Choosing a bible translation?

Rhamiel said:

I use the New American Bible and the Douay Rheims
have you read the KJV? if you can understand that style of writing then you can understand the Douay-Rheims translation, they came out about the same time
I think the New Testament of the Douay Rheims came out even before the KJV

Click to expand...

the rheims bible?

hmmmm haven't heard that one in a while.

but I like the byzantine text type, byzantine family, type manuscripts.

so the KJV, and 1 or two others are from these manuscripts, athough many majority text translations are in the works currently. Some better quality than others.

but regardless we need to stray from NASB, NIV, and ESV (uugg)....because they are from questionable manuscripts.

I still use the ESV as a greek tool to see how some words are translated, because it is a quite excellent word for word translation, it's just that it is based on a questionable alexandrian text like the sinaiticus.


more on the alleged sinaiticus forgery here:
http://kjvonly2.blogspot.com/2011/09/sinaiticus-may-really-be-forgery-after.html

here is an analysis on the priority of the byzantine over the modern texts source (alexandrian):
http://www.skypoint.com/members/waltzmn/ByzPrior.html


and some other translations that are not archaic like the KJV but still based on majority text:
(some links criticize some majority text translations, others support them, this is my list of links, they are unsorted and for your analysis and feedback as you have time)

http://www.byztxt.com/download/index.html
http://www.skypoint.com/members/waltzmn/RobPier.html
http://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.com/2006/01/review-of-robinson-and-pierpont.html

http://www.byztxt.com/download/index.html
http://solascriptura-tt.org/Bibliol...extMovingAwayFromPreservedScripture-Cloud.htm
https://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/te...ament_greek/text/wallace-majoritytext-gtj.pdf
https://bible.org/article/some-second-thoughts-majority-text
http://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.com/2006/03/interview-with-dan-wallace.html
http://www.livingwater.org/about-the-logos-21-translation.html
https://bible.org/article/majority-text-and-original-text-are-they-identical#_ftnref26
http://majoritytext.com/letter.html
http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/gtj/04-1_119.pdf
http://www.skypoint.com/members/waltzmn/RobPier.html
http://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.com/2006/01/review-of-robinson-and-pierpont.html

Reep said:

According to the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops, the NRSV (non-CE?) is the approved version in Canada.

I won't ask which is the best translation (as that is subjective, and prone to long debates), however I am curious as to which translation(s) you read (Catholics or non-Catholics) and why/how you chose it. (I'm not overly crazy about modern translations, simply because of the inclusive language).

Sorry if this is in the wrong thread, I wasn't quite sure where it belongs.

Click to expand...

Don't be put off by the "inclusive language" of the NRSV (CE). Often when you read "he" in a Bible, it refers to both he & she. NRSV makes the correction for readers, removing the doubt of whether the Bible is referring to he and/or she. The NRSV does NOT include "she" just to be inclusive. For example, Jesus, God the Father, etc. are NEVER referred to as "she."

You should also be aware that scholars who compiled the NRSV sought out the oldest, most reliable Biblical transcripts available, so in a sense, you're getting "the best of both worlds" (old & new).

I'm not of the Catholic faith, but as a M.Div. student, I was required to purchase an NRSV Bible. Since I already had almost a dozen Bibles, I figured I might as well buy the Catholic Version and add the Apocrypha to my library (most non-Catholic Bibles don't include it).

Paxton25 said:

Don't be put off by the "inclusive language" of the NRSV (CE). Often when you read "he" in a Bible, it refers to both he & she. NRSV makes the correction for readers, removing the doubt of whether the Bible is referring to he and/or she. The NRSV does NOT include "she" just to be inclusive. For example, Jesus, God the Father, etc. are NEVER referred to as "she."

You should also be aware that scholars who compiled the NRSV sought out the oldest, most reliable Biblical transcripts available, so in a sense, you're getting "the best of both worlds" (old & new).

I'm not of the Catholic faith, but as a M.Div. student, I was required to purchase an NRSV Bible. Since I already had almost a dozen Bibles, I figured I might as well buy the Catholic Version and add the Apocrypha to my library (most non-Catholic Bibles don't include it).

Click to expand...

ahhh, the oldest is best, theory.

well I believe the more complete papryi manuscripts are the best, not necessarily the oldest.

thanks for the added insight.

Good Morning to you brother in Christ!
My name is Jim and I have been an avid student if the word of God for many years now.
To me, the Holy Christian Bible is more dear to me than any other thing! I have learned many things about life through it, and with the Holy Spirit's help and guidance, it is the most magnificent work and study that I believe is available to mankind.
At the present there are many Biblical translations as I'm sure that you know. When I started studying the Bible on a consistent basis about thirty years ago, I was given a New American Standard Bible by another Christian man, who by the grace and wisdom of God became my teacher, a great friend, and confidant more powerful in the word of God than I should ever expect to be.
After literally wearing that one out, I was also given a Holman Bible which I still have today. The Holman Bible is a Bible which has been brought forth by Baptist theologians and the like, and in my humble opinion is a very good work although I am not a Baptist myself.
With God's help and guidance I have been studying and teaching from it for many years, as there is always a need to help some understand the deeper spiritual and direct meanings of the word of God correctly, as many who have read and studied it have told me of many difficulties that they have had getting at and understanding some of its core meanings, parables, and the like.
It is also my opinion that whatever translation that you choose, then it must be examined not only just at face value as a person, but by the Spirit of God Himself within us always!

Good Hunting in your quest for excellence!
Your brother Jimmie

My standard translation is KJV, but I also have other editions as well. I do find myself relying on the KJV more than any other though.

again with recent research indicating that modern translation may or may not have been from a forgery (sinaiticus manuscripts now has questionable roots), and there is no modern translation that I know of that does not use this sinaiticus manuscript.

if you want forgery, possibly and do not care about authenticity etc.

then go for it, and no more discussion needed.

I use the NKJV, I am not KJV only, as they think the NKJV is from satan.

but I suppose the NKJV is a newish translation, but it is not considered a modern translation.

One of my favorite critical apologists is Hank Hanagraaf, (We disagree on a lot, but that is another story)

one of my friends wrote a brief book on it, I will see if I can get a copy of it somewhere.

2005 Choosing the Right Bible for You (Calvary Chapel Publishing)- Brian Nixon -PhD

but anyway, you are going to want to go with a majority text translation,

not the ones that most of the posters are posting here.

I was fortunate to go to a church that by default used one, but even when I was going to another denomination, I carried my KJV study Bible there (my first Bible).

anyway, let me know if I can answer any questions for you, okay.

God Bless.

What do You suggest for the OT? If the NKJV - is it to have the same somewhat unique English style and great vocabulary as what You use for the New Testament (NKJV)? Somewhat unique in that not many other versions sound like the English of the same period as the NKJV as not too many versions came out around the '70s and naturally because of the vocabulary and maybe slightly because of the formal equivalence (which in itself is a not that common trait in English Bible versions). Do You have any alternative suggestion for the OT other than the NKJV, if not there are many who can suggest versions based on approximately what's in the 1977 Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartiensis as there are lots of such versions. Now, in a not too distant future I'll learn to use the footnotes of the Hebrew which will help me use the 1959 RSV Old Testament which predates the Qumran finds except that they checked the manuscripts a little bit for the book of Isaiah although they barely changed anything, just to have a version consistent in English style of the 1971 RSV 2nd Edition New Testament which I use to a large extent (among other versions):

gradyll said:

but anyway, you are going to want to go with a majority text translation,

not the ones that most of the posters are posting here.

Click to expand...

Unix said:

What do You suggest for the OT? If the NKJV - is it to have the same somewhat unique English style and great vocabulary as what You use for the New Testament (NKJV)? Somewhat unique in that not many other versions sound like the English of the same period as the NKJV as not too many versions came out around the '70s and naturally because of the vocabulary and maybe slightly because of the formal equivalence (which in itself is a not that common trait in English Bible versions). Do You have any alternative suggestion for the OT other than the NKJV, if not there are many who can suggest versions based on approximately what's in the 1977 Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartiensis as there are lots of such versions. Now, in a not too distant future I'll learn to use the footnotes of the Hebrew which will help me use the 1959 RSV Old Testament which predates the Qumran finds except that they checked the manuscripts a little bit for the book of Isaiah although they barely changed anything, just to have a version consistent in English style of the 1971 RSV 2nd Edition New Testament which I use to a large extent (among other versions):

Click to expand...

an old instructor of mine, (who did work on the NASB translation, is a KJV guy, and he says the NIV as being thought for thought, captures more of the old testament wordage better.

I would not know.

I suppose I can see that, but that does not solve the issue of accuracy relating to the forgeries of the texts behind the NIV.

I use many translations when I study to keep diverse. But I hold 90% weight in NKJV, and ESV.

ESV to see what the modern texts are saying, and NKJV to see what is actually written in the byzantine text type.

but there should be another new NKJV, or an NKJV2 or something, one that matches more of a majority text type of translation like hodges and farsdads translation, but still holding to the literal methodology.

many of the majority text type translations are worded so you can read it better, not worded for accuracy like the KJV.

but anyway, that was what the instructor said.

Reep said:

Thanks for the link, I'll have a bit of reading to do later.
I think what I was stuck on, is tradition vs. modern. I would prefer something more traditional, but also I would rather have something (at this point) that is easier to understand, which means a more modern translation.
Thanks again.

Click to expand...

Just throwing this one out there try the Jerusalem bible up to date modern in its language and also has a traditional feel.

Wrexscar said:

For everyday reading I mostly use the NIV. I have several other translations for studying.
My Pastor changes his version every two years. Once the text grows familiar to him he swaps so it still has an impact and makes him question himself.
The only translations I don't use are KJV and such. I don't speech seventeenth century English much as I don't speech biblical Greek so I need a translation written in my language.

As such I do use paraphrases although it's important to remember the distinction between a paraphrase and translation. They can be a useful tool at certain times.

Click to expand...

I believe that is exactly what keeps me away from the KJV also. It is hard to understand what you don't speak. Not to say that the KJV is bad, it is just harder for me to understand. I am having a hard time trying to pick a translation of choice to go to between ESV and NASB. Maybe both working together is the answer.

Reep said:

I do quite a bit of reading so I suspect sooner or later I'll need glasses for reading.
I only read in English. I only know a understand certain words in German, French, Croatian and Polish but cannot actually speak them.

Click to expand...

I wear Trifocals and I also strain with smaller fonts in some bibles. So, that is why all of my bibles have at least Large Print. It helps a lot even though it does add quite a bit of volume to the weight of the bibles themselves.

Reep said:

Currently at home I have KJV, RSV and RSV-CE (missing pages though). My Catholic friends I've talked to say without question, Douay-Rheims is THE bible to read, although I'm uncertain as others claim it's difficult to understand.

Click to expand...

Douay-Rheims isn't a terribly accurate translation. Having checked much of the Greek, the ESV seems the most accurate to me, followed by the NIV.

The most recent Catholic Bible seems to be the NABRE, and I get the feeling that Catholic Bibles are progressively getting closer to Protestant Bibles, as better scholarship is applied.

rivulet said:

I also like the Holman's Christian Standard Bible.

Click to expand...

The HCSB is quite good. It has been revised as the Christian Standard Bible, I believe.

I am glad that all of us have our "go to" translations that helps us get closer to God and God's Word. But, I am starting to get the message from God that it isn't as important "What" translation we choose as long as it brings us closer to God and helps keep our Faith in Him strong.
I have been asked so many times in my short Christian life what bible I would recommend and I always have the same answer that I go to.

"The best bible for you is the one that makes you want to keep reading it on a daily basis"

I, myself, have narrowed my likes down to NASB and ESV. It is working for me, up to this point, and I'm not really sure I need to make any choices. At this point, I really don't feel that I am qualified enough, and learned enough, to really make a decision between the two. That is not to say that tomorrow and someday from now that I won't be able to choose.
I thank all of you for all your input. It has given me a real insight into what resources are out there for me. Thank you all so much and God bless you all.

Reep said:

I've spent the past couple of weeks trying to figure out which bible translation I should read, as I want to start reading the bible daily, but I'm still stumped! While I am a Catholic, I have also been questioning if I'm one for the right reasons (another post for another day I suppose).

Currently at home I have KJV, RSV and RSV-CE (missing pages though). My Catholic friends I've talked to say without question, Douay-Rheims is THE bible to read, although I'm uncertain as others claim it's difficult to understand. I've contacted a few Catholic churches who have suggested the NIV (which they use), another suggested either the NRSV-CE or the New Jerusalem Bible Catholic Edition to start off with. According to the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops, the NRSV (non-CE?) is the approved version in Canada.

