What's Your Favorite Bible?

[GodsGrace]

The KJV is the version I had read and heard all my life before I became a Christian , so that would be the reason it seemed to be the natural choice for me . My wife was already using a Thompson C-R bible before we got married , she said it was a recommended bible for young ministers .
YES ! You can get the Thompson Chain-Reference Bible in other translations too .

Watch a few minutes and I think you will get an idea how the Chain-Reference part works , pretty neat I think 2 .

Maybe you need to watch the video on this page for a chain-reference version of the NASB . It might give you a better idea of how it works . NASB 1977 Thompson Chain-Reference Bible

I watched the video.
It seems complicated...but guess what?
I'm going to have to get one.
I guess in the NASB. Not sure...
Could start by finding out in what versions it's available.
THANKS!!

 

[Edward]

I use The Open Bible KJV. It's like so many different books in one with two concordances, archeological discoveries, detailed outline to each book, harmony of the Gospels, prophecies that Christ has already fulfilled, teachings and illustrations of Christ, the miracles of Christ, all the prayers in the Bible, and a guide to Christian workers in a Q&A

This is actually my second one as I wore out my first one.

That sounded real familiar to me so I flipped it open to see and it is an Open Bible too, with all those study aids. Mine is a NKJV. The same one that used to be an NIV. I don't remember if that one was an open bible too or not?

So I use that NKJV in paper version and my Biblegateway is set to KJV cuz that's what I was weaned on lol.

 

[GodsGrace]

I started on the NASB before the NIV came out.

The Peshita is a family of bible manuscripts written in Aramaic. There are 2 sets in different dialects, and the earliest ones date from the 300s, equally old to the Greek NT. They also pre-date the Masoretic text of the OT by several centuries. George Lamsa (sp?) grew up speaking a modern Aramaic as his native language. He spent from the 1940s into the early 1960s doing a translation of the Bible from those earliest Aramaic manuscripts. It has some interesting variations to our more standard Greek and Masoretic versions.

Artscroll is a top line publisher of Orthodox Jewish religious texts. I first heard of them in the mid 1990s when visiting an Orthodox synagogue. Their translation of the OT is very good.

JPS (Jewish Publication Society) is also a Jewish publisher but is aimed at Reform and Conservative Judaism along with the Orthodox. They predate Artscroll by several decades. Their bible is standard fare, especially in the Conservative movement. Until Artscroll came along, they also were common in Orthodox congregations.

Koren is the new kid on the block, and also is a Jewish publisher for the Orthodox. They are trying to break the monopoly Artscroll has in that community. They are also published in Israel instead of the US. Their Bible translation is actually only a year or 2 old. I have only just started using it but it seems quite good. So far.


Most people I have met in the Messianic movement were regular church attenders before joining the Messianics. Most are gentiles but have some kind of Jewish background.

My dad was a Wesleyan pastor but had left the pastorate before I was born. So I attended Church of the Nazarene before my mom and dad broke up. Then we started attending Assembly of God.

Interesting.
If I had to choose a different denomination it would be the AofG, although I don't believe it's necessary to speak in tongues as proof of having received the Holy Spirit. Although I can't really choose anymore.

The Peshita sounds very interesting to me.
Maybe because I speak a romance language fluently and I understand that it's not easy to translate some thoughts.
Although I have no accent in the Italian language, some catch that I studied elsewhere because of HOW I put my sentences together. I wonder if the Peshita could be purchased...but what good would it do - it would be a translation!

 

[tim-from-pa]

For the English language, I'm always going to officially be a KJV man. However, I like (and am reading now again) the NKJV. In church when I read the KJV aloud, I'd often do my own ad lib substitutions for words namely pronouns (thee's and thy replaced by today's pronouns) or updating the word such as "speaketh" I would just say "speaks". In short, I'd replace the old language for the class to understand and sounded like normal talking without changing the meaning. To my delight, the NKJV stays true to the KJV and sounds very much like my ad lib replacements. LOL

With the attached chart, notice that folks like me who like the KJV, NKJV, NASB, etc are on the left side "word for word" end of the spectrum. The famous NIV and "Living" translations the latter often used for youth or newer Christians are more on the thought and paraphrase end of the spectrum. At first glance, that sounds good, but the problem there is that it is subject to translation bias and whatever those translators believe.

