I’m often asked what translation of the Bible I use and recommend. While I have a bookshelf containing every major translation, and some not so major, here’s my answer:
For accuracy, I prefer the NASB, the ESV, and the NKJV. For some texts, the NASB reads better and is closer to the original. For others, the NKJV or ESV is better.
The NKJV is a more elegant read, however. So that’s why I picked it for my Thompson Chain Reference Bible. Though when I speak publicly, I typically use the NASB.
For clarity, nothing can trump the NLT. For some texts, this version is simply masterful. The NIV is good for clarity on some texts also.
Example: Ephesians 2:10 in the NLT – “For we are God’s masterpiece . . .”
You can’t get much better than that.
On that score, some have asked me about certain translations that are authored by a single person.
For instance, N.T. Wright, David Bentley Hart, F.F. Bruce, and many others have created their own translations of the New Testament.
In addition, other authors who don’t have the scholarly pedigrees that these folks do have created their own translations as well.
All I can say about these versions is that in some places, they are great. In others places, not so good.
(For instance, Eugene Peterson’s The Message is excellent in certain places, and not so great in others.)
Exactly what one would expect when a single individual tries to translate the inspired text on their own.
For my analysis of chronological Bibles, see my post on the subject.
Lessons from RUSH
An expanded translation of the New Testament by Kenneth Wuest …
The message
Niv/Esv
http://www.scripture4all.org/. Excellent inter linear. Free. Made available by a Dutch brother.
But if we could only choose just one, to teach from, to have kids read from, to discuss theology, the HCSB is the best as it is accurate and readable on very high levels. It is the NASB and NLT if they got to “know” each other, if you read my meaning: Bada Bing!
If you could only have one. Pound for pound the best is the . . . . . . .
HCSB
for overall readability, accuracy, conservative/liberal issues, old vs young, and for memorization.
Now if they would only sell a text without the baptist extras and drop the Holman and just call it CSB it would be near perfect for an American Christian.
I reviewed the HCSB below. I like the NASB and NLT better. 🙂 To each his own.
I reference pretty much all the major translations, as well as a slew of lesser-known ones.
NASB is generally my default for reading and quoting, but I also very frequently use the ESV, NKJV, and NET (primarily for its incredible translation notes).
For study, I like the literal versions. Young’s (YLT), Green’s (LITV or KJ3), and Darby’s are all excellent. The Concordant Literal Version (CLV) can be really helpful as well.
I also like to reference the historical (pre-KJV) translations, such as Bishops, Coverdale, Geneva, Wycliffe, Tyndale, etc.
I really do not care for paraphrase translations, however. The Message and the NLT are really more like commentaries than translations, and they are pretty bad commentaries at that. They often totally change the meaning of the text or exclude important nuances of wording.
Great article. I totally concur on your first three. NASB along with NKJV for easier understanding, KJV when I want to be sure. I do like the NLT along with the Message for those times I want to share something especially simple. And I also enjoy the NIV. Thanks for an interesting article.
The NASB and HCSB. I use the HCSB as my everyday Bible. The NASB for comparison. I have the ESV but see it as only a revision from the RSV/NSRV. The ESV is still very clunky and seems to try to sound too majestic in the phrasing but whne looking at the RSV I see where that comes from. Others that I have are the NLT, NKJV, NCV but rarely use those. I do like the NET Bible because of the extensive translator notes. The HCSB, in my opinion, is a step up from the NIV, which I have always despised, but it is quite literal and clear when reading alongside of the NASB. The HCSB is a new translation as is the NET Bible. I have transitioned from using the RSV, since it was what I had when I believed, then the NASB for several years but used the NKJV for 3-5 years but went back to the NASB. I compared the ESV and HCSB and decided on the HCSB.
I am an advocate of the Contemporary English Version. It is written on a 3rd grade reading level, but it does not sound childish. I have been a reading teacher in the public schools, and I am very aware of the difficulties people have with reading. I appreciate the effort of this Bible to present the Word of God faithfully, so people who struggle with reading can understand it.
One point is very clear as I read the comments on this post..The Bible can be read for many different purposes. Identifying the purpose for reading is central to clarifying the “best” translation…
Holly: Excellent point.
