# Does Your Household All Use The Same Bible Translation?



## Username3000 (May 22, 2018)

Does your entire family use the same (primary) Bible translation; or, do different members prefer different translations? If different, how does this affect times spent looking at the word together; and how do these times look, practically speaking?


----------



## arapahoepark (May 22, 2018)

While my family is not interested in details like I am, we all typically use the NIV.


----------



## Jack K (May 22, 2018)

We're all fairly similar in that we all use multiple translations, depending on the purpose. We proudly take Bible geekiness to new heights!


----------



## Tom Hart (May 22, 2018)

Ours is a bilingual family, so different translations are something of a necessity!


----------



## JimmyH (May 22, 2018)

I'm the only one in the household and I use a variety of translations ;-)

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Doulos McKenzie (May 22, 2018)

My father amd mother both use the NASB while both my older siblings use the ESV. I used to use the ESV but recently I jumped to the KJV as my main translation. My younger sister who is in early high school uses the CSB but she used to use the ESV. Both my super young brother and sister use the NIV. Usually for family worship the ESV is used.


----------



## jw (May 22, 2018)

Yeah, we do. 

For private study, I like the KJV, but for devotional reading I prefer the KJV. The KJV is a favorite of mine, and I also really like the KJV. Me and my household use the KJV. 


P.S. - Are you familiar with the KJV? It, too, is a superb translation all around.

Reactions: Like 1 | Funny 3


----------



## VictorBravo (May 22, 2018)

My wife and I have and use all the major translations except NIV (there's one laying around somewhere, probably at the bottom of a storage bin). We also have several different Greek editions and two different Hebrew editions. 

My wife's primary use is NKJV, but she will sometimes go through the ESV just to catch some of what she calls "editorial indiscretions." Having read through it a few times, it is more a novelty than a primary translation for her. I pretty much don't like it or the NASB simply for their respective styles.

My daily reader is KJV. 

We have no problem with different translations--often we go to the Greek or Hebrew to see for ourselves what was behind a particular translation choice.


----------



## Josh Williamson (May 22, 2018)

I use the NKJV for private reading and preaching. My wife uses the ESV, but for family worship we use the AV. Our home church also uses the NKJV.


----------



## VictorBravo (May 22, 2018)

Joshua said:


> Are you familiar with the KJV? It, too, is a superb translation all around.



Vaguely. Tell me more, Josh.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## ZackF (May 22, 2018)

Wife uses NASB. Daughter now uses CSB and NIV. I use CSB, KJV and now more and more RV1960 and couple other Spanish translations.


----------



## bookslover (May 23, 2018)

I use the ESV. My son, whom I _thought_ I had trained well, uses the NASB.


----------



## Brian R. (May 23, 2018)

I'm with Josh. My wife, seven children, and I all use the KJV exclusively. That's not to say I won't consult another translation occasionally for comparison, but all of our reading, study, and worship are done with the KJV.


----------



## Gabriel Barnes (May 23, 2018)

Everyone in my family uses the KJV.


----------



## Dachaser (May 23, 2018)

E.R. CROSS said:


> Does your entire family use the same (primary) Bible translation; or, do different members prefer different translations? If different, how does this affect times spent looking at the word together; and how do these times look, practically speaking?


Different translations in my household, as my wife still has and uses the Niv study bible Niv, bought for her when we married 20 years ago, my boys use the Nlt, and I use both Nas/Esv.


----------



## Ask Mr. Religion (May 23, 2018)

I use the KJV or NKJV primarily, while my wife preferred the updated NLT, which basically reads as a _poor man's commentary_ to measure my holding forth using the KJV/NKJV. Made for lively discussions, too.


----------



## Scott Bushey (May 23, 2018)

Ask Mr. Religion said:


> I use the KJV or NKJV primarily, while my wife preferred


....

same with me; My wife seems to prefer the ESV.


