What Bible translation(s) do you prefer?

[SeekerOfChrist94]

What Bible translation(s) do you prefer?

Is there a specific one you like because it makes reading easier? Do you use multiple versions? Have you used the same one all your life? What do you like about certain ones and dislike about others?


I personally prefer the NIV and ESV, as they're an easier read for me than the KJV, but I do like the KJV when I'm in the mood for a challenge. I dislike The Message translation because it confuses me.

 

[PastorTeacher]

I personally have about 8 Bibles and mostly use the KJV. It is beautifully written. However, I find myself leaning heavily on the NASB as of late and very well might make that my "go-to" Bible. I have noticed that the NASB is closer to word-for-word then the KJV while others such as the NIV, ESV and others are more though-for-though with the message Bible being more thought-for-thought. On a scale the NASB is most word-for-word and the message is most thought-for-thought.

 

[beggarsall]

I definitely use multiple versions. There's no perfect English translation so I feel like certain versions capture certain verses a little more accurately than other versions.

I love the NLT. But I also use the NASB as well as the King James and New King James. It just depends on what I feel captures what I'm reading most accurately.

When I just sit down to read, though, I usually crank out the NLT and get my Bible on!

 

[abysmul]

Multiple bibles, and Bible Gateway is one of my favorite sites on the internet.

My go to translation is my NASB. I like how clear and accurate a translation it is.

I was raised memorizing passages from the KJV and hearing scripture read from it... it is beautiful and takes me back when I read it. When I'm in the right mood, it's the translation I turn to.

 

[Christian Seasteader]

My current fav. is the World English Bible (WEB): (ebible.org)

The project is spearheaded by a Wycliff missionary and amazingly, the project is in the public domain. All other modern translations that I know of are NOT in the public domain and have restrictions on their use.

An interesting note about the NIV - The © is owned by Biblica, but most actual bibles are published by Zondervan which is owned by Harper Collins, which is owned by newcorp. newscorp owns alot of things including the Wall Street Journal, Fox News and The Sun tabloid in the UK. The Sun publishes topless inappropriate content on a daily basis. I like the NIV, but I prefer the WEB because of this.

Sadly, BibleGateway is also indirectly owned by newscorp, but I use it anyway because it's such a great site.

 

[JustSy]

I prefer the KJV. I've mostly read it all my life because my church reads from it. Growing up, I would use the NLT, NIV, NKJV, and the WEB. I wanted to understand God's Word. I never liked feeling as if I was the only one with a different Bible version because I couldn't follow along with Bible readings.

I used the ESV several months ago because an app I used, used only that version. When I switched back to the KJV, I remembered why I liked it: it seemed poetic.

 

[Boidae]

Currently, I am reading from a Holman Christian Standard Bible (Firefighter's/EMT Edition), but I also have two NIVs, one a Dad's Devotional and the other a Men's Devotional, plus I have a NKJV Chronological Study Bible and an ESV Study Bible.

 

[Miss Spaulding]

KJV. ...I've always read KJV, I've been taught through using KJV, so it's what I understand best. I know some find it difficult to read, but when you've grown up on it like I have you find it pretty simple.

If I used any other translation, I'd use ESV.

 

[PastorTeacher]

Some of you mentioned Biblegateway which is a decent online Bible source. But I use Blue Letter Bible a lot. It has several study tools that I find useful plus a Greek and Hebrew lexicon.

 

[GrayJM9]

I only use a HCSB study bible. It has maps, references, and it explains translated words. I think it is the most accurate translation and I think it's the best option for not only seasoned Christians but also young or new ones.

 

[BryanW92]

I've been a strong supporter of the HCSB until last weekend. I was preparing for a talk that I was going to give and Matthew 16:18 was part of it. I read my HCSB and it was just wrong. I double-checked the Greek and verified it. I can't believe they did this in error.

I will be probably be switching to the ESV in the future. I compare the two frequently and they almost always agree, but Matthew 16:18 is one of the verses that shapes my view of the church, so its a deal-breaker for me.