@Brian: Thanks for the tip about the KJ3. I like it. I don’t know if I’ll buy a physical copy yet (I love my NET too much), but I’ll continue using the KJ3 this week and I’ll get back to you 🙂
cheers still the kj3 me to , after I discovered what took place in England with all the masonic features, associations in the alchemical wedding , fludd, Andrews, were all part of that activity it appears , and the king bacon and the Andrews I had to make the break, after that was all pretty clear, l spoke to green was free for comment we have spoken many times he is aware of the many sins that were added for power and lordship type words…free of the numerology used early….. I heavily researched the kjv guys and their world what they belonged to was a stunning find as it is sad to see what men do got money and power… , Tyndale had it right he knew the mystery stuff they transpired into the use nicolation clergy distinction etc there much more once you look . back to real faith love for one another and real time fellowship worship in truth and spirit.
Have you read any of the KJ3? I’m liking it more and more. I stumbled upon it using my pocket interlinear given to me years ago.
I use the ESV (English Standard Version) for accurate word for word translating. I use the CEV (Contemporary English Version) for a version that I can use to discuss Biblical issues or notions in common American language and if I want something in between, I use the HCSB (Holman Christian Standard Version). I have or can access every available english translation in print via palm computer (iPhone) but printed texts that I can make notes in. I also have a Greek to English translation program so that I can look up the original greek used and compare. No translation is perfect as they are done by men often with preconceived beliefs that “color” interpretations. The KJV may as well be in Latin as anyone born after 1800 speaks a far different language. There aren’t many of those folks left. King James also insisted that ‘his’ translation conform to the teachings of the Church of England. Thou art betwixt a rock and a hard place as ye tryeth to speaketh a half century old language to they that know not the lord so verily I say unto thee that thou shouldst tryeth using thee own tongue. (just kidding). I don’t understand why some people revert to this language when they pray (or lead public prayer). God understands you perfectly. I think God wants you to be the same person when you pray that you are the rest of the time. For that reason, I use modern translations for bible study but always check for accuracy. I avoid the newer “watered down” gender neutral translations.
I absolutely LOVE the NET. )
I like that it has the Best copyright, besides the KJV. It can be quoted with nary a violation (unlike 90% of translations out there. Plus, it’s mighty accurate.
Secondly, I love the NLT also, and it’s usually my preferred translation. (However, being raised in a KJV only church, where they beat you with a KJV, I still feel a little guilty reading such an enjoyable translation 40 years later 🙂 )
Also, my I prefer the “God’s Word” translation over the Message for a quick read. I think the Message can be very corny at times. (My dead tree copy of “God’s Word” is falling apart)
For both its accuracy while maintaining its readability, the NEe Revised Standard Version (NRSV) is my favorite. I also like the TNIV and ESV in that order. As for the KJV/NKJV…they are just too many earlier original language manuscripts not consulted for me to accept them as good modern translations.
Grace and Peace,
K. Rex Butts
Thanks for this information. And about Greek material: Dictionary, concordance etc … what is your opinion?
angconley, thanks for the heads up on the Updated NASB. Now how is it that I have been unaware of that update for 15 years? It’s even displayed in some of my favorite online references having parallel translations and I never noticed the change. I’m simply embarrassed.
Time to shop for a new NASB and see how I like it.
Jeff, the NASB has updated and revised itself and taken those pesky thees and thous out of the prayers and poetry now; supposedly, anyway– I just got a Hebrew/Greek Key Bible in NASB, and was very excited they had made that change, but my new Bible doesn’t have the New NASB, just the old one. How disappointing! I don’t mind reading KJV or Elizabethan English, but can’t stand how Christians have made a ‘holy prayer language’ out of it — which the NASB promoted with their choices. The KJV translators chose to use ‘thee’ because that is the more intimate, familiar form of ‘you,’ but Christians have turned it around and used it to formalize prayer and distance themselves from the Lord. I’ve heard sermons about how not using those forms in prayer is disrespectful to God!! ( I got the Key Word Bible because it had Strong’s Hebrew and Greek dictionary in the back — handy for decimating crappy teaching on the fly when I was still going to a traditional church occasionally–but I hate the notes which are too Calvinistic and traditional, and whenever I am interested in a particular word, it’s never the one underlined and ‘keyed’ to the dictionary. I wish they’d ditch the notes and use the space to ‘key’ every one of the main words in each verse. It’s huge to lug around and mostly useless without lugging my Greek interlinear as well. I wish I could get a leather Greek interlinear with a good dictionary/lexicon bound in the back, or even better, both the Hebrew OT and the Greek NT — but that would be gigantic!)
