Bible choice - please advise!

BCubed · Jul 30, 2024

I'm starting a one year Bible study with a group of friends using "The Bible Recap" as our guide (as far as reading the Bible on a daily basis in chronological order).

I've researched the various translations and I know there are ones that are more "word for word" and others that are more "thought for thought." (I'm not considering a paraphrased Bible) I've also read there are translations that blatantly change the meaning of parts of the Bible while there are translations that completely leave out many verses found in the original text.

So basically now I'm confused about which Bible would offer the easiest understandability without being inaccurate or incomplete.

Any help you can provide on the which translation I should use would be greatly appreciated!

Thank you!

BCubed

AV1611VET · Jul 30, 2024

Sure thing, B³

The 1611 King James Bible.

You can't go wrong!

Accept no imitations!

Always in His Presence · Jul 30, 2024

BCubed said:
I'm starting a one year Bible study with a group of friends using "The Bible Recap" as our guide (as far as reading the Bible on a daily basis in chronological order).

I've researched the various translations and I know there are ones that are more "word for word" and others that are more "thought for thought." (I'm not considering a paraphrased Bible) I've also read there are translations that blatantly change the meaning of parts of the Bible while there are translations that completely leave out many verses found in the original text.

So basically now I'm confused about which Bible would offer the easiest understandability without being inaccurate or incomplete.

Any help you can provide on the which translation I should use would be greatly appreciated!

Thank you!

BCubed

One you can understand. Personally the New King James is my preference.

chevyontheriver · Jul 30, 2024

BCubed said:
I'm starting a one year Bible study with a group of friends using "The Bible Recap" as our guide (as far as reading the Bible on a daily basis in chronological order).

I've researched the various translations and I know there are ones that are more "word for word" and others that are more "thought for thought." (I'm not considering a paraphrased Bible) I've also read there are translations that blatantly change the meaning of parts of the Bible while there are translations that completely leave out many verses found in the original text.

So basically now I'm confused about which Bible would offer the easiest understandability without being inaccurate or incomplete.

Any help you can provide on the which translation I should use would be greatly appreciated!

Thank you!

BCubed

The ESV is pretty good, fairly literal, and in modern enough English that it makes sense. As to completeness it is available in a Catholic edition that doesn't leave out any books. As to verses that some translations no longer have, I don't know one way or the other what the ESV does.

bling · Jul 30, 2024

Do not just stick with one translation even if a group of translators had to agree on the translation. Do not use like you seem to be aware of already any Bible translation done by an individual or just a few individuals.
If you are American, you may want to avoid translation done by people outside America or you might have language issues.
The main thing is to involve the indwelling Holy Spirit in your study and the fact everything has to do with Christ and leads to Christ.

RandyPNW · Jul 30, 2024

I recommend NET Bible, which is what my brother suggested to me. Online you can see numbered notes, which are quite helpful. The version I've used since the 70s is a new version the NIV Bible. It really tries to communicate, which does not require an exact word for word translation. And it makes use of many authors and scholars.

I grew up on the RSV Bible, which I used to memorize a lot of material--a really readable version. Well, I've lost much of that now, having changed translations. But changing versions help you look at things fresh. I even tried reading the Bible in my very limited Spanish, which also helped me get "outside the box."

Of course, if you know some Greek or Hebrew you have the best of all worlds, but most of us can only do the lexicon/concordance thing. Though there is always the KJV crowd, most versions today make use of the earliest manuscripts, to cover all bases. And if a version excludes material, often that fact is included in the notes.

I'm not against even the most watered down versions. I don't think any of the versions wish to dilute the theology--just make the Bible readable for all. So you can read any of it. But word for word is advertised when you just look up Bibles.

jas3 · Jul 30, 2024

Of the Bibles I own, my favorite is the Orthodox Study Bible. It also provides the most books, as far as I know, of any Bible in English.