----------



## JM (May 23, 2018)

When the kids were little we all used the AV. Now it's just my wife and I and we still use the AV.


----------



## GulfCoast Presbyterian (May 23, 2018)

I use the AV/ESV, my wife likes the CSB, and the dogs are totally remiss in their daily reading.

Reactions: Funny 2


----------



## yeutter (May 23, 2018)

I use the Authorized Version. My wife uses the Nepali translation recently published by the Trinitarian Bible Society. She also uses Judson's Burmese translation. When she does use an English translation she uses the KJV and consults the ESV at times. I am more inclined to consult Young's, the ASV, and Geneva.


----------



## KMK (May 25, 2018)

As far as I know, my household of 11 uses the KJV exclusively. However, we all use electronic devices to read from, so it is kind of hard to tell. 

(Don't bother pointing out the irony of a family that reads a 17th century book on 21st century devices.)


----------



## Von (May 25, 2018)

GulfCoast Presbyterian said:


> the dogs are totally remiss in their daily reading.


So typical...
That's why they will be outside the kingdom (Rev 22:15)

I use the 1953 Afrikaans translation as well as the NIV.
My wife reads the ESV.
Our kids are being taught from the 1983 Afrikaans translation.


----------



## Stephen L Smith (May 25, 2018)

Josh Williamson said:


> I use the NKJV for private reading and preaching. My wife uses the ESV, but for family worship we use the AV. Our home church also uses the NKJV.


I thought you switched to the CSB?


----------



## Josh Williamson (May 25, 2018)

Stephen L Smith said:


> I thought you switched to the CSB?



No, I tested out the CSB last year, but found it too American. Congregations here found the translation distracting.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Username3000 (May 25, 2018)

Thanks for the responses. I've thought, and posted, about this topic before; but since Inhave been reading a pre-updated NASB, it got me thinking again. My wife uses the ESV, as does our pastor.


----------



## Dachaser (May 26, 2018)

Josh Williamson said:


> No, I tested out the CSB last year, but found it too American. Congregations here found the translation distracting.


what would too American refer to?


----------



## Username3000 (May 26, 2018)

Dachaser said:


> what would too American refer to?


Poor English, choppy sentences, and vulgar to the point of lacking any hint of majesty in the language?


----------



## ZackF (May 26, 2018)

E.R. CROSS said:


> Poor English, choppy sentences, and vulgar to the point of lacking any hint of majesty in the language?


All of my best qualities in one sentence!!

Reactions: Like 1 | Funny 3


----------



## Username3000 (May 26, 2018)

ZackF said:


> All of my best qualities in one sentence!!


Yankee Doodle came to town riding on a pony?

In all seriousness, I'm interested to hear the answer to the question of how the CSB is too American as well.


----------



## Bill The Baptist (May 26, 2018)

E.R. CROSS said:


> Poor English, choppy sentences, and vulgar to the point of lacking any hint of majesty in the language?



Tell us how you really feel


----------



## Username3000 (May 26, 2018)

Bill The Baptist said:


> Tell us how you really feel


I feel that not only was rebellion against your king wrong, but so was jettisoning the King's English. 

But let us not derail this thread.

Reactions: Funny 2


----------



## Stephen L Smith (May 26, 2018)

I think what Josh is meaning is that both Australia and New Zealand are former British colonies. Therefore our 'outlook' and language in a number of respects is British. The Queen remains head of state in both nations. Thus our English is still, in the main, British English. In terms of the way our Parliaments are run, we operate as Independent nations. That is the British Government has no power over the Australian and New Zealand Parliaments. But our British heritage remains.


----------



## Dachaser (May 26, 2018)

E.R. CROSS said:


> I feel that not only was rebellion against your king wrong, but so was jettisoning the King's English.
> 
> But let us not derail this thread.


Well, the British have given to us Dr Who and James Bond.


----------



## JimmyH (May 26, 2018)

Dachaser said:


> Well, the British have given to us Dr Who and James Bond.