My favorite translation by far is the NKJV (darn Key Bible people don’t have it as a choice!!) for a few straightforward reasons. They italicize added words, they are the ONLY popular modern translation that includes all the New Testament without the footnote,”not in the earliest manuscripts,” ( a very misleading phrase, as ‘earliest’ does not equal ‘most reliable’) and they are the ONLY translation that includes translation notes differentiating between the Textus Receptus, Majority Text, and the Nestle/Aland Greek text. I love the Majority Text and think it is the most accurate Greek text so far, and I love being able to compare the different Greek texts right in my everyday English Bible. No one else respects the reader like that. You can see at a glance what the modern translations would leave out because of Westcott and Hort, and also where the old King James and Textus Receptus differ from the modern Majority Text. No need to know the original languages to benefit from the info, just to be a little informed on the textual issues at stake. I also find it readable and beautiful, no stupid retention of thees and thous for ‘holiness’ sake, and wherever I have checked, which is ALOT of places, it is always hands- down more accurate to the original languages than any other popular version, even the vaunted NASB, which has some major flubs. I really don’t know why anyone would want to use anything else for general purpose carrying and studying, even if they prefer something else for light reading. It makes me think people are not seriously comparing it to both other translations and the Greek and Hebrew. I had to wade thru alot of ‘KJV only’ stuff due to some friends being into it, and consistently found the NKJV more accurate than anything else. It’s not perfect, but it’s the closest I’ve found, and the preface is a great summary of the translation issues everyone should be familiar with. I don’t understand people who would chose a translation based on ‘liking’ over accuracy. Or people who ‘study’ a verse by reading a bunch of different translations and then picking the one they ‘like’ the most, with no attention to which one is the most accurate. (I know people who do that!)
Since I know some Greek and Hebrew, I also love The Interlinear Bible (Jay Green), and the NKJV Interlinear Greek NT — the only one to have the Zane/Hodges Majority Text. I study from the original languages using these as a base and looking things up in my lexicons or online.
I like the Daily Bible/Narrated Bible (chronological NIV with connective historical commentary) for reading myself or to the kids. It’s the only chronological Bible that really tries to make a continuous story out of the whole Bible. It would be nice if it had pictures and maps –especially maps. I find the NIV reasonably accurate enough for the Old Testament, but am irritated by their textual and word choices in the NT. At least the NIV puts the stuff they cut out in footnotes so I can add it back in. I don’t hold with most new translations or paraphrases, because they just leave stuff out completely, and ‘dynamic equivalence’ means there’s too much opinion and liberties taken in the translation for my tastes. (I can’t stand The Message for that reason.) I find it interesting that higher critics want to cast doubt on two of the most important passages in the Gospels — the story of the woman taken in adultery (an attack on legalism, injustice, and male domination) and the end of Mark (the passage that defeats the cessationists and the exaltation of clergy over the laity).
The NKJV Chronological Bible is awesome with it’s beautiful pictures, maps and cultural notes, but it’s more suited to serious reading and studying, with parallel passages following each other and not such an attempt at making the Bible a continuous story as the NIV Daily Bible. I find the liberal historical commentary and dates in the OT irritating and biased. It’s too bad they don’t have another NKJV formatted more like the Daily Bible.
I love The Life of Christ in Stereo for reading the Gospels and think it is the best Harmony, as it actually folds the gospels together into one continuous story without leaving a single word out. To shake me up and wake me up I like to read the Phillips NT –He was a Greek scholar and I sometimes disagree with his translation choices, but he makes Paul’s letters immediate and exciting.
I’m still waiting for ANY version of the Bible to translate those pesky ‘women’ verses correctly — i.e. from an egalitarian perspective. I check every new one I hear of and they all fail miserably. The more coloquial they are, the worse they handle those passages, with no way to correct them without flatly contradicting what they say.
If anyone does, I will buy it, but until then, I find it easy to ‘fix’ the NKJV since it is a very literal translation without as much interpretation. The problem with paraphrases and ‘dynamic equivilence’ translations, is they choose one possible meaning and run with it, when I think the Lord is sometimes deliberately ambiguous or saying two things at the same time — and both things are important. As Frank likes to show, He is often really saying something very different than what tradition thinks He’s saying, and most translations are very traditional even while trying to be ‘up-to-date.’ When we come between what the original actually says and the reader, we sometimes dumb it down, and prevent the reader from digging the meaning for themselves — which dumbs them down and/or assumes they can’t figure it out without our help. And what if your choice of meaning is completely wrong, but you have put it in the text as ‘gospel truth’? Better to stay very literal at the sacrifice of some readability, and put some ‘dynamic equivalence’ in footnotes or commentary.
