I am newly saved and have a question about the different translations of the bible. I have a NIV (Quest Study Bible to be exact) but I see all the other versions. Is one translation considered "better" than the other or does it not really matter? Thanks in advance!
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
NIV question
- Thread starter plowboy22
- Start date
- Status
Unnamed Servant
Active Member
NIV is a little more paraphrased, meaning that the translators may have put a few words to help the reader understand the passage. Those words being what the translator might have been trying to get accross. I would recommend a slightly paraphrased bible to a new Christian like the NIV. There are other versions like the Message that is extremely paraphrased that I wouldn't recommend, but for you being a new Christian the NIV is great to learn on and get the understanding of scripture. When you get a feel for scripture you can move on to more literal translations like the NASB, ESV, or KJV.
If you have any questions be sure to ask me or pm me and I will try to give the biblical answer and/or pray for you.
If you still don't know what version to get and it's bugging you then pray about it.
Love-In-Christ,
Unnamed Servant
If you have any questions be sure to ask me or pm me and I will try to give the biblical answer and/or pray for you.
If you still don't know what version to get and it's bugging you then pray about it.
Love-In-Christ,
Unnamed Servant
Upvote
0
herev
CL--you are missed!
wow, welcome to the famiily. YOu have no idea the can of worms you are opening, but yes, one version is better than the others, the problem is we all disagree as to which one that is. While some will tell you that you need to read the KING JAMES and nothing else, the rest of us would tell you that it is a good idea to look at various versions. YOu can do this online or buy other versions.
I personally would recommend that you leave the quest alone for now. It doesn't have notes, but instead questions in the margins. It is a great study tool for someone leading Bible study or someone already familiar with the Bible, but for someone newly saved, I would look at the Life Application study bible or the NIV study bible or the New Oxford annotated Study Bible. The notes are much more informative. NIV is fine with me--it's what I usually preach from
God bless
I personally would recommend that you leave the quest alone for now. It doesn't have notes, but instead questions in the margins. It is a great study tool for someone leading Bible study or someone already familiar with the Bible, but for someone newly saved, I would look at the Life Application study bible or the NIV study bible or the New Oxford annotated Study Bible. The notes are much more informative. NIV is fine with me--it's what I usually preach from
God bless
Upvote
0
I see you attend a Nazarene Church.
When I attended Eastern Nazarene College MANY years ago the NIV was the Bible they used in the classroom. (Maybe not for the divinity students)
I personally go back and forth between the KJV, the new KJV and the NIV.
The Study Bible I use the most is the NIV.
When I attended Eastern Nazarene College MANY years ago the NIV was the Bible they used in the classroom. (Maybe not for the divinity students)
I personally go back and forth between the KJV, the new KJV and the NIV.
The Study Bible I use the most is the NIV.
Upvote
0
rainbowprism
Elevate My Soul
Whatever version YOU are able to read and understand...and whatever version YOU are giong to be motivated to read often is the right version for you.
I find that I get the most out of NIV translation, but that's just me.
I find that I get the most out of NIV translation, but that's just me.
Upvote
0
daveleau
In all you do, do it for Christ and w/ Him in mind
- Apr 12, 2004
- 8,984
- 703
- 50
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
I know you didn't mean for it to be a loaded question, but this is a hotly debated topic on this forum. 
I wish it wasn't.
The NIV has some debatable attributes to it that have caused some on the fringe to deny it as a Bible that should be used.
Conversely, it is the best of the modern translations that updates the King James, which has language that is very difficult to new readers of the Bible. The KJV is claimed by some to be inerrant. Conservative theological scholars typically deny this. Most conservative theological scholars claim that the original Bible was completely inerrant and that the Bibles we have today are 99% inerrant (KJV, NIV, NASB etc), but are 100% theologically inerrant. What I am getting at is that the errors in the KJV and the NIV or any other major version (not paraphrased versions, but ones that attempt to translate one word for one word when possible) are not going to change any theology. In actuality, the NIV removes some Scribe inserts that were added to the original to improve understanding.
My recommendation is to get an NIV to start off with. You will be much better served by an NIV because it is easier to read and understand because of the updated terminology (what some of the above have called paraphrasing). If you are in a church that preaches from a King James Bible, then I would recommend a NIV/KJV parallel Bible that has BOTH versions side by side. This is a great tool and will bless you immensely. AND you can pick out the better translation of each as you go along. This takes some study, but it will come with experience.
God bless you,
Dave
I wish it wasn't. The NIV has some debatable attributes to it that have caused some on the fringe to deny it as a Bible that should be used.
Conversely, it is the best of the modern translations that updates the King James, which has language that is very difficult to new readers of the Bible. The KJV is claimed by some to be inerrant. Conservative theological scholars typically deny this. Most conservative theological scholars claim that the original Bible was completely inerrant and that the Bibles we have today are 99% inerrant (KJV, NIV, NASB etc), but are 100% theologically inerrant. What I am getting at is that the errors in the KJV and the NIV or any other major version (not paraphrased versions, but ones that attempt to translate one word for one word when possible) are not going to change any theology. In actuality, the NIV removes some Scribe inserts that were added to the original to improve understanding.
My recommendation is to get an NIV to start off with. You will be much better served by an NIV because it is easier to read and understand because of the updated terminology (what some of the above have called paraphrasing). If you are in a church that preaches from a King James Bible, then I would recommend a NIV/KJV parallel Bible that has BOTH versions side by side. This is a great tool and will bless you immensely. AND you can pick out the better translation of each as you go along. This takes some study, but it will come with experience.
God bless you,
Dave
Upvote
0
Ave Maria
Ave Maria Gratia Plena
- May 31, 2004
- 41,132
- 2,030
- 43
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
I also recommend the NIV. It is easiest to understand for beginning Christians. It is the one that I started out with. I say don't listen to those who claim the KJV is the only inspired and inerrant Word of God. I have done my research and my research tells me that this simply is not true. The KJV is a very good Bible to read but you should wait until you better understand easier versions like the NIV before you go digging in to tougher versions like the KJV. Another version that would be nice to look in to is the NLT. It is highly paraphrased but very easy to understand. I recently bought a HCSB which I love! You might also want to look in to it but I don't know if it'd be good for beginners or not.
Upvote
0
I use many versions and have studied Greek and Hebrew to the point that I am able to make my own translations when I want to. Still, I use the NIV first when I am trying to study book of scripture.
Different translations have different purposes and different audiences.
KJV and NKJV were translated specifically to be read aloud in public. Their translators paid special attention to the beauty of the words to a listener. The RSV and NRSV are also good for reading aloud.
The NASB and the Amplified are written for readers who want to concentrate on the exact meanings of key words.
The NIV is translated specifically for the way most modern English speakers read silently for general meaning.
That's why, when I'm going to teach, I first read the entire book in one sitting in the NIV. I meditate on whatever I remember out of it for a week, then (if I have enough time, and I try very hard to schedule my teaching commitments far enough in advance to be able to do this) I read the whole book in one sitting in another version, and meditate on it for another week before I begin any in-depth study of the details.
As I'm studying the details and/or teaching, I continue to read the whole book in one sitting weekly, each time in a different translation. I find that after I read a whole book weekly for 8-10 weeks, I feel like I really "know" the book. It belongs to me.
It is very important to get the "big picture" before concentrating too much on the details. The NIV is the best version for personal reading when one is trying to get the "big picture" on the book level, rather than the chapter, verse or word level. For a new Christian, this is a very important objective. Don't get too bogged down in the details. Try to get a general understanding of each book first. This will serve you well as a foundation for further Bible study.
God bless you as you begin your life-long journey with God and study of the scriptures.
Different translations have different purposes and different audiences.
KJV and NKJV were translated specifically to be read aloud in public. Their translators paid special attention to the beauty of the words to a listener. The RSV and NRSV are also good for reading aloud.
The NASB and the Amplified are written for readers who want to concentrate on the exact meanings of key words.
The NIV is translated specifically for the way most modern English speakers read silently for general meaning.
That's why, when I'm going to teach, I first read the entire book in one sitting in the NIV. I meditate on whatever I remember out of it for a week, then (if I have enough time, and I try very hard to schedule my teaching commitments far enough in advance to be able to do this) I read the whole book in one sitting in another version, and meditate on it for another week before I begin any in-depth study of the details.
As I'm studying the details and/or teaching, I continue to read the whole book in one sitting weekly, each time in a different translation. I find that after I read a whole book weekly for 8-10 weeks, I feel like I really "know" the book. It belongs to me.
It is very important to get the "big picture" before concentrating too much on the details. The NIV is the best version for personal reading when one is trying to get the "big picture" on the book level, rather than the chapter, verse or word level. For a new Christian, this is a very important objective. Don't get too bogged down in the details. Try to get a general understanding of each book first. This will serve you well as a foundation for further Bible study.
God bless you as you begin your life-long journey with God and study of the scriptures.
Upvote
0
vinsight4u
Contributor
You need to stick with the KJV only.
What's a good use for the new versions?
Well, when the beast shows up -send him them!
Mark the section in Rev. 17 where he along with the ten horns it is wrongly written burn mystery, Babylon!
Hopefully he will read this -and burn his own city of trade.
ten give their kingdom unto the beast
the bible is clear this is the same group that will burn the city
thus -the ten
not the beast
Save your deception versions and mail them to the ac when he shows up!
maybe they will fool the ac (nebuchadnezzar) into thinking he should burn his own city of trade
Tyre in Lebanon
But, darn!
God has already shown him the future!
Maybe He had to just in case he read the new versions and then didn't know if his number is 616 or 666.
What's a good use for the new versions?
Well, when the beast shows up -send him them!
Mark the section in Rev. 17 where he along with the ten horns it is wrongly written burn mystery, Babylon!
Hopefully he will read this -and burn his own city of trade.
ten give their kingdom unto the beast
the bible is clear this is the same group that will burn the city
thus -the ten
not the beast
Save your deception versions and mail them to the ac when he shows up!
maybe they will fool the ac (nebuchadnezzar) into thinking he should burn his own city of trade
Tyre in Lebanon
But, darn!
God has already shown him the future!
Maybe He had to just in case he read the new versions and then didn't know if his number is 616 or 666.
Upvote
0
As much as I hate to say it, your post made no sense to me at all. Could you clarify why I should read the KJV only.
Upvote
0
vinsight4u
Contributor
The new versions have put man's ideas into them, and let God's way get shoved off the pages. One reason the church is so deceived now is because of the things written incorrectly in the new versions.plowboy22 said:
An example: Many believe that the beast will burn mystery, Babylon in Rev. 17. In the KJV and older versions (that I have checked) the beast is not among the ones that set the city aflame.
Rev. 17:16
"And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast.....shall......burn her with fire."
The new versions have mistranslated it to now reading that the beast and the ten horns burn the city.
So which are we to watch for?
the ten horns as kings burn this wicked city?
or the beast and the ten horns burn it?
It matters as this city will be the trade center for the beast, thus he will not burn his own city.
At the end of the great tribulation is when the ten horns are done giving the beast their kingdom for one hour (the hour of temptation that shall come upon the whole world to try them) and burn his center city of major trade.
That city will be Tyre in Lebanon.
The beast will be a ruler of Iraq.
What I'm saying is the end is coming upon us as to the things that are for the time for the beast and the new versions have been spreading all over the earth deceiving people as to what to expect.
In the NIV, NRSV, Amplified, NKJV, NASB, RSV, and the Living bibles -he and the ten horns burn the city.
Just looking at the verses show us that cannot be correct.
verse 16
And the ten horns......
So the ten horns are being discussed, not the beast here.
these shall hate the harlot
>they will hate the city
We are still only discussing the ten horns = kings.
They hate it, thus they are the ones that will burn it.
verse 17
For God hath put it in their hearts to fulfill his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast....."
See we have not switched from discussing only the ten horns and what they are to do? They will burn the city and in the next verse -they will give their kingdom unto the beast.
If you try to learn about the endtimes using the new versions, you will end up with a totally way off from God's true plan picture.
Compare Deut. 28:48
1 Kings 10:14
One version even brings in a whole other person for Daniel 9:27. one to confirm the covenant and then another one to desolate the sanctuary
The KJV is tested and has stood the test, the new versions can't hold up to the quality of the KJV.