William Shakespeare, John Milton, Keats, Shelly, and John Donne were no slouches either.


----------



## Herald (May 26, 2018)

My wife uses the NKJV and I use the NASB. It has never been an issue for us.


----------



## Herald (May 26, 2018)

E.R. CROSS said:


> I feel that not only was rebellion against your king wrong, but so was jettisoning the King's English.
> 
> But let us not derail this thread.


I needed a good laugh today.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Josh Williamson (May 27, 2018)

Dachaser said:


> what would too American refer to?



For instance, when I preached through Psalm 113, the CSB uses the word "trash," which isn't a commonly used word here. The congregation said they found that wording distracting and too American. I had to agree.


----------



## TheOldCourse (May 27, 2018)

E.R. CROSS said:


> Poor English, choppy sentences, and vulgar to the point of lacking any hint of majesty in the language?



What's this kerfluffle all aboot eh?


----------



## iainduguid (May 27, 2018)

Josh Williamson said:


> For instance, when I preached through Psalm 113, the CSB uses the word "trash," which isn't a commonly used word here. The congregation said they found that wording distracting and too American. I had to agree.


I used to think that trash was an American word too until I came across it in Gurnall's "Christian in Complete Armour". John Owen also uses it in his commentary in Hebrews. It was actually a good Puritan English word, long before the Americans discovered it. It's time we British knew the history of our own language better.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## Username3000 (May 27, 2018)

iainduguid said:


> I used to think that trash was an American word too until I came across it in Gurnall's "Christian in Complete Armour". John Owen also uses it in his commentary in Hebrews. It was actually a good Puritan English word, long before the Americans discovered it. It's time we British knew the history of our own language better.


Why not use the KJV then if we are handing out points for old words that are no longer used by people today?

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## ZackF (May 27, 2018)

E.R. CROSS said:


> Why not use the KJV then if we are handing out points for old words that are no longer used by people today?



I think the word trash is in use today.


----------



## iainduguid (May 27, 2018)

E.R. CROSS said:


> Why not use the KJV then if we are handing out points for old words that are no longer used by people today?


No British person misunderstands the meaning of the word "trash", they simply (erroneously) think it to be an American word. Just setting the record straight.

By the way, I take the point about the potential difficulty of a "foreign-sounding" translation. Even if that perception is mistaken, it could easily be an obstacle. The Presbyterian church in England in the 19th and 20th centuries unfortunately fostered the sense of the exotic foreignness (Scottishness) of their faith by calling most of their churches "St Andrew's" or "St Columba's". Perception matters, which is why the NIV is published in both British and American versions. The KJV is clearly British English rather than American English, but that is not an obstacle in America because British English is generally perceived as "intelligent" and "polite" by Americans, so no one is offended by it.

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## JimmyH (May 27, 2018)

iainduguid said:


> The KJV is clearly British English rather than American English, but that is not an obstacle in America because British English is generally perceived as "intelligent" and "polite" by Americans, so no one is offended by it.


I have anglicized (British) versions of the NIV and ESV, and I prefer those to their American counterparts. Aside from colours instead of colors, for example, there is a dignity to the language lacking in the American versions ...... in my humble opinion.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Username3000 (May 27, 2018)

ZackF said:


> I think the word trash is in use today.



You're right. Apparently not commonly used in Brisbane, though.



iainduguid said:


> No British person misunderstands the meaning of the word "trash", they simply (erroneously) think it to be an American word. Just setting the record straight.
> 
> By the way, I take the point about the potential difficulty of a "foreign-sounding" translation. Even if that perception is mistaken, it could easily be an obstacle. The Presbyterian church in England in the 19th and 20th centuries unfortunately fostered the sense of the exotic foreignness (Scottishness) of their faith by calling most of their churches "St Andrew's" or "St Columba's". Perception matters, which is why the NIV is published in both British and American versions. The KJV is clearly British English rather than American English, but that is not an obstacle in America because British English is generally perceived as "intelligent" and "polite" by Americans, so no one is offended by it.