Which translation do I use? For me the Complete Jewish Bible, The Scriptures, An Interlinear Bible are my first that I use. I use the KJV and sometimes Modern KJV. Rarely the NASB. The Scriptures is more literal than the NASB but very close. The Complete Jewish Bible gives a Hebraic perspective back to scripture that has been stripped out by centuries of Greco-Roman revisionist. Its an interesting Read. I enjoy the Amplified bible at times to break down a longer understand on the word. I have a 26 Translation in one Parallel bible that I love and use as well. Westscott and Hort, are very dubious characters. There are valid Aramaic translations of the New Testament as well. Good for study.
There are different types of translation; word for word, paraphrase or thought for thought. I prefer word for word over paraphrase or thought for thought. Many modern translations are thought for thought. Also the modern translations use ecumenical and universalist councils to translate appealing to larger audiences. I do not appreciate universalism dictating translation. I prefer a scholarly scribal approach over an appease all approach. I respect the veracity and tenacity that Hebrew scribes had in reverence of G-ds word. KJV and NASB are word for word, whereas NIV is a paraphrase version using a ecumenical council to translate, its a “literary” work, Zondervan NIV’s parent company is owned by HarperCollins the company that hols the “sole” copyright to produce the satanic bible. HarperCollins also owns News Corporation. Its important to note their translation is becoming more gender neutral to appease the LGBT crowd. Its scary that a company that owns the copyright to the satanic bible also owns the company with the NIV bible. Meaning they can be pressed on the same presses on the same paper. This fact is disturbing to me. The NASB prefers the Hebrew word order over the english word order, whihc make it exceptional among translations. The Message, New Century Version and The New Living Translation are thought for thought as well. I’m not sure how you decide what thoughts transfer from one language to another. Not a fan of thought for thought however they seem popular with readers as literary works. I just pray that readers recognize they are reading a paraphrase that is not one hundred percent literal and should only be considered an interesting read not a doctrinal treatise.
The King James version in the process of translation the translators used Latinized words at the request of the king to translate actual English words that where used to continue Catholic doctrines that the Angelican Church of England wanted to continue including “Christening” and Anti-Semitic views among others carried over. NASB attempted to be as accurate to the Hebrew and Greek, using a word for word translation method. The NASB prefers the Hebrew word order.NASB is more modern not as bad in places yet does accept some of the modern ecumenical techniques. Complete Jewish Bible is good modern Hebraic perspective. Has the Hebrew glossary in the back for Hebrew words. In my opinion the KJV and NASB are the best of the modern translations. KJV is anti-Jewish and inaccurate biased towards Angelican Orthodox. Torah forbids sacrifice of human. Oh’lah can mean Burnt Offering or Living Sacrifice. Living your life as a living sacrifice is not a New Covenant idea in Midrash and Talmudic teaching Oh’lah is living your life as a living sacrifice. IE as in a Nazeretic vow. The living sacrifice is the call to the Sect of the Nazarene, or making a Nazeretic Vow… The NT life is one of a Nazerite. A Nazeretic vow can be a man or woman. A vow of celibacy, abstinence, etcetera… As in she won’t have children & will be barren by choice, dedicated to the lord. “Thou Shall Not Murder” meaning pre-meditated murder. Killing for no reason, for anger or vengeance is murder. Orthodox and Traditional do not cremate the body. War is battle-conflict not murder. There are many Hebrew words for sacrifice don’t contextualize the bible to western thought, it must be contextualized to Tanakh “OT” Hebraic-Jewish culture.
As a suggestion I would say its important to learn to translate and understand the original languages for self and you will do well. Getting a good Hebrew Lexicon like Brown Driver and Briggs. Some beginners may try Vines or Strong which are English to Hebrew to help get a basic understanding of English to Hebrew. However when you want accuracy you need to translate Hebrew to English.
Of modern bibles I still prefer NASB (being more accurate among others) followed closely by M(odern)KJV, KJV, & N(ew)KJV. The Amplified Bible, ASV (American Standard Version) and CEV (Contemporary English Version) are acceptable translations. The Amplified bible does a good job of giving full description of words meanings in English. The CEV includes Apocryphal books in some versions as its the Catholic prefered translation. The NIV, NLT, NCV, The Message are very unreliable in places if you want a literal translation. For a readable paraphrase or thought for thought they are “entertaining.” The Living Bible was written by a man who wanted make the bible more readable for his kids, later friends pressured him to make it public. The NLT took his idea blended in a “universal” translation committee. The Message bible takes the NLT ideas and NIV ideas further into a more readable and understandable literary piece which doesn’t seem to fall into the “thought for thought” but maybe a more “idea for idea” style approach. The CEV is based in the Latin Vulgate however they have a Hebrew names and Messianic edition, that I like the use of the divine name Yahweh.
