Favourite Bible Translations

[KJV1611]

Your opinion isn't the arbiter of other people's opinions.

Yeah I realize my opinion means nothing here.

 

[Dino246]

the KJV is Gods words in the English language

You are certainly welcome to your opinion.

Do you have anything substantial to support your opinion? Don't bother answering with comments about other translations; answer with regard to the KJV. Why do you prefer it, not why don't you prefer others? Don't bother with answers built on circular reasoning either.

 

[Dino246]

Yeah I realize my opinion means nothing here.

In light of the thread topic, your opinion has exactly the same weight as that of anyone else. Bickering over details and attacking other translations was off topic from the start.

See my post to Truth7t7 and answer the same question.

 

[KJV1611]

In light of the thread topic, your opinion has exactly the same weight as that of anyone else. Bickering over details and attacking other translations was off topic from the start.

See my post to Truth7t7 and answer the same question.

Why aren’t you saying anything to Angel who brought up the supposed discrepancy in the KJV to start with?

 

[fredoheaven]

Yes, the translators made a call as to which words to include in the text, but when a marginal note says, "Or" with an alternate rendering, the translators are clearly demonstrating the legitimacy of the alternative. See the lower-right corner in the photo:

View attachment 223293

Most KJV readers would never have seen that the translators provided the alternate "from above" because the marginal notes are not included in most modern KJV printings.

The basic argument of “Or” alternate reading is of facts and not a myth, however, if the issue is that they (KJ Translators) could not decide then that’s very pretty wrong. The Alternate shows other reading is being considered and discussed by the KJ translators Rule 8 of the Translation says “Translations and revisions were to be done first by individuals, then submitted to the whole company for scrutiny, criticism, and the final approval.” If there’s still doubt or difference by the reviewing company, they shall notify the original company. If their objection is declined, the matter shall be settled at a General Meeting. (Rule 10) etc. In the areas of difficulty or disputed passages they refer to the “referral committee” and that the translation was scrutinized at a minimum of 14 times. Also, we have to remember that Rule 6 needs “No marginal notes shall be added, except for the explanation of the Hebrew and Greek words which cannot be briefly and fitly expressed in the text.” The annotation showing alternate readings being created for the KJV margin is the result of an intermediate draft of the revision of the Bishops Bible. The alternate or the other reading in the KJV,only shows that they were rejected words and it so happened that many new English translation have it. Now in the case of John 3:3 that only a few English bible translation adopted “born from above” but the many of the mainstream English translation have it altogether the English reading of the text as “born again”.
As to the awareness of the provision of the original 1611 showing the marginal notes is now publickly available. The link would provide us the original 1611 with its marginal notes is found here: https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/

 

[Dino246]

Why aren’t you saying anything to Angel who brought up the supposed discrepancy in the KJV to start with?

You are in error when you say, "to start with". Truth7t7 was the first to go off topic with several direct attacks on other translations. Angela didn't come in with guns blazing; she began by stating her preference, with reasons, and then made some responsive comments.

 

[fredoheaven]

I primarily use the NIV for study and daily reading because of its popularity. But I also use the ESV and NKJV because they are the translations of some very wonderful study Bibles
I am curious to know some favourite Bible translations of other Christians and why they chose them.

I use the KJV. Thanks

 

[Dino246]

The alternate or the other reading in the KJV,only shows that they were rejected words

That doesn't hold water. There is absolutely no good reason to include a rejected reading prefaced by the word, "Or". If it was rejected, it wouldn't have been printed, which is why the hundreds of verses from Tyndale that don't appear verbatim in the KJV are not included in similar marginal notes.

 

[Truth7t7]

You are in error when you say, "to start with". Truth7t7 was the first to go off topic with several direct attacks on other translations. Angela didn't come in with guns blazing; she began by stating her preference, with reasons, and then made some responsive comments.

Off Topic?

