# Bible Tranlations.



## etexas (Jun 20, 2007)

What is used in the PB? King James, New King James, New American Standard, English Standard Version, New International Version, Other. This is about your primary Bible, whatever you usually carry, study from and read at night, that sort o thing.


----------



## KMK (Jun 20, 2007)

I follow Jesus said:


> What is used in the PB? King James, New King James, New American Standard, English Standard Version, New International Version, Other. This is about your primary Bible, whatever you usually carry, study from and read at night, that sort o thing.



I use the KJV.


----------



## etexas (Jun 20, 2007)

I myself use the King James, I love the cadence and ability to transport you.


----------



## Coram Deo (Jun 20, 2007)

I choose other...

Because

I use the 1599 Geneva Bible in Modern Spelling of course......


----------



## etexas (Jun 20, 2007)

thunaer said:


> I choose other...
> 
> Because
> 
> I use the 1599 Geneva Bible in Modern Spelling of course......


Cool....I did not know those were around. I have decent Bible collection...........that might have to be a purchase!


----------



## JonathanHunt (Jun 20, 2007)

NKJV. It is the pulpit Bible of my church and hence the easiest to use all the time as I preach from it.

It is also In my humble opinion based upon the best texts, and retains much of the grandeur and translational quality of the KJV without the archaic language.

That said, I love the KJV and don't hesitate to use it in preaching where something is rendered or expressed better therein.

JH


----------



## LadyFlynt (Jun 20, 2007)

Other....

1599 Geneva


KJV also.


----------



## Coram Deo (Jun 20, 2007)

It just came out this year...... and put out by Tolle Lege Press..

I purchased mine through the Visionforum because they had a special Thanksgiving package included with the bible.....

I love it....

Michael



I follow Jesus said:


> Cool....I did not know those were around. I have decent Bible collection...........that might have to be a purchase!


----------



## etexas (Jun 20, 2007)

thunaer said:


> It just came out this year...... and put out by Tolle Lege Press..
> 
> I purchased mine through the Visionforum because they had a special Thanksgiving package included with the bible.....
> 
> ...


Can you get them through Amazon? That's where I get my books online.


----------



## RamistThomist (Jun 20, 2007)

thunaer said:


> I choose other...
> 
> Because
> 
> I use the 1599 Geneva Bible in Modern Spelling of course......



Same here!


----------



## Coram Deo (Jun 20, 2007)

Yes, I just looked it up....

1599 Geneva Bible 

1599 Geneva Bible by Dr. Marshall Foster and Gary DeMar (Leather Bound - 2006)
Buy new: $79.95 4 Used & new from $62.95
Get it by Thursday, Jun 21, if you order in the next 27 minutes.
Eligible for FREE Super Saver Shipping.

Here is the Link... http://www.amazon.com/1599-Geneva-Bible-Marshall-Foster/dp/0975484613/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/102-3897201-9062544?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1182376062&sr=8-1



I follow Jesus said:


> Can you get them through Amazon? That's where I get my books online.


----------



## etexas (Jun 20, 2007)

thunaer said:


> Yes, I just looked it up....
> 
> 1599 Geneva Bible
> 
> ...


Thanks..........I need to get Megan in here and drop an "I need this Bible.........."!


----------



## Coram Deo (Jun 20, 2007)

I know what you mean...... LOL



I follow Jesus said:


> Thanks..........I need to get Megan in here and drop an "I need this Bible.........."!


----------



## etexas (Jun 20, 2007)

If you don't mind I would like a little feedback on why you like the translation you use! Thanks!


----------



## Blueridge Believer (Jun 20, 2007)

Authorized version for me. However I do read from the NKJV and also have the 1599 Geneva as well.


----------



## Coram Deo (Jun 20, 2007)

Well, I believe in the Doctrine of the Preserved Text.. I am not King James only since I use the Geneva... But I hold that God has held and preserved the textual family down through the ages which has been the Received Text.. The King James, New King James, Geneva Bible, Great Bible, etc are translated from.

I like the Geneva bible better because it translate alittle better since King James Boy over there in Ole England of yours  changed a few things in the translation after the translation comittee was finished with it. There was a few things he did not like.....

I still use the King James because it is a good translation, but I use my Geneva most of the time...


I have issues with the other textual families......

Michael



I follow Jesus said:


> If you don't mind I would like a little feedback on why you like the translation you use! Thanks!


