What version is your bible?

[Lanolin]

We dont always read from the same bibles but just out of interest what bible does everyone have or their most preferred version.

I wonder if anyone reads the same one as me...I seem to cop a lot of flack for sticking with the one God gave me. Its KJV and He has always given me that one to read. I dont know, every other version just doesnt have that God Breathed spirit in it. Even NKJV didn't gel. When I looked up the same scripture in NKJV for a proverb and compared it to KJV it was completely different! One word was changed in the NKJV and the Proverb didnt make any sense.
NIV also didnt make sense cos it was missing so much.

I did use CEV when teaching children but I personally dont read or study from CEV myself. Its also weird how for a childrens bible it has so many footnotes, quibbling about words. I would rather use a paraphrase or retell the story when teaching children, we actually didnt use it that much but it was the one the teachers manual quoted from. I guess depends on what level you at but for 6 year olds its a but much. Anyway, please share.

If God showed you a certain one or you just found it.

The christian bookstore sent me their latest catalogue and theres all these different bibles in it.
I mean how do you even choose. Since theres about two dozen different ones in english alone.

Or do you just go, well it has a pink cover and flowers on it that means its a girls bible.

Obviously some versions are more understandable than others, for example, Im glad nobody regularly quotes lolcat bible on TJ.

The CEV tried to disguise that it was even a bible. Its title was Level 66.

To this day I never heard of anyone saying I'm reading Level 66. But that is what it has on the cover and title page.

 

[Dave M]

I love the NIv, NKJV, ESV, get a head ache reading the KJV simply can not get a hang of that old language. One of my instructors uses the Nasb,and my other intructors uses the KJV.

 

[Brad Huber]

Because I am an american, I prefer the New American Standard Bible or NASB in short. It is translated from the earliest texts to make it more accurate, its considered one of the most accurate bibles out there. But I also like KJV, because its what I grew up with, and its the most popular with many who will accept no other translation in a debate. Now the original greek and hebrew are of course more accurate, because they are what bibles are translated from, but unless you are fluent with both of those languages, and take into account the nuances found in the writing at the time of the writing, which is nearly impossible to do, from 2000 years ago or more. Or.... do what I do, read NASB or KJV, and ask the Holy Spirit to help you understand properly and then trust the Holy Spirit to guide you like promised.

 

[Lanolin]

What do you mean 'earliest texts'. Are there 'latest texts'.

I think its better to just stick to one bible, cos It just seems silly to carry two or more whenever you go to church or a bible study and fluff around!

Most people just take ONE bible to church. Ive never seen someone take two, but maybe they have one thats got a zillion versions on their phone and waste time trying to find verses.

I havent met anyone who is fluent in both greek and hebrew. There arent many greek immigrants where I am nor jewish. It would be interesting to meet some though. One of my brothers lawyers said he did know hebrew but...he was charging like $400 an hour to see him so its not like you can just chat to him.

There is some hebrew in my bible, in the psalms 119 each section is named with the hebrew letter.

 

[Sue J Love]

Lanolin,

For the sake of time, I am going to repost here what I wrote to you in another thread where you brought up this subject, for this is my experience and what I believe on this subject:

Lanolin,

Actually I read the KJV the first 27 years of my life, and I just didn't understand it, not much of it anyway, because it is not in my language. I don't speak in 17th Century King James English. No one I know does, either. So, if I want to communicate with my readers in 2017, I need to speak in 20th and 21st Century English.

When the KJV first came out, one of its purposes was to write it in the language of the people of that day so that the people could understand it. Well, that day was 400 years ago, as you pointed out to me, and we here in America, anyway, and I suspect in your country, too, don't speak like they did back then. So, it is a blessing from God to have translations which are in our language today. Praise the Lord!