But I do love the HCSB Study Bible. The reference material is awesome, so I'm not throwing it away. I'm just going to compare translations much more.

 

[strelok0017]

I've read KJV and ESV but prefer KJV for now.

 

[Boidae]

I've been a strong supporter of the HCSB until last weekend. I was preparing for a talk that I was going to give and Matthew 16:18 was part of it. I read my HCSB and it was just wrong. I double-checked the Greek and verified it. I can't believe they did this in error.

I will be probably be switching to the ESV in the future. I compare the two frequently and they almost always agree, but Matthew 16:18 is one of the verses that shapes my view of the church, so its a deal-breaker for me.

But I do love the HCSB Study Bible. The reference material is awesome, so I'm not throwing it away. I'm just going to compare translations much more.

Hmm... I just read Matthew 16:18 in five different translations and while the words are not the same, every single translation that I read says and means the same thing.

18 And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock[a] I will build my church, and the gates of hell[b] shall not prevail against it. ~ESV

and

18 And I also say to you that you are Peter,[a] and on this rock[b] I will build My church, and the forces[c] of Hades will not overpower it. ~HCSB

If you are speaking of Hades, I have always known Hades to mean Hell, and that was before I became a Christian. So the translations that say Hades were never an issue for me.

 

[GrayJM9]

I've been a strong supporter of the HCSB until last weekend. I was preparing for a talk that I was going to give and Matthew 16:18 was part of it. I read my HCSB and it was just wrong. I double-checked the Greek and verified it. I can't believe they did this in error.

I will be probably be switching to the ESV in the future. I compare the two frequently and they almost always agree, but Matthew 16:18 is one of the verses that shapes my view of the church, so its a deal-breaker for me.

But I do love the HCSB Study Bible. The reference material is awesome, so I'm not throwing it away. I'm just going to compare translations much more.

I see nearly no difference between the HCSB and the KJV on this verse, which version says something different than what the HCSB says?

 

[thesunisout]

I use the NKJV primarily..and the KJV secondarily..but I will use all of the translations to compare with when I am researching.

 

[BryanW92]

the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. ~ESV

and

the forces of Hades will not overpower it. ~HCSB

I'm talking about the gates vs forces and prevail vs overpower. One translation casts the church as a passive defender (forces/overpower) while the other casts the church as an active attacker (gates/prevail).

Jesus did not create the church to sit around defending itself from Satan. Our mission is to go forth and take the world back from him, one person at a time. The Greek is pule, which does mean gate.

 

[GrayJM9]

I'm talking about the gates vs forces and prevail vs overpower. One translation casts the church as a passive defender (forces/overpower) while the other casts the church as an active attacker (gates/prevail).

Jesus did not create the church to sit around defending itself from Satan. Our mission is to go forth and take the world back from him, one person at a time. The Greek is pule, which does mean gate.

Satan and his demons are attackers and we use the shield of salvation to protect ourselves from him. I believe that this verse is speaking of saved Christians and not speaking of evangelism.

 

[Boidae]

I'm talking about the gates vs forces and prevail vs overpower. One translation casts the church as a passive defender (forces/overpower) while the other casts the church as an active attacker (gates/prevail).

Jesus did not create the church to sit around defending itself from Satan. Our mission is to go forth and take the world back from him, one person at a time. The Greek is pule, which does mean gate.

I don't think the average reader is going to infer anything other than the intended meaning out of either of those translations which for me read as the same thing.

 

[BryanW92]

Satan and his demons are attackers and we use the shield of salvation to protect ourselves from him. I believe that this verse is speaking of saved Christians and not speaking of evangelism.

The original Greek is still pule.

We individually use the shield of salvation. This is talking about the church, collectively.

 

[BryanW92]

I don't think the average reader is going to infer anything other than the intended meaning out of either of those translations which for me read as the same thing.

I thought so too, so I asked a few people and got some very interesting answers. The words really do mean things.