Recommend a bible version.

[Eseven]

Just get a good concordance and use it as you read.
Blue Letter Bible - Home Page has a lot of versions, and the Strong's concordance of Hebrew and Greek.

Then, read, read, read. Compare, compare, compare.

I do use biblegateway.com and biblestudytools.com sometimes, they have tools and various versions, but i was looking for one specific version as my main version.

 

[toolmanjantzi]

I would speak against the NIV; but compared to The Message (that was never intended to be anything other than paraphrase) the NIV, is the bomb. But I will always be a KJV.

 

[Eseven]

What is the blue letter bible? Is that an actual bible version or just an organization devoted to bible study? (I feel silly asking, but i don't the answer)

 

[Keachian]

What is the blue letter bible? Is that an actual bible version or just an organization devoted to bible study? (I feel silly asking, but i don't the answer)

It is a Bible study website with a bit more functionality than Bible Gateway, however it has less versions available because of this.

 

[Eseven]

I would speak against the NIV; but compared to The Message (that was never intended to be anything other than paraphrase) the NIV, is the bomb. But I will always be a KJV.

It is a Bible study website with a bit more functionality than Bible Gateway, however it has less versions available because of this.

Thanks to you both.

 

[Keachian]

I never was an NIV fan, i have seen it posted i think and it seems loosly translated and wreckless, if memory serves me. Im leaning toward NKJV and KJV both, im not sure what manuscripts ESV, RSv or other translations are based on to be honest, but that's why i started this thread, to get opinions

The ESV is based at least on the NA27 it does take some readings from the research being done as part of the Editio Critica Maior project at Institut für neutestamentliche Textforschung, I do believe that with the application of the Granville Sharps rule in regards to Greek grammar and the use of the Iesous variant in Jude 5 that in regards to the defense of Christ's divinity the ESV is the strongest Bible on the market.

The RSV is based on the NA17

You can find a lot more information in regards to what Bibles use what printed texts as their basis for translation here:
Bible Research by Michael Marlowe

 

[sunlover1]

NKJV fan myself but I guess NASB is supposed to be the closest to original.

I also agree with you about "Easter"

 

[Rhamiel]

I would speak against the NIV; but compared to The Message (that was never intended to be anything other than paraphrase) the NIV, is the bomb. But I will always be a KJV.

I have had my problems with the NIV as well, but I am Catholic so I have a slightly differant theological view on some things

but we can all agree
The Message is horrible

 

[Eseven]

The ESV is based at least on the NA27 it does take some readings from the research being done as part of the Editio Critica Maior project at Institut für neutestamentliche Textforschung, I do believe that with the application of the Granville Sharps rule in regards to Greek grammar and the use of the Iesous variant in Jude 5 that in regards to the defense of Christ's divinity the ESV is the strongest Bible on the market.

The RSV is based on the NA17

You can find a lot more information in regards to what Bibles use what printed texts as their basis for translation here:
Bible Research by Michael Marlowe

Thanks, the info and link you provided gives me a lot to put in the google search, a place to start.

 

[Eseven]

NKJV fan myself but I guess NASB is supposed to be the closest to original.

I also agree with you about "Easter"

Thanks.

 

[NorrinRadd]

I'm a fan of parallel Bibles. I'm hoping Zondervan will update Today's Parallel Bible to the must recent editions of the NIV, NASB, and NLT, to go along with the original KJV. (Actually, I'd prefer they move to the NKJV, but I get the impression there's a bit of professional friction between Zondervan and the publishers of the NKJV, and so that's not likely to ever happen.)

 

[Eseven]

I'm a fan of parallel Bibles. I'm hoping Zondervan will update Today's Parallel Bible to the must recent editions of the NIV, NASB, and NLT, to go along with the original KJV. (Actually, I'd prefer they move to the NKJV, but I get the impression there's a bit of professional friction between Zondervan and the publishers of the NKJV, and so that's not likely to ever happen.)

Yes, paralleling verses is good. Thanks Fundygelical.

 

[NorrinRadd]

The paperback version of the 2011 NIV Study Bible can usually be found for under $25. That's a nice price for a good all-around translation with some useful notes and commentary.

If you want to be able to look up words in a "Strong's" type of concordance, I don't know if there are any non-KJV options other than the NASB -- and even then, I'm not sure if the concordance has been updated for the 1995 NASB (as opposed to the original 1977), or if it's even still available at all.

 

[Eseven]

The paperback version of the 2011 NIV Study Bible can usually be found for under $25. That's a nice price for a good all-around translation with some useful notes and commentary.

If you want to be able to look up words in a "Strong's" type of concordance, I don't know if there are any non-KJV options other than the NASB -- and even then, I'm not sure if the concordance has been updated for the 1995 NASB (as opposed to the original 1977), or if it's even still available at all.

Im just not an NIV fan, but i guess its useful.