Otherwise, I like the NASB 1995 (not 2020), ESV, and KJV. For completeness, you'll want to find an ESV-CE or KJV "with apocrypha." Unfortunately the NASB, as good of a translation as it usually is, is only available with the shorter canon.

BCubed · Jul 31, 2024

chevyontheriver said:
The ESV is pretty good, fairly literal, and in modern enough English that it makes sense. As to completeness it is available in a Catholic edition that doesn't leave out any books. As to verses that some translations no longer have, I don't know one way or the other what the ESV does.

I did a quick search of Bibles that contain the apocrypha and many of them say the Catholic version. Are Catholics the only ones that recognize more than 66 books in the Bible? Is the importance of the other books more for history, for understanding God/Jesus, or both?

I appreciate you help and input!

jas3 said:
Otherwise, I like the NASB 1995 (not 2020), ESV, and KJV. For completeness, you'll want to find an ESV-CE or KJV "with apocrypha." Unfortunately the NASB, as good of a translation as it usually is, is only available with the shorter canon.

I've seen a couple people recommend the 1995 of the NASB instead of the 2020. Why is the 1995 version recommended over the newer one?

As I asked 'chevyontheriver', is the importance of the apocrypha for historical purposes, a better understanding of God/Jesus/Holy Spirit, or both of these?

Thank you very much for your help!

BCubed

chevyontheriver · Jul 31, 2024

BCubed said:
I did a quick search of Bibles that contain the apocrypha and many of them say the Catholic version. Are Catholics the only ones that recognize more than 66 books in the Bible? Is the importance of the other books more for history, for understanding God/Jesus, or both?

I appreciate you help and input!

I've seen a couple people recommend the 1995 of the NASB instead of the 2020. Why is the 1995 version recommended over the newer one?

As I asked 'chevyontheriver', is the importance of the apocrypha for historical purposes, a better understanding of God/Jesus/Holy Spirit, or both of these?

Thank you very much for your help!

BCubed

The Orthodox (Eastern and Oriental), many Anglicans, and some Lutherans accept the full canon. So it’s not just Catholics. Some Orthodox have maybe another book or some have a Psalm 151. I’m not all the way up on all those details.

The canon was based on the Septuagint, the common Greek OT produced in Alexandria even before Jesus was born. For interesting reasons the Jews in Israel decided to adopt a shorter canon and the Protestants eventually accepted that.

A shorter Bible? Why take books out? I can’t wade into that today and I don’t want to derail the thread about translations too far. For me it’s simple. The ESV has that Catholic edition so I can get a good translation and the whole Bible. The RSV also has a Catholic edition and is a good translation too, albeit a little older.

jas3 · Jul 31, 2024

BCubed said:
I did a quick search of Bibles that contain the apocrypha and many of them say the Catholic version. Are Catholics the only ones that recognize more than 66 books in the Bible? Is the importance of the other books more for history, for understanding God/Jesus, or both?

As @chevyontheriver said, the Orthodox also accept more than 66 books. I will add that I'm not sure if any Protestant denomination would say that the deuterocanon (the proper name for these other books) is canonical, but the more traditional ones certainly have no problem with keeping the deuterocanon as reading for edification.
I haven't read the entirety of the deuterocanon, but from what I have read, its significance seems to be partly historical, partly hagiographical (recording miracles of Daniel, for example), and partly doctrinal.

BCubed said:
I've seen a couple people recommend the 1995 of the NASB instead of the 2020. Why is the 1995 version recommended over the newer one?

The newer one makes changes that remove various verses from the main text where the editors think those verses came later, as well as changing the language to be "gender neutral," so many places where "man" is used in the 1995 version replace the word with person, and anywhere "brothers" are mentioned the 2020 version adds "and sisters," even though the original Greek just says brothers.

BCubed · Jul 31, 2024

I appreciate everyone taking the time to respond and to answer my various questions. I've spent a good amount of time comparing various verses from all parts of the Bible in the translations you've mentioned as well as several others.