I personally prefer Aramaic translations such as the LAMSA Bible or The Peshitta however there not as common or easy to find. I’ve found they do add a depth to some of the text meanings.
I don’t know about the accuracy of all the Hebraic roots translations, The Scriptures and The Complete Jewish Bible, are excellent. I question the use of modern translation as reference material confusing the original intent because it relies on universalist translations for the English. Though the use of modern Hebrew does bring back the Jewish context of scripture. So its double edge the modern uneversalist translation loose some, however the Hebraic content gains some. They are good study aides to help understand modern Hebrew thought and linguistics. I do enjoying reading to gain the Hebraic perspective. I enjoy the Complete Jewish Bible. The Scripture is another Hebraic Roots bible. There are a few out there.
I would suggest getting a good Interlinear bible along with good Hebrew to English concorances and lexicons to learn how to translate for yourself. Do not rely on English mis-transliteration as final authority. Original language is inspired not transliteration. Translation is partial. Original inspiration is impartial. Do not rely on Strong it reverse translate English to Hebrew from the Authorized King James Version. Only helps in reverse translation from English to Hebrew not Hebrew to English. When learning Spanish you want English to Spanish dictionary. When translating from Spanish to English you need a Spanish to English dictionary.
To Get: NASB for “Word For Word”, CJB for “Contextual Cultural,” BDB (Brown Driver & Briggs), Jewish NT Commentary by Dave Juster & Stutgard Hebraica Word Studies
The Ritual of Scribing The Torah (The Reason I Trust The OT Scholarship)
A scribal Sofer or Soferiem have rituals they go through everyday before they work on scribing the Torah. They begin each day taking a ritual Mikvah (Bath). The must immerse completely in running (living) water. A Soferiem makes his own ink. The pen must come the feather of a Kosher bird, most commonly a Duck or Goose, thou the Goose is more common. The skin of a Kosher animal, cow or buffalo, more commonly a cow, is to be used for parchment to write on. The thread holding the parchment together must be from the tendons of a Kosher animal. The torah is to be set apart & holy. To write the name of G-d, YHVH, (the Tetragramaton), they use a special pen, that is only used to write the name of G-d. If a mistake is made they can use a special knife to scrape the text off, except for the name of G-d. They must start again after burying the page of errored parchment in a ritual burial. Scraping or erasing the name of G-d is considered blaspheme. They must always end the day with a joyful sentence. As we all know that Numbers and Deuteronomy have few joyous phrases, so it may takes hours upon hours to finish a day. Days can last eight to twelve hours. They must end each day in prayer. They are not allowed to ever copy any text from memory, no matter how many times they’ve done it, they must be copied from an authenticated Torah. They must say a blessing before and after writing the Name of G-d. They take a MikVah before & after writing HaShem YHVH. It can take nine months to a year to complete a Torah.
The L-RD G-d Revelation
The use of the terms Lord and God are used with and without caps to denote the difference between Yahweh, Adonay and Elohim. Kurious in the Greek Septuagint is used to translate Elohim which is common translated into Lord in modern universalist terms. I prefer the use of Elohim in reference to the biblical God of the covenant with Abraham and his seed, our Messiah Yeshua. Theos in the Greek Septuagint is used to translated Adonay which is also commonly translated God in modern universal terms. I prefer the Hebraic or biblical Adonay when refering to the God of the bible. 11:11:30 AM is important to note in reference to divine name the divine name for Yahweh is translated in the Greek Septuagint as Ego Eimi which translates to English as I Am. In most modern translations Lord and God are capitalized to denote which is used. There are two basic variations LORD God and Lord GOD used to denote the use of three words. LORD God refers to Yahveh Adonay, whereas Lord GOD refers to Elohim Yahveh. This is important to note in the Old Testament Elohim Yahweh is refering to Yeshua, the Son, who is Adonay manifest in flesh or the Angel of The Lord IE… Gen 18:1-3; 19;24). LORD God (Yahveh Adonay) is refering to The Father in heaven who has been seen at no time by no one. Finally the Holy Spirit is refered to as the Ruach HaKoddesh. So we see that the Eternal GodHead can be found in the original language however many translations lack and miss the clarity of the distinct words and terms used to describe Yahweh Adonay and His Redeemer, Elohim Yahweh, (To find out more about and on the proper understanding and use of divine name look for my previous block discussing the Eternal GodHead Revelation).
Overall, I really enjoy the NET Bible, which has copious translation notes explaining every choice in manuscript interpretation or meaning. Without exception, even on those passages where I disagree with how they rendered a phrase, they have the alternate rendering in the margin notes.
It’s the only modern translation I’m aware of that charges no royalties, so it can be redistributed without limitation if you give proper attribution. That really helps missionaries and others doing ministry in poor countries.
However, the NET Bible also frustrates me intensely with a certain specific passages, especially in the Old Testament, where the translation destroys the poetry or subtle meanings (especially when the same passage is quoted in the NT and the link between the two is lost) with an attempt at “clarity” or wooden faithfulness to the dominant meaning of a word or phrase in Hebrew. But as I mention, in every disputed translation instance, the alternate renderings are found in the notes. They make it clear what the alternatives are and why they selected the rendering presented, which makes it an excellent window for an English-only reader into the process of translation and the original manuscripts.
For readability, I like the NIV. For accuracy and memorization, I like the NASB but simply can’t stand its use of Old English in prayers — totally unnecessary and I believe unbiblical in the tone it projects. If the NASB publishers replaced the Old English with normal second person pronouns and verbs, that would instantly be my favorite.
I grew up with the NIV; my impression has been that it is a good balance between accuracy and readability. I use NASB when I want to get the best understanding of the original text. I picked up a Good News Bible a few years ago; I like reading a more modern translation. While it certainly has its quirks, I’ve been enjoying reading the Message recently; I like getting a fresh perspective on scriptures, and it really helped me to understand Romans better.
I generally read from the NIV for readability and NASB and KJV for accuracy. When I’m really looking for accuracy, I will use my Interlinear KJV-NIV Parallel New Testament in Greek and English to look at how the original was written and for specific word use in context.
The NLT I enjoy reading from time to time. I love how ISV translates some of the text into hymns. I like how HCSB includes the words “Messiah” and “Christ” dependent upon the word usage in context. I have used other helpful Bible tools but these seem to be the best and simplest for me.
On another note: I would love to see a translation of the New Testament that would actually remove the institutional bias/institutional word choices from the various translations that have caused a number of divisions in the church.
Great stuff!
Just had a look at the CEB based on amy’s comment above – not impressed with the way it translates 1 Tim 5:17 – Elders who lead well should be paid double, especially those who work with public speaking and teaching.
There is nothing in the text or in early christian history to support the use of the word ‘paid’ to translate the word normally translated as ‘honor’. Also, this translation is made more ridiculous when considering that it is advocating double pay, when followers of Jesus in early Acts held all things in common??!? Do well in the kingdom of god and you get paid more?!?? Also totally ignores the honor shame context of the Ancient Near East which is probably what should be used to interpret that verse.
I tend to go from ESV and NIV. I really like the NIV ‘noteworthy’ version of the NIV that has every-other page blank for notes. I was using the ESV for teaching but it wasn’t always as clear to others as I would like.
TNIV is extremely user friendly and inclusive.
I use the ‘JNDarby translation’ – gifted to me a few years back by some Exclusive Brethren folk, it has been a help. Manin reason? Every time some smart preacher says ‘of course, in the original it is better translated..such and such’ – there it is! In the JND version. I am also a ‘sneaky Message reader’…I find it refreshing….is that bad?
I started out studying the bible and really getting to know it with the NASB. That is the main staple. Now, for studying I have a bible called the Word that has King James as its main text and then it draws from 26 other translations to show any portion of the scripture it may differ and shed more light. I also like the NKJV as well.
For reading I found a New Testament that didn’t have the chapters and verses in it written and translated by Richard Latimore it is a pretty good translation.
There is another version that I don’t own but have found it helpful at times for different scriptures and that is the Recovery version.
My favorite is Today’s New Living Translation. It is easy to read. I would say it falls somewhere between NASB and NLT as far as how it reads.
I just read this from wikipedia, “On September 1, 2009, it was announced that development of a new revision of the NIV is in progress, and that once it is released both the TNIV and the original NIV would be discontinued.”
I really like the TNIV, so now I hope that the new NIV will be similar to the TNIV but better.
I also read the einheitsübersetzung because I am a missionary to Germany.
The NKJV and ESV for my study and for regular reading my KJV. I plan to get a NLT sometime soon as I hear it’s good as well. If you like you should consider getting a Septuagint or simply “LXX” I prefer its reading of some of the psalms and all the Paul quotes that are not found in MS old testament are in the LXX.
I like the NASB, NLT, NKJV, and Amlified in that order. I read my NASB Keyword Greek/Hebrew for study then turn to my NLT for clarity. I love the language of the NLT and have found myself reading it aloud quite often.
The first Bible I ever had was the Nelson NKJ Study Bible, so many of the foundational scriptures that I can quote from memory come from that one.
