https://www.blueletterbible.org/
Only way to study the Bible. See the original text and all translations.
Thanks for the informative post.
New American Standard is a really good interpretation
So God would inspire idiomatic statements in the original languages? That would not be the way for the Gospel to be preached around the world, so no.
I like the poetic feel of the KJV, but the language is outdated, and can lead to misinterpretations. I have a large (some would say display) version given to me by my parents. It’s a New American interpretation, which seems accurate enough, if less poetic.
St Jerome spent 30 years translating the Bible. Those who deny the Body and Blood in the Eucharist need to reflect upon the reasons God became incarnate.
Nice article.
I’m not sure why he says this, though.
“Here’s the irony: the King James Version is 90 percent the work of William Tyndale.”
It’s not ironic.
Paul wrote the Bible in King James English and that’s good enough for me!
Seriously, I read the English Standard Version.
Around 50 years ago, I dated a little cutie. Her Father was one of the best people I ever knew. Her Mother too.
Her Father was also a devoted Christian and award winning inventor. His favorite Bible was the King Janmes version but also liked the “Good News Bible”. Her Mother gave me a paper back copy of it.
A few years later, I attended a Bible Study conducted by a fellow worker at a Summer retreat. He was a seminary student.
He told me that the Good News version was a true translation while “The Living Bible” was a paraphrase. He said both versions were good.
I am of the opinion that there are three distinct periods in most christians walk; Novice, Studied, Nuanced.
During the Novice period, the Christian is becoming aquainted with the general concepts and structure of the Bible. This period is often best served by the translation that is easiest to understand by the new christian.
The studied period shows a desire to learn more about the Bible itself, the authors of the books, and the life and teachings of Jesus. Often this is accompanied by a desire to details and delve into the meanings and implications of passages. This often requires a more standard translation such as KJV, NKJV, or NIV. This enables the christian to communicate with the rest of Christandom and share/express views.
The more Nuanced Christian begins to want to understand the original Hebrew / Greek texts as there are subtle differences in translations that can have a subtal or neuanced meaning. To that Christian, I would advise a Bible that provides the text in a native language, and the original texts, along with Strongs translations.
For me the version I began memorizing as a youngster is by far the best for that very reason. It rolls off the tongue for me. That is the KJV. It then works well with a concordance; because the key words I want to look up are the same.
Now if youngsters these days are memorizing the NLT, the NASB, the ESV, the NIV (Non Inspired Version [JK] :)), Holman, or others, and if there are concordances readily available in those versions, then I’d say ‘go for it’.
The arguments made regarding idioms from Bible days, hebraicisms and the like, and our understanding or misunderstanding of them today, hold very little water for me. If the KJV renders them exactly as written, and another, more ‘hip’ version renders them with a knowing nod and a concession to modern frames of reference, I must say that I am not uncomfortable with the KJV method because it plays the phrases as they lay, word for word. I have a degree of discomfort over any strained attempts to render old idioms into modern ones.
As in golf, so in Bible translation: play it as it lays.
For serious study of the Bible, “Strongs’ Exhaustive Concordance” is very useful.
ppPLl Pleaz.
Dis is only virgeon you shud be reading. With cheezburger.
https://web.archive.org/web/20190327161227/http://www.lolcatbible.com/index.php?title=Main_Page
I use the versions that speak plain current day English for most stuff - the site SubMareener offered looks like a perfect way to access multiple versions on same topics/verses
They were heavily involved in the modern New Testament translation of 1881. They were believed for years to be upright Anglican clergymen.
Any web search for Westcott Hort will turn up a wealth of hair-raising information on these two heretic communists. Their work has influenced nearly all modern bible translations.
KJV for me. Which does not mean that the KJV translators always translated the TR (Textus Receptus) rightly. Most of the time they did, but in important critical passages you should go back to the TR Greek text to see if it they translated right. Some they didn’t.
Its not the English KJV, per se, its the Greek text it is translated FROM, the TR, that is the issue. I totally reject the other versions, which are translated from Greek texts I have no confidence in: the Alexandrian, the RCC Vulgate, etc.
The most literal translation available today is the NASB.
Well Jesus spoke King James english,,shouldnt we only follow the actual words he spoke?