----------



## jbergsing (Jun 20, 2007)

ESV here. The main reasons are that I like how it reads as smoothly as the NIV, yet is more literal to the original and it is the pew bible in our church. I must admit, though, a few in our SS class use the 1599 Geneva Bible and I really like it, as well.


----------



## MrMerlin777 (Jun 20, 2007)

I voted other because when I'm studying I use as many English translations I can get my hands on. (Mainly NKJV, KJV, NIV, ESV, and 1599 Geneva as those are the translations I happen to own at this time.)


----------



## etexas (Jun 20, 2007)

When I left my Atheist position I bought an NIV, back in 92 or 93, everyone was buying the NIV then..............what happened (other than it not being that great a translation?)


----------



## etexas (Jun 20, 2007)

MrMerlin777 said:


> I voted other because when I'm studying I use as many English translations I can get my hands on. (Mainly NKJV, KJV, NIV, ESV, and 1599 Geneva as those are the translations I happen to own at this time.)


Come on Donald..........don't cop-out on me here......I am asking for the Bible that is on your nightstand and in your car on Sudays..............things like that, you must have one you at least slighly slant towards................


----------



## MrMerlin777 (Jun 20, 2007)

I follow Jesus said:


> Come on Donald..........don't cop-out on me here......I am asking for the Bible that is on your nightstand and in your car on Sudays..............things like that, you must have one you at least slighly slant towards................




Well, then it's a toss up between the NKJV and the ESV.


----------



## larryjf (Jun 20, 2007)

ESV


----------



## VaughanRSmith (Jun 20, 2007)

larryjf said:


> ESV





I use (and voted) the ESV because I enjoy reading it, but I also love the Geneva Bible.


----------



## etexas (Jun 20, 2007)

larryjf said:


> ESV



 sweet.


----------



## Herald (Jun 20, 2007)

NASB. Considering how critical I am in real life, the critical text works for me.


----------



## etexas (Jun 20, 2007)

BaptistInCrisis said:


> NASB. Considering how critical I am in real life, the critical text works for me.


When I want a Critical text reading I use the NASB, it is more literal (though less polished) than the ESV.


----------



## sastark (Jun 20, 2007)

I voted NKJV, though I probably use my 1599 Geneva more now-a-days. 

Why? NKJV is based on the TR. Geneva Bible because I like the way it reads (much more so than the KJV) and because of the wonderful notes.


----------



## etexas (Jun 20, 2007)

sastark said:


> I voted NKJV, though I probably use my 1599 Geneva more now-a-days.
> 
> Why? NKJV is based on the TR. Geneva Bible because I like the way it reads (much more so than the KJV) and because of the wonderful notes.


I think I will get a used Geneva.........you guys are making it sound interesting.


----------



## sastark (Jun 20, 2007)

Max, it is *definitely* worth the price. I know you said you buy through Amazon, but you can get a better price through the publisher's website, here:

https://www.tollelegepress.com/store/product.php?productid=63


----------



## etexas (Jun 20, 2007)

sastark said:


> Max, it is *definitely* worth the price. I know you said you buy through Amazon, but you can get a better price through the publisher's website, here:
> 
> https://www.tollelegepress.com/store/product.php?productid=63


Cool, I will give it a check.


----------



## etexas (Jun 20, 2007)

Slight ESV lead followed close to heel by the KJV, no one has voted for the NIV. Zondervan still claims it is the best selling Bible.............hmmmmmmmmmmm.


----------



## JM (Jun 20, 2007)

AV.


----------



## etexas (Jun 20, 2007)

JM said:


> AV.


To the point AV............there is a good man.


----------



## LadyFlynt (Jun 20, 2007)

The one I would like is a facsimile with a leather buckle  but uhm...we're talking $300 there...or $225 without the buckle...no modern typeset or spellings...nope, facsimile of the real thing  I actually prefer my s's to look like f's...something from when I was learning to read out of Luther's German Bible.


----------



## etexas (Jun 20, 2007)

LadyFlynt said:


> The one I would like is a facsimile with a leather buckle  but uhm...we're talking $300 there...or $225 without the buckle...no modern typeset or spellings...nope, facsimile of the real thing  I actually prefer my s's to look like f's...something from when I was learning to read out of Luther's German Bible.


I did see the Geneva fac with the buckle and it is VERY cool, I would never use that, I would keep it as a collectors piece.


----------



## LadyFlynt (Jun 20, 2007)

oh, I would use it....Bibles and books are only as good as they are used!


