posts: 374 | From: Austin, TX | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
NeFan77
Advanced Member
Member # 2973
|
posted
I have a NIV Quest Study Bible and it rocks! I like the articles in the margins!
I don't like the KJV because I don't speak in old english! I like my NIV because it is written in what I would call "Good Ol' American!"
Mike
Posts: 81 | From: Illinois | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
NeFan77
Advanced Member
Member # 2973
|
posted
What translation or version of the Bible do you read?
Poll Information
This poll contains 1 question(s). 43 user(s) have voted.
You may not view the results of this poll without voting.
| |
Posts: 81 | From: Illinois | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic
