Fundamentalist Baptists and Bible Versions

[Ave Maria]

Thanks everyone for your input! It is quite appreciated. Personally, I have changed back to being King James Version Only. But that is just me. I do sometimes use modern Bible versions to compare with the KJV but that is rare for me.

 

[edie19]

my church uses the NASB - as my pastor likes to say, it's incredibly accurate

most of our guest speakers use either the NASB or NKJV - I'll be honest, I don't remember any using KJV, but they might have and I just didn't realize it (I would have just thought it was different than my translation)

I routinely use the NKJV. I just got an ESV Reformation Study Bible and am enjoying that translation as well. I also have the NASB, NIV & New Century. All have their places. Like many others here, I hold with whichever translation the person will read.

 

[Ave Maria]

You all should read this. It's called The Fourfold Superiority of the King James Version.

 

[BigNorsk]

What does an fictional work have to do with this?

It would be better to read Michael Marlow's explanation of some of the errors found in the KJV and thereby know that it is not perfect, a wonderful work for it's time but not perfect, the texts behind it were far from perfect too. Hence that would be why the translators in places took the reading from the Vulgate over either the Hebrew or Greek. It's understandable, they didn't know what some words meant. They did know their Latin.

http://www.bible-researcher.com/kjvdefects.html

Marv

 

[Jessica Lauren]

What do you guys think of the NKJV compared to the regular KJV ?

 

[BereanTodd]

What do you guys think of the NKJV compared to the regular KJV ?

The NKJV is right there with the NASB as the best translations out there. If you lean towards majority text in your beliefs, then the NKJV would be for you, if you are more of an Alexandrian then the NASB. I personally love both and use both a lot, though I lean slightly to the NASB.

But specifically to your question, the NKJV is much more readable and understandable for today's student of the Scriptures than the outdated language of the KJV. It also is just plain a better translation. My personal view of the best translations is this.

1. NASB/NKJV.
2. (very close to 1) ESV, NET.
3. (a little more distant) KJV
4. (a lot more distant) NIV
5. (comentaries, NOT translations) NLT, Message, et al.

I don't have real experience or much exposure yet to the HCSB or the NRSV so I did not rank those.

 

[Izdaari Eristikon]

The NKJV is right there with the NASB as the best translations out there. If you lean towards majority text in your beliefs, then the NKJV would be for you, if you are more of an Alexandrian then the NASB. I personally love both and use both a lot, though I lean slightly to the NASB.

But specifically to your question, the NKJV is much more readable and understandable for today's student of the Scriptures than the outdated language of the KJV. It also is just plain a better translation.

I concur. The NKJV is a very good translation, one of the best, and far superior to the KJV.

I mostly agree on the other translations, and since I do use both the HCSB and the NRSV, and think highly of them, I would include them in at least the 2nd rank.

However, I must disagree on the NLT. It isn't a paraphrase, but a real translation. The project started out as a revision to the Living Bible, which is a paraphrase, but it evolved into doing an all new translation, a real one that leans toward dynamic-equivalence, and I think a pretty good one, one of my favorites.

 

[desmalia]

The NKJV is right there with the NASB as the best translations out there. If you lean towards majority text in your beliefs, then the NKJV would be for you, if you are more of an Alexandrian then the NASB. I personally love both and use both a lot, though I lean slightly to the NASB.

But specifically to your question, the NKJV is much more readable and understandable for today's student of the Scriptures than the outdated language of the KJV. It also is just plain a better translation. My personal view of the best translations is this.

1. NASB/NKJV.
2. (very close to 1) ESV, NET.
3. (a little more distant) KJV
4. (a lot more distant) NIV
5. (comentaries, NOT translations) NLT, Message, et al.

I don't have real experience or much exposure yet to the HCSB or the NRSV so I did not rank those.

Totally agree. And personally I prefer the NASB, tho the NKJV is so similar it's hard to tell the difference between the two at times. But I will say the KJV has a poetic loveliness to it as well.

 

[BereanTodd]

I mostly agree on the other translations, and since I do use both the HCSB and the NRSV, and think highly of them, I would include them in at least the 2nd rank.

I have heard that the HCSB is very similar of quality to the ESV, but I can't judge it not having checked it out myself.

However, I must disagree on the NLT. It isn't a paraphrase, but a real translation. The project started out as a revision to the Living Bible, which is a paraphrase, but it evolved into doing an all new translation, a real one that leans toward dynamic-equivalence, and I think a pretty good one, one of my favorites.

Well, I will say this ... I do MUCH prefer the NLT to the Message, and think it vastly superior to it ... but it is still far too loose of a translation in my opinion.