In 1977, when I was 27 years old, my pastor at that time introduced us to the NASB, and it was wonderful! I could finally understand what I was reading!! And, I could hear God speaking to my heart so clearly. It brought me to tears, in fact. It is like God's Word just opened up to me and I was so excited about hearing from God so clearly. And, it radically changed the direction of my life, i.e. because I could hear God so clearly, I was able to walk in his ways more completely. And, he taught me so, so much! Eventually I switched over to the NIV84, which is my preference, and I also now read the ESV, at times. The NIV84 has gone away, though, and I am not as fond of the new NIV.

The difference back then, when I switched over to the NASB, though, was like going from reading something that I read because I knew I was supposed to, but that I didn't understand, to reading something I could understand, and that I wanted to read, because I was getting something out of it. So, why should I go back to reading the KJV? There is no benefit for me or for my readers if I go back. It is a foreign language, i.e. it is not my language. I enjoy the variety of translations, too, because each one gives a different way of wording it, at times, and sometimes one or the other will be more accurate to the original language, and so I will choose that one over the other because I believe it says it more clearly.

 

[Lanolin]

Am still trying to find a bilingual chinese english bible, also an audio version in cantonese.
I cant read chinese, but if I had the english next to it I could figure it out, and I can listen to it. I requested at one of the asian bible bookstores but they never got back to me. This was years ago, so I find that a bit slack.

Ok if you american it just seems everyone reads the nasb. Thats ok americans have their own language, just wondering if its much different. I think a lot of misunderstandings come from reading too many different versions thats all.

Why go back to reading kjv? Well if you got one it does helps for those who read kjv! Cant just ignore it. And it does benefit the reader ...well this one. So you got ONE reader lol. I feel like the odd one out now. :-(

In contrast why should I read nasb when I dont even have one?

I think it just helps because if you did read the kjv you would know agape love is trAnslated as charity you wouldnt have to wonder about it.

 

[Brad Huber]

What do you mean 'earliest texts'. Are there 'latest texts'.

I think its better to just stick to one bible, cos It just seems silly to carry two or more whenever you go to church or a bible study and fluff around!

Most people just take ONE bible to church. Ive never seen someone take two, but maybe they have one thats got a zillion versions on their phone and waste time trying to find verses.

If you research any bible, you will find it was usually translated from an earlier bible version, like the Vulgate or even the KJV. Then there are manuscripts or parts of manuscripts that are parts of one book of the bible that are earlier than those two. People doing the translation will sometimes use the earliest portion to avoid multiple language translations of that portion at least, then in the 1940's, there was a treasure trove of religious texts found in Israel in what is termed the dead sea scrolls, which have the earliest of some of the old testament books. The older back you go, the less is lost in translation.

You only need one bible to carry with you, but in your home collection of books, you can have multiple copies to see the difference if you wish.

 

[Brad Huber]

Am still trying to find a bilingual chinese english bible, also an audio version in cantonese.
I cant read chinese, but if I had the english next to it I could figure it out, and I can listen to it. I requested at one of the asian bible bookstores but they never got back to me. This was years ago, so I find that a bit slack.

Here are some listed you can buy online.

https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_...ield-keywords=bilingual+chinese+english+bible

 

[Brad Huber]

If you research any bible, you will find it was usually translated from an earlier bible version, like the Vulgate or even the KJV. Then there are manuscripts or parts of manuscripts that are parts of one book of the bible that are earlier than those two. People doing the translation will sometimes use the earliest portion to avoid multiple language translations of that portion at least, then in the 1940's, there was a treasure trove of religious texts found in Israel in what is termed the dead sea scrolls, which have the earliest of some of the old testament books. The older back you go, the less is lost in translation.

You only need one bible to carry with you, but in your home collection of books, you can have multiple copies to see the difference if you wish.

And I forgot about the earliest greek and hebrew bible portions.

 

[amadeus2]

I have always read the KJV version in English. I also have a bi-lingual English[KJV]=Spanish [Valera 1960] which is easy to obtain in our area. I also read a Luther Bible printed in 1922. For the German I would like to have a bi-lingual edition with English KJV, but even online, I have had no success in finding one.

I would never seriously consider changing from the KJV to another as over the years that one matches most closely the construction used in both my Spanish and German Bibles.

 

[Sue J Love]

Why go back to reading kjv? Well if you got one it does helps for those who read kjv! Cant just ignore it. And it does benefit the reader ...well this one. So you got ONE reader lol. I feel like the odd one out now. :-(

In contrast why should I read nasb when I dont even have one?

Lanolin, I don't think anyone on here... at least I know of no one who thinks you should switch from the KJV to the NASB. We each have a version or versions we prefer, through which we connect with God, and that is great! A lot of people on here quote scriptures from the KJV. I have no issues with that at all. If I don't understand it, then I can go and read it in the NASB or in the ESV or in the NIV84. And, the same applies to you, too. If we are quoting the Bible in a version with which you are unfamiliar, then just read it in the KJV.

Yes, these other translations are going to use different words from the KJV, but it doesn't make them wrong and the KJV right. I know that the KJV is not the authority on what the real wording should be. Only the original languages in which the scriptures were written are. And, since probably none of us, or not many of us speak in Hebrew, Greek or Aramaic, then we have to rely on English translations or Bible helps to give us the correct wording. And, not one translation has it right all the time, which is why I like to see how it is worded in various translations and then to check that against an interlinear to see the literal word for word translation.

But, the bottom line is really that we have to depend on God, and on his Holy Spirit to guide us into all truth, and that is the truth we must follow.

 

[Brad Huber]

But, the bottom line is really that we have to depend on God, and on his Holy Spirit to guide us into all truth, and that is the truth we must follow.

Most definitely, this is the greatest truth.

 

[Born Again 2004]

I have about five different translation I guess I like the NIV, NRSV and NKJV and the Message the most. I just read them and let the Holy Spirit tell me what he is saying!

 

[Lanolin]

I would like a chinese english kjv version in print and cantonese version in audio.

There doesnt seem to be any available :-(

Then maybe mum could read it or hear it.

I do get confused if people say well we dont even know what charity is or means. What do you mean, it's in the bible! It even gives the definition. But it seems only the KJV bible has this word!!!

Oh but we have to use the greek word agape and say well its love but not as we know it. Well anyone who has charity MUST know what it means cos charity is selfless and doesnt matter if its your enemy or not. Its kindness. Its patient. It isnt rude, all this describes charity. Charity isnt just a a 'love offering' its love no questions asked. Charity doesnt keep a record of wrongs...have you ever had a charity that withheld from anyone who needed it just because they did something wrong? So we DO have a word in english that means agape and it has already been translated.

If we love others who love ourselves back, what credit is it to you, sinners do the same. This is why so much charity helps the poor and needy cos they cannot give anything in return.

Sometimes it does pay to just have a look at KJV if a verse or passage in a differnt translation is raising questions or not making sense. Im not saying that it ought to be the only english version everyone has to read but dont dismiss it just cos its old.

Hmm well the thing with KJV is, most all of the time it is right. I mean I have come across many other bible versions that people use and you go and compare them and KJV comes out tops. Lord knows why. You go and compare all the versions on verses in bible hub and some of them have gaps or even NO verse where there is actually meant to be a verse!!

Let me put it this way. Its a Bible translation that christians who speak english have trusted for over 400 years and faith was a lot stronger and less diluted when there was this bible thay everyone read but many of the modern versions are so wishy washy you wonder if people were trying to edit or dumb down the Bible.

And im sure Hebrew and Greek just cos they are ancient languages nobody is going to dismiss just cos its old. God's word was written down thousands of years ago of course its going to sound old or foreign to the way we ordinarily speak. The Hebrew in the bible probably sounds old to hebrew speakers today.

