Which bible do you reference? | Page 1 | The Bible | Guild Forums

XenithFreelancer

Offline

Posted: Sun Jun 12, 2016 10:03 am

I have King James and the New Living Translation, but I tend to stick with NLT because its easiest for me to understand.
I want to get more versions though just to kind of compare.

How about everyone else? What version do you stick with?

((Not sure if this is the right forum section, but it seemed to fit best here))

Posted: Mon Jun 13, 2016 7:32 am

Depends on what I'm doing:

- studying the Greek and Hebrew? By default, I have to use a KJV and NASB (because I use the Strong's concordance and NASB concordance on biblos.com).

- Personal reading and meditation? I use a version called Halleluyah Scriptures which leaves several terms in Hebrew (and all the names in Hebrew, when the person has a Hebrew name). I use that one for personal reading and meditation because it reads more closely to what I'd find in an interlinear without it actually being one. Leaving terms in Hebrew forces me to dig deeper into the verse, naturally, in order to understand it; as a result, I end up defining the term literally the way the Hebrew does. So, when I compare it other English versions (multiple versions), I notice that there's a nuance that they're not conveying or they're being highly interpretative with a line; just overall, it's a Bible version that leads me into deeper meditation, has me linking verses that I otherwise would not have done. Plus, I really like having an accurate pronunciation of names [when I first started reading the Bible, totally unchurched, figuring out that Ezekiel is pronounced "ee-zee-key-uhl" made no sense, discouraged me from reading, and just compounded onto what I perceived to be at the time the ridiculousness of the Bible—even the names don't make sense. But in Hebrew they do, the pronunciation is practical, simple, and the names actually have meaning in that language.

- Talking to people online? usually the NIV, for its level of readability, yet accuracy; it's more accurate than the NLT. (continuum of word-for-word vs thought-for-thought: http://www.mardel.com/bibleTranslationGuide). Though sometimes I use the WEB because it says "Yahweh" instead of a generic title (the LORD), and it does not have a copyright (it's public domain); KJV is public domain too but the WEB is more readable for most people I meet.

- I used the AMP version a lot when I first began reading the Bible, because it functioned like a concordance providing multiple words that fully expressed the Hebrew or Greek term being used in a verse.

- IRL I use various Spanish versions when studying / reading with my mother and other believing family members.

P.S. - I'll be moving this to the main forum since it's not really a debate, just inquiring into what the rest of the members read.

cristobela
Vice Captain

Offline

SARL0

Quotable Dabbler

Offline

Posted: Mon Jun 13, 2016 2:42 pm

King James Version
i prefer it to all other versions and based on personal experience is really the only version that feeds and nourishes my hungry soul. 3nodding

Posted: Mon Jun 13, 2016 5:41 pm

NASB. It's the version that my Bible study group uses.

OtakuKat

Moonlight Healer

Offline

Garland-Green

Friendly Gaian

Offline

Posted: Sat Jun 18, 2016 1:32 am

I mostly use the ESV and the NIV when referencing. I have never read the Bible completely in my own language (Norwegian), though it is available. Mostly because I believe the English language is more nuanced and elegante than Norwegian is. The problem with that is that I have the English translation in my head. The English names etc. This makes it hard to give a quote to someone in my own language.

The positive thing about the NIV is that it is easy to understand. Written in a very easy to understand language. The disadvantages of the NIV is that its translation form is dynamic equivalence. Meaning that it doesn't always translate words, but meaning. The footnotes in the NIV are great in that they indicate where the translators have changed words It is an honest translation despite the claims to the contrary by some.

When I first started reading the Bible I read the King James Bible. Great advantages I think to start off reading that particular translation. You have to pause a lot and think about what you are actually reading because of the language. There is no just reading through it. To me the language seems reverent and poetic, and that attributes to why I like it so much. I am aware it would just be ordinary English to someone from the 17th century, but you have to admit that 'Thou' sounds better than 'You'. lol

Posted: Sat Jul 09, 2016 8:11 pm

Garland-Green

When I first started reading the Bible I read the King James Bible. Great advantages I think to start off reading that particular translation. You have to pause a lot and think about what you are actually reading because of the language. There is no just reading through it. To me the language seems reverent and poetic, and that attributes to why I like it so much. I am aware it would just be ordinary English to someone from the 17th century, but you have to admit that 'Thou' sounds better than 'You'. lol

I think this is exactly right! I've cross-referenced and reread the KJV so much more, even though I grew up with NIV version in church etc.

God has really used the KJV to help me understand more things, I'm continually amazed by passages I've read numerous times that I suddenly understand in a different way- some because of where I am in my own like and others because I didn't know the context.