For ease of understanding and fluid reading, I find 2 translations that seem to have risen to the top for me: ESV ('16), and NASB ('95).

Would you say both of those are pretty similar in accuracy?

Again, I truly appreciate everyone's help!

BCubed

BobRyan · Jul 31, 2024

BCubed said:
I'm starting a one year Bible study with a group of friends using "The Bible Recap" as our guide (as far as reading the Bible on a daily basis in chronological order).

I've researched the various translations and I know there are ones that are more "word for word" and others that are more "thought for thought." (I'm not considering a paraphrased Bible) I've also read there are translations that blatantly change the meaning of parts of the Bible while there are translations that completely leave out many verses found in the original text.

So basically now I'm confused about which Bible would offer the easiest understandability without being inaccurate or incomplete.

Any help you can provide on the which translation I should use would be greatly appreciated!

Thank you!

BCubed

I like NASB -

But I find it best to check with a combination of translations when trying to get to the bottom of a tough problem
KJV
NKJV
NASB
NIV
YLT -- Young's Literal

So then dismissing all the "thee's and thou's" and "makest" and "hearest" and "heardest", "wouldest" and "Hearken" and "meat" where the term just means "food" in some cases... etc.

So sometimes NIV is best - such as in 1 John 2:2 where we find that Jesus "is the atoning sacrifice for our sins and not for our sins only , but for the sins of the whole world"

Halbhh · Jul 31, 2024

BCubed said:
I'm starting a one year Bible study with a group of friends using "The Bible Recap" as our guide (as far as reading the Bible on a daily basis in chronological order).

I've researched the various translations and I know there are ones that are more "word for word" and others that are more "thought for thought." (I'm not considering a paraphrased Bible) I've also read there are translations that blatantly change the meaning of parts of the Bible while there are translations that completely leave out many verses found in the original text.

So basically now I'm confused about which Bible would offer the easiest understandability without being inaccurate or incomplete.

Any help you can provide on the which translation I should use would be greatly appreciated!

Thank you!

BCubed

Having read fully through the Bible in the KJV, NASB, and most (or perhaps by now about all) of it in the NIV, ESV, NRSV, and many passages in a variety of further translations also, the definitely best answer is the NIV translation, with occasional reading in additional translations for some passages that you wonder about, where excellent translations include the NASB and ESV (the ESV is I think rightly considered to be the best overall translation currently by many, but I'd recommend the NIV as a first reading translation, and still often read in it, as many in our bible studies groups like to use it, so I'm hearing it read every week from those study groups).

But if you had a NASB or ESV that's fine, it's just that the NIV is often easier on first reading. (but do avoid the NLT (new living translation) due to the writers added doctrines here and there)

I strongly recommend (having read all the Bible through 3 times and most books in it 4 and more times) that you begin with a Gospel, or 2, like Matthew and John, and then proceed to read through the New Testament generally (all books is good) and only after that the Old Testament (which has a lot of great things in it also and I'm reading a lot in it in the last year especially (books for the 3rd and 4th time), but is less key for us today of course than the New Covenant in the New Testament). Instead of thinking you need the Old Testament to understand the New Testament, it's really the other way around for us today -- people need very much to learn from the New Testament in order to better understand the Old Testament, so that they can avoid some errors that come from failing to have broader context.

seeking.IAM · Jul 31, 2024

BCubed said:
while there are translations that completely leave out many verses found in the original text.

I started out during childhood with the KJV. Then I used an RSV which was a welcome change removing some language complexity and improving understanding. In adulthood, I have mainly used NIV. I would have no problem with the NSRV or the NKJV for that matter.

