Last edited by Dani H; Sep 20th 2012 at 04:01 PM.
I use and prefer the KJV also, especially for study since it has an exhaustive concordance for reference.
My second choice is ESV because it reads to my mind clearly with out me having to check concordances and lexicons every few verses.
But, to be as fair to the folks who prefer other versions of His word, here is a clickable link to expound on your point about the changes and or omissions in all later versions, including the ESV's:
While I use both the ESV and NIV, as well as several English translations, I prefer to read the NIV. It reads in normal English and avoids archaic terms. So for general reading that's the one I have used for over 30 years.
I would prefer the ESV. Using E-sword you can create your own parallels (personal flavors) with a multitude of versions and your own read through the bible plan. The NIV can be purchased as a add on as well as NKJV and NASB. It's a great program.
"He's wild, you know. Not like a tame lion."
C.S. Lewis, "The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe."
"Oh, but sometimes the sun stays hidden for years"
"Sometimes the sky rains night after night, When will it clear?"
"But our Hope endures the worst of conditions"
"It's more than our optimism, Let the earth quake"
"Our Hope is unchanged"
"Our Hope Endures" Natalie Grant
~"It is one thing to speak God's name in a message but another to speak of God's standards in a message. The name of God is not removed from many a message today but the standards of God... ARE removed."~
~"Psalm 106:23 Therefore He said that He would destroy them, Had not Moses His chosen one stood before Him in the breach, To turn away His wrath, lest He destroy them."...
So don't say that God never meant to destroy the Hebrews, to do so, makes God a liar.~
For a bible I would recommend the ESV study bible over the NIV. I have one and the notes are great. They do not seem to favor any particular denominational slant that is common in study bibles. In slant I mean OSAS vs NOSAS or predestination vs free will. I personally think the NASB and ESV are the closest translations to the original text for translation, but also feel that each should use which ever translation that fits for them. The important thing is that one is in the bible and studying.
For apps on the phone, I use the kindle app. I downloaded the ESV bible in its entirety for free. I'll have to check out the other app suggested above.
I am a Christian man in the Devil's land, spreading the gospel man to man.
Have you laid your burdens down?
ESV is the one i would choose if i had too. and u get the free online ESV bible, with MAcarthur study notes, literal study notes, study bible notes and much more .. its a crossway ESV... GOD bless have fun with oyur new bible!!
For many years I was using my NIV Life Application Bible. I like it but I have found myself liking The Message much better...
So I picked up The Message Study Bible and have never turned back.
I love the way Peterson translates everything into today's language
In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity. - unknown
Read your Bible and pray every single day. - Pastor Jon Courson
If your grace ain't greasier than a bucket full of chitlin's and gravy, you might be a legalist - an internet friend.
No it doesn't, but if one is making a choice between two translations it shouldn't hurt to be informed of the mindset of those that are in charge of the translation.The ESV doesn't claim the first three chapters of the Bible are a fairy tale.
Work on this translation was prompted, in the early 1990s, by a need for a new literal translation.The New International Version was judged to be too paraphrastic for use in detailed study. Additionally, some believe that a theory of plenary verbal inspiration is lessened by or incompatible with dynamic, "thought-for-thought" translations. The New American Standard Bible's readability was judged to have overly-wooden English and the New King James Version based on limited manuscripts further in date from the originals. The Revised Standard Version (RSV), and the Revised English Bible, rendered virtually all passages given a Messianic interpretation by Christians in a manner such as to preclude such an interpretation, even when "conjectural emendations" and alterations of the text had to be made in order to do it.[note 2]
Under Reformed theologian J.I. Packer, who served as general editor, the translation committee was formed, and sought and received permission from the National Council of Churches to use the 1971 edition of the RSV as the English textual basis for the ESV. About 6–7% of the RSV text (for comparison, the entire New Testament is about 20% of the Bible) was changed in the ESV.
J. I. Packer
James Innell Packer (born July 22, 1926) is a British-born Canadian Christian theologian in the low church Anglican and Reformed traditions. He currently serves as the Board of Governors' Professor of Theology at Regent College in Vancouver, British Columbia. He is considered one of the most influential evangelicals in North America.
In 2008 Packer wrote an endorsement for a book called 'Creation or Evolution: Do We have to Choose?' by Denis Alexander. The book advocates theistic evolution and is critical of Intelligent Design. Packer said of the book: 'Surely the best informed, clearest and most judicious treatment of the question in its title that you can find anywhere today.' This perhaps reveals Packer's current position in the evolution/intelligent design debate.
However, he has also expressed caution as to whether the theory of evolution is actually true, 'its only a hypothesis... its only a guess... so as science, in terms of philosophy of science... evolution is by no means proven and as a guess it is very strange and contrary to all analogies...' He also said, 'the biblical narratives of creation... don't obviously say anything that bears one way or another on the question of whether the evolutionary hypothesis might be true or not...'
The most recent information on Packer's position on evolution comes from his foreword to Reclaiming Genesis by Melvin Tinker. Reclaiming Genesis is a 'pro-evolution' book with the subtitle 'The Theatre of God's Glory - Or a Scientific Story?' in it Packer writes "Melvin Tinker is fully on wavelength in this lively and enlivening series of expositions. His book is wise, popular, and powerful. I heartily commend it."
Theistic evolution or evolutionary creation is a concept that asserts that classical religious teachings about God are compatible with the modern scientific understanding about biological evolution. In short, theistic evolutionists believe that there is a God, that God is the creator of the material universe and (by consequence) all life within, and that biological evolution is simply a natural process within that creation. Evolution, according to this view, is simply a tool that God employed to develop human life. According to the American Scientific Affiliation:
Theistic evolution is not a scientific theory, but a particular view about how the science of evolution relates to religious belief and interpretation. Theistic evolution supporters can be seen as one of the groups who reject the conflict thesis regarding the relationship between religion and science – that is, they hold that religious teachings about creation and scientific theories of evolution need not contradict. Proponents of this view are sometimes described as Christian Darwinists.A theory of theistic evolution (TE) — also called evolutionary creation — proposes that God's method of creation was to cleverly design a universe in which everything would naturally evolve. Usually the "evolution" in "theistic evolution" means Total Evolution — astronomical evolution (to form galaxies, solar systems,...) and geological evolution (to form the earth's geology) plus chemical evolution (to form the first life) and biological evolution (for the development of life) — but it can refer only to biological evolution.
Now showing all the in's and out's on that...Packer is 86 years old and did not edit this translation along. Secondly no where does it say or even suggests he thinks the first part of the bible is a fairy tale...or believe himself in strict evolution. Third, there are a number of Christians on this board that believe in Theistic evolution. I don't view them as anything less then Christians because of their views actually. Its not a salvation issue, though some seem to think it is.
Anyway I just started reading the ESV myself not long ago after reading other translations.
"People do not drift toward holiness. Apart from grace-driven effort, people do not gravitate toward godliness, prayer, obedience to Scripture, faith, and delight in the Lord. We drift toward compromise and call it tolerance; We drift toward disobedience and call it freedom; We drift toward superstition and call it faith. We cherish the indiscipline of lost self-control and call it relaxation; we slouch toward prayerlessness and delude ourselves into thinking we have escaped legalism; we slide toward godlessness and convince ourselves we have been liberated?" - D A Carson
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)