 

[stovebolts]

me who like the KJV, NKJV, NASB, etc are on the left side "word for word"

I’m glad to see the NET Bible clumped with the KJV.
What I like about the NET Bible, is they tell you why they translated a word the way they did.
In other words, they tell you their reasoning. This is something you don’t get with the KJV and yes, the KJV has a bias, but it doesn’t readily show itself.

 

[Free]

Here is my choice a Thompson chain reference KJV .

KJV Large Print Thompson Chain Reference Bible

""Influence-Free" Study Bible
A Thompson® is considered by some to be the only true "Influence-Free" Study Bible. This is the one very important difference between a Thompson® and most other study Bibles. Most study Bibles fill their margins with another person's commentary. These are notes from a knowledgeable author who tries to explain the text to you. Commentaries can be useful, but every author has his or her own view and biased agenda. Commentaries offer wide and often opposing influence. The Thompson® Bible is "influence-free," because instead of commentary, the margins are filled with thousands of chain-references® that propel you ahead into Scripture. Scholars agree that the Bible is its own best commentary, and the Thompson® Chain-Reference® Study Bible is built on this premise."

Here is a video about it .

There is no such thing as an "influence-free" study Bible or "influence-free" Bible. Such is the nature of translation. But with the Thompson Chain-Reference, the references themselves could very much influence one's study as it is the authors that have determined what the references are, and it is likely that they have not included all relevant references (how could they?).

I just read this a couple of days ago:

"The KJV for a long time was the most widely used translation in the world; it also served for several centuries as the classic expression of the English language. Indeed, its translators coined phrases that will be forever embedded in our language (“coals of fire,” “the skin of my teeth,” “tongues of fire”). However, for the New Testament, the only Greek text available to the translators of the 1611 edition was based on late manuscripts, which had accumulated the mistakes of over a thousand years of copying. Few of these mistakes — and we must note that there are many of them — make any difference to us doctrinally, but they often do make a difference in the meaning of certain specific texts. Recognizing that the English of the KJV was no longer a living language — and thoroughly dissatisfied with its modern revision (RSV/NRSV) — it was decided by some to “update” the KJV by ridding it of its “archaic” way of speaking. But in so doing, the NKJV revisers eliminated the best feature of the KJV (its marvelous expression of the English language) and kept the worst (its flawed Greek text). This is why for study you should use almost any modern translation other than the KJV or the NKJV." (Fee, Gordon D.; Stuart, Douglas. How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth (pp. 43-44). Zondervan Academic. Kindle Edition.)

I mostly stick to the ESV but will reference many others, including the HCSB, NIV, and NASB.

 

[tim-from-pa]

I’m glad to see the NET Bible clumped with the KJV.
What I like about the NET Bible, is they tell you why they translated a word the way they did.
In other words, they tell you their reasoning. This is something you don’t get with the KJV and yes, the KJV has a bias, but it doesn’t readily show itself.

Wow! I looked up the NET bible on the blueletterbible site and looked at some passages. I don't like that translation at all. I would rate them on the far right of the spectrum. I mean, when you compare the Hebrew passages to what they have, I found a clear case they were adding or compromising some meanings and I fail to see the word-for-word (so much for that chart I copied from the Internet LOL). They may have a reason to use the words they did, but I get the distinct feeling it's their words explaining what they think the passage is saying. That's exactly what I was concerned about with some of the paraphrases. This translation reminds me of a Living Bible type wording.

 

[DavidT]

I rely on the good ole' KJV. It still is the best English translation to date, even though all... versions have some translation errors.

In the study software I use I have many different Bible versions. I find the later versions to be corruptions, especially versions like the NIV and even the New King James Version which is supposedly a version to get away from the thee and thou, but in reality it reads just like the NIV which was translated from a different set of Greek manuscripts.

So if you don't think God's written Word is being toyed with regarding modern Bible versions, you'd better think again. 19th century British scholars Wescott and Hort were determined to get rid of the Textus Receptus Greek texts (Majority Texts) which were used for the 1611 KJV Bible, and supplant it with the corrupt Codex Vaticanus and Codex Alexandrinus texts...