A close friend and mentor with whom I visit occasionally reads The Living Bible. I have picked it up and read some passages and thoroughly enjoyed it. I looked for one online and was surprised that so few are now available. I could only find one copy in print which is available only in hardback. Is there a reason that the old Living Bible has completely been pushed aside by the New? I find the language and the flow of the old quite beautiful.
I agree with your NKJV but I would have said NIV instead of NASB to compliment the NKJV (but that might be because i’m not american). I love the NLT for a first port of call and the Message for reading in bed (feels more like reading a story – which the bible is).
The New Century Version would be worth a mention too because they have committed themselves to using simple english, which doesn’t mean they’ve dumbed it down. Great for younger people to start off with.
For some reason I feel fond of the Good News too…. an oldie but a goodie. Maybe because of the way it translates the Sermon on the Mount.
Jack and all: I think all translations have their strengths and weaknesses. I own just about every translation mentioned, except for a few which I plan to obtain.
When I’m doing rigorous research and want light shed on a particular text, I’ll look at that text in many different translations. If I’m writing, I’ll seek the version which brings out a particular thought the clearest for quotation purposes.
However, the NASB/NKJV I prefer for accuracy in my normal reading and the NLT I prefer for clarity. Put another way, those are my top choices. Your mileage may vary.
TNIV
Though I also use…
ESV
NLT
MSG
CJB
and looking forward to the soon to be released Delitzsch Hebrew Gospels
Personally…I can’t stand KJV
I can totally understand the reason why the NIV is not used. First of all, the Zondervan is a subsidiary of Harper Collins which is owned by porno pusher Rupert Murdoch himself. Second there are complete verses left out of the NIV such as: Matthew 17:21, 18:11, 23:14, Mark 7:16, 9:44, 9:46, 11:26, 15:28, Luke 17:36, Romans 16:24, or Acts 8:37.
In addition, the NIV both omits and changes the meaning of the text, sometimes even teaching the opposite truth. Consider prayerfully, the following passages.
Matthew 1:25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.
NIV: But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.
Psalms 10:5 His ways are always grievous; thy judgments are far above out of his sight: as for all his enemies, he puffeth at them.
NIV: His ways are always prosperous; he is haughty and your laws are far from him; he sneers at all his enemies.
Jeremiah 51:3 Against him that bendeth let the archer bend his bow, and against him that lifteth himself up in his brigandine: and spare ye not her young men; destroy ye utterly all her host.
NIV: Let not the archer string his bow, nor let him put on his armor. Do not spare her young men; completely destroy her army.
Hosea 10:1 ¶ Israel is an empty vine, he bringeth forth fruit unto himself: according to the multitude of his fruit he hath increased the altars; according to the goodness of his land they have made goodly images.
NIV: Israel was a spreading vine; he brought forth fruit for himself. As his fruit increased, he built more altars; as his land prospered, he adorned his sacred stones.
Hosea 11:12 Ephraim compasseth me about with lies, and the house of Israel with deceit: but Judah yet ruleth with God, and is faithful with the saints.
NIV: Ephraim has surrounded me with lies, the house of Israel with deceit. And Judah is unruly against God, even against the faithful Holy One.
Proverbs 17:8 ¶ A gift is as a precious stone in the eyes of him that hath it: whithersoever it turneth, it prospereth.
NIV: A bribe is a charm to the one who gives it; wherever he turns, he succeeds.
Proverbs 26:22 The words of a talebearer are as wounds, and they go down into the innermost parts of the belly
NIV: The words of a gossip are like choice morsels; they go down to a man’s inmost parts.
Be careful and beware. You cannot eat from everybody’s table.
I grew up with the King James Bible, and can still appreciate the beauty of its language. However, for accuracy I like the NASB best. Within the last few years I’ve been most blessed by Eugene Peterson’s The Message. I avoided that version for a long time, feeling that it wasn’t “pure” enough, and that it was only a paraphrase trying to be culture-friendly. But I’ve become aware that it was written by a scholar who honors the original languages, and who translated with integrity and a passion to invite people to read and engage with the powerful message that is God’s Word to us. My most recent Bible purchase is a NASB/The Message parallel Bible. With it I can read the Bible with the fresh, exciting perspective that The Message provides and have the NASB’s accuracy right there for comparison and further study.
The NLT for reading, devotional, conversation; the NASB for academia; the NRSV for academia when I need the Deuterocanon books.