I had this lady in one if my bible studies, she was younger than me, look at my bible and dismiss it cos it was too old. She told me I had to get a new one. She had a shiny new one with silver edges and commentaries and everything and it looked very expensive whereas mine was old and falling apart. Well she was the one struggling to understand some basic teachings despite this shiny new bible of hers. I think it was NIV or one that had 'new' in the title. Well new doesnt necessarily mean better.

I had thought if I were to republish and repackage the bible to call it

The totally new contemporary modern updated revised edition. Or TNCMURE for short.

My childrens version would be called the pick-apart-bible and will come in collectors editions so they can swap stories with their friends and it will be in ringbinders.

 

[B-A-C]

I have seen a movie called Les Miserables about a dozen times. But it wasn't the same movie. It was four different versions.
All four versions had different actors, they were filmed at different locations. The dialogue and scenes were slightly different in every movie.

I have talked to people who haven't seen all four versions. But they know what the story is about. They know who was done wrong, who was taken advantage of.
They know who the hero was, and who helped people. They know who was persecuted unjustly. They could even tell you the moment that Jean Val-jean had his
heart broken by God (and a priest).

If God is big enough to direct the course of rivers... ( Prov 21:1; ) and He know how many stars there are, and He even calls them by name... ( Isa 40:26; Psa 147:4; )
Is it too hard for God to protect His word?

Isa 40:8; The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.
1 Pet 1:25; BUT THE WORD OF THE LORD ENDURES FOREVER." And this is the word which was preached to you.

Sometimes exact words are important, but as long as the same message is being said, does the exact wording matter?
I'm sure if we looked at King James translated into German, Chinese, Russian, Spanish.. and English... the words would be different. But the message would be the same.

There are some books of "doctrine" that are pretty far out the there. The book of mormon, the Joehovah's witness watchtower doctrines, the catechisms of the RC church.
But these things aren't the word of God. If His sheep know His voice and won't listen to another voice... I don't think we will get too far off reading many of the translations
of today. The problem is when they get away from translating.. and start putting in their own interpretations. Some Bibles don't claim to be translations.
Some claim to be interpretations. (The Message, God's Word, parts of the NIV, etc.. )

 

[Lanolin]

But you have to make sure its the Word...nothing been added, nothing taken away. Even in translation. Make sure what you are reading is actually scripture.

In hebrew, they dont have gaps between words and they read from right to left, whereas in english we read from left to right. Chinese you can read right to left or top to bottom.

The point is not just the meaning of different versions but why did God emphasise the Word...why didnt he say the Meaning was with God from the beginning. Cos if you read or watch five different versions of les mis are you sure its getting the same? I know if there are different versions of say the Hobbit well there was a movie made of it and it added stuff from that was not even in original! And then it would leave out other stuff that was important in the original story. Now if you didnt know the original can you say well that really was the Hobbit. To someone who read the original no...they would be missing the point but for the person who watched the movie theyd be talking about a character that wasnt even in the book lol.

And then you would go well dont you remember what the book was like and the person that just watched the movie and never even read the book might say well I dont need to even read the book i can just watch this drawn out movie of the hobbit video game its enough for me. Its to hard to read this book even though its in the same language as what I speak. Its too old. Im just going to watch the new movie version and let the spirit guide me to the meaning. You totally dont get the story, the book must have missed out this female character. Lets rewrite the book.

Im just giving a secular example of the Hobbit.
I dont know if they actually did publish a novelisation of the movie version but knowing Hollywood execs they probably did. Nevermind about the original. The thing is the movie was LONGER than it took to read the book. They drew it out into three parts (to make more money off movie goers I suppose) when it could have been just one feature movie..so by the time you got to part 3 you were bored out of your mind (i didnt even bother watching the third installment) since they add more stuff that wasnt even in the original but someone elses interpretation, then lost the point of the entire story since they added stuff that wasnt even necessary. Talk about a subplot that takes over!

This is why translation is careful to be word for word, not trying to interpret the meaning for you. The word in the Bible can speak for itself, Gods word is quick and powerrful...when people dilute it and add their own meaning it takes away from scripture.

