What Translation Of The Bible?

Our senior minister uses the KJV. Sometimes when I try to follow along with him using my NIV, I have no idea what he is reading...

Hi all,

This is an interesting subject and I comment based on sharing what I believe and not in the spirit of "my translation is better than yours".

I have always used the Kings James version, since I do believe that it preserves the original letter and spirit of God's word from the original Greek and Hebrew texts. For what it's worth, here's a link to Chick publishing, which I use for study guides and work group aids for my congregation:

http://www.chick.com/ask/articles/nkjvtext...ROM=biblecenter

I will refute the feeling by many Christians that "any version of the Bible is better than none at all" - I believe that it's the difference between the truth and a lie. Trying to make the Word of God more understandable for many people is a good thing, but that's why God invented pastors and teachers - to proclaim His word and explain the parts that people don't understand. I believe that God never intended his Word to be DIY.

For what it worth, that's my view.

I love this subject, too. I have been attending a Thursday night women's Bible Study for the last 6-8 months. We all read from different versions and it is both fascinating and hard for me to follow at times. But my two favorites are the New American Standard and New International Version. I mostly read the latter though.

And hear hear! I need to read mine more, too. Working on that though.

Muircheatach, I agree with you on your belief that some Bibletranslations are way better than the others (I study right from the Grek and Hebrew texts as best I can anyhow) and I hate to rain on your Bible Study aids but even when I was a fundamentalist I wouldn't touch Jack Chicks amterial with a ten foot pole. He is one of the most anti catholic writers out there. And there are probably a few protestant churches he doesn't like either. Please check him out!
here is what Catholic answers says about him.

http://www.catholic.com/library/sr_chick_tracts_p1.asp

Hi Robert,

I appreciate your response and I'm sorry that I didn't get to respond sooner. I don't disagree that several publications from Mr. Chick are not what I would want to read or perhaps even be associated with. However, there are a number of booklets his publishing company carries that we use to teach the validity of the Holy Bible. To tell the truth, not being Catholic, I was not aware of any "Catholic-bashing" or for that matter criticizing the way others worship.

I apologize to anyone who I offended on this post if, like Robert, you only knew Chick Publications for hate-mongering. I certainly didn't mean to convey that aspect.

No offense ever taken. Just thought you might want to know about it. I didn't always know them for their anticatholic material. For a little while I thought they were great stuff. Even used a few of their tracks. Had all thier comic books and stuff too untill a friend of mine told me that thier priest story wasn't provable. So now I just try to get people to really look at their source material. Oh yes, I also found out that Wikipedia is not considered source material for research papers by some universities. Ouch! Would have had an "A" instead of a "B"
Here's a Catholic response to some of thier tracks if you would like to read it:


http://www.catholic.com/library/sr_chick_tracts_p1.asp

I love KJV and NKJV for the same reasons others have mentioned.

Just to broaden the discussion, but hopefully not detract from it, I also love to use electronic versions. eg, I use a Palm Treo and have several versions of the Bible on it.

I love the technology that allows mutliple versions, concordance, commentary etc - all in my pocket, not to mention the fast search features.

Maybe this could be the subject of another thread.

I just jumped in on the last few posts, so forgive me if this is misplaced. When I was a new "believer" a friend scoffed at my electronic Bible (considering it just a toy) and took me to the Christian bookstore for a paper Bible. We ended up with a Bible that was splilt into columns, one with the NLT translation and the other was KJV. My point being, while some translations are more authentic than others, in the beginning getting the general message across is better than being lost in the translation.

Popping on with a FWIW, not to comment on what is better or worse...

If you're going to study with a mind to picking what you're reading apart in any way for a better understanding, Precept Ministries has probably the best, non-denominational studies. They simply go verse by verse, Precept on Precept...

And if you are a Strongs or Zodhiates user, they both use the NAS which is translated almost word by word from the original Hebrew and Greek.

I have several translations here at the house, but use the NAS exclusively for any study.

I like "The Message". It is written in plain english so for someone like me who gets lost trying to read the king james version, I am more likely to read it. I realize you loose things in the translation, but if this one is the only one that make much sense to me, maybe I'll keep at it. (I've struggled for years with the king james version)

Montie,

I've just added the message translation to my reading also. It definitely is easier to read and understand.

Well here is another issue, quite aside from the question of accuracy, biased translation, and other matters - the matter of cultural relevance comes in here as to one's Bible of choice.

While I understand that some here cannot cope with the old-worldly language of KJV - I actually like it.
I guess it not only syncs well with my love of all things medieval, but the language is classic and beautiful to me.
I know that some words have lost their meaning or even mean the opposite today, but it isn't too difficult to work through those words, and I'm not especially clever.