Bible Translations

[Friarbob]

my favorite translations in order of preference are :

1. NKJV

2. KJV

3 NIV

4. NASB

[ColleenLovesMischief]

I used to read the NIV until I realized how much was left out of it. Now I am NKJV all the way.

[Botz]

Hi Butero...I would have thought the KJV 1611 is as full of mis-translation as any other imperfect attempt at translation, especially in the light that the scholarship of today has a greater profusion of manuscripts and fragments from which to better understand the meaning and intent of the original Authors words.

I have always used the NASB because I have found it reasonably well translated, but I know it has flaws like any translation, if I seriously thought the the KJV 1611 was the most authentically accurate translation I would use that version as well... perhaps you can elucidate and give me a few pointers about why it is such a good translation. Thanks. Botz

[OneLight]

I enjoy the NKJV the most. It still has some of the "old fashion" way of the KJV, but it is easier for me to follow. Still, it is not me who teaches me scripture, but the Holy Spirit. Sure wish I had the ability to receive an education that would allow me to understand the original text.

[jmwhalen]

(bold is my emphasis)

Bible Buffet/Stew-Truth or Preference

Submitted by John M. Whalen

"Come, let us reason together...." Isaiah 1:18

________________________________________________________________________________

________

Comments from this post, on the question:

[Khristeeanos]

I will read most any translation except the KJV.

My personal favorites are the NIV and New Century Version.

[Botz]

Hi Butero...I would have thought the KJV 1611 is as full of mis-translation as any other imperfect attempt at translation, especially in the light that the scholarship of today has a greater profusion of manuscripts and fragments from which to better understand the meaning and intent of the original Authors words.

I have always used the NASB because I have found it reasonably well translated, but I know it has flaws like any translation, if I seriously thought the the KJV 1611 was the most authentically accurate translation I would use that version as well... perhaps you can elucidate and give me a few pointers about why it is such a good translation. Thanks. Botz

You just brought up one of the problems. Today's translators use a host of manuscripts other than the Textus receptus. Many of these were found in caves over the years, and they will often times omit key verses. When these people translate them to English, they often times claim "the most reliable manuscript leaves this or that portion of scripture out." In reality, the only reliable manuscripts are those of the Textus Receptus.

Just to give you one example I found, in the story where the disciples failed to cast out devils from a man, they later asked Jesus why they failed? He stated that this kind goeth not out by by prayer and fasting. In many of the newer translations, they leave the word fasting out. The new versions water down key passages. It was this kind of problem that first caused me to examine the various translations as opposed to the King James Version, and the more I have looked into the subject, the more convinced I have become that I need to stay with the King James Version only.

What my critics will claim is that the various manuscripts are older and therefore must be more reliable. To those who want to make this claim, there is little I can do to change their minds, but I will point this out. All the various new translations are differen't, and those who hold to them believe all translations have flaws. Those of us who hold to the King James Version only have complete confidence and trust in it's absolute reliability.

Well I cannot argue against that type of understanding. I knew there were people who had a very dogmatic view regarding the KJV, but I thought they would also be able to see some of its short-comings. It seems a very blinkered approach, although I can understand not wanting to be tainted with what they/you perceive as corrupted... this in itself would make sense if the KJV was demonstrably perfect, but it latently isn't which makes it a bit odd that it is treated as if it is perfect.

I know we would all like to have the perfect version and be able to rely totally on every word it contains, but it seems G-d has chosen to preserve His Word through the imperfection of man. The slight imperfections of the various serious versions are of no great consequence unless taken completely out of the context of the whole thrust of Scripture, and I am not aware of this being the case at all, and quite often there are side notes to clarify differences.

I cannot seriously believe that a person weaned on the NASB and another weaned on the KJV are going to have doctrinal differences or more truth and better revelation...ultimately it is the Holy Ghost who quickens G-ds Word to our hearts, and He is quite able to do it through all sorts of versions...and even paraphrases have their uses, because sometimes G-d reveals Himself in the minutiae of detail, and at other times in a general overall picture.

[Botz]

Hello John Whalen...thanks for your post. I found it a formidably long-winded way of saying...

No one has stated that they believe every word of the Holy Bible. I do, and I will. I believe the King James Bible is the preserved, without error word of God for English speaking people.

You almost persuade me G-d is an Englishman!

I think we need to take care that we do not take a form of pride in our ability to believe things that others struggle with. In many ways it might seem commendable to take a stand and develop an unshakable conviction...but ones faith is only ever as strong as the object one puts it in.

