11 replies to this topic

[MamaElephant]

The Baptist church I am studying at uses the KJV but I am finding it near impossible to understand. Would a NKJV help with this?

The Living Bible is my true love because it is so easy to read and understand and brought about my conversion. Does anyone know of any inaccuracies in this version? I would also want to have at least one version that would be considered different from this one, in order to check the accuracy, kwim?

Do you all agree with the post below that I copied from elsewhere?

If you want a word-for-word or wooden translation, then go with NASB or ESV. If you want a thought-for-thought, then go for NIV. If you want beauty of historical language, you can't beat KJV, but the language can be cumbersome. I agree with the poster who said that there is much to be gained from reading a Bible without any commentary. I used a NASB when I read through the Bible several years ago. However there is so much that is impossible to understand without an explanation such as the tabernacle structure, the system of sacrifices, etc., spelled out in Leviticus. I have an ESV Study Bible now and am using it to read through the Bible chronologically. I do appreciate the study notes. HTH!

I was told by a former JW that is now a Christian missionary that the NASB is the most accurate. It looks to me like the ESV is easy to understand... but perhaps I don't need that as much because I have the Living Bible? Any advice is very welcomed! Thank you.

[Ron]

The Baptist church I am studying at uses the KJV but I am finding it near impossible to understand. Would a NKJV help with this?

Yes, the NKJV is fine if it helps you to better understand the scriptures; the KJV is hard to understand… You will get some, who will argue that only the KJV is a true translation, or the NIV is the best (etc…) and that is fine, I am not going to argue any of those points because I don’t really think that will get us anywhere (so it is no constructive to our conversation). I will make this point clear though; the “Living Bible” is not a translation, but a paraphrased version.

Personally, I use many different translations during my studies; but I also find that a good concordance (Strong’s Exhaustive for example), a good Bible Dictionary (Holeman’s Illustrated for example), and an interlinear Bible (this is one that has parallel English and Hebrew/Greek scriptures) are great helps as well.

But, the greatest tools you can use are an insatiable hunger for the Bible, and a willingness to be lead by the Holy Spirit!

[Fred Williams]

I was told by a former JW that is now a Christian missionary that the NASB is the most accurate. It looks to me like the ESV is easy to understand... but perhaps I don't need that as much because I have the Living Bible? Any advice is very welcomed! Thank you.

My preferred order: NKJV, KJV, NASB. I agree with Ron that its a good idea to keep a good concordance and dictionary handy. Here is IMO the best Bible website: blueletterbible.org. Just put in a verse and give it a try, very easy to look up the definition of the words, compare to other translations, etc.

Beware of most other translations, IMO (I have not studied the virtues or lack thereof of ESV). Bibles like the NIV and Living Bible should be taken with great caution, they have plenty of mistranslated verses and I would discourage them if the versions I mentioned are available - however, they are better than not having the Word at all, I wouldn't keep one of those Bibles from someone if its their only available option (no need to throw the baby out with the bathwater).

Fred

[MamaElephant]

Yes, the NKJV is fine if it helps you to better understand the scriptures; the KJV is hard to understand… You will get some, who will argue that only the KJV is a true translation, or the NIV is the best (etc…) and that is fine, I am not going to argue any of those points because I don’t really think that will get us anywhere (so it is no constructive to our conversation). I will make this point clear though; the “Living Bible” is not a translation, but a paraphrased version. Yes, of course I realize that. It says in the intro to the Living Bible itself that a translation is needed. Some verses make much more sense to me in the Living Bible, like the last verse of 1 John. Instead of "idols" it says "anything that takes the place of God in your hearts."

Personally, I use many different translations during my studies; but I also find that a good concordance (Strong’s Exhaustive for example), a good Bible Dictionary (Holeman’s Illustrated for example), and an interlinear Bible (this is one that has parallel English and Hebrew/Greek scriptures) are great helps as well. I will be getting a NASB first. I often use Strong's, blueletterbible and interlinear translations that I have found online. I read that Strong's is influenced by Unitarian beliefs and that had me a little worried.

