Jump to content
IGNORED

What's your favourite Bible version?


marvelloustime

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  35
  • Topic Count:  1,192
  • Topics Per Day:  0.20
  • Content Count:  7,264
  • Content Per Day:  1.19
  • Reputation:   15,710
  • Days Won:  194
  • Joined:  07/15/2007
  • Status:  Offline

The KJV. It is the one I grew up on and memorized scriptures in. It has stronger renderings and scriptures that some modern versions will omit.

But in certain verses with obscure meanings, I will use the NKJV (or another) for clarification purposes-to define certain words. For example James 3:13 says-

"Who is a wise man and endued with knowledge among you? let him shew out of a good conversation his works with meekness of wisdom.

'Conversation' in old English meant conduct (whereas today it means people chatting :))

"Who is wise and understanding among you? Let him show by good conduct that his works are done in the meekness of wisdom." NKJV

  • Loved it! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  16
  • Topic Count:  104
  • Topics Per Day:  0.04
  • Content Count:  3,776
  • Content Per Day:  1.29
  • Reputation:   4,746
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  03/31/2016
  • Status:  Offline

18 hours ago, Blood Bought 1953 said:

 

I always use KJV as the final authority if there is any controversy

Which one?  I use the 1769 if I am reading the King James.  The 1611 and the 1769 have quite a few variances that make me draw to the 1769 when reading the King James.  And the 1611 is more difficult to read.

For example:

1611 - Ezekiel 24:6-8 = "¶ Wherefore thus sayth the Lord God, Woe to the bloodie citie, to the pot whose scumme is therein, and whose scumme is not gone out of it; bring it out piece by piece, let no lot fall vpon it.  For her blood is in the middest of her: she set it vpon the toppe of a rocke, she powred it vpon the ground to couer it with dust: That it might cause furie to come vp to take vengeance: I haue set her blood vpon the top of a rocke, that it should not be couered."

1769 - Ezekiel 24:6-8 = "Wherefore thus saith the Lord God; Woe to the bloody city, to the pot whose scum is therein, and whose scum is not gone out of it! bring it out piece by piece; let no lot fall upon it.  For her blood is in the midst of her; she set it upon the top of a rock; she poured it not upon the ground, to cover it with dust;  That it might cause fury to come up to take vengeance; I have set her blood upon the top of a rock, that it should not be covered."

Uncovered blood called out for vengeance, so to speak.  [Think Cain/Abel].   The "she" here is Jerusalem and there was so much bloodshed that people were not being buried.  She [the city] "set" the blood on a rock, not the dust as should have been to be covered up. [This is all metaphorical].  And God would not allow it anyway it says.

My opinion is that the 1611 is wrong here and the 1769 is correct.  Considering the context.

Here's another [This is all I'll cover].

1611 - 1 Corinthians 12:28 - "And God hath set some in the Church, first Apostles, secondarily Prophets, thirdly Teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helpes in gouernmēts, diuersities of tongues."

1769 - 1 Corinthians 12:28 - "And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues."

This is the church Paul is talking about.  Not helps IN governments.  But helps AND governing within the church.

Ergo, again I think the 1769 is correct here and the 1611 is wrong.

When I read the King James, I read the 1769 - not because I believe it to be perfect, because I do not.  But because it's more easily readable and several -more than just these two that I listed - several variances have been corrected.  And I'm not talking about spellings and such, but contextual errors.

Edited by Jayne
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  17
  • Topic Count:  344
  • Topics Per Day:  0.13
  • Content Count:  7,393
  • Content Per Day:  2.70
  • Reputation:   5,321
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  09/27/2016
  • Status:  Offline

KJV - Septuagint

My personal opinion is these are the two most accurate translations. Jesus Himself would have had access to the Septuagint. It's not known when Jesus was reading and quoting from the Old Testament, if it was from scroll copies of the original texts, or the Septuagint. At least to my knowledge. 

The Dead Sea Scrolls found seem to back up and support both the KJV and Septuagint. That's my opinion anyway.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Mars Hill
  • Followers:  4
  • Topic Count:  6
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  2,280
  • Content Per Day:  1.25
  • Reputation:   854
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  03/31/2019
  • Status:  Offline

The only real difference in the 1611 and Authorized version is spelling, that is, regarding the 66 books of the canon.  I personally like the 1611 edition but post using the Authorized version.

  • Praise God! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  5
  • Topic Count:  30
  • Topics Per Day:  0.02
  • Content Count:  149
  • Content Per Day:  0.08
  • Reputation:   264
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  06/02/2019
  • Status:  Offline

I currently use ESV. Grew up with NIV. When it comes with the 23rd Psalm though, KJV since that's the version I memorized it in when I was 5.