I won't ask which is the best translation (as that is subjective, and prone to long debates), however I am curious as to which translation(s) you read (Catholics or non-Catholics) and why/how you chose it. (I'm not overly crazy about modern translations, simply because of the inclusive language).

Sorry if this is in the wrong thread, I wasn't quite sure where it belongs.

Click to expand...

Most of various main-stream translations work fine. There is no magic to it.

The one key thing is this..... no translation is perfect. If you really want to have the most perfect understanding, you would need to learn Aramaic, Hebrew, and Greek. Well... most of us are not in that boat, at all.

Pick a translation that is easy enough for you personally, that you can actually read your Bible yourself, and not need aspirin.

I grew up with KJV obviously, but NIV and ESV, both work fine with me.

The key of course is, if you stumble on anything, don't be afraid to look up what other translations say, and I personally have found that sometimes that clarifies things a lot.

As for being Catholic.... I am not Catholic. I find that some of the beliefs held in the Catholic church, are not beliefs that I can justify in my Bible.

So I am a non-denominational Bible believing Christian, and my Bible is all I have ever really needed.

Andrew77 said:

Most of various main-stream translations work fine. There is no magic to it.

The one key thing is this..... no translation is perfect. If you really want to have the most perfect understanding, you would need to learn Aramaic, Hebrew, and Greek. Well... most of us are not in that boat, at all.

Pick a translation that is easy enough for you personally, that you can actually read your Bible yourself, and not need aspirin.

I grew up with KJV obviously, but NIV and ESV, both work fine with me.

The key of course is, if you stumble on anything, don't be afraid to look up what other translations say, and I personally have found that sometimes that clarifies things a lot.

As for being Catholic.... I am not Catholic. I find that some of the beliefs held in the Catholic church, are not beliefs that I can justify in my Bible.

So I am a non-denominational Bible believing Christian, and my Bible is all I have ever really needed.

Click to expand...

I think you nailed it exactly. Thank you so much for that great peace of advice. God bless you.

My go to is the ESV and the NLT

Guy Incognito said:

My go to is the ESV and the NLT

Click to expand...

Interesting chart. So women should all use the NRSV, I assume.

It is nice you have had so many replies. I also suggest a few different translations. My main Bible is this one- The Student Bible NIV. Have used this now about a dozen years. I have found it keeps my interest and makes me want to read more. Other translations find my mind drifting more, not this one.
I am not school age but, have no issue carrying a 'student' Bible as I am truely a student in the Word.
You can find these on Amazon lightly used for almost nothing. I've bought over a dozen of them. A few times a year, esp Christmas and Easter, I post this pic on my face book page and offer all my friends a free copy of this. Several people have taken me up and have mailed them out.
If anyone here who may be deeper in the Word than me, and find this translation bad for some reason, please let me know. I find it very helpful in my Walk and recommend it. Blessings

Reep said:

I've spent the past couple of weeks trying to figure out which bible translation I should read, as I want to start reading the bible daily, but I'm still stumped! While I am a Catholic, I have also been questioning if I'm one for the right reasons (another post for another day I suppose).

Currently at home I have KJV, RSV and RSV-CE (missing pages though). My Catholic friends I've talked to say without question, Douay-Rheims is THE bible to read, although I'm uncertain as others claim it's difficult to understand. I've contacted a few Catholic churches who have suggested the NIV (which they use), another suggested either the NRSV-CE or the New Jerusalem Bible Catholic Edition to start off with. According to the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops, the NRSV (non-CE?) is the approved version in Canada.

I won't ask which is the best translation (as that is subjective, and prone to long debates), however I am curious as to which translation(s) you read (Catholics or non-Catholics) and why/how you chose it. (I'm not overly crazy about modern translations, simply because of the inclusive language).

Sorry if this is in the wrong thread, I wasn't quite sure where it belongs.

Click to expand...

I like The Amplified Bible as it gives more full descriptions of words being used. Also I like The Complete Jewish Bible at times (which includes the N.T.) because of their greater attention to the original Hebrew meanings of words.

No Bible is perfect. I would recommend listening online to those who say only the KJV is good. I don't agree that it should be the only source, but they do point out some serious flaws in some other Bibles. At Bible Gateway you can get many different Bible translations.
BibleGateway.com: A searchable online Bible in over 150 versions and 50 languages.