Translations is the topic, corruption in the new translations isnt something you want to hear

You dont want to hear the creator of the Greek Text (Novum Testamentum Graece) that supports all new translations was created by Adulterers Kurt Aland, Barbara Ehlers, and Homisexual union supporters, Roman Catholic Jesusit Cardinal (Carlo Maria Martini)

You dont want others to see these factual truths regarding new translations

Try Finding The Verses Below In Your NIV, ESV,

Matthew 17:21
Matthew 18:11
Acts 8:37
Roman's 16:24

Time Honored King James Version, 409 Years And Going Strong

A Masterpiece, The King James Bible and its translators, all confessing Christian's, scholars beyond comparison!

For a closer look at the King James Bible and its translators, check out the attached link

 

[fredoheaven]

That doesn't hold water. There is absolutely no good reason to include a rejected reading prefaced by the word, "Or". If it was rejected, it wouldn't have been printed, which is why the hundreds of verses from Tyndale that don't appear verbatim in the KJV are not included in similar marginal notes.

Umm...this is the very reason why they were omitted in the later editions of the KJV because of the rule 6. Well, the KJV had to work on the Bishops Bible and not Tyndale and the argument “Or” and sometimes indicated by “Al.” simply means the “other reading” or from the “other copies” that were discussed, scrutinized before going to final words to be used in the KJB text.

 

[Ahwatukee]

How do you decide which one to go with? Whatever you choose, it is your decision. You are being your own final authority. I don’t want that responsibility.

Hi John146!

My purpose in comparing them is not to pick one, but to get a complete understanding of what is being said. Looking at all of the major translations in parallel is a great way to do this. They translations are usually not that far off. It's usually just a matter of using a different translated word with the same meaning. For example:

Interlinear
Thus for loved God the world that the Son the only begotten He gave so that everyone believing in Him not should perish but should have life eternal

New International Version
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

New Living Translation
“For this is how God loved the world: He gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.

English Standard Version
“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.

Berean Study Bible
For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son, that everyone who believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life.

Berean Literal Bible
For God so loved the world that He gave the only begotten Son, so that everyone believing in Him should not perish, but should have eternal life.

New American Standard Bible
"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.

New King James Version
For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.

King James Bible
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Christian Standard Bible
For God loved the world in this way: He gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.

Contemporary English Version
God loved the people of this world so much that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who has faith in him will have eternal life and never really die.

Good News Translation
For God loved the world so much that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not die but have eternal life.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
"For God loved the world in this way: He gave His One and Only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish but have eternal life.

International Standard Version
"For this is how God loved the world: He gave his unique Son so that everyone who believes in him might not be lost but have eternal life.

 

[Truth7t7]

Hi John146!

My purpose in comparing them is not to pick one, but to get a complete understanding of what is being said. Looking at all of the major translations in parallel is a great way to do this. They translations are usually not that far off. It's usually just a matter of using a different translated word with the same meaning. For example:

Interlinear
Thus for loved God the world that the Son the only begotten He gave so that everyone believing in Him not should perish but should have life eternal

New International Version
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

New Living Translation
“For this is how God loved the world: He gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.

English Standard Version
“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.

Berean Study Bible
For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son, that everyone who believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life.

Berean Literal Bible
For God so loved the world that He gave the only begotten Son, so that everyone believing in Him should not perish, but should have eternal life.

New American Standard Bible
"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.

New King James Version
For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.

King James Bible
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Christian Standard Bible
For God loved the world in this way: He gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.

Contemporary English Version
God loved the people of this world so much that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who has faith in him will have eternal life and never really die.

Good News Translation
For God loved the world so much that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not die but have eternal life.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
"For God loved the world in this way: He gave His One and Only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish but have eternal life.

International Standard Version
"For this is how God loved the world: He gave his unique Son so that everyone who believes in him might not be lost but have eternal life.

The Translations Are Not That Far Off?

Try Finding The Verses Below In Your NIV, ESV,

Matthew 17:21
Matthew 18:11
Acts 8:37
Roman's 16:24

Time Honored King James Version, 409 Years And Going Strong

A Masterpiece, The King James Bible and its translators, all confessing Christian's, scholars beyond comparison!

For a closer look at the King James Bible and its translators, check out the attached link

 

[Dino246]

Off Topic?

Yes, off topic. Here is the topic of the thread:

"I am curious to know some favourite Bible translations of other Christians and why they chