Bible Translations

Andrewn · May 9, 2021

Baby Cottontail said:
I like the NIV, but I am used to the 1984 edition. I would like to get a 2011 thinline sometime, just to be up to date. The church I am in does not use the NIV, and I haven’t been in a situation where I have needed to update to 2011 yet. When I was in college, I used the NIV a lot.

It's wonderful that your wishlist includes a lot of Bibles, rather than other material stuff. I am a person who has bought a lot of Bibles over the years. But the number of new translations produced almost every year is hard to keep up with.

You mentioned 7 Bibles on your wishlist. If I were in your position, I'd use the NIV 1984 for reading the OT and the NRSV (and/or NASB 1995) for the NT. I would compare other translations online but not buy any new Bibles until I decide on which church I will attend in the future.

I never told you which Bibles I currently use because I didn't want to add confusion. But now I will tell you. I read the Jerusalem Bible OT and the Evangelical Heritage Version NT

. A translation that is good in the NT is not necessarily good in the OT and vice versa.

HIM · May 9, 2021

Baby Cottontail said:
I am not sure if this is the correct forum to ask this question (please move it to the correct place if I have put it in the wrong spot).

Anyway, I am developing a wishlist of Bibles I would like to purchase in the future. Is there a list of recommended Bible translations for Christians? It seems like there has been a recent explosion of translations in the past few years. It used to be that New Revised Standard Version and New International Version seemed to cover enough of my experiences (church services, Christian conferences/events, Bible studies, etc.). However, now there seem to be a lot more in use.

I have the 1984 New International Version, the 1995 New American Standard Version, and the New Revised Standard Version. I also have a Good News Bible that I received when I was in 3rd grade, but do not care for that translation. I have a Common English Bible, as my denomination has been pushing it in its literature for children, and I teach confirmation classes at my church. I thought it would be good to have a copy of it.

I am aware that the NIV was updated in 2011, and the NASB was updated in 2020, both to be gender inclusive. I will probably eventually want to get updates of those translations. I haven’t gone to a church that used the NIV since I was in graduate school, so have not updated yet to the 2011 edition. The NASB is for my own personal study, as I like the literalness of it.

I would like to get a full copy of the New King James Version, as I think it is a beautiful translation, and I would just like to have one. When I was in Campus Crusade for Christ in College, and went to Christmas Conference or Big Break, someone read Ephesians 3 out of there, and it was just so lovely. This definitely would not be my main translation, but I would just like to have it.

My pastor really likes the New Living Translation, and has asked that I use that in the confirmation class that I will be teaching in the fall. I would like to have a copy of that so that I can become familiar with it. I also am aware that many Christians like the English Standard Version and the Christian Standard Bible. If those are super popular, I may want to pick those up in the future.

I am also trying to future proof myself, as I don’t know if I will end up staying in my current denomination or not. It all depends on how things go, and what happens. I know some churches/Bible studies really celebrate a diversity of Bible translations, while others prefer people in a Bible study to all be reading the same translation of the Bible.

What are the translations that you use in your church, and do the Bible studies that you are apart of prefer one translation, or do they like diversity? If one is preferred, which one? What do you believe are the essential Bible translations for Christians today?

What about study Bibles? Do you use/encourage a specific one, or do you like it when people bring different ones to a Bible study?

I have several study Bibles —
Zondervan NASB (which doesn’t appear to be in print anymore. It uses the study notes from their NIV Bible)

NRSV Harper Collins Study Bible (required for the New Testament class I took)

New Oxford Annotated NRSV Third Edition

NIV 1984 Life Application Bible

NIV 1984 Student Serendipity Bible

Have you ever used a Interlinear? Here is a link: JP GREEN INTERLINEAR BIBLE PDF

Baby Cottontail · May 9, 2021

Andrewn said:
It's wonderful that your wishlist includes a lot of Bibles, rather than other material stuff. I am a person who has bought a lot of Bibles over the years. But the number of new translations produced almost every year is hard to keep up with.

You mentioned 7 Bibles on your wishlist. If I were in your position, I'd use the NIV 1984 for reading the OT and the NRSV (and/or NASB 1995) for the NT. I would compare other translations online but not buy any new Bibles until I decide on which church I will attend in the future.

I never told you which Bibles I currently use because I didn't want to add confusion. But now I will tell you. I read the Jerusalem Bible OT and the Evangelical Heritage Version NT . A translation that is good in the NT is not necessarily good in the OT and vice versa.

Thanks for your advice

I have never read either the Jerusalem Bible or the Evangelical Heritage Version. I know the Jerusalem Bible is online.

