What Is Your Favorite Bible Translation?

[The Dragonslayer]

For any of the Christians out there, what is your favorite translation of the Bible? I grew up with the King James Version. That's the one I've generally read, but I have looked at some more modern translations.

[Lenny]

They are generally all the same. The message of Christianity cannot be distorted much with minor transliteration differences.

Though NIV does contain some passages downplaying the divinity of Jesus, I have seen, and is very "new age" in general, so it is probably my least favorite.

Old King James is just too archaic in language (When James commissioned a new translation, the translators took pains to use archaic language even of that day...And that was 400 years ago). We modern people don't understand probably 10-20% of the words. It's very poetic though. It's like the old Lord's Prayer: When do any of us ever say in day-to-day life: "he art" [Our father who art in heaven], instead of "he is".

If you forced me to name one, I guess I'd say RSV or NRSV, because I have probably read them the most.

[Loki]

When I read the Bible, I preferred the NIV, to be honest. Its language was the most clearly understood, and contextually made more sense than the others.

[Lenny]

When I read the Bible, I preferred the NIV, to be honest. Its language was the most clearly understood, and contextually made more sense than the others.I never noticed any problems with it until someone showed me a list of 50 or so NIV passages with side-by-side comparisons to the same passages in earlier versions. Some of the NIV passages seemed to imply a unitarian Christianity, which is a modern movement (or perhaps a revival of the long-dead Arian tradition) which I oppose. This is probably all splitting hairs to some extent.

I find RSV to be excellent in terms of readability, too. KJV is absolutely terrible in terms of readibility, except for Shakespeare scholars perhaps.

[Loki]

I never noticed any problems with it until someone showed me a list of 50 or so NIV passages with side-by-side comparisons to the same passages in earlier versions. Some of the NIV passages seemed to imply a unitarian Christianity, which is a modern movement (or perhaps a revival of the long-dead Arian tradition) which I oppose. This is probably all splitting hairs to some extent.

The question though, is if the NIV is in that respect perhaps truer to the original Greek text? Some of the early translations lacked in accuracy.


I find RSV to be excellent in terms of readability, too. KJV is absolutely terrible in terms of readibility, except for Shakespeare scholars perhaps.

Agreed. Even the NKJV is not much better.

[The Dragonslayer]

I've attended church at both Episcopal and Anglican parishes. They have used either the RSV or the NRSV. Which one is probably the best of those translations? I don't want something that's been too liberalized. That's always my fear with more modern translations. I feel that they tone down what the Bible says to make it more satisfying to the masses. I want a Bible that's going to continue with the traditional teachings of the Christian faith.

[WinterMoon]

Regardless of which version is used, I think it is best to also look at the original Greek, Hebrew, or Aramaic for understanding and also to look at things in a historical context. No one should ever use any one translation as a means of understanding the Bible.

I use KJV, NKJV, and NIV. KJV is not so bad if you grew up reading it. It also makes understanding Shakespeare easy when you get older. I can understand how, if someone was not raised with it, it would be very difficult to read and understand (as would Shakespeare).

[Arrow Cross]

Regardless of which version is used, I think it is best to also look at the original Greek, Hebrew, or Aramaic for understanding and also to look at things in a historical context. No one should ever use any one translation as a means of understanding the Bible.
What she said. I'm not quite a fan of the ancient Hebrew and Greek languages(I like Latin though), but I understand why they are taught in the theological universities: they are the best means to understanding the original context.

[The Dragonslayer]

Regardless of which version is used, I think it is best to also look at the original Greek, Hebrew, or Aramaic for understanding and also to look at things in a historical context. No one should ever use any one translation as a means of understanding the Bible.

I use KJV, NKJV, and NIV. KJV is not so bad if you grew up reading it. It also makes understanding Shakespeare easy when you get older. I can understand how, if someone was not raised with it, it would be very difficult to read and understand (as would Shakespeare).

Thanks. Have you or anyone else here ever seen the Companion Bible?

http://www.amazon.com/Companion-Bible-Version-Burgandy-Indexed/dp/0825421802/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1227456950&sr=1-1