Best Bible Version

personal preference for digging deeper--Amplified. I have used the Comparative Study Bible for years. It is a parallel Bible with KJV, NASB, Amplified, and NIV. I read the NIV and if I want to check a translation that isn't afraid to take more words I look over at the Amplified. If am questioning the translation accuracy, I figure if all four agree in essence, it must be correct.

i recommend it every time, but it is worth downloading 'interlinear scripture analyser' from http://www.scripture4all.org

that aside, i would recommend the international standard version (currently only at download level (still some verses to translate) - you can get the unfinished bible or just the NT with Psalms and proverbs from http://isv.org ))

either way, both are free


Steve

If you're going to spend your time studying scripture in a foreign language (KJV) why not just go right for the Greek?

The NIV is a fine translation that is very readable and often poetic.

mrhappy3 said:

for study

K J or N K J or NASB

which is more accurate ????

THANKS

Click to expand...

For study I'd use all three, I'd also add NIV, GNB, and the New Living.

John O.

The only reason that I still have a KJV is because the Strong's concordance is made for the KJV. But there is now a Strong's for the NASB (I have yet to get that version of Strong's, but it's on my wish list). Once I do that I'll probably cease using my KJV altogether. With that said, I'd recommend getting a variety of translations, especially ones that aren't all in the same translational family (KJV, ASV, RSV, NASB, NRSV, ESV, WEB). There are some that you can download, such as the NET (New English Translation), which is free. But since the NASB has a Strong's to go along with it, and the KJV is in early modern English, and the NJKV does not have a Strong's, I definitely recommend getting a NASB and its associated Strong's at the very least, along with whatever else you choose to get.

I use the ESV.

I think it was Balance who turned me onto this link with some good info.

http://www.christianbook.com/Christian/Books/cms_content/129496710?page=73521&sp=1003

http://www.christianbook.com/christian/books/cms_content/129496710?page=73521&sp=1003

LeadWorship said:

I use the ESV.

I think it was Balance who turned me onto this link with some good info.

http://www.christianbook.com/Christian/Books/cms_content/129496710?page=73521&sp=1003

http://www.christianbook.com/christian/books/cms_content/129496710?page=73521&sp=1003

Click to expand...

I love the ESV most of all. It is by far the one that I use predominately. I love its mixture of accuracy, clarity, and style.

As far as the three you listed, the NASB is the more literal, and the more accurate translation. The KJV & NKJV are based on the Greek text known as the Textus Receptus which comprises of the testimony of 6 or 7 very late mss. (the earliest ms is from the 12th century). All modern English translations are based on an ecclectic Greek text known as the NA27 (Nestle-Aland 27th edition), which is comprised of the testimony of much earlier Greek mss (the earliest being 2nd century). It also takes into consideration the variants found in all 5600+ Greek mss that have been discovered thus far, and any major differences between it and the TR are usually noted in the footnotes.

I like Gordon Fee's recommendation to always consult several different translations from various points along the spectrum from formal equivalent to functional equivalent.

I'm generally not big on the KJV. However, it's use of "thee," "thou," etc., while archaic, does have the advantage of reproducing the "case" and "number" of the Greek better than "modern" translations.

NASB can be excessively literal, but it is useful as one of the few non-KJV translations with easily-available original-language resources.

NRSV is widely respected, especially among scholars. Some arch-conservatives believe it is too "liberal" and "feminist."

ESV is pretty good. However, its origins are a bit quirky. Like the NRSV, it is an update and revision of the RSV. It came about because its creators believed some modern translations were becoming too "feminist." A big part of their goal was to combat this perceived error. Unfortunately, that creates some doubt about the ESV: Was its translation dictated by a desire for accuracy, or by a desire to not be "too feminist"?

NIV and TNIV are well-regarded "middle of the road," "all-purpose" translations. However some arch-conservatives find them -- especially the TNIV -- to be liberal and feminist.

NET is a good middle of the road translation, and is freely available online.

ISV is at this time about 79% complete. (The NT is finished.) It seems roughly similar to NIV, but perhaps a bit more literal. A very interesting feature is the fact that it renders poetry *as* poetry -- with rhyme and meter. AFAIK, no other translation attempts this; they may present poetic sections in "stanzas" so that the reader recognizes that the original mss. were poetic at that point, but they don't actually try to translate them poetically.

NLT is well regarded as a representative of the "functional equivalent" end of the spectrum.

i love my ISV (have been using the downloaded version since last year).

i like the ESV as well, but do actually find that they have translated certain passages to support evangelical doctrinal positions rather than simply 'translating them' But mostly that is by the way.

I would just like people to translate bibles according to what the underlying text says, and avoid imposing christian belief structures into the translation - i want the word to be unadulterated... (to that end i like the Interlinear scripture analyser as it gives the ability to use a mechanical concordant method.


Steve

mrhappy3 said:

Thanks guys - thats interesting stuff

Was told NIV misses stuff out ie the fasting passage.

Otherwise told that NASB was a more modern take on the KJV

All down to opinion I guess.

Thanks again

Click to expand...

The NIV also had a homosexual on the translation commity that fought to have male prostitute in the OT translated differently to cult prostitute so as not to insinuate homosexuality as a sin.

NASB is more accurate than the KJV primarily because of its inclusion of current linguistic and archaeological finds.

The most current that is in the same line of translation philosophy as the KJV and NASB is the ESV. Real good.

cyberlizard said:

i love my ISV (have been using the downloaded version since last year).

i like the ESV as well, but do actually find that they have translated certain passages to support evangelical doctrinal positions rather than simply 'translating them' But mostly that is by the way.

I would just like people to translate bibles according to what the underlying text says, and avoid imposing christian belief structures into the translation - i want the word to be unadulterated... (to that end i like the Interlinear scripture analyser as it gives the ability to use a mechanical concordant method.


Steve

Click to expand...

Yeah I found the placement of words in 1 Peter inline with doctrinal presupposition rather than placement in the Greek.

But these are not so common as far as I have found.