Which translation do you prefer and why?

 

Of the ones I'm most familiar with (KJV, NKJV, NASB, and NIV), I probably prefer the New King James. I like the regular King James, but the NKJV updates the language and makes it a lot easier for me to read. I also like the NASB pretty good and I use it sometimes. I don't use the NIV a whole lot though...for some reason I don't like it as good...maybe because I started using the other two first and got used to them. I don't know, but it seems to be a pretty good translation. I don't really have any problems with it, other than it's just not my preference.

 

I'm less familiar with the NLT (New Living Translation) and from what I have seen of it, I'm not a big fan.

 

A couple of others that I'm vaguely familiar with are the Amplified Bible and the Message...I enjoy reading what they say sometimes as a comparison and find them useful in that regard. Of course, that's sort of the purpose of the Message I think.

 

Anyway, I was just wondering what everyone else thought. I know there are more out there, but those are the ones I know the most about.

Imo the only version of the Bible is the King James Version. I just don't know about all of these "living Bible" translations. Imo the more versions of the Holy Bible that there are the more chance for someone to inject their own opionions and "their rules" into it.

 

JMO

KJV

And I totally agree with Oldrambler

I believe the English Standard Version is the best effort at translation from the original Hebrew and Aramaic. It was recommended by Forbes many, many years ago, and I agree with them.

 

I do not like the NIV. Loses the formality that was intended for many verses and passages.

 

The KJV is a beautiful script translation, in classic high church style. However, it was nearly impossible conversion to Middle English from Latin Vulgate, and I think an awful lot was changed in the translation, even in essential meanings of words like "brother." Beautiful though it is, I do not believe it is as accurate.

I don't do paraphrase Bibles. I really dislike The Message. I think the NIV is the best read, but the NASB is more accurate.

I used to be a KJ version only kind of guy. But, I carried a parallel Bible (4 translations side by side) to Sunday school for several years and compared them over time.

 

My parallel Bible has KJ, NIV, Amplified and the New Living. I found them to be pretty good.

 

I like the way the New Living translation reads – it’s much easier for me to understand. But, I like having the KJ translation there for comparison. The Amplified translation is good for elaborating on a point.

 

Old dogs can learn new tricks,

Graybeard

I don't do paraphrase Bibles. I really dislike The Message. I think the NIV is the best read, but the NASB is more accurate.

 

I would hope no one would use it as a primary Bible, but it can be useful sometimes just to see how it paraphrases a certain passage. I don't have one though.

I believe the English Standard Version is the best effort at translation from the original Hebrew and Aramaic. It was recommended by Forbes many, many years ago, and I agree with them.

 

I do not like the NIV. Loses the formality that was intended for many verses and passages.

 

The KJV is a beautiful script translation, in classic high church style. However, it was nearly impossible conversion to Middle English from Latin Vulgate, and I think an awful lot was changed in the translation, even in essential meanings of words like "brother." Beautiful though it is, I do not believe it is as accurate.

 

I've never seen that one, but I'll have to check it out. Your point on the NIV is one reason I don't like it as much...it seems the NKJV and NASB stays closer to the KJV style that I enjoy.

I don't do paraphrase Bibles. I really dislike The Message. I think the NIV is the best read, but the NASB is more accurate.

 

I really like the NASB...I compared it to the NKJV and found that they have a lot of similarities. I like them both.

I used to be a KJ version only kind of guy. But, I carried a parallel Bible (4 translations side by side) to Sunday school for several years and compared them over time.

 

My parallel Bible has KJ, NIV, Amplified and the New Living. I found them to be pretty good.

 

I like the way the New Living translation reads – it’s much easier for me to understand. But, I like having the KJ translation there for comparison. The Amplified translation is good for elaborating on a point.

 

Old dogs can learn new tricks,

Graybeard

 

That's a good point on the Amplified...similar to the Message, sometimes it can help me understand things better, or look at them from a different perspective...

 

...I can't imagine carrying a parallel Bible with 4 translations around though...was that a good workout?

I've never seen that one, but I'll have to check it out. Your point on the NIV is one reason I don't like it as much...it seems the NKJV and NASB stays closer to the KJV style that I enjoy.

 

If you've ever heard of a "Scofield" bible, that's an ESV.

Could someone explain to me what makes the KJV "The Bible"?

...I can't imagine carrying a parallel Bible with 4 translations around though...was that a good workout?

 

The one I carried was a New Testament only - not too big. I have a complete parallel Bible in my home office - and I don't carry it around much.

NIV is what I use....A quarrelsome wife is like a constant dripping on a rainy day; restraining her is like restraining the wind or grasping oil with the hand. NIV

 

KJV A continual dropping in a very rainy day and a contentious woman are alike.

Could someone explain to me what makes the KJV "The Bible"?

 

Its majestic prose and poetry; its commission at the request of the King, thus uniting Church and secular authorities; its nomer as the "Authorized Version" in Great Britain, from whence we are primarily derived; its replacement of the high church etymology in place of the degraded terms from the Reformation.

 

It "feels" like the Bible of the King of Kings.