 

[Jessica Lauren]

Awesome! Thanks guys. I have owned a NKJV for quite some time. It's what I read from at home, though sometimes the NASB sometimes online. I read the NASB was the most accurate, so I just wanted opinions on it. Especially since the Baptist church I'm going to start to attend uses the NKJV like me . Plus I want the most accurate. I don't like the NIV either. I like word-for-word translation and then I use my own brain to figure it out.

 

[WannaWitness]

What do you guys think of the NKJV compared to the regular KJV ?

Glad you asked!

Personally, I think it's a decent translation, and pretty straightforward for being made in 1982. That's the one I use the most (and I use King James, as well).

I do feel, however, that there are some crazy translations to watch out for. One example is "The New World Translation", the Jehovah's Witness "bible". Now if anyone wants to call this a "PERversion", they'd be right in doing so.

As far as the King James Only issue is concerned, this is a conviction that is shared by many believers, regardless of denomination. As a conviction, it is to be commended. However, there are a few people who use only King James who really believe people are unsaved who use other translations. As with any other special conviction (like dresses only for women, etc.), special caution should be taken not to become a Pharisee about it.

The following links give a lot of insight on the issue of Bible Versions. This is NOT meant to offend anyone, but simply intended as interesting commentaries that are worth a peek.

http://www.evangelicaloutreach.org/kjvo.htm

http://www.evangelicaloutreach.org/gailriplinger.htm

http://www.isitso.org/guide/kjvonly.html

 

[Jessica Lauren]

Thanks for the links and info!

I wouldn't ever buy a NWT or a JW "Bible!"

 

[Izdaari Eristikon]

Thanks for the links and info!

I wouldn't ever buy a NWT or a JW "Bible!"

And actually even that's fine except for the parts that've been altered to conform to JW doctrine! Of course, you'd have to know which parts those are to watch out for them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_World_Translation_of_the_Holy_Scriptures

 

[Christian Soldier]

I don't have real experience or much exposure yet to the HCSB or the NRSV so I did not rank those.

The HCSB is very good, IMHO. I use the HCS Apologetics Study Bible (HCSASB) on a frequent basis, and am quite satisfied with it.

Judging by the contributors to the HCSASB, the HCSB has gained acceptance amongst world class apologists such as Geisler, Rhodes, Moreland, Copan, Boa etc.

I also use The King James Study Bible (Thomas Nelson). I don't buy the "It's just too hard to understand" argument in regard to the KJV, since there are several excellent study Bibles available today that make it quite easy to understand.

 

[BereanTodd]

You shouldn't require a study bible in order to make something easily understandable. In fact, though I did in my younger days enjoy study bibles (Ryrie's is the best imho), I don't like study bibles any longer. I don't want another man telling me what to think about a passage. I want the pure word of God to have its effect on me. If I need or want some references, I know where to go for answers. Give me a plain-ole thinline bible with nothing but the word.

 

[Izdaari Eristikon]

The HCSB is very good, IMHO. I use the HCS Apologetics Study Bible (HCSASB) on a frequent basis, and am quite satisfied with it.

Judging by the contributors to the HCSASB, the HCSB has gained acceptance amongst world class apologists such as Geisler, Rhodes, Moreland, Copan, Boa etc.

I have that edition too, and I like it very much.

I also use The King James Study Bible (Thomas Nelson). I don't buy the "It's just too hard to understand" argument in regard to the KJV, since there are several excellent study Bibles available today that make it quite easy to understand.

For me, it's not that the KJV is too hard to understand, but rather that the archaic English is annoying and distracting.

 

[WannaWitness]

For me, it's not that the KJV is too hard to understand, but rather that the archaic English is annoying and distracting.

I see what you mean. I can understand that some people might find some words in KJV awkward to read (out loud), even though the same words may not necessarily be hard to understand. And then, there are some words that are more difficult (like succour) which may call for the use of a commentary.

 

[The Time Traveller]

Personally I use the KJV, but would consult with the Hebrew OT and the Greek NT when I want further insight on a passage.

Regards to all

The Time Traveller

 

[Izdaari Eristikon]

I see what you mean. I can understand that some people might find some words in KJV awkward to read (out loud), even though the same words may not necessarily be hard to understand. And then, there are some words that are more difficult (like succour) which may call for the use of a commentary.

Right. I do own a KJV (among many other translations - I sort of collect Bibles), and if it had to serve as my only Bible, I'd get by just fine. But it'd sure take a lot of getting used to, as unlike many KJV fans, I was not raised with it. In the first church where I began to seriously study the Bible, the RSV was the popular version.

 

[GodGunsAndGlory]

Complete Jewish Bible.

Only Bible out there that doesn't say you have to marry the person who rapes you(atheists love the quote, but the actual word in Hebrew means seduce).