----------



## Coram Deo (Jun 20, 2007)

Would you carry it and use it at church?

Those facsimile seem pretty big and bulky.......

Kinda wish my 1599 Leather bound slimdown copy had a buckle lock on it.. That would be sweet......





LadyFlynt said:


> oh, I would use it....Bibles and books are only as good as they are used!


----------



## bookslover (Jun 20, 2007)

larryjf said:


> ESV



Ah, a rare actual photo of the ESV being created!

I voted for the ESV because that's what I read normally, though I am now reading through the Scriptures in the KJV. (I'm up through the middle of Ezra and the language to me is, well, tedious.)

I appreciate the ESV because it reads smoothly yet is a fairly literal translation. Also, it gave me an excuse to drop the NIV, which I was increasingly growing to dislike.

At church, we have NASB pew Bibles, and the pastor preaches from the NASB, although his personal favorite is the NKJV. When it was time to replace our pew Bibles, a poll was taken in the congregation to see what the favorite was, and most people (surprisingly) voted for the NASB. I usually bring my ESV to church, though.


----------



## etexas (Jun 20, 2007)

bookslover said:


> Ah, a rare actual photo of the ESV being created!
> 
> I voted for the ESV because that's what I read normally, though I am now reading through the Scriptures in the KJV. (I'm up through the middle of Ezra and the language to me is, well, tedious.)
> 
> ...


Actually the NASB vote is surprising! Though as I have stated, I am a King Jimmy man but if I want to read an English translation of the Critical Text I use the NASB myself.


----------



## LadyFlynt (Jun 20, 2007)

thunaer said:


> Would you carry it and use it at church?
> 
> Those facsimile seem pretty big and bulky.......
> 
> Kinda wish my 1599 Leather bound slimdown copy had a buckle lock on it.. That would be sweet......



I would't see why not...it looks sturdy enough. 7 by 9...but can't tell how thick...looks pretty thick. Mostly I don't use my Bible during services though right now as I have my hands pretty full with the baby. Kinda difficult balancing a child and a bible at the same time.


----------



## Coram Deo (Jun 20, 2007)

:Nods:

My wife is in the same boat right now...  

They do look pretty thick... 




LadyFlynt said:


> I would't see why not...it looks sturdy enough. 7 by 9...but can't tell how thick...looks pretty thick. Mostly I don't use my Bible during services though right now as I have my hands pretty full with the baby. Kinda difficult balancing a child and a bible at the same time.


----------



## etexas (Jun 20, 2007)

They should make a thinline version..........with the buckle.


----------



## etexas (Jun 21, 2007)

Still no NIV people!


----------



## CDM (Jun 21, 2007)

I follow Jesus said:


> When I left my Atheist position I bought an NIV, back in 92 or 93, everyone was buying the NIV then..............what happened (other than it not being that great a translation?)



The same thing that's going to happen to the ESV!


----------



## etexas (Jun 21, 2007)

mangum said:


> The same thing that's going to happen to the ESV!


It is funny you should say that....I have some friend who are not predicting a long "shelf-life" for the ESV. I have one friend who does call it the NIV for the 21st century. That is both good and bad.


----------



## etexas (Jun 21, 2007)

trevorjohnson said:


> I choose ESV due to more literal translation method and use of the critical text instead of the KJV text family.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## etexas (Jun 21, 2007)

shameless bump for my first poll..................


----------



## sastark (Jun 21, 2007)

mangum said:


> The same thing that's going to happen to the ESV!



The ESV will continue to be published until it becomes unprofitable, to steal a line from _The Simpsons_.


----------



## etexas (Jun 21, 2007)

Wait one minute here my friends................SOMEONE voted NIV...........come on fess up! Who done it!


----------



## Civbert (Jun 21, 2007)

I voted NKJV, but I also like the NASB and the HCB (Holman Christian Standard Bible) is very good. I also like the ESV but not as much as I hoped when if first came out.


----------



## etexas (Jun 21, 2007)

Civbert said:


> I voted NKJV, but I also like the NASB and the HCB (Holman Christian Standard Bible) is very good. I also like the ESV but not as much as I hoped when if first came out.


You know......I really forgot to put the Holman in my list, I have one......sometimes it has so really nice readings but I found some clunkers in it as well, all the same I am sorry I neglected it as an option.