The thing with Hebrew is every word counts. Its a very specific language.
Not so sure about greek but if you reading a bible make sure its not missing words or putting weasly words as round about way of saying stuff instead of direct translations.

Cos If Paul wrote you a letter, say you were the corinthian church, and you wanted to know what it was, would you just say oh give me the gist of it I dont need to know what he actually wrote. Well its a letter wouldnt you want to know every word? And treat every word as precious?

Ok not extreme but you think well when is a bible a bible and when is it a travesty of the original. Are all bibles the same or do they really have the same meaning or are some missing the whole point, giving you just enough to think its the bible but really falling short or shortchanging you on Gods word.

I was reading the Beginners Bible right, its for children, but even that one, because its so simplified, really misses a whole lot that children need to know. Maybe they only had so many pages to tell the story, but i just found a lot of it lacking. This was also one recommend to use in teaching but I found 'lamb songs' stories to be much better and true to the Bible. And its only because I had read the full version first. Some people are missing out on the fullness of Gods word. Thats all am saying.

Search the scripture to see if things are so, if we dont, we miss out. Make sure the bible you read has all the scripture.

 

[amadeus2]

There are differences.

Sometimes there are additions and/or subtractions and even distinctively different meanings. In the three Bibles I read, although it is rare, sometimes the meanings and/or the + or - words or phrases make a difference that I can easily see.

But... it is still for all of us who don't read the original languages it boils down putting trust in someone and most of all in God. Even if the translators did the best they could to provide an unbiased translation they still may have misunderstood some thing or made an honest mistakes. That is where we are when we are trusting ourselves in the flesh or other men in the flesh on anything... especially on things pertaining to God.

Actually, we all probably believe the Bible originally was written by men as they were inspired by God [II Tim 3:16]. So then we must also in a measure take it by faith that God guided the translators of the version we are using. Was God not able in that as He was able with the originally inspired writers?

Now, there are likely some very poor translations or translations purposely twisted by men to make them fit better their own pet doctrines. That should not have ever happened, but knowing man, when left to his own devices, it probably has happened. So how can a new convert or even an old believer protect himself?

What we must look for and pray for and expect is for the Holy Spirit in us to guide us to a good translation for us or to ask brothers and sister in whom we have confidence to help us decide which Bible to choose and help us receive the understanding that God wants us to receive.

Does not prayer make a difference? So then let us pray for God to inspire us in our reading as He inspired those first translators in their writing.

 

[Hekuran]

When controversies break out about which translation to read, I'm always tempted to ask which translation to live by, or which translation to obey. Some translations are better than others, some have strengths in particular areas. If you are studying in depth, any good commentary will help you out with the difficulties in translation and the nuances of the original text.

Here are three very different takes on Philippians 4:8. The life lived in the light of the King James version is indistinguishable from the life described in the message.

Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things. [ESV]​

Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things. [Authorized King James]​

Summing it all up, friends, I’d say you’ll do best by filling your minds and meditating on things true, noble, reputable, authentic, compelling, gracious—the best, not the worst; the beautiful, not the ugly; things to praise, not things to curse. [The Message]​

 

[Sue J Love]

I do get confused if people say well we dont even know what charity is or means. What do you mean, it's in the bible! It even gives the definition. But it seems only the KJV bible has this word!!!

Oh but we have to use the greek word agape and say well its love but not as we know it. Well anyone who has charity MUST know what it means cos charity is selfless and doesnt matter if its your enemy or not. Its kindness. Its patient. It isnt rude, all this describes charity. Charity isnt just a a 'love offering' its love no questions asked. Charity doesnt keep a record of wrongs...have you ever had a charity that withheld from anyone who needed it just because they did something wrong? So we DO have a word in english that means agape and it has already been translated.