In response to the quote above, just a note that we don't really have the "original" text. Different translations draw on different historical source texts, but the original text is believed to be lost in antiquity. And, therein lies the problem. The printing press is a relatively recent invention along the timeline of Christianity. Before then, the Bible was reproduced by scribes bent over papyrus with a quill - an arduous process that resulted in some variations from locale to locale. So any modern translation is influenced by the source text from which it was drawn (as well as personal factors of the translators).

BCubed · Jul 31, 2024

BobRyan said:
So sometimes NIV is best - such as in 1 John 2:2 where we find that Jesus "is the atoning sacrifice for our sins and not for our sins only , but for the sins of the whole world"

Halbhh said:
I'd recommend the NIV as a first reading translation

seeking.IAM said:
In adulthood, I have mainly used NIV. I would have no problem with the NSRV or the NKJV for that matter.

What's funny is that many years back (maybe about 15 years ago) I asked everyone I talked to what translation I should avoid. Other than paraphrased Bibles, the first answer was always the NLT...the second answer was the NIV!

So I guess the NIV is more accepted now? I know the readability is easier, but how is the accuracy of the NIV compared to the NASB ('95) and the ESV?

After more comparing of various chapters from different books in the Bible, I'm really liking the NASB ('95), the ESV, and the NKJV (reads very poetically in some areas).

Again, I appreciate all of the advice!

BCubed

ARBITER01 · Jul 31, 2024

BCubed said:
I'm starting a one year Bible study with a group of friends using "The Bible Recap" as our guide (as far as reading the Bible on a daily basis in chronological order).

I've researched the various translations and I know there are ones that are more "word for word" and others that are more "thought for thought." (I'm not considering a paraphrased Bible) I've also read there are translations that blatantly change the meaning of parts of the Bible while there are translations that completely leave out many verses found in the original text.

So basically now I'm confused about which Bible would offer the easiest understandability without being inaccurate or incomplete.

Any help you can provide on the which translation I should use would be greatly appreciated!

Thank you!

BCubed

Why not have a reading bible for normal everyday use, and also have a computer program that you can have multiple translations in it for study?

jas3 · Jul 31, 2024

BCubed said:
What's funny is that many years back (maybe about 15 years ago) I asked everyone I talked to what translation I should avoid. Other than paraphrased Bibles, the first answer was always the NLT...the second answer was the NIV!

So I guess the NIV is more accepted now? I know the readability is easier, but how is the accuracy of the NIV compared to the NASB ('95) and the ESV?

Again, I appreciate all of the advice!

BCubed

I would still suggest avoiding the NIV. It takes some liberties with its translation that compromise it doctrinally, from revising masculine words to "gender-neutral" alternatives (e.g. changing "fathers" to "ancestors") to translation of the Greek paradosis as "tradition" when used in a negative sense, but as "teaching" when used in a positive sense.

As for your earlier question, the ESV and NASB are about the same in terms of accuracy. If in doubt, it's never a bad idea to pull a verse up on Biblehub and compare translations.

AlexB23 · Jul 31, 2024

@BCubed Here are my personal preferences: NIV, NKJV, NRSV-CE (Catholic edition), and ESV.

It is best to use multiple translations.

SavedByGrace3 · Jul 31, 2024

AlexB23 said:
@BCubed Here are my personal preferences: NIV, NKJV, NRSV-CE (Catholic edition), and ESV. It is best to use multiple translations.

For study - Any literal Bible.
For fellowship = KJV

AlexB23 · Jul 31, 2024

SavedByGrace3 said:
For study - Any literal Bible.
For fellowship = KJV

Agreed, or for classic poetic verses, I love the KJV as well. Anything in the green and yellow in the chart below is good for me, I stay away from the orange and red.

Chart: Bible translations: Comparison charts - Chapter 3 Ministries

Bible choice - please advise!

Active Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Jesus is the only Way

Well-Known Member

Regular Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Junior Member

Everything You say is Life to me

A View From The Pew

Active Member

Legend

Well-Known Member

Christian

Jesus is Lord of ALL! (Not asking permission)

Christian

Similar threads