----------



## etexas (Jun 21, 2007)

Ok I hate to  but I really want to know who did the NIV vote! For the rest of you, if you have not voted please do so (this is a limited time only poll ) and I truly would like a feel for what primary translation you like.


----------



## VictorBravo (Jun 21, 2007)

ASV of 1901 is what I carry in my briefcase, along with a "pocket" Stephanus Greek hardcover.

On my reading stand is a pew bible AV, which is my primary reading bible this year. (I love just reading it--no notes, no cross references--I usually read an entire book in one sitting).

But I also carry this little guy to church along with my ASV:


----------



## etexas (Jun 21, 2007)

victorbravo said:


> ASV of 1901 is what I carry in my briefcase, along with a "pocket" Stephanus Greek hardcover.
> 
> On my reading stand is a pew bible AV, which is my primary reading bible this year. (I love just reading it--no notes, no cross references--I usually read an entire book in one sitting).
> 
> But I also carry this little guy to church along with my ASV:


Interesting! Where does one get a 1901 ASV these days, I can read it online but I cannot find a paper edition and heck.....I even have it's 1881 forerunner the RV.


----------



## etexas (Jun 21, 2007)

Found where to get an ASV ,Star Bible Company the last publishers of the ASV it seems!


----------



## tellville (Jun 21, 2007)

HCSB. I like understanding my Bible and I prefer the Critical text. I use the ESV as my secondary text, NASB as a third. 

Even though my church is Canadian Southern Baptist, we still use the NIV as the HCSB was never really promoted up here that much. 

I grew up on the NIV. Then I went through a crisis during my years in college over which translation to read, and I have finally settled on the HCSB. I almost chose the ESV, but I still had trouble's understanding it, mainly in the prophets, but elsewhere as well.


----------



## etexas (Jun 21, 2007)

tellville said:


> HCSB. I like understanding my Bible and I prefer the Critical text. I use the ESV as my secondary text, NASB as a third.
> 
> Even though my church is Canadian Southern Baptist, we still use the NIV as the HCSB was never really promoted up here that much.
> 
> I grew up on the NIV. Then I went through a crisis during my years in college over which translation to read, and I have finally settled on the HCSB. I almost chose the ESV, but I still had trouble's understanding it, mainly in the prophets, but elsewhere as well.


I have had a number of people say they prefer the Holman over the ESV, perhaps I should try reading some more of the HCSB, I grew up King James and RSV so the ESV sounds more familiar to me.


----------



## VictorBravo (Jun 21, 2007)

I follow Jesus said:


> Found where to get an ASV ,Star Bible Company the last publishers of the ASV it seems!



That's right, and they often are out of stock.

Don't buy one if you are looking for good print. They seem to use a facsimile. It's readable, but not great.


----------



## etexas (Jun 21, 2007)

victorbravo said:


> That's right, and they often are out of stock.
> 
> Don't buy one if you are looking for good print. They seem to use a facsimile. It's readable, but not great.


I think I saw an inexpensive NT, I might order that and see how it "roll across" my eyes.


----------



## VictorBravo (Jun 21, 2007)

I follow Jesus said:


> I think I saw an inexpensive NT, I might order that and see how it "roll across" my eyes.




That's probably a good idea. The Old Testament is very much like the AV, the NT is a bit different. It follows an earlier form of the CT, but makes notes about differences from the AV.


----------



## etexas (Jun 21, 2007)

victorbravo said:


> That's probably a good idea. The Old Testament is very much like the AV, the NT is a bit different. It follows an earlier form of the CT, but makes notes about differences from the AV.


done.


----------



## etexas (Jun 21, 2007)

Just curious, I grew up in the UMC and my first Bible was an RSV. This was the 70's yes...did anyone else have an RSV "phase"? (RSV used to be THE pew Bible in the Methodist Church.)


----------



## LadyFlynt (Jun 22, 2007)

tellville said:


> I like understanding my Bible...



Really? Why can't you understand the others?


----------



## tellville (Jun 22, 2007)

LadyFlynt said:


> Really? Why can't you understand the others?



I think most of the people on this site have no idea how hard it is for many people to read some of these ridiculously old translations because most of the people on this site grew up on them. I never grew up on the KJV, nor the ASV, or even the RSV, I grew up on the NIV. Besides the Shakespeare sections in English class I've had zero contact with KJV English or syntax.

Think of it this way: When you learn a language when you're young, you tend to be much more able in the language when you're older. However, start a language when you're 25 and even after 20 years you won't have compete command over it. 

There are so many times where I've read the KJV (again, much more often in the Prophets, Psalms and Wisdom then elsewhere), I think I know what's going on, then I read some modern translations and realize I'm WAY off. 

So why should I struggle to read my Bible when I have some perfectly good translations translated in the language I actually speak and read? I don't need the Bible to sound all "holy" and "majestic" I need it to communicate to me God's truth. 

A lot of you come off like the Greek Orthodox who scoff at those who need a modern Greek translation of the New Testament: "Why on earth would you want to read a Greek translation of the Bible when you already have the original Greek in your hands!" I'll tell you why: So I can understand it. Isn't that more important? 

I know a lot of you think the KJV is so vastly superior to anything out today that taking the time to learn 17th century English should be a priority. However, I don't follow that line of thinking (the KJV being vastly superior) and thus, the desire of being able to understand my Bible really makes the KJV obsolete in my eyes.


----------



## matthew11v25 (Jun 22, 2007)




----------



## etexas (Jun 22, 2007)

I read Romans in the Holman last night ,it was pretty good, my problem is that I hold to the TR and am also just used to the sound and feel of the AV.


----------



## etexas (Jun 22, 2007)

OK PB guys and gals my wife and I are leaving for the the Keys this afternoon, so this poll still has a few days left on it and a lot of regulars still have not voted, I would like someone to become caretaker of this (keep it alive) for at least the next two or three days, a bump or two now and then, I am really interested in the translation issue and cannot wait to read the posts and poll when we return. Grace and Peace.


----------



## AV1611 (Jun 22, 2007)

King James...all others are sinking sand.


----------



## etexas (Jun 22, 2007)

AV1611 said:


> King James...all others are sinking sand.


When all is said and done, the AV from what I have been able to put together on Bible Translations.....is the word in the English language!


----------



## tellville (Jun 22, 2007)

I follow Jesus said:


> I read Romans in the Holman last night ,it was pretty good, my problem is that I hold to the TR and am also just used to the sound and feel of the AV.



I appreciate that Max.


----------



## AV1611 (Jun 23, 2007)

*bump*


----------



## Ivan (Jun 23, 2007)

I do not intend ever to break fellowship with a brother or sister in Christ over their choice of what translation of the Bible they use....not that anyone is saying that here, but I want to be clear about that.

My journey through the translations is, I believe, typical for a person my age. I grew up with the AV. In fact, I don't think I knew there was anything else until I was in my mid-teens (circa '68). The church I grew up in used the AV, but did employ the Today's English Version (Good News) and the Living Bible. I think it was done out of novelty and a nod to the teens in the church in the mid 60's to early 70's. But never was another translation other than the AV was used in the pulpit. 

When I went to college I attended a SBC church where the pastor was reformed-friendly and taught the doctrines of grace. While there he switched to the NASB. Again, I think it may have been more the idea of something new and novel, although I know he was big on a more literal translation of the Bible. He has since switched to the NKJV and has used it for many years.

I have used the AV, NASB, NIV, ESV, and the NKJV, which is my primary translation of use. I still like reading the AV, but don't use it at this time when preaching. I'm a NKJVer at this point. Of the translations I've mention the NKJV, AV, ESV, and the NASB are the only ones I recommend. 

I've used many different translations in study, but interestingly I've never read the HSB. Imagine...a Southern Baptist who has not read it! I think I should purchase a copy however. It seems better than some.


----------



## LadyFlynt (Jun 23, 2007)

Mark,

My question was not a snub...it was serious. I've heard a number of reasons why someone believes they cannot understand the KJV and like translations. My husband and others I know that grew up on modern translations, now find they prefer the KJV BECAUSE of the differences. A study done several years back actually showed the NIV replaced simpler English words (in the KJV) with more complicated English words in many passages. Other areas it left out parts of a passage altogether (and yes, I've heard all the excuses why).

Despite all of this, it was not a criticism of your use of the NIV...it was a sincere question. There is one circumstance where my husband and I (being KJV or older translations) have actually given and recommended a newer translation/version. We knew a gent who was sincere in wanting to study the Word and yet barely could read...only enough to fill in a job application and acquire a bluecollar job. We gave him a parallel Bible (4 translations side by side). We told him to read it in the KJV, then the NKJV, the NASB...and the reasons we didn't recommend the NIV, but naturally if he wanted, just read all 4. That helped him in many respects...one was that he bettered his reading and became accustomed to being able to read the KJV and NKJV as well as the other translations. He even was able to pick up on the differences from what I understand.

