Translation Wars!

[Drick]

Okay, not really. I do have a few questions, though. Firstly, I wanted a sample of how many people use various different versions of the Bible.

But what I'm really curious about is... well, we all know the conundrum between the readers of the King James Bible and the readers of modern versions. I want to know the arguments. If you're a KJV-only person, why do you think updating the Bible to incorporate newly found texts and updated grammar is wrong? If you read the NIV or NRSV, or any number of new translations, why did you choose the one you did, how does it compare to others, and why don't you use the KJV, most popular translation of the Bible in the English-speaking world?

As always, I appreciate any insights any of you can give me.

 

[Drick]

Well, the poll is butchered and I can't fix it. If your choice is other, just go with the first one.

 

[Dave-W]

New American Standard, New King James and Tree of Life Version.

NASB is the closest to the Nestle Aland text. TLV is a close 2nd and since I am Messianic, it uses Messianic terminology.

But I like to compare them both to the NKJ as it comes from a different Manuscript family - Textus Receptus. (same as the earlier KJV)

 

[AlexDTX]

Okay, not really. I do have a few questions, though. Firstly, I wanted a sample of how many people use various different versions of the Bible.

But what I'm really curious about is... well, we all know the conundrum between the readers of the King James Bible and the readers of modern versions. I want to know the arguments. If you're a KJV-only person, why do you think updating the Bible to incorporate newly found texts and updated grammar is wrong? If you read the NIV or NRSV, or any number of new translation, why did you choose the one you did, how does it compare to others, and why don't you use the KJV, most popular translation of the Bible in the English-speaking world?

As always, I appreciate any insights any of you can give me.

I read KJV because that is what I started reading first. I have read many other translations but my memory verses are in the KJV.

There are good reasons for newer translations. The biggest reason is deprecation. There are many words used in that era whose meanings are now the opposite of what is meant today. For example when we read the word "prevent' we think of stopping, but it means "to come before".

Criticism of the "thees" and "thous" is nonsense. Just use the word "you".

The real reason people object to KJV is that it was written with a higher academic standard using words that many people are too lazy to look up. Instead they look up the Greek or Hebrew words, as if they had any real understanding of those languages. Just use a dictionary, for crying out loud!

 

[dysert]

This could be a long reply, but I'll make it short. I don't use the KJV anymore because (1) it's hard to read (I did grow up on it, though), and (2) it does not reflect current scholarship.

Instead I bounce typically between the NKJV and the HCSB. Neither of which have the problems mentioned above.

I like the majesty of the NKJV even though it's not quite as rich as the KJV. It's still better than any other in that regard. And the HCSB is, I think, a bit more accurate than even the NKJV. I also like my Bible to capitalize the pronouns for deity (most modern ones don't), and of course it has to have red-letter and cross references.

Oh! And it has to be available in e-Sword

 

[Lazarus Short]

I use the KJV for quotes, but to read, I use the Unvarnished NT for NT, and I used to use the Ferrar Fenton for OT. These days I am leaning toward getting the Eastern/Syraic OT.

 

[HereIStand]

The NIV is only version that I've read from cover to cover. Lately, I've been reading the ESV. I like the cultural heritage of the KJV, some parts are quite a challenge though.

Mainly, I've read a translation at a given time based on circumstances. In growing up fundamentalist, it was the KJV. Later in college the NIV became popular. In attending a mainline church, the NRSV was preferred. In the evangelical church that I attend now, I'm not sure one version is used exclusively, but the ESV seems to a preferred one.

 

[Drick]

I read KJV because that is what I started reading first. I have read many other translations but my memory verses are in the KJV.

There are good reasons for newer translations. The biggest reason is deprecation. There are many words used in that era whose meanings are now the opposite of what is meant today. For example when we read the word "prevent' we think of stopping, but it means "to come before".

Criticism of the "thees" and "thous" is nonsense. Just use the word "you".

The real reason people object to KJV is that it was written with a higher academic standard using words that many people are too lazy to look up. Instead they look up the Greek or Hebrew words, as if they had any real understanding of those languages. Just use a dictionary, for crying out loud!

My reasons for using the KJV are most because it's still the most universally accepted Bible around, and honestly, I really like the way it flows. I can read it more efficiently than any new Bible, with the possible exception of the Jerusalem Bible. Although with scholarly issues, I do default to the NRSV, which is a close second in regards to my favorite translations.

I used to not like the KJV Bible, but looking back now, I think that's because when I first tried to read, I didn't have the necessary reading comprehension (I was 15, after all). Nowadays, I don't know if I could read any other English version with the enthusiasm I do now.

My only real problem with it is that it's impossible to find a good KJV study Bible that includes the deuterocanon, which I value more than most Protestants. It's not a huge deal, since I have newer Bibles with good notes on them, but it's kind of a pain having more copies than absolutely necessary.

 

[faroukfarouk]

I too appreciate and use the King James.

 

[W2L]

NKJV

 

[Drick]

NKJV

Any particular reason? Or is it just the first one you picked up, and you enjoyed it?

 

[Living Soul]

I read the version that has John 3:16 in it. All others I do not read.

On a more serious note, I read the English Standard Version because it's just the easiest version for me to understand. I'm not very scholarly on Bible translations, and I'm just hoping the really important stuff comes through well enough.

 

[W2L]

Any particular reason? Or is it just the first one you picked up, and you enjoyed it?

Its what im use to. I read scriptures from ESV and NIV once in a while.

 

[disciple1]

Okay, not really. I do have a few questions, though. Firstly, I wanted a sample of how many people use various different versions of the Bible.

But what I'm really curious about is... well, we all know the conundrum between the readers of the King James Bible and the readers of modern versions. I want to know the arguments. If you're a KJV-only person, why do you think updating the Bible to incorporate newly found texts and updated grammar is wrong? If you read the NIV or NRSV, or any number of new translations, why did you choose the one you did, how does it compare to others, and why don't you use the KJV, most popular translation of the Bible in the English-speaking world?

As always, I appreciate any insights any of you can give me.

and why don't you use the KJV

I use the NIV I read many translations over 20 years ago, and found it to be best, I believe the KJV is written in words that mean something totally different now, a singer 70 years ago wrote a song about when he was young and gay, now it means something different, not that I have anything against gay people.

 

[AlexDTX]

@Drick
While your question regards translations, it is noteworthy that I rarely read from a printed Bible anymore. I do with my Bible Study groups and with family devotions with my wife, but for my personal study time, I use software programs. The ease to cross reference other translations, commentaries, dictionaries and maps makes reading on my computer much more satisfying. And of course text editors are provided for note taking, as well as highlighting verses, etc.

I use a free program created by Rick Meyers in Tennesee he calls E-Sword and is available for Windows, Apple and if you use Linux, he will show you how to use it there.

 

[tampasteve]

There are two "Other" options

I chose "Other" I use a TLV for New Testament reading, but for Tanach I use JPS or Artscroll, usually Artscroll. Being Messianic with a definite lean towards Judaism I prefer the Jewish scriptures from the JPS or Artscroll for that reason, among others. Sometimes I use an ESV in my car that I keep in my glove box.

Also, I can definitely "second" the E-sword program, another forum member pointed me to it before and it really is a great free software. It takes a little practice to use, but it is really nice.

 

[AlexDTX]

I prefer the Jewish scriptures from the JPS or Artscroll for that reason, among others. Sometimes I use an ESV in my car that I keep in my glove box.

I also read JPS just for that same perspective. The E-Sword program also included the Septuagint with Greek inserted which makes an interesting comparison since the Septuagint, as the TANAK was translated into Greek by the Alexandrian Jews in Egypt.

 

[Drick]

There are two "Other" options...

Yeah... I accidentally posted with an incomplete poll, then I screwed the poll up while trying to finish it, and then people started voting, so I couldn't fix it. So the poll's just going to have to exist forever in its weird, half-finished, out of order, double-othered state.

 

[JoeP222w]

Okay, not really. I do have a few questions, though. Firstly, I wanted a sample of how many people use various different versions of the Bible.

But what I'm really curious about is... well, we all know the conundrum between the readers of the King James Bible and the readers of modern versions. I want to know the arguments. If you're a KJV-only person, why do you think updating the Bible to incorporate newly found texts and updated grammar is wrong? If you read the NIV or NRSV, or any number of new translations, why did you choose the one you did, how does it compare to others, and why don't you use the KJV, most popular translation of the Bible in the English-speaking world?

As always, I appreciate any insights any of you can give me.

There is only one version of the Bible. Different translations, but only one version. Translations and versions are not the same thing.

I prefer the ESV translation in general, but I occasionally refer to other translations (including on occasion the KJV), and sometime the Greek text. I prefer ESV because it is close to word for word translation and it is most understandable to me. It is merely a preference, not a requirement.

I disagree with anyone who claims that you must only trust in the __fill in the blank English translation___ to prove you are a true Christian. Whether that be KJV only, ESV only, RSV only or what have you. Anyone who demands you must prove you're Christian by one certain English translation only, is not walking in the truth of God, and is probably in a cult. The Bible was not written in English, but rather Greek and Hebrew.

 

[Dave-W]

There is only one version of the Bible. Different translations, but only one version. Translations and versions are not the same thing.

True, they are not the same. But there are different versions, esp of the NT. There are several competing manuscript families in the Greek and at least a couple in Aramaic. (which are as old as the best Greek manuscript)

In the OT there are basically 2 versions, the Masoretic text in Hebrew and the LXX in Greek. They are different; and while Hebrew is universally understood as the original language, the LXX appears to have been translated from a different version than the Masoretic.