I use New American Standard Bible (NASB) currently, but have also used the New King James Version (NKJV) in the past. It’s probably to my disadvantage, but I generally stay away from those versions which are paraphrases, the first that I recall coming on the scene was The Living Bible, because it is the “interpretation” of one person, as is, to my understanding, the Amplifed, and the Message, whereas the NASB and NKJV, as I’m sure others too, are the work of a group of scholars. To me I think that is important for the accountability which helps keep personal biases from coloring the translation. I understand those who read the paraphrases for “devotional” purposes but don’t feel I’m missing anything by sticking with the NASB…though I could be wrong. I think before I branched out in to tons of other translations I would devote the time and energy to learning at least Greek and add a Greek bible to my reading.
Have you heard about the new Common English Bible translation? The CEB is backed by diverse and extensive scholarship, including the work of over one hundred and seventeen scholars—men and women from twenty-two faith traditions in American, African, Asian, European and Latino communities. As a result, the English translation of ancient words has an uncommon relevance for a broad audience of Bible readers—from children to scholars. The NT is available now in book stores and online. Here’s the website: http://www.commonenglishbible.com. There’s a good Twitter feed, too: http://twitter.com/commonengbible. I urge you to give it a look.
” I find most translations to be slanted to the understanding of the translator.”
LOL… no, not most, _ALL_.
Shalom all, I use mostly the NASU along with the NIV; NRSV; ESV; The Scriptures; The AENT; CJB. I very rarely ever use the NKJV or KJV. They’re very poor translations. I have several others that I use from time to time.
You have left out what I feel are the two single best translations in English. The God’s Word Translation, and The Complete Jewish Bible by Stern. These are ALWAYS the first two I turn to. I recommend you get them.
I like the NASB and the Message. I use a 25 Translations as well to compare. I also like to read the Phillips NT.
Frank, which of the three chronological bibles do like most?
The last one I mentioned in that post.
Sorry to be a bit of a downer on this conversation but although I have been in the church for nearly 30 years now I would still have to look up all those acronyms, maybe it is the difference between the American church and the UK church but I don’t recall those acronyms being used and I don’t think it is helpful for those exploring the faith or having just come to faith.
NASB
NIV
The Interlinear Greek-English
NLT
When studying I use 22 translations.
I am completely in sync with you on this one. For preaching and study I primarily use the NASB and occasionally the HCSB for accuracy. For reading and devotional times, I like the ease and language of the NLT. Sometimes for illustrations or emphasis I will use the MSG. Great post and thanks for sharing!
My favorites are:
1. ESV – For accuracy and “deep” Bible study.
2. NLT – For ease of reading and light study.
3. MSG – For easy reading when I’m out.
I just found all three of these in the Essential Evangelical Parallel Bible. The type is small, but you can see them all at the same time!
When looking at a passage, I like to look at the NASB, NLT, and MSG side by side. I used to look at more, but over time have paired it down to those three. For general reading, I like the NLT. The bible I carry around is an NASB.
Hey, that was a question I wanted to ask you, so thanks.
I’d say the same as Joel about “The Message.”
I was raised learning passages from KJV, and though I still love the poetic passages especially, I am using the NKJV from which to teach my children.
A few years back I came across a book called “God’s Secretaries: the Making of the King James Bible” by Adam Nicolson. The backgrounds of the scholars involved and of the events leading up to the 1611 translation were fascinating. It brought to the surface some questions regarding human intellect vs. the inspired Word of God and its validity; questions that I needed to face, but couldn’t quite put into words at the time. (Besides a major work of God’s grace in my life, your books helped out with these questions, as I’ve said before.)
Some of the notations in the NIV are questionable from my perspective, but in general the version aids in understanding difficult passages. And I have the same opinion of the Amplified.
Although I normally read the RSV due to my parents giving me one when I was very young. But for accuracy I read the Concordant Literal and Young’s Literal. I find most translations to be slanted to the understanding of the translator.
ESV, hands down. I get this question often as well from people in our congregation. I almost always recommend the ESV. I explain it this way. If the NASB (dad) and the NIV (mom) got married and had a kid it would be the ESV. He is definitely faithful to his father’s name but he has all of the energy and passion of his mother.
I like the Amplified Bible…it expands on meanings and just drives the verse a bit deeper for me. Sometimes it gives the meaning and context of a word and definitions of Hebrew and Greek names right there in the script. And sometimes I like to read the message after reading a passage out of the amplified..
I was raised with KJV and later NIV was introduced (Vineyard era~ around the mid-to-late 80’s)…I remember attending private schools and NIV was not allowed..and NKJ was iffy..
NLT is right up there for me as well…
I also like the TNIV for study as well. For just reading, I enjoy picking up “The Message”