Which Bible translation to get? (moved from Bible Study)

[Gilbertgrape]

Hi all, this is my first post.

I've recently started going to church again, but am really wanting to buy another bible. I already own an NIV and a NKJV.

I made the mistake? of searching bible translations on the net to decide on which bible I will get next. It's been abit of a downer actually.

This is what I want.

I want a real leather, thumb indexed study bible. One that will last.

But, the more I compare translations the more confused I get. I want a translation that is the closest to that which it was translated from(Textus receptus?). When I do verse comparisons and see that some have ommissions, I just get further away from a decision.

I'll probably get a KJV, although others in consideration are NASB, NKJV and ESV.

[JohnDB]

I would reccomend a UBS version 4 and a Biblica Hebraica Stutengartensia.

the UBS will be in Greek and the BHS will be in Hebrew...but then no translatiion will be neccesary and you will be able to understand exactly what the original intended.

These two compilations are what all modern translations have been derived from. They are the most accurate representations of what the original autographs were like that can be had.

Depending upon how hard you wish to study will determine your real need.

NIV is a thought for thought translation
NASB is an almost word for word translation...much like the KJV

The problem is that many of the words in Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic, and Latin have more than one connotation to them and often more than one connotation needs to be understood in a passage.

How many connotations can be derived from the word "BOW"?

The problem is that English is the worst receptor language for any of these languages. So much is missed and misunderstood because of this.

Look at John 1:12. (I am meaning look at it now)

It is all in past tense. Is it all over for us and we are kidding ourselves?
Of course not. But there is a tense in the Greek that means past, present-active, and future all at the same time. We do not have this tense in the English language. The translators had to pick one tense to write it in...so when they came accross this particular tense, as they did with a lot of them, they chose past tense. There are verb forms that mean two of the three but not the third. What do you do with that?

How about the plural "you" that exists in scripture.
"When "you" pray..."
"I am going to give you the keys to the Kingdom..."

In these instances the "you" is plural which is close to the southern "Ya'all" but that isn't really proper english now is it?


Pick one translation. Stay with it. Understand how the translators did their work and why. So that when you read it on a Sunday morning you can have a good idea as to how and why things were said the way they were said from the original. Yes, this means a lot of work and study on your part...but this sort of thing is always rewarded.

[fuzzi]

Hi all, this is my first post.

I've recently started going to church again, but am really wanting to buy another bible. I already own an NIV and a NKJV.

I made the mistake? of searching bible translations on the net to decide on which bible I will get next. It's been abit of a downer actually.

This is what I want.

I want a real leather, thumb indexed study bible. One that will last.

But, the more I compare translations the more confused I get. I want a translation that is the closest to that which it was translated from(Textus receptus?). When I do verse comparisons and see that some have ommissions, I just get further away from a decision.

I'll probably get a KJV, although others in consideration are NASB, NKJV and ESV.

There are quite a number of Bibles out there, with various choices of binding, covers and 'extras', like indexed tabs. What's most important is to get something that you will read and keep for years, so as has been pointed out here, you don't wind up switching Bibles every few years.

I'd highly recommend the King James: it's been tried, tested, and not been found wanting. It has been the Bible of choice for all the great revivals of the last few centuries, and you don't have to worry about getting the latest 'update' every five years.

A few so-called 'archaic' words shouldn't keep you from enjoying and understanding it, either. I've taught Sunday School where the kids had no difficulty comprehending the King James. The sentences in the King James tend to be shorter, and the words have fewer syllables than other versions.

One thing that is often misunderstood is the use of 'ye' and 'thee'. Did you know that people didn't use those words back in King James' day, but they were used in the King James Bible to clarify who was being addressed? 'You' as used in English can be either plural or singular, but in order to help people understand God's word better, the older 'ye' and 'thee' were used.

I pray you find what is best for you.

[-SEEKING-]

I'd say right now the best readable literal translation out there is the ESV. Hands down.

[thepenitent]

One thing that is often misunderstood is the use of 'ye' and 'thee'. Did you know that people didn't use those words back in King James' day, but they were used in the King James Bible to clarify who was being addressed?

Then why is Milton's "Paradise Lost" (1670) chock full of "thee", "thou" and "ye"? Yes, that is how the English people talked in the 1600s.

[crossnote]

Why not get a NetBook computer. It's lap size (for pew viewing) and you could put a hundred or so versions on it and really go bonkers trying to figure it all out.

[JohnDB]

Why not get a NetBook computer. It's lap size (for pew viewing) and you could put a hundred or so versions on it and really go bonkers trying to figure it all out.

I just got my son one of those. I put on there the same bible software that I use on it. He loves it. (he liked poking at his stepmother about Salt is good with it)

But the truth is that during a sermon these days no one really has to look up verses of scripture. The verses are always displayed on the big screen by the guy running the projector. (I do that too)

Granted between the gaffs our preacher has with what he says versus what he wants to read...good thing I know scripture and can fix it for him on the fly. He will say chapter 23 and verse 4 meaning chapter 4 verse 23 in another book. No one in the pews can keep up with that. (well a few might) The other guy who works with me can't...he has tried covering for me when I go use the bathoom. Failed miserably at it too. And this is during the second service. LOL..I wonder how he coulda forgotten in such a short time span.

Oh well.

But mostly bible's these days are for devotional time anyway...and a few Small group bible studies.

But listening to what the speaker is saying is usually best...save the devotional time for later.

BTW....I play video games during the second service.
The sermons ain't any better the second time than they were the first.

[JesusMySavior]

Hi all, this is my first post.

I've recently started going to church again, but am really wanting to buy another bible. I already own an NIV and a NKJV.

I made the mistake? of searching bible translations on the net to decide on which bible I will get next. It's been abit of a downer actually.

This is what I want.

I want a real leather, thumb indexed study bible. One that will last.

But, the more I compare translations the more confused I get. I want a translation that is the closest to that which it was translated from(Textus receptus?). When I do verse comparisons and see that some have ommissions, I just get further away from a decision.

I'll probably get a KJV, although others in consideration are NASB, NKJV and ESV.

The KJV is the only Bible that uses Textus Receptus.

If you are looking for accuracy (many will dispute me here), get the KJV. If you're looking for idea by idea, I'd recommend NLT.

I searched for years until God led me to the KJV. To me, it is the Bible, the others are to be compared along side it.


I have the Authorized KJV from Cambridge. It has a Concordance and the words of Christ in red. I wept when I opened it at the book store.

[IsItLove?]

I'd say right now the best readable literal translation out there is the ESV. Hands down.

Its a good one, but I still like my old NASB

[-SEEKING-]

Its a good one, but I still like my old NASB

I have both. And they are both excellent.

[Gilbertgrape]

Thanks so much for the replies and suggestions.

I'm really leaning toward th KJV. I seem to have a fairly good grasp of the thees and thous, but there may be some other words in there that I need to learn.

I just want an accurate Bible. I guess I just have to have faith that I have an accurate Bible. I'm not sure I did myself any favours looking into different translations lol. I don't want to get too into the comparisons of Bibles that I neglect to actually read a bible.

I think I'm also going to get the Bible on cd to put onto an mp3 player for the car.

Thanks everyone.


Edit: I have an NASB on loan at the moment(Haven't started reading it yet). Would this be close to a KJV in a more modern English form?

[Firefighter]

It is close to the Greek texts. Isn't that what really counts???



To REALLY muddy the waters a bit... You also need to know that the "Textus Receptus" is not a text, it is a FAMILY of texts, and all of them have their own variations as well.

[grit]

Thanks so much for the replies and suggestions.

I'm really leaning toward th KJV. I seem to have a fairly good grasp of the thees and thous, but there may be some other words in there that I need to learn.

I just want an accurate Bible. I guess I just have to have faith that I have an accurate Bible. I'm not sure I did myself any favours looking into different translations lol. I don't want to get too into the comparisons of Bibles that I neglect to actually read a bible.

I think I'm also going to get the Bible on cd to put onto an mp3 player for the car.

Thanks everyone.


Edit: I have an NASB on loan at the moment(Haven't started reading it yet). Would this be close to a KJV in a more modern English form?

To answer the NASB part, not exactly.

Most English translations of the past century avail themselves of the discovery of more ancient Bible texts which either weren't available in the 1600's when the KJV was produced, or which were already discovered but which the Roman Catholic Church (where they were housed at the Vatican) would not allow Protestant English translators to use. So then, the KJV, particularly for the New Testament, is based on texts closer in history to our time. It does an excellent job of accurately conveying these texts into English, but its base Greek text likely reflects additions to the original writings in copying over time. Since the KJV was produced earlier than the NASB and other more recent English translations, these additions of the KJV have an appearance of being omissions in the NASB and other prominent modern translations making use of more ancient texts.

The NASB is generally regarded by most Bible scholars as the most 'accurate' of popular English translations, but there are varying philosophies of translating which each attempt accuracy. The NASB, however, favours a philosophy which is sometimes termed transmitter-specific; that is, it may read somewhat more choppy in English but it attempts to be closer to original language idioms, syntax forms, and other nuances which may somewhat strain the receptor language of English. Even so, in difference to the KJV and similarity to other popular modern translations, the NASB uses an ecletic original language base working through scholarly evaluation of thousands of manuscript and other evidences more ancient than what was available to the translators of King James.

I don't write this to dissuade you from the KJV or to make any charge that the KJV is in any way inferior to more recent English translations. I grew up on the KJV and it remains one of my favourite translations. Even the original language base it used, which became the Textus Receptus, was of a tradition of manuscripts most widely used by Christianity, just not as anciently preserved.

It should be understood that modern English translations do not omit parts of Scripture by intention, but reflect scholarly evaluation determined to have the original language based used for English translation as close to what the Bible originally was as can be humanly achieved.

I think you do well to use the KJV, or the NASB or ESV. In my opinion, The ESV Study Bible, particularly, is the best study Bible on the market today. If you choose to use the NASB, I might suggest the NASB Study Bible. If you choose the KJV, I'd recommend either the KJV Study Bible form Zondervan Publishers or the King James Study Bible from Nelson Publishers. Another excellent choice would be the MacArthur Study Bible, which is available in either the NKJV or the NASB. All of which are available in genuine leather or bonded leather editions. The thumb indexing may be a bit of a difficulty to obtain, depending on which Bible you choose. Even if a particular publisher does not offer thumb indexing on the Bible of your choice, you can still usually have the process done for about a $10 fee by a distributor.

[RabbiKnife]

I personally recommend that people do NOT buy study bibles and do NOT stick to just one translation.

We need to wrestle with the translated text as we have it, not with the preconceived ideas of the editors of the study notes.

If we need to know historical, linguistic, cultural background, etc. (and we DO, desperately!) then we need to turn to historical, linguistic, and cultural resources (multiple...more than one) that are not trying to promote a particular interpretation.

[Buck shot]

There are quite a number of Bibles out there, with various choices of binding, covers and 'extras', like indexed tabs. What's most important is to get something that you will read and keep for years, so as has been pointed out here, you don't wind up switching Bibles every few years.

I'd highly recommend the King James: it's been tried, tested, and not been found wanting. It has been the Bible of choice for all the great revivals of the last few centuries, and you don't have to worry about getting the latest 'update' every five years.

A few so-called 'archaic' words shouldn't keep you from enjoying and understanding it, either. I've taught Sunday School where the kids had no difficulty comprehending the King James. The sentences in the King James tend to be shorter, and the words have fewer syllables than other versions.

One thing that is often misunderstood is the use of 'ye' and 'thee'. Did you know that people didn't use those words back in King James' day, but they were used in the King James Bible to clarify who was being addressed? 'You' as used in English can be either plural or singular, but in order to help people understand God's word better, the older 'ye' and 'thee' were used.

I pray you find what is best for you.

I also use the KJV most of the time (always from the pulpit ). My personal favorite is the KJV rainbow study Bible ( http://www.christianbook.com/Christi...=4&action=Next ). It does not change or add anything to the text but does have highlights in different colors for different themes.

That is not to say the KJV is the one you need. If you find another translation that you will spend time reading and studying more then i would say get that one.

The tabs do make it much faster to get where you are going .

One thing to ponder when buying a Bible it to think about what version your pastor preaches from. It's a lot less confusing if everyone is using the same translation. When you are reading one and the pastor reads or quotes from another we get side tracked on the differences and miss part of the message.