This is for Christians. What Bible Version do you use

What version of the Bible do you use?

  • KJV

    Votes: 23 41.1%
  • NIV

    Votes: 21 37.5%
  • NASB

    Votes: 6 10.7%
  • RSV

    Votes: 3 5.4%
  • NLT

    Votes: 2 3.6%
  • ESV

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • NKJV

    Votes: 5 8.9%
  • CEV

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • ASV

    Votes: 2 3.6%
  • Other

    Votes: 15 26.8%

  • Total voters
    56

classical_hero

In whom I trust
Joined
Jan 30, 2003
Messages
33,262
Location
Perth,Western Australia
The Bible that I use is KJV. I believe that is the best translation around at the time. Sure it uses archaic words but is was written around when the English language was at it peak, think Shakespeare.
Here are the options.
1. KJV. King James Version also known as the Authorised Version.
2. NIV. The New International Version.
3. NASB. The New American Standard Bible.
4. NLT. The New Living Translation.
5. RSV. Revised Standard Version.
6. ESV. English Standard Version.
7. NKJV. New King James Version.
8. CEV. Contemporary English Version.
9. ASB. American Standard Bible.
10. Other versions.

EDIT. Here are some rules.
1. If you are not going to be constructive with this, then don't post on this thread.
2. You must make you point clearly and as concisely as possible so that others can respect your POV and agree or disagree with it.
3. You must be a Christian to post on this thread, or you will be Bible bashed. :joke:no exclusionary threads, even by joke intimidation, allowed

Hopefully that clears things up.
 
NASB (10 characters)
 
I use the LDS Version of the King James Bible. Its only different from regular King James' versions because it is cross referenced with the Book of Mormon
 
Six versions whose names I can't remember, plus two norwegian and one picture bible (not a kiddie version!)
 
For those who don't speak English as their first language (which means almost everyone :joke: ), this is English versions only. If you read an English version the vote for that one. Any foreign language Bibles can be stated but this does not count for the vote. Other is for other English versions.
 
Classical Hero...what exactly is the difference between these versions of the bible?
 
It's not correct to call them versions..:rolleyes:
 
NASB, NIV, NRSV, NLT, KJV in order of preference.
 
rmshape said:
2.0 patched to 2.03 beta.

Exactly. Versions are different from each other. The Bible is the same, what changes are the different translations. but the idea or point of each sentence is the same. Some words may change but the meaning doesn't.
 
Definitely the RSV.

Some characteristics of some of these translations:

The Authorised Version (also called the King James Version) was produced in the early seventeenth century and was very good for its time. It included a lot of the work of Tyndale, which would have pleased Tyndale if he hadn't been burned to death some time previously for his own translation. But I don't think it's much use today. It is not a great translation by modern standards and has a number of inaccuracies. Plus, of course, it's written in decidedly old-fashioned language, which may be terribly nice to listen to but really, I mean, come on!

The Revised Standard Version was produced in the twentieth century essentially as an "update" to the Authorised Version. It uses that version as a guide but is completely redone. It is extremely good and the "standard" version used today. Most scholarly works on the Bible or other religious matters quote the RSV.

An alternative which inexplicably doesn't make this list is the New Revised Standard Version or NRSV, which is basically a slightly updated version of the above. The main difference is that it uses gender-inclusive language throughout. I use this version, so I voted RSV - although come to think of it I'm not a Christian, so perhaps I shouldn't have voted at all.

The New International Version was translated by conservative evangelicals and is not very good. It contains frequent subtle mistranslations, which essentially make the Bible say slightly different things from what it actually does. I remember being rather shocked when I compared the NIV's translation of Romans with the original Greek - even my decidedly rusty Greek was good enough to spot a lot of theological bias creeping in. Don't use the NIV. Use the RSV or NRSV instead.

As for the others on this list, no idea. A shame not to see the Good News Bible in the list, which is actually almost a paraphrase of the Bible, in very easy-to-read and quite simple English. Despite the fact that it is not a very literal word-for-word rendition (as the AV tried to be) it's actually surprisingly accurate, in my opinion. You won't find it quoted by scholars but I would certainly recommend it over the NIV.
 
I use the RSV for general reading with the NASB for a more exact, if not awkward, translation. I studied Classic Greek for 2 years and occasionally read the original New Testament, though that's more of my father's domain.

I bought an NIV once and after reading it for a while threw it away with disgust. It's a very bad translation (some of the errors seem deliberate even :confused: ) and you should avoid it if possible. My father (who used to teach Classic Greek and did much in the way of translating the bible as accurately as possible) shares my sentiment on the NIV-its trash for the most part.
 
Never read the book, I did look at some stuff from the brick testament though :)
 
The NIV and the NAS. I think they are easier to read.

A Bible is a Bible to me. I can't tell the difference.

Usually it is best to use a Bible that was translated into a modern language from Ancient Greek or Hebrew. Using one that was translated from Latin, like the KJV, is less likely to be correct because it is a translation of a translation of a translation.
 
Back
Top Bottom