Wescott And Hort — The Overthrow of the Greek Text

3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the wo…

coercioncode.com

 

[for_his_glory]

There is no such thing as an "influence-free" study Bible or "influence-free" Bible. Such is the nature of translation. But with the Thompson Chain-Reference, the references themselves could very much influence one's study as it is the authors that have determined what the references are, and it is likely that they have not included all relevant references (how could they?).

I just read this a couple of days ago:

"The KJV for a long time was the most widely used translation in the world; it also served for several centuries as the classic expression of the English language. Indeed, its translators coined phrases that will be forever embedded in our language (“coals of fire,” “the skin of my teeth,” “tongues of fire”). However, for the New Testament, the only Greek text available to the translators of the 1611 edition was based on late manuscripts, which had accumulated the mistakes of over a thousand years of copying. Few of these mistakes — and we must note that there are many of them — make any difference to us doctrinally, but they often do make a difference in the meaning of certain specific texts. Recognizing that the English of the KJV was no longer a living language — and thoroughly dissatisfied with its modern revision (RSV/NRSV) — it was decided by some to “update” the KJV by ridding it of its “archaic” way of speaking. But in so doing, the NKJV revisers eliminated the best feature of the KJV (its marvelous expression of the English language) and kept the worst (its flawed Greek text). This is why for study you should use almost any modern translation other than the KJV or the NKJV." (Fee, Gordon D.; Stuart, Douglas. How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth (pp. 43-44). Zondervan Academic. Kindle Edition.)

I mostly stick to the ESV but will reference many others, including the HCSB, NIV, and NASB.

The most important thing before studying any translation is to pray first and ask the Holy Spirit teach you and to also test the spirits that try to teach us, 1John 4:1-6.

 

[stovebolts]

Wow! I looked up the NET bible on the blueletterbible site and looked at some passages. I don't like that translation at all.

Go to net Bible.org

Just because you don’t like something doesn’t always mean it’s wrong. For instance, I read a lot of OT from Chabad.org and they translate some things very differently than the KJV. Their version is held to the highest esteem for translations into English. On occasion, they even split their verses in different areas.

 

[D-D-W]

Go to net Bible.org

Just because you don’t like something doesn’t always mean it’s wrong. For instance, I read a lot of OT from Chabad.org and they translate some things very differently than the KJV. Their version is held to the highest esteem for translations into English. On occasion, they even split their verses in different areas.

Of course they do. Their chapter and verse divisions are on the natural flow of the Hebrew, not English. All Jewish bible translations do that.

And the order of books is different. It is first the 5 books of Moses, then the Hebrew prophets and then the writings (psalms, etc.) That is the division of books our Lord used:

Luke 24:44
Now He said to them, “These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things which are written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.”

 

[GodsGrace]

Ya can't make everyone happy... I hold the view that these versions have their place.

Ha, yes, it is different. Sometimes I think it sounds more like laymen commentary, or should I say what you would hear after church during the potluck ;-)

Yes. It does sound like that!
But now, thanks be to you, I'll have to get myself a copy of the NET version.
I thought I had it but couldn't find it - maybe I got mixed up with the NLB.
So many versions...
So little time !

 

[GodsGrace]

Of course they do. Their chapter and verse divisions are on the natural flow of the Hebrew, not English. All Jewish bible translations do that.

And the order of books is different. It is first the 5 books of Moses, then the Hebrew prophets and then the writings (psalms, etc.) That is the division of books our Lord used:

Luke 24:44
Now He said to them, “These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things which are written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.”

Very interesting comment DDW. About how the O.T. was arranged in Jesus' time.

I also know that there's a bible that's in chronological order.
I really think all bibles should be put together this way.
The history would make more sense.

 

[GodsGrace]

I also like using the Jerusalem Bible and the NIV at times to compare with the KJV. Not to much on commentaries except to find scriptures on what they are commenting on.

Agreed 100% !
I use different versions when necessary and try to avoid commentaries unless really necessary.

I've also found the Italian bible has helped me at times (not too often)...
For instance it helped a lot with the meaning of the word DRAW in different verses.
It doesn't mean the same in each instance even though the English word DRAW is used for all of them.

 

[GodsGrace]

For the English language, I'm always going to officially be a KJV man. However, I like (and am reading now again) the NKJV. In church when I read the KJV aloud, I'd often do my own ad lib substitutions for words namely pronouns (thee's and thy replaced by today's pronouns) or updating the word such as "speaketh" I would just say "speaks". In short, I'd replace the old language for the class to understand and sounded like normal talking without changing the meaning. To my delight, the NKJV stays true to the KJV and sounds very much like my ad lib replacements. LOL

With the attached chart, notice that folks like me who like the KJV, NKJV, NASB, etc are on the left side "word for word" end of the spectrum. The famous NIV and "Living" translations the latter often used for youth or newer Christians are more on the thought and paraphrase end of the spectrum. At first glance, that sounds good, but the problem there is that it is subject to translation bias and whatever those translators believe.

Hi TimfromPA

Thanks for the great chart!

And welcome to the forum.

 

[GodsGrace]

Wow! I looked up the NET bible on the blueletterbible site and looked at some passages. I don't like that translation at all. I would rate them on the far right of the spectrum. I mean, when you compare the Hebrew passages to what they have, I found a clear case they were adding or compromising some meanings and I fail to see the word-for-word (so much for that chart I copied from the Internet LOL). They may have a reason to use the words they did, but I get the distinct feeling it's their words explaining what they think the passage is saying. That's exactly what I was concerned about with some of the paraphrases. This translation reminds me of a Living Bible type wording.

I agree.
The above reason is why I didn't get the NET originally...I did get the NLT, which is about the same in my opinion, even though they're on opposite sides of your chart.

I'd like to get away from the NASB (after 40 years worth) but am having difficulty.
No matter which version I try to use, I find myself checking it with the NASB before I trust it !

 

[D-D-W]

Very interesting comment DDW. About how the O.T. was arranged in Jesus' time.

IT still is arranged that way in Jewish circles.
This can explain it better than I can with the limits of the time and the forum:

Hebrew Bible - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[GodsGrace]

IT still is arranged that way in Jewish circles.
This can explain it better than I can with the limits of the time and the forum:

Hebrew Bible - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Read.
Thanks!

 

[D-D-W]

For the English language, I'm always going to officially be a KJV man. However, I like (and am reading now again) the NKJV. In church when I read the KJV aloud, I'd often do my own ad lib substitutions for words namely pronouns (thee's and thy replaced by today's pronouns) or updating the word such as "speaketh" I would just say "speaks". In short, I'd replace the old language for the class to understand and sounded like normal talking without changing the meaning. To my delight, the NKJV stays true to the KJV and sounds very much like my ad lib replacements. LOL

With the attached chart, notice that folks like me who like the KJV, NKJV, NASB, etc are on the left side "word for word" end of the spectrum. The famous NIV and "Living" translations the latter often used for youth or newer Christians are more on the thought and paraphrase end of the spectrum. At first glance, that sounds good, but the problem there is that it is subject to translation bias and whatever those translators believe.

It is a good chart, but IMO is a bit dated. Either that or they left off a good number of translations. Surprising is the absence of the Young's Literal Translation (usually abbreviated YLT or LIT) It should be left of the NASB.

And speaking of the NASB, which version is being represented? 1972? 1977? 1995? 2020?

The Messianic translation Tree of Life Version (TLV) should be plotted at the same place as NASB. (1995)

 

[hawkman]

There is no such thing as an "influence-free" study Bible or "influence-free" Bible. Such is the nature of translation. But with the Thompson Chain-Reference, the references themselves could very much influence one's study as it is the authors that have determined what the references are, and it is likely that they have not included all relevant references (how could they?).

Did you watch a video to see how the reference system they use works ? I have not found any problems so far .

I mostly stick to the ESV but will reference many others, including the HCSB, NIV, and NASB.

There is a Thompson Chain-Reference version of the ESV . Try one out you may find you like it . Here is a link and there is a two minute video showing how the Chain-Reference works . ESV Thompson Chain-Reference Bible