Edited by EllaGrace
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  68
  • Topic Count:  185
  • Topics Per Day:  0.04
  • Content Count:  14,204
  • Content Per Day:  3.35
  • Reputation:   16,629
  • Days Won:  30
  • Joined:  08/14/2012
  • Status:  Offline

The first Bible I read was the Amplified NT, which was wonderful for me because I love word studies.  I currently use NKJV, but often refer to the ESV because of the excellent way in which they translate the present progressive like tenses.  It is easier for me to read Tyndale then KJV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  5
  • Topic Count:  125
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  2,082
  • Content Per Day:  0.57
  • Reputation:   500
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  04/03/2014
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  09/15/1956

NET Bible

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  8
  • Topic Count:  29
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  3,239
  • Content Per Day:  0.86
  • Reputation:   1,686
  • Days Won:  6
  • Joined:  12/26/2013
  • Status:  Offline

On 6/17/2019 at 5:53 PM, GandalfTheWise said:

I've read the Bible through in several different English translations as well as a couple Spanish ones and Greek.

My favorite has changed over time.   A long time ago, I used the Living Bible.

When the NIV came out, I started using that and later picked up a 1901 ASV that became my favorite.   For a time, I used the ASV for OT reading and the NIV for NT reading.

I now do most of my reading in Greek using the Septuagint for my OT reading.

Did you teach yourself Greek?  How long did that take?  I’m not surprised....you’re GandalftheWise! 

  • Loved it! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  8
  • Topic Count:  29
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  3,239
  • Content Per Day:  0.86
  • Reputation:   1,686
  • Days Won:  6
  • Joined:  12/26/2013
  • Status:  Offline

I use two versions side by side on Blue Letter Bible App:

KJV and NIV

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  24
  • Topic Count:  40
  • Topics Per Day:  0.02
  • Content Count:  1,459
  • Content Per Day:  0.61
  • Reputation:   2,377
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  08/23/2017
  • Status:  Offline

1 hour ago, Spock said:

Did you teach yourself Greek?  How long did that take?  I’m not surprised....you’re GandalftheWise! 

;)    Self-taught.  In terms of how long it took, I could say it either took over 30 years, or about 5 years.   I spent about 30 some years doing the typical approach to learning Greek and making no real progress.  I worked on memorizing tables, grammar, etc. and just couldn't seem to achieve any amount of reading skills.  To make a long story short, I was ready to give up when I ran across some independent language learners online and realized I was going at stuff all wrong.  In an hour of study, I was probably spending 55 minutes thinking in English about Greek and perhaps 5 minutes actually looking at Greek.   When I reversed that I started seeing real progress in comprehension.   I started using a combination of recordings (Spiros Zhodiate's modern greek pronunciation of the Greek NT) and following with an interlinear.  I found that over the course of weeks and months that my brain started internalizing greek.  I started with the gospel of John and just repeated the audio and followed it several times for each paragraph or so until it started to seem familiar and then moved to the next one.   Basically, I turned learning Greek into something similar to learning songs.  It's sort of like learning the happy birthday song or Christmas carols.  Via repetition, they just become more and more familiar.  I then used grammar and tables as reference tools to improve my understanding of things I was uncertain about.

Here's a link to learning this way I put on another site.  https://www.christianforums.com/threads/online-cf-experiment-can-you-learn-some-greek-i-think-you-can.8018322/#post-71531033

I would say I can now read greek in the same way I say I can ride a bicycle.  It is a skill that improves over time on a continuum.  You start off riding bike by trying not to fall off, depending on how much you practice and ride, you can get comfortable riding around the block, riding a few miles, or becoming a competitive on road or motocross rider.  When I started practicing reading, I was doing good to understand a fraction of what I saw.  Day by day, more and more things started to become internalized and familiar.  Now, I can look at most narrative genres (gospels, acts, and books such as Genesis, Samuel, Kings, etc. in the Septuagint) and understand most things I see.  In contrast, genres such as wisdom and prophetic books in the OT have a more challenging vocabulary because of so much symbolism and comparisons to random things in nature or other places.  I read the Septuagint in a parallel Greek/English version.  I spend most of my time reading the Greek with glances to the English as a quick look up for things I don't catch.

There is a nice recording of the gospel of John on the Librivox site by a woman (native Greek speaker I believe) with a pleasant voice and intonation (at least to my ear).  There is also a PDF version of the old out of copyright Interlinear Greek NT by George Ricker Berry available various places online.  The two of those sources are a nice starting point to just listen and follow for perhaps 10 minutes in the morning and evening.  I use Audacity (an audio editing software package) to play the audio so it's easy to pick sections to play and re-play.

 

 

 

  • Praise God! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...