Yes, perception does play a large role. 

Not that it matters what I think, but the fact that the CSB is tied to the SBC--especially with what I see going on in the SBC right now with a racialized, social gospel--turns me off from the translation at the outset. 

But all this could be another thread. 

As far as family translation choice goes, I have been ESV since I was saved; but lately I am trending toward the pre-1995 NASB, and very much liking it. 

If someone is reading Scripture, does following along in a different translation take away from your ability to really listen to the words, since you may be comparing or noting differences?


----------



## Username3000 (May 27, 2018)

JimmyH said:


> I have anglicized (British) versions of the NIV and ESV, and I prefer those to their American counterparts. Aside from colours instead of colors, for example, there is a dignity to the language lacking in the American versions ...... in my humble opinion.


Brother, the only dignity left in my country is found where she resembles the old Motherland the most. And, not to sound too harsh, but she is most undignified where she has swallowed current American culture hook, line, and sinker. 

Alas, the character of all our nations have changed beyond repair as we have turned away from God.


----------



## TheOldCourse (May 27, 2018)

E.R. CROSS said:


> Brother, the only dignity left in my country is found where she resembles the old Motherland the most. And, not to sound too harsh, but she is most undignified where she has swallowed American culture hook, line, and sinker.
> 
> Of course, old America was far better than her contemporary self as well.



As my wife is an almost completely Americanized Canadian, even to the extent of preferring football over hockey and occasionally dropping a y'all, I resemble that remark! Still, this does not explain Newfies!


----------



## Username3000 (May 27, 2018)

TheOldCourse said:


> As my wife is an almost completely Americanized Canadian, even to the extent of preferring football over hockey and occasionally dropping a y'all, I resemble that remark! Still, this does not explain Newfies!


My British blood (Lowland Scottish--AKA not English-hating Highlander-- & English) boils to read of such things!

And Newfoundlanders is what happens when the Irish don't have the civilizing influence of old Bristish culture, and are instead left to themselves in the New World. A scary thing.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## iainduguid (May 27, 2018)

iainduguid said:


> No British person misunderstands the meaning of the word "trash", they simply (erroneously) think it to be an American word. Just setting the record straight.
> 
> By the way, I take the point about the potential difficulty of a "foreign-sounding" translation. Even if that perception is mistaken, it could easily be an obstacle. The Presbyterian church in England in the 19th and 20th centuries unfortunately fostered the sense of the exotic foreignness (Scottishness) of their faith by calling most of their churches "St Andrew's" or "St Columba's". Perception matters, which is why the NIV is published in both British and American versions. The KJV is clearly British English rather than American English, but that is not an obstacle in America because British English is generally perceived as "intelligent" and "polite" by Americans, so no one is offended by it.


Once I started thinking about this, it raised a number of interesting questions about unassimilated Britishisms in American translations - for example the rendering of terms for small coins such as "lepton" and "kodranten": the KJV goes with the terms "mite" (which was probably not a current coin even in those days) and "farthing", which is very British. It uses the equally British "penny" for the denarius. The ESV regularly retains the very British penny (following its source, the RSV), and even the supposedly American CSB has "penny" in Matthew 5:26 and 10:29, unlike the genuinely American NASB, which goes with "cent" throughout (CSB has "cent" in Luke 12:59). By the way, this is a great example of dynamic equivalence in the KJV, translating small coins into equivalent familiar small coins, rather than simply transliterating!

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## TheOldCourse (May 27, 2018)

E.R. CROSS said:


> My British blood (Lowland Scottish--AKA not English-hating Highlander-- & English) boils to read of such things!
> 
> And Newfoundlanders is what happens when the Irish don't have the civilizing influence of old Bristish culture, and are instead left to themselves in the New World. A scary thing.



I still shake my head at Prairie cowboys driving around with Confederate flags on their trucks. What an odd phenomenon! At least you have far less of the French influence in BC!

But there was a time when even your lowland people were not so eager to adopt the demonym British and also a time when many, especially of Presbyterian and Reformed conviction, sympathized with the American "rebellion." As one of (partial) Scots heritage myself I still am piqued at England's abandonment of the Solemn League and Covenant. I'll take Christ's Crown and Covenant over Charles and Canterbury. 

I still grant that the Brits, excepting Cockney variants and their ilk, have a far greater command of the language than Americans.

Anyways, we typically use the AV and ESV in our family. I tend to use the AV more and my wife the ESV but we use both.


----------



## Cymro (May 27, 2018)

I use the AV for all occasions, and so does my wife. Just can’t understand why Josh keeps using the KJV in every instance. Surely he must have heard of the Alternative Version instead of Knowing Josh’s Version! Not only that but though he is under grace he breaks the law, in that I believe the AV under the law of the realm, is the only Authorised Version to be read in churches. Get with it Josh, and update your reading by joining our AV only society, and be an Advanced Verbalist, renouncing all Americanisms and solely defending the KING JAMES VERSION.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Username3000 (May 27, 2018)

TheOldCourse said:


> I still shake my head at Prairie cowboys driving around with Confederate flags on their trucks. What an odd phenomenon! At least you have far less of the French influence in BC!
> 
> But there was a time when even your lowland people were not so eager to adopt the demonym British and also a time when many, especially of Presbyterian and Reformed conviction, sympathized with the American "rebellion." As one of (partial) Scots heritage myself I still am piqued at England's abandonment of the Solemn League and Covenant. I'll take Christ's Crown and Covenant over Charles and Canterbury.
> 
> ...



I sometimes wrestle in my mind about being of both Scottish and English descent, and what my thoughts are about England/the Union, etc. 

I'd be lying if I put on an anti-English bias due to my Scottish roots though. The deal breaker is perhaps that, in her glory days, Canada was mostly a very British nation; therefore, I can consider myself Canadian-British, with Scottish roots.

I wonder how my family felt about England when they left Glasgow for Canada in the 1820's?

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Username3000 (May 27, 2018)

https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?year_start=1800&year_end=2008&corpus=15&smoothing=7&case_insensitive=on&content=dignity&direct_url=t4;,dignity;,c0;,s0;;dignity;,c0;;Dignity;,c0

This is interesting, and sad.

Note the steady decline of the usage of the word 'dignity' within the books that Google has in Google Books. Fractions of percentages of all books, but still. A striking graphic. 

Dignity is not even on our lips any longer as it once was.


----------



## Josh Williamson (May 28, 2018)

We certainly know what the word 'trash' means, but it just isn't in common usage here. Nor would do we think that trash was an American invention (the Americans butcher the English language, then us Australians come along and make it worse), but since it is used mostly by Americans, it strikes our ears as being "too American" when it appears in the translation, and distracts the congregation. Due to this the CSB now sits on my shelf, although I do enjoy reading it every now and then.


----------



## Josh Williamson (May 28, 2018)

Cymro said:


> I use the AV for all occasions, and so does my wife. Just can’t understand why Josh keeps using the KJV in every instance. Surely he must have heard of the Alternative Version instead of Knowing Josh’s Version! Not only that but though he is under grace he breaks the law, in that I believe the AV under the law of the realm, is the only Authorised Version to be read in churches. Get with it Josh, and update your reading by joining our AV only society, and be an Advanced Verbalist, renouncing all Americanisms and solely defending the KING JAMES VERSION.



Haha!

Her Majesty authorised the printing of the NIV for Her diamond jubilee, so I guess that makes the NIV the New Authorised Version.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Stephen L Smith (May 28, 2018)

Josh Williamson said:


> (the Americans butcher the English language, then us Australians come along and make it worse),


Josh, you gave us Kiwis some free ammunition  I met some American Reformed Baptists touring New Zealand a few months ago. They said they loved NZ Fish and Chips. I was very impressed they said Fish and Chips with the same accent as us Kiwis. So the concept of fesh and cheps is foreign to American thinking.