Upvote
0
vinsight4u
Contributor
beast and ten horns.......burn her with fire
Rev 17:16 (NIV) The beast and the ten horns you saw will hate the
>> prostitute. They will bring her to ruin and leave her naked; they will
>> eat her flesh and burn her with fire.
ten horns.......burn her with fire
>> Rev 17:16 (KJV) And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast,
>> these shall hate the harlot, and shall make her desolate and naked, and
>> shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire.
Rev 17:16 (NIV) The beast and the ten horns you saw will hate the
>> prostitute. They will bring her to ruin and leave her naked; they will
>> eat her flesh and burn her with fire.
ten horns.......burn her with fire
>> Rev 17:16 (KJV) And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast,
>> these shall hate the harlot, and shall make her desolate and naked, and
>> shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire.
Upvote
0
HumbleMan
Ragamuffin
- Dec 2, 2003
- 5,258
- 274
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
The KJV was translated by a committee of Anglicans and Protestants, both clergy and laity, using Tyndale's Bible, the Bishop's Bible, and to a smaller extent, the Latin Vugate as it's source material.
If you want a good history of the KJV and how it came to be, read "God's Secretaries", (Can't remember the Author, sorry). It really is a good book, and gives valuable insights to the thought processes behind the first major English translation of the bible.
I prefer the NRSV and the NIV myself.
If you want a good history of the KJV and how it came to be, read "God's Secretaries", (Can't remember the Author, sorry). It really is a good book, and gives valuable insights to the thought processes behind the first major English translation of the bible.
I prefer the NRSV and the NIV myself.
Upvote
0
vinsight4u
Contributor
In the NRSV what do you think of Psalm 22:16?
Also compare the KJV for Jeremiah 30:8.
Also compare the KJV for Jeremiah 30:8.
Upvote
0
HumbleMan said:
If you go to crosswalk.com they have all the translations. I hope this helps.
Upvote
0
plowboy22 said:
PB, there are lots and lots of KJV-only threads all over these forums, with KJV-only advocates far more articulate than vinsight. I think you will learn more if you look at some of those threads.
If those posting here continue to pursue this line of debate, you will learn nothing about other translations, since comparing the NIV and NASB, for example, is irrelevant to the KJV-only question. All other versions are equally condemned, so why learn anything about any of them except how they differ with the KJV? Do you see the point?
Basically, there are some people who have developed a doctrinal view that the Bible is strictly inerrant in every word for all purposes. When one becomes very extreme in this view, the idea that there are variations in ancient manuscripts is intolerable. Some go even further, and find it intolerable that there not be a 100% perfect translation in the English language. There must be one absolutely perfect manuscript and one absolutely perfect translation, and every variant must be a diabolical corruption because the Word of God must be absolutely pure, and God must have made sure it was preserved in its absolutely pure state.
Therefore, they take the text that is most familiar to them, the text their spiritual ancestors used when they developed their complicated doctrines during the 19th century, and insist it must be that absolutely pure and perfect text.
Most other Christians understand that, while the Bible is authoritative, we can't say for sure that there is a 100% pure and perfect manuscript of it today, but by comparing thousands of manuscripts and seeing that the variations are minor, we can understaned it. They also understand that when translating from one language to another, choices sometimes have to be made since there may be no word or grammatical structure that is exactly the same in the new language as in the original language. For that reason, someone who does not know the original languages well can benefit from reading more than one translation.
Basically, these are the two sides of the KJV-only issue. If you'd like to study this issue more, I encourage you to do so. But if you'd like to talk about versions other than KJV, I'd suggest you not let this thread get sidetracked into another KJV-only debate thread. It will cut off all discussion of the relative merits of other translations. A KJV-only advocate will not compare the relative merits of the NIV, NASB or NRSV because he thinks all three are corruptions of the devil.
Upvote
0
Every Bible teacher worth his salt will tell you that the inspiration is in the original author's writings, for that is where the Divine inspiration exists. Translations are best when they best capture it. Some details may always be obscure to us, but critical, salvific truths remain intact in even the most liberal of orthodox translations.
I like NASB best, but find some verses better expressed in others. I use a computer program too with many versions and commentaries for serious studies. Right now, I am intrigued with the exact expression in Romans 3:25.
Stan
I like NASB best, but find some verses better expressed in others. I use a computer program too with many versions and commentaries for serious studies. Right now, I am intrigued with the exact expression in Romans 3:25.
Stan
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