I believe the Word of G-d is infallible...I believe that translations of that Word have missed the full meaning on occasion, and at other times gone with their own prejudices and preferences when trying to translate. I have no reason to believe the KJV is an exception

[jmwhalen]

quite the post, mr. whalen. but quite frankly, you lost me in the middle somewhere. it began to sound too much like the rhetoric of legalists, so i gave up reading. the length of it also had something to do with it. (just trying to be honest, here.)

my nasb is THE Word of God. so is my esv. and my niv, my nlt, my rsv, etc. so is my kjv. i believe my God is big enough to give me the truth of His Word no matter what the words of my english bible say. its not the "words" we hold to, but the One who wrote the words. my God is not so small that He needs to use a certain translation of the bible to speak truth to me. if i want the truth, He will give it to me. if i dont want the truth, it will not come to me--even if i'm reading the original manuscripts, let alone the kjv.

the kjv may be totally accurate; it may not. (actually, i know it's not because i know of translation errors in it.) had we not the God we do, this would make a difference. however, we have a God who transcends ALL human error. His desire is that we draw close to Him, and i believe He will give us whatever we need to do so--and He's not limited by a "bad" translation of His words to us! you might be, but He's not.

kjv is not the "only" Word of God to english speaking people.

___________

"it began to sound too much like the rhetoric of legalists"

My comment:Scripture, please. I quoted scripture. You did not. And you refer to quoting scripture as "legalists." One's opinion and the truth are independent.

" its not the "words" we hold to, but the One who wrote the words."

My comment:And just how did come to hold to the Lord Jesus Christ, to know him? In a dream, or a vision? No. You would have no knowledge of the Saviour without him being revealed to you by the word of God through the power of the Holy Spirit. Notice how many times the Lord Jesus Christ said "it is written....", "Have ye not read....", "Did ye never read in the scriptures","For what saith the scripture?"

Have you not read?:

"So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." Romans 10:17

"....for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name." Psalms 138:2

Interesting, wouldn't you say:

"And in very deed for this cause have I(the LORD God-my note) raised thee up, for to shew in thee my power; and that my name may be declared throughout all the earth." Exodus 9:16

"For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth." Romans 9:17

and

"And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, which she had born unto Abraham, mocking.Wherefore she said unto Abraham, Cast out this bondwoman and her son: for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, even with Isaac.And the thing was very grievous in Abraham's sight because of his son.And God said unto Abraham, Let it not be grievous in thy sight because of the lad, and because of thy bondwoman; in all that Sarah hath said unto thee, hearken unto her voice; for in Isaac shall thy seed be called." Gen. 21:9-12

"Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman." Galatians 4:30

Notice the Holy Bible's testimony: What scripture says, is eqivalent to what the LORD God says. Scripture makes them equivalent-it draws no distinction.

The Lord Jesus Christ, the living Word, reveals God the Father, and the written word of God, reveals the living Word of God, the Lord Jesus Christ, through the Holy Spirit. Again, you cannot know the LORD God any other way, according to the Holy Bible, despite any one's opinions or "feelings." Please quote scripture.

"if i'm reading the original manuscripts,"

My comment: They do not exist. They crumpled into dust thousands of years ago. Thus, the doctrine of preservation is emphasized over and over again in scripture. If we had "the originals", there would be no need for the doctrine, and no need for "versions"(over 200 of them in the last 100 years).

"actually, i know it's not because i know of translation errors in it.)"

My comment: If it has errors, it is not the word of God. You are on record of denying that the scripture, if it is to be called scripture, has no error,and that you do not have the word of God. This is the only rational conclusion one can conclude from your own argument(your argument, not mine). These are your words, not mine.

"my nasb is THE Word of God. so is my esv. and my niv, my nlt, my rsv, etc. so is my kjv. i believe my God is big enough to give me the truth of His Word no matter what the words of my english bible say. "

My comment: Ever hear of the law of non-contradiction? For the sake of argument :The NIV may be the word of God, or the KJB may be the word of God, but they both cannot be the word of God, not at the same time, if Isahiah 1:18 is to be believed. They contradict each other in hundreds of places.

Again, do you believe every word of the esv, niv, nlt, rsv etc?Yes or no? If they are, then they have no errors, correct?

You believe God is big enough to ... etc? But why do you not believe scripture's own testimony? Please provide scriptural evidence backing "i believe my God is big enough to give me the truth of His Word no matter what the words of my english bible say." That phrase seems to right out of what all the other "religions" say, or something Oprah Winfrey would say(talk show opinions).

I noticed you did not cite/quote scripture in your response. Why is that? Perhaps you do not believe it, or have it? Is it without error? What book can you hold up, press to your heart, and say, with conviction: This is the word of God. The LORD God wrote it, preserved it, it is without error, and I believe it because this is the LORD God's own testimony?

In Christ,

John Whalen

[Iryssa]

I believe the Word of G-d is infallible...I believe that translations of that Word have missed the full meaning on occasion, and at other times gone with their own prejudices and preferences when trying to translate. I have no reason to believe the KJV is an exception

That's pretty much exactly how I feel.

Also, if I were depending wholly on my own understanding while reading I would find that very scary, but I know that I am indwelt by the Holy Spirit, an infallible teacher. Where our English translations might miss a beat (don't get me wrong, I believe that, with a few exceptions, they have preserved the truth wholly!), the Holy Spirit does not.

John, this note is totally off topic...but I just wanted to warn you that using your full real name on forums like this can be dangerous...pseudonyms are much safer in all online activity where you can use one.