----------



## Josh Williamson (May 29, 2018)

Stephen L Smith said:


> Josh, you gave us Kiwis some free ammunition  I met some American Reformed Baptists touring New Zealand a few months ago. They said they loved NZ Fish and Chips. I was very impressed they said Fish and Chips with the same accent as us Kiwis. So the concept of fesh and cheps is foreign to American thinking.



NZ is the land of the long lost vowel.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Logan (May 29, 2018)

E.R. CROSS said:


> https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?year_start=1900&year_end=2008&corpus=15&smoothing=7&case_insensitive=on&content=dignity&direct_url=t4;,dignity;,c0;,s0;;dignity;,c0;;Dignity;,c0
> 
> This is interesting, and sad.
> 
> ...



The data cannot support that conclusion. One might then also note the sad, steady decline of the use of the word "foot" in our 20th century.

First, the percentages are so small that we're close to the noise level (two versus eight thousandths of one percent). Second, there may be many factors that contribute to a perceived decline: not just changing language but copyright laws which mean fewer (or certain types) of modern books are indexed, automatically excluding a huge portion of what is being printed today. Third, you're relying on OCR to recognize these words, and not all will be accounted for equally over each time period. Fourth, the decline could be contributed by the number of books indexed from other languages (and their copyright laws) changing over time. Lastly, if you'll draw that graph back to the 1600s, you'll see that the usage of the word appears to have risen (based on the data obtainable), which could lead one to the conclusion that the 1600s were a sad period too!

Or even changing the time period and being case sensitive, we could be encouraged that "Dignity" has doubled in usage since the 1920s!


----------



## hammondjones (May 29, 2018)

Josh Williamson said:


> NZ is the land of the long lost vowel.



I thought that was Wales....


----------



## Username3000 (May 29, 2018)

Logan said:


> The data cannot support that conclusion. One might then also note the sad, steady decline of the use of the word "foot" in our 20th century.
> 
> First, the percentages are so small that we're close to the noise level (two versus eight thousandths of one percent). Second, there may be many factors that contribute to a perceived decline: not just changing language but copyright laws which mean fewer (or certain types) of modern books are indexed, automatically excluding a huge portion of what is being printed today. Third, you're relying on OCR to recognize these words, and not all will be accounted for equally over each time period. Fourth, the decline could be contributed by the number of books indexed from other languages (and their copyright laws) changing over time. Lastly, if you'll draw that graph back to the 1600s, you'll see that the usage of the word appears to have risen (based on the data obtainable), which could lead one to the conclusion that the 1600s were a sad period too!
> 
> Or even changing the time period and being case sensitive, we could be encouraged that "Dignity" has doubled in usage since the 1920s!


I didn't know that, thanks.


----------



## Cymro (May 29, 2018)

With a name like Jones you should know that is not true.There are 7 vowels in Welsh and only 5 in English.Such is the versatility of the language that there is a poem written on the subject of the spider ,only penned in consonants.


----------



## Dachaser (May 29, 2018)

E.R. CROSS said:


> You're right. Apparently not commonly used in Brisbane, though.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The Nas is an excellent translation for those who prefer the Critical Text, and the NKJV for those preferring the TR, and the Web for those liking the Majority text. All 3 of them would be formal/literal translations.


----------



## Josh Williamson (May 29, 2018)

E.R. CROSS said:


> You're right. Apparently not commonly used in Brisbane, though.



As a travelling preacher I found that people in different parts of Australia had issue with it. When I used the CSB in NZ I didn't use Psalm 113, so I am not sure how they would have responded.


----------



## Logan (May 30, 2018)

E.R. CROSS said:


> I didn't know that, thanks.



It's hard for the engineer in me to resist talking about data and conclusions


----------