@Lanolin - Just out of curiosity I did a Bible search in the AKJV and the KJV for the word "charity" and it brought up 24 times this word was used, and only in the NT, not in the OT. Then, I put in the word "love" and it brought up a total of 442 times, 240 times in the OT, and 202 times in the NT this was used, most of which seemed to be used (in the NT) for the word "agape." I didn't check all 24 or all 202, but I checked quite a few of them, and it seems that the AKJV and KJV used the word "love" way more times than it used the word "charity" when translating the word "agape." So, they didn't always use the word "charity" for "agape." So, then, that makes me wonder why they chose to use "charity" those few times, while the majority of the time they used "love" when translating "agape." I don't know the answer to that, but just found it interesting that "love" was preferred way more often by the KJV translators than "charity" when translating the word "agape."

Then, you say the word charity is in the Bible so we should know what it means. But, what you mean is that it is in the KJV of the Bible, but not all of us read that one. So, I looked it up in the NASB, and it had the word "charity" only 3 times, and all three times it meant "alms," and was not in reference to the word "agape." So, someone reading a translation other than the KJV might not be familiar with the word "charity" for the word "agape." And, since the KJV people didn't even seem to feel it important to translate but only a few of the references to the word "agape" as "charity," but the vast number of references to "agape" they translated as "love," then it seems to me that even they preferred the term "love" most of the time.

The other thing you said here is that, not only is "charity" in the Bible, meaning the KJV, but that the Bible even gives the definition for the word "charity," again speaking of the KJV Bible. But, the original Greek was describing "agape", not "charity." And, the NASB doesn't use the word "charity," so in the passage in 1 Corinthians 13, it is describing the word "love." So, just because 1 Corinthians 13 gives a description of agape God-like love does not translate into the word "charity" being the correct word to use, especially in light of the fact that the KJV only used "charity" 24 times, but they used the word "love" 442 times (not sure how many were in reference to divine love), and the bulk of those, in the NT, were in reference to agape.

Ok, lastly, how many times do you, personally, use the word "charity" in place of the word "love" when you are talking about God's love with other people. Do you say "God so charity the world that he gave his only begotten Son..."? Did Jesus say to Peter, Peter do you charity me more than these?" I don't think I have heard you use that word in the course of your normal conversations with us. So, you use the word "love," too, when referencing agape love (divine love). Also, what is the definition of the word "charity" in our English language?

M-W Dictionary: "
benevolent goodwill toward or love of humanity

• The holidays are a time for charity and goodwill.

2a :generosity and helpfulness especially toward the needy or suffering; also :aid given to those in need

• received charity from the neighbors

b :an institution engaged in relief of the poor

• raised funds for several charities

public provision for the relief of the needy"​

So, this doesn't say "divine love," and it doesn't say "prefers what God prefers," which is the meaning of "agape." And, even non-believers in Jesus Christ can exercise "charity" towards other people, but only followers of Jesus Christ can "agape" God and others.

When controversies break out about which translation to read, I'm always tempted to ask which translation to live by, or which translation to obey. Some translations are better than others, some have strengths in particular areas. If you are studying in depth, any good commentary will help you out with the difficulties in translation and the nuances of the original text.

Here are three very different takes on Philippians 4:8. The life lived in the light of the King James version is indistinguishable from the life described in the message.

Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things. [ESV]​

Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things. [Authorized King James]​

Summing it all up, friends, I’d say you’ll do best by filling your minds and meditating on things true, noble, reputable, authentic, compelling, gracious—the best, not the worst; the beautiful, not the ugly; things to praise, not things to curse. [The Message]​

The Message is not an actual translation. It is a transliteration, and it is not good. So, I would recommend anyone to stay away from that, for it makes a mockery of what God considers serious business, and it takes a lot of liberties with what is considered the sound Word of God.

 

[Hekuran]

Yes it's a transliteration, and never intended to replace the likes of the KJV, NIV, NRSV. The author is a serious scholar and a godly man. I've read him in interview saying he's perplexed when he hears it read in church ending 'this is the word of the Lord'.

His aim was to present the message of the bible in modern idiom. A worthwhile project.