But, the greatest tools you can use are an insatiable hunger for the Bible, and a willingness to be lead by the Holy Spirit!

Well in the KJV I studied the whole book of 1 John and several chapters in Revelation over the past couple of days and only had trouble understanding one verse, so... good.

[ikester7579]

The reason it's hard to understand is because it uses old English. I have been told, and I have found true, that one of the reasons it's preferred is because the truth is hidden until God reveals it. This is because God is not going to reveal to you what might damage you faith until you are ready.

The problem I find with using different translations is the flesh factor. Our logic, which mainly will adhere to fleshly wants, will go with the interpretation that sounds best to it and not to our spirit. But that is my opinion.

[MamaElephant]

The church already provided me with a KJV. I got a NKJ at the library and I plan to buy that and also a NASB. I will ask the pastor where to get them.

[MamaElephant]

Yes, the NKJV is fine if it helps you to better understand the scriptures; the KJV is hard to understand… You will get some, who will argue that only the KJV is a true translation, or the NIV is the best (etc…) and that is fine, I am not going to argue any of those points because I don’t really think that will get us anywhere (so it is no constructive to our conversation). I will make this point clear though; the “Living Bible” is not a translation, but a paraphrased version.

Personally, I use many different translations during my studies; but I also find that a good concordance (Strong’s Exhaustive for example), a good Bible Dictionary (Holeman’s Illustrated for example), and an interlinear Bible (this is one that has parallel English and Hebrew/Greek scriptures) are great helps as well.

But, the greatest tools you can use are an insatiable hunger for the Bible, and a willingness to be lead by the Holy Spirit!

Can you recommend an interlinear version for both the OT and the NT?

My preferred order: NKJV, KJV, NASB. I agree with Ron that its a good idea to keep a good concordance and dictionary handy. Here is IMO the best Bible website: blueletterbible.org. Just put in a verse and give it a try, very easy to look up the definition of the words, compare to other translations, etc.

Beware of most other translations, IMO (I have not studied the virtues or lack thereof of ESV). Bibles like the NIV and Living Bible should be taken with great caution, they have plenty of mistranslated verses and I would discourage them if the versions I mentioned are available - however, they are better than not having the Word at all, I wouldn't keep one of those Bibles from someone if its their only available option (no need to throw the baby out with the bathwater).

The missionary I am working with says that the manuscript that the translation is based on is very important? The NASB and the KJV are based on different manuscripts?

The main thing I want in the next translation I obtain is consistency. I don't want to find that 4 different ancient words are all translated as one word so that there is no difference shown in the translation, or that one ancient word is translated into many different words depending on the theology of the translators. I thought the NASB was a good choice for this, but then there is the manuscript question...

The missionary (he specializes in freeing JWs) recommends the Amplified Bible?

[Teejay]

[quote] name='MamaElephant' timestamp='1311563849' post='73420']
The Baptist church I am studying at uses the KJV but I am finding it near impossible to understand. Would a NKJV help with this?

The Living Bible is my true love because it is so easy to read and understand and brought about my conversion. Does anyone know of any inaccuracies in this version? I would also want to have at least one version that would be considered different from this one, in order to check the accuracy, kwim?

Do you all agree with the post below that I copied from elsewhere?

If you want a word-for-word or wooden translation, then go with NASB or ESV. If you want a thought-for-thought, then go for NIV. If you want beauty of historical language, you can't beat KJV, but the language can be cumbersome. I agree with the poster who said that there is much to be gained from reading a Bible without any commentary. I used a NASB when I read through the Bible several years ago. However there is so much that is impossible to understand without an explanation such as the tabernacle structure, the system of sacrifices, etc., spelled out in Leviticus. I have an ESV Study Bible now and am using it to read through the Bible chronologically. I do appreciate the study notes. HTH!