Just a thought.


----------



## AV1611 (Jun 24, 2007)

trevorjohnson said:


> I know some folks who, because of their reverance for the KJV, they even pray out loud in church in old english.
> 
> It is very strange to me.
> 
> It seems that the most clear way of talking in your native tongue should also be the way one prays, and we should strive for our Bible translations to be clear likewise.



I "pray out loud in church in old english" which is for three reasons:

*1.* The language is more God honouring i.e. addressing God as Thee, Thy and Thou.

*2.* I often will quote Scripture in my prayers which naturally comes from the AV

*3.* As a Church in the service I attend (8am Holy Communion) we use the BCP 1662 which is obviously from 1662 

in my opinion "It is very strange to me" why you would not do this. But at the end of the day, you speak to God how you wish (up to a point of course) and I will do likewise.


----------



## panta dokimazete (Jun 24, 2007)

I voted ESV, which is the version I carry in my pocket. I grew up KJV, but my thirst to truly understand God's word led me away to the NIV when I was around 19 - my weakness, I'm sure, but the funny thing is - most of the verses in my memory are KJV.

Truth be told, I reference many versions at Bible Gateway when I research/study and "test" the texts (and my presuppositions!) with the Interlinear Study Bible.

It has these sources:

Old Testament Source
Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (BHS)
Septuagint (LXX)

New Testament Source
Nestlé-Aland 26 Greek Text
1894 Textus Receptus
1991 Byzantine Greek Text


----------



## toddpedlar (Jun 24, 2007)

I follow Jesus said:


> I did see the Geneva fac with the buckle and it is VERY cool, I would never use that, I would keep it as a collectors piece.



Those fac copies are VERY hard to read, though... I did a bit of reading in the 1599 during grad school when the Cornell library had bought a copy (at my request! ) but not only do you have to do the translation of f's to s's and the like, but the copy on those is often quite smudgy.

My poll answer is "other" - I'm very thankful that Tolle Lege came out with the 1599 reprint last year - it's my usual reading bible, though I do go to the ESV, NASB and AV for cross-checking.


----------



## Ivan (Jun 24, 2007)

toddpedlar said:


> Those fac copies are VERY hard to read, though... I did a bit of reading in the 1599 during grad school when the Cornell library had bought a copy (at my request! ) but not only do you have to do the translation of f's to s's and the like, but the copy on those is often quite smudgy.
> 
> My poll answer is "other" - I'm very thankful that Tolle Lege came out with the 1599 reprint last year - it's my usual reading bible, though I do go to the ESV, NASB and AV for cross-checking.



Todd,

Has Tolle Lege corrected the problems with their first printing of the Geneva?


----------



## toddpedlar (Jun 24, 2007)

Ivan said:


> Todd,
> 
> Has Tolle Lege corrected the problems with their first printing of the Geneva?



Not that I'm aware of. Anyone have a 2nd printing yet?


----------



## LadyFlynt (Jun 24, 2007)

toddpedlar said:


> Those fac copies are VERY hard to read, though... I did a bit of reading in the 1599 during grad school when the Cornell library had bought a copy (at my request! ) but not only do you have to do the translation of f's to s's and the like, but the copy on those is often quite smudgy.


I've seen one IRL. The print doesn't bother me, though I could see how it would most people. I love old things and the f's to s's comes easily to me now since I was learning German from Luther's Bible.


----------



## tellville (Jun 24, 2007)

I appreciated your post LadyFlynt, thanks. Just one comment:

I don't read the NIV, I read the HCSB! I grew up on the NIV, but during college I realized I really needed to change that. My school used the NRSV as its translation, but I didn't like it, nor the reasons it was chosen. Eventually I went to the ESV but still had a hard time with it, and finally have rested on the HCSB for my reading Bible. in-depth study of course I will look at all sorts of translations, including the KJV


----------



## bookslover (Jun 25, 2007)

tellville said:


> I appreciated your post LadyFlynt, thanks. Just one comment:
> 
> I don't read the NIV, I read the HCSB! I grew up on the NIV, but during college I realized I really needed to change that. My school used the NRSV as its translation, but I didn't like it, nor the reasons it was chosen. Eventually I went to the ESV but still had a hard time with it, and finally have rested on the HCSB for my reading Bible. in-depth study of course I will look at all sorts of translations, including the KJV



Mark - Could you post some text from the HCSB, from a familiar passage, like Romans 1, for example? I'm not familiar with this translation at all. I've seen copies, but I don't think I've ever cracked one open. If you've a mind to do it, just post 8 or 10 verses; that should be enough to get a feel for it.

Others on the PB have said they read it, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who's curious.


----------



## VaughanRSmith (Jun 25, 2007)

You can read a searchable HCSB here.


----------



## VaughanRSmith (Jun 25, 2007)

For God's wrath is revealed from heaven against all godlessness and unrighteousness of people who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth, since what can be known about God is evident among them, because God has shown it to them. From the creation of the world His invisible attributes, that is, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what He has made. As a result, people are without excuse. For though they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God or show gratitude. Instead, their thinking became nonsense, and their senseless minds were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man, birds, four-footed animals, and reptiles.


----------



## JM (Jun 25, 2007)

It's good to see the AV is still being used.


----------



## tellville (Jun 25, 2007)

The big thing with the HCSB is the footnotes. Wherever they dynamically translate the passage too much they will place a more literal translation in the footnotes. I probably wouldn't have made the HCSB my reading Bible without the footnotes.


----------



## D. Paul (Jun 25, 2007)

Am I gonna get smacked around if I say how much I am beginning to grow very fond of the NET Bible? I learn much from the translator notes and actually like the phraseology. Please don't  or  or 

Will it save me if I say I carry my Geneva Study Bible (NKJV) to church?


----------



## 3John2 (Jun 25, 2007)

I'm still a KJV man. Though I have many other translations. I DO like the Phillipp's for the NT.


----------



## VictorBravo (Jun 25, 2007)

D. Paul said:


> Am I gonna get smacked around if I say how much I am beginning to grow very fond of the NET Bible? I learn much from the translator notes and actually like the phraseology. Please don't  or  or
> 
> :



Well, I like Darby's version as well. Whenever anybody challenges that, I tell them to read it. His eschatology and ecclesiology were wacked, but his scholarship is remarkable. (He first translated it into French, and also into German).

There is sort of a rumor that the 1901 ASV translators kept a Darby Bible around as a "pony". The similarities are striking (but not total), but I think it is because they were all using a critical text. Darby noted departures from the TR in his notes.

But, as I noted above, my reading bible is the AV, and always will be. But I look to various others for study too. 



> Will it save me if I say I carry my Geneva Study Bible (NKJV) to church?



 No, only the original Geneva will do.


----------



## tellville (Jun 26, 2007)

D. Paul said:


> Am I gonna get smacked around if I say how much I am beginning to grow very fond of the NET Bible? I learn much from the translator notes and actually like the phraseology. Please don't  or  or



Actually, I had a stint with the NET Bible. However, I received right before I went to India and I gave it away to an Indian friend of mine going to a Christian college there. I thought the footnotes would be extremely valuable to him given the lack of resources in India. 

Since then, I haven't really gone back to the NET Bible because I find myself reading the footnotes much more than the actual text!


----------



## ANT (Jun 26, 2007)

ESV here ...


----------



## Pilgrim (Jun 26, 2007)

tellville said:


> HCSB. I like understanding my Bible and I prefer the Critical text. I use the ESV as my secondary text, NASB as a third.
> 
> Even though my church is Canadian Southern Baptist, we still use the NIV as the HCSB was never really promoted up here that much.
> 
> I grew up on the NIV. Then I went through a crisis during my years in college over which translation to read, and I have finally settled on the HCSB. I almost chose the ESV, but I still had trouble's understanding it, mainly in the prophets, but elsewhere as well.



I've found that the ESV in some passages is more difficult than the NASB, particularly in the OT. I suspect some like it because it seems more literary or "reverent" in those and similar passages. The HCSB is one translation I don't have.


----------



## Ivan (Jun 26, 2007)

ANT said:


> ESV here ...



Good to see you, ANT!


----------



## Pilgrim (Jun 26, 2007)

My first choice is the NASB. 2nd choice would be NKJV, 3rd probably KJV or ESV.


----------



## Pilgrim (Jun 26, 2007)

Here's a link to the CBA's Top 10 list of bestselling versions, with data collected in April. The NIV is #1 followed by KJV, ESV, NLT, NKJV. There tends to be a lot of fluctuation in this list from month to month. For example I've seen the NKJV at #1 before and for April it was only #5.


----------