 

[bornofGod888]

I don't want to rock the boat, but I know that the ESV Bible is a terrible translation. So bad, that I recently left a church because the pastor not only read from it all of the time, but it was also the pew Bible in his church. I had engaged the pastor, privately, in conversations where I gave him verse by verse comparisons between the ESV and the KJV and the ESV greatly undermines the Deity of Christ and a whole bunch of other important fundamental Christian beliefs. I believe that in the New Testament alone, the ESV has somewhere around 33,000 less words in it than the KJV. Again, those less words are mostly what I consider to be deliberate omissions which greatly undermine many important Christian beliefs. In fact, in many cases, the ESV reads just like the Jehovah's Witness Bible. I'm not sure how many less words are in the ESV Old Testament as compared to the KJV Old Testament, but there are significant changes and omissions there as well.

 

[Eseven]

I don't want to rock the boat, but I know that the ESV Bible is a terrible translation. So bad, that I recently left a church because the pastor not only read from it all of the time, but it was also the pew Bible in his church. I had engaged the pastor, privately, in conversations where I gave him verse by verse comparisons between the ESV and the KJV and the ESV greatly undermines the Deity of Christ and a whole bunch of other important fundamental Christian beliefs. I believe that in the New Testament alone, the ESV has somewhere around 33,000 less words in it than the KJV. Again, those less words are mostly what I consider to be deliberate omissions which greatly undermine many important Christian beliefs. In fact, in many cases, the ESV reads just like the Jehovah's Witness Bible. I'm not sure how many less words are in the ESV Old Testament as compared to the KJV Old Testament, but there are significant changes and omissions there as well.

Interesting thanks. KJV And NKJV seem to be the most popular and or trusted, by most of the posters here, so far.

 

[bornofGod888]

Interesting thanks. KJV And NKJV seem to be the most popular and or trusted, by most of the posters here, so far.

I'm no fan of the NKJV either. If my memory serves me correctly, then the NKJV has close to 2,300 less words in its New Testament than the KJV has in its New Testament. Also, I believe that the word "Lord" is removed about 66 times and that the word "God" is removed somewhere around 51 times.

 

[Keachian]

I don't want to rock the boat, but I know that the ESV Bible is a terrible translation. So bad, that I recently left a church because the pastor not only read from it all of the time, but it was also the pew Bible in his church. I had engaged the pastor, privately, in conversations where I gave him verse by verse comparisons between the ESV and the KJV and the ESV greatly undermines the Deity of Christ and a whole bunch of other important fundamental Christian beliefs. I believe that in the New Testament alone, the ESV has somewhere around 33,000 less words in it than the KJV. Again, those less words are mostly what I consider to be deliberate omissions which greatly undermine many important Christian beliefs. In fact, in many cases, the ESV reads just like the Jehovah's Witness Bible. I'm not sure how many less words are in the ESV Old Testament as compared to the KJV Old Testament, but there are significant changes and omissions there as well.

When you make the KJV the standard rather than what the writers of the NT wrote anything goes obviously.

in regards to a comparison to the NWT do you have any particular thing in mind where the deity of Christ or the personality of the HS is concerned?

The ESV follows the Granville Sharps rule at 2 Pet 1:1 and Tit 2:13 which the NWT does not and neither does the KJV (that's because the KJV was translated before this rule was discovered) this strengthens the case for Jesus' divinity Alpha and Omega Ministries, The Christian Apologetics Ministry of James R. White

The ESV follows the Jesus variant in Jude 5, this strengthens the case for Jesus' divinity. Neither the NWT nor the KJV do this (the variant was unknown at that point in time, it has since been found to be the most likely reading)

The ESV translates Heb 1:8 as "Your throne, O God, is forever" this strengthens the case for Jesus' divinity, the NWT doesn't have this, the KJV does as well.

The ESV doesn't murder the Carmen Christi (Phil 2:6ff) like the NWT does.

Is there any reason why I should consider myself worse for wear considering I have these?

Yes I prefer the I Tim 3:16 reading of God, however we are talking about the difference of two lines as to what makes up the variant reading here:

OC compared with ϴϵ that is the difference between "he was" and "God was" in the majuscule text with sacra nomina and you need to keep in mind that Papyri and velum MSS are not like the paper we have today, they have grain and deformities that make it difficult in low light to see the difference between the two.

Not to mention I can take a NWT and show someone the deity of Christ, the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society isn't that good at hiding it.

 

[bornofGod888]

When you make the KJV the standard rather than what the writers of the NT wrote anything goes obviously.

Would you like to quote where I said or implied that the KJV is the standard?

The underlying Hebrew and Greek texts are the real issues here. Well, from a natural standpoint, that is. Spiritually speaking, that old serpent, the Devil, is still asking "Yea, hath God said?".

 

[Eseven]

I'm no fan of the NKJV either. If my memory serves me correctly, then the NKJV has close to 2,300 less words in its New Testament than the KJV has in its New Testament. Also, I believe that the word "Lord" is removed about 66 times and that the word "God" is removed somewhere around 51 times.

I did say either KJV or NKJV. Im just taking the pulse of the thread, i wasn't getting too specific though.