I was told by a former JW that is now a Christian missionary that the NASB is the most accurate. It looks to me like the ESV is easy to understand... but perhaps I don't need that as much because I have the Living Bible? Any advice is very welcomed! Thank you.
[/quote]

ME,

Although I'm old enough to understand Elizabethan English, I use the New King James. Why? I teach Bible studies, and the younger folk today have a difficult time with the old English phrases and with TV and video games, their reading comprehension is not what it was 50 years ago. So I reason that their salvation is more important than my "King James only" dogma.

I also have a King James. I don't use it for teaching but I sometimes like to look up a word or passage that I am studying just to get another perspective. To save yourself money, you can go on line and look up other Bible versions to back up your New King James or King James.

I like a Bible that has the paragraph references down the middle of the page, giving a reference to other passages in the Old and New Testaments that correspond to the verse I'm reading. Many times these paragraph references will give the King James translation of a main word or phrase. My Bible also has titles at the top of the page to show what the paragraph is about. For example, "Peter's Witness to Centurion Cornelius." This so helpfull to quickly locate a matter.

In my New King James I have found only one translation that is translated incorrectly where as the King James has it translated correctly. Most differences in Bible are not crucial. This one is crucial. The King James correctly translates this:

"But contrariwise, when they [Peter and James at Jerusalem Council, Acts 15] saw that the gospel OF the uncircumcision [grace] was committed unto me [Paul], as the gospel OF the circumcision [law and works] was unto Peter..." (Galatians 2:7, King James).

The New King James incorrectly translates this:

"But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel FOR the uncircumcised had been committed to me, as the gospel FOR the circumcised was to Peter..." (Galatians 2:7, New King James).

A few years ago, I did a Bible tour of Greece and the Greek Islands where Paul journeyed. My tour guide was a Christian (not Greek Orthodox) and he could read ancient Greek fluently. I had him read from the ancient Greek and translate it to English. He read, gospel "OF" and not gospel "FOR." I showed him our New King James and he was appalled. He asked me, "Do you realize how this will confuse Christians?"

TeeJay

[Chris]

For my own use, I keep a 1611 KJV. The wife refers to it, tongue firmly in cheek, as my "Bleffed be" Bible, since the spelling is somewhat archaic. It's beautiful, though, and once your mind adjusts to the flow of the old-fashioned spelling and sentence structure, it's great mental exercise.

I was told, though I've yet to check for myself, that subsequent editions of the KJV leading up to the 1729 corrected several spelling and grammatical errors introduced in the earlier printings, as well as altering the spelling of many words to reflect changes in the English language. So that's next on the list of Bibles to read.

Though I won't personally discourage using other translations until performing the requisite research and weighing their merits, I will say, without reservation, that reading the KJV is much more satisfying for me.

[Chris]

For my own use, I keep a 1611 KJV. The wife refers to it, tongue firmly in cheek, as my "Bleffed be" Bible, since the spelling is somewhat archaic. It's beautiful, though, and once your mind adjusts to the flow of the old-fashioned spelling and sentence structure, it's great mental exercise.

I was told, though I've yet to check for myself, that subsequent editions of the KJV leading up to the 1729 corrected several spelling and grammatical errors introduced in the earlier printings, as well as altering the spelling of many words to reflect changes in the English language. So that's next on the list of Bibles to read.

Though I won't personally discourage using other translations until performing the requisite research and weighing their merits, I will say, without reservation, that reading the KJV is much more satisfying for me.

Whoops. Pardon the double-post, but I meant to say 1769, not 1729. It's been a long day and my eyes are crossing!

[MamaElephant]

Thanks Chris. I now use the NKJV along with a KJV study bible for most of my studying. I have a One Year Bible and an ESV that I use for reading and if I have questions in those I will look it up in the others. My husband uses the NASB and Amplified along with the KJV study Bible. We are pretty happy with this mix.

[jason]

that there 1769 kjv.