Baby Cottontail · May 9, 2021

HIM said:
Have you ever used a Interlinear? Here is a link: JP GREEN INTERLINEAR BIBLE PDF

No, I have not. Thanks for the link.

Davy · May 9, 2021

Baby Cottontail said:
Every online source I have come across states that the NKJV uses the Textus Receptus for the NT. Let me check the NT KJV that I have to see if it says in the introduction...unfortunately my copy doesn’t have any kind of introduction from the translators. I don’t have a complete NKJV. The one I have came from the Gideon’s when they were giving NT out when I was in school.

The MEV someone earlier suggested that I read also uses the Textus Receptus, according to the online sources that I have read.

Regardless of what text is used for the NT, the basic message of the Bible is the same in all translations I have looked at (except for the New World Translation). The gospel message is the same.

As far as linking heresies to the Alexandrian texts, people can also come to heretical beliefs by reading the KJV, too. After all that’s the translation that Mormons use. The point I am making is that any person can take any Bible translation, and if they take things out of context, they can use it to support any heresy they wish.

Any translation can also be used to refute these heresies.

Where do the KJV and the NKJV differ greatly? I just checked and the NKJV has 1 John 5:7 in it, which I know is a complaint that some people have regarding newer translations. (I know why it isn’t in other translations).

From Bible Gateway:

What do the footnotes in the NKJV [New King James Version] mean?
June 13, 2018 13:58

These notations are meant to identify the original manuscript source of Bible passages. Here are more details from the New King James Version preface:

Where significant variations occur in the New Testament Greek manuscripts, textual notes are classified as follows:

NU-Text
These variations from the traditional text generally represent the Alexandrian or Egyptian type of text [the oldest, but sometimes questioned text]. They are found in the Critical Text published in the Twenty-sixth edition of the Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament (N) and in the United Bible Society's third edition (U), hence the acronym "NU-text."

M-Text
This symbol indicates points of variation in the Majority Text from the traditional text [a consensus of most Greek manuscripts]. It should be noted that M stands for whatever reading is printed in the published Greek New Testament According to the Majority Text, whether supported by overwhelming, strong, or only a divided majority textual tradition.

Davy · May 9, 2021

Baby Cottontail said:
Regardless of what text is used for the NT, the basic message of the Bible is the same in all translations I have looked at (except for the New World Translation). The gospel message is the same.

I agree the Gospel Message is pretty much the same in all translations, otherwise it couldn't be claimed it was a Bible at all. But that's not the point once the believer has already come to Christ and been baptized, and is trying to study God's Word according to 2 Timothy 2:15.

As far as linking heresies to the Alexandrian texts, people can also come to heretical beliefs by reading the KJV, too. After all that’s the translation that Mormons use.

That's not really a valid argument, since the Mormons' rely on The Book of Mormon. Even the devil quoted Bible Scripture, but that doesn't make the Scripture his (Luke 4).

And by the way, the NKJV omits the original KJV phrase "at any time" in Luke 4 which the devil ADDED when quoting Psalms 91:11-12 to our Lord Jesus. That phrase is in the Textus Receptus manuscripts. If the NKJV is a faithful version of the original KJV from the same Greek manuscripts, you should ask yourself why that "at any time" phrase was left out. A comparison with the KJV when reading the NKJV will produce many of these inconsistencies, so the difference is not a myth.

Baby Cottontail · May 9, 2021

Davy said:
From Bible Gateway:

What do the footnotes in the NKJV [New King James Version] mean?
June 13, 2018 13:58

These notations are meant to identify the original manuscript source of Bible passages. Here are more details from the New King James Version preface:

Where significant variations occur in the New Testament Greek manuscripts, textual notes are classified as follows:

NU-Text
These variations from the traditional text generally represent the Alexandrian or Egyptian type of text [the oldest, but sometimes questioned text]. They are found in the Critical Text published in the Twenty-sixth edition of the Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament (N) and in the United Bible Society's third edition (U), hence the acronym "NU-text."

M-Text
This symbol indicates points of variation in the Majority Text from the traditional text [a consensus of most Greek manuscripts]. It should be noted that M stands for whatever reading is printed in the published Greek New Testament According to the Majority Text, whether supported by overwhelming, strong, or only a divided majority textual tradition.

Okay, so one of your objections to the NKJV is that it includes footnotes about the other manuscripts?

I think those are included in order to truly make the translation scholarly. Most translations include footnotes showing that there are some variations in the various manuscripts. They are trying to be honest, not hiding the fact that there are other manuscripts that show different variations.

If a person isn’t interested in what other manuscripts say, the footnotes can be completely ignored. If you want only the Textus Receptus, just ignore the footnotes.

Baby Cottontail · May 9, 2021

Davy said:
I agree the Gospel Message is pretty much the same in all translations, otherwise it couldn't be claimed it was a Bible at all. But that's not the point once the believer has already come to Christ and been baptized, and is trying to study God's Word according to 2 Timothy 2:15.

That's not really a valid argument, since the Mormons' rely on The Book of Mormon. Even the devil quoted Bible Scripture, but that doesn't make the Scripture his (Luke 4).

And by the way, the NKJV omits the original KJV phrase "at any time" in Luke 4 which the devil ADDED when quoting Psalms 91:11-12 to our Lord Jesus. That phrase is in the Textus Receptus manuscripts. If the NKJV is a faithful version of the original KJV from the same Greek manuscripts, you should ask yourself why that "at any time" phrase was left out. A comparison with the KJV when reading the NKJV will produce many of these inconsistencies, so the difference is not a myth.

I am glad that you agree that the gospel message is the same in all translations.

My point was that people can read any translation, including the KJV, and pull Scripture out of context, and believe in any heresy they wish. Exactly. Even Satan quoted Scripture, and it doesn’t make it his. The same is true for Bible translations other than the KJV. Just because someone might believe a heresy having read a non Textus Receptus translation does not mean that the manuscripts caused the heresy.

I read over Luke chapter 4, and I have no idea why there is a difference, except possibly a difference in how the translators translated the text. Even if two groups of people start out with the exact same manuscripts, these people can come up with different translations. There is some interpretation in all translations. I can’t find a footnote to explain this, so I have no idea what is going on.

I will check it with the the online copy of the MEV too, which also comes from the Textus Receptus. “At any time” isn’t in the MEV either.

I don’t read Greek, so I don’t know what the Textus Receptus says there, but I assume that the translators of both the NKJV and the MEV had reasons for not including “at any time.” Might it have been a scribe addition that isn’t actually in the Textus Receptus, and somehow found its way into the KJV?

You know what? I will do a quick google search to see if I can find out.

I searched, and can’t find anything.

Taodeching · May 9, 2021

Baby Cottontail said:
What are the translations that you use in your church

In Church we use the NKJV as that. I have the NASB which I like, my wife got it for me. I also like the Good News Translation which I would love to get someday and my favorite Bible at the moment is the Action Bible. The Action Bible is like a graphic novel of the Bible. One more I really like is the Lighthouse Bible, it is very close to the NKJV

GodLovesCats · May 9, 2021

Does anyone know if all Bibles have red text for what Jesus said?

Baby Cottontail · May 9, 2021

ChristianForCats said:
Does anyone know if all Bibles have red text for what Jesus said?

No, they all do not. This seems to be a publisher decision. If you want Jesus’ words in red, you need to look for a red letter edition, or one that says that Jesus’ words are in red. Some people want this and others don’t.

If you are buying a Bible in person, it will be easy to check if it is red letter. All you will need to do is flip to the NT and see if Jesus’ words are in red or not.

If you are ordering online, you need to read the description carefully, as well as read the reviews. Check a Bible you are interested in on several websites and read the description.

Not all Bibles of the same translations are red letter/not red letter.

GodLovesCats · May 9, 2021

Red text is not a deal breaker for me, but it does have a purpose. Sometimes people want to start reading where Jesus is talking instead of the beginning of a chapter.

Baby Cottontail · May 9, 2021

Taodeching said:
In Church we use the NKJV as that. I have the NASB which I like, my wife got it for me. I also like the Good News Translation which I would love to get someday and my favorite Bible at the moment is the Action Bible. The Action Bible is like a graphic novel of the Bible. One more I really like is the Lighthouse Bible, it is very close to the NKJV

I don’t know anything about the Lighthouse Bible. Is it the name of a translation, or is it an edition of some other translation?

If you go to the American Bible Society website it looks like you can get a hardcover Good News Translation Bible. Hopefully it is good quality. I saw on the Christianbook website that one person who has been looking for a Good News Bible is having a hard time finding one of good quality on christianbook. If you order it directly from the publisher (American Bible Society), I think your chances for a good one are higher.

My Good News is a children’s Bible that I received when I was in third grade. Unfortunately, it doesn’t seem to be in print anymore. It’s decent quality.

I have heard of the Action Bible, which I know is really popular with kids. I have heard that it isn’t a complete Bible. Is that true?

Baby Cottontail · May 9, 2021

ChristianForCats said:
Red text is not a deal breaker for me, but it does have a purpose. Sometimes people want to start reading where Jesus is talking instead of the beginning of a chapter.

I think most of the editions of Bibles I own are out of print now. I will still tell you which of mine are red letter so you have an idea:

My NASB (1995) study Bible, which was printed by Zondervan is red letter. I think they only make new Zondervan study Bibles using the 2011 NIV. I am guessing it would also be red letter, but you will have to read the description for sure. My study Bible is really heavy, so I don’t carry it to church anymore.

My NASB (1995) thinline is also printed by Zondervan, but this particular edition seems to be out of print. I think they might sell newer editions. It’s also red letter.

My NIV (1984) thinline is definitely out of print, but I know Zondervan sells NIV 2011 thinline Bibles. This one is printed by Zondervan , and it is red letter.

My CEB thinline with the Apocrypha is out of print with the DecoTone cover. It’s also the first edition printing, and has a few errors in it that were corrected in later editions. It only has Common English Bible listed as the publisher on the Bible, but I am pretty sure it is actually Abington Press. Anyway, it is NOT red letter.

My NRSV is likely a gift and award one, and it’s falling apart. I carried it to and from a class when in college, and the binding just couldn’t take it. It’s made pretty cheaply. I received it from my church when I graduated from high school. It has Cokesbury listed on the spine, but When I opened it up to look at the publisher information, it’s actually Zondervan that published it. Anyway, it is red letter.

My Good New Bible (out of print now) is published by Nelson, and is NOT red letter.

My NRSV Harper Collins Study Bible with Apocrypha is still in print. It’s published by Harper Collins, and is NOT red letter.

My NRSV New Oxford Annotated Bible with Apocrypha 3rd edition is out of print. However, the 5th edition is in print, as is the original version with the RSV. It’s Oxford University Press, and is NOT red letter.

My NIV (1984) Serendipity Bible is out of print. It’s published by Zondervan, and is NOT red letter.

My NIV (1984) Women’s Devotional Bible is out of print (but I am sure there is a 2011 version). It is published by Zondervan and is NOT red letter.

So, in my collection, the red letter editions happened to be all published by Zondervan, but not all of my Zondervan ones were red letter. I don’t have a fair sampling of Bibles by other publishers. If you would like to have one with red letters, just make sure it has red letters before buying it

. However, if it’s not a super popular translation, like Good News or CEB, you might not have much choice on the red letter feature.

GodLovesCats · May 9, 2021

Baby, do you read the Apocrypha? I thought all Protestant churches rejected it.

GodLovesCats · May 9, 2021

Baby Cottontail said:
I have heard of the Action Bible, which I know is really popular with kids. I have heard that it isn’t a complete Bible. Is that true?

There is no such thing as a complete Bible for kids. They cannot comprehend every message in it. I know there are age-appropriate Bibles so kids can learn some of the most important stuff, like why there are so many different languages in the world.

Baby Cottontail · May 9, 2021

ChristianForCats said:
Baby, do you read the Apocrypha? I thought all Protestant churches rejected it.

I very rarely read it. I have read some of it. I reject it as canon/Scripture, but it does have some interesting stories/traditions in it. My church does not read from it.

Some of those Bibles with apocryphas were required for classes I took.

It’s not actually a bad thing to read it. It can also be useful when talking to people who do view it as canon. Ultimately, no one needs to read it, but there is nothing wrong with reading it either. I don’t believe there is any spiritual harm in it.

Baby Cottontail · May 9, 2021

ChristianForCats said:
There is no such thing as a complete Bible for kids. They cannot comprehend every message in it. I know there are age-appropriate Bibles so kids can learn some of the most important stuff, like why there are so many different languages in the world.

I think it depends on the age of the kids. Are we talking about babies, toddlers, preschoolers, elementary kids, pre teens, or teens?

At what age do you believe they can comprehend it?

Faith is a process. None of us understand everything about the Bible. We are all learning, and we all understand more as we grow in our faith.

To me, the most important stuff has to do with Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection. However, I think it’s good for kids to learn the stories of both Testaments—learn what the Christian faith teaches. I believe that the Holy Spirit will help them understand at their level what they need to know.

GodLovesCats · May 9, 2021

Baby Cottontail said:
It’s not actually a bad thing to read it. It can also be useful when talking to people who do view it as canon. Ultimately, no one needs to read it, but there is nothing wrong with reading it either. I don’t believe there is any spiritual harm in it.

The spiritual harm would be believing God wrote those books if He did not. That is a totally different topic though so I will not comment further.

GodLovesCats · May 9, 2021

Baby Cottontail said:
I think it depends on the age of the kids. Are we talking about babies, toddlers, preschoolers, elementary kids, pre-teens, or teens?

At what age do you believe they can comprehend it?

I think kids are able to comprehend the concept of a prophet doing miracles in elementary school, but the first one - having a virgin mother - requires understanding the human life cycle to realize Jesus is not just a man with supernatural powers, but God in human form.

Bible Translations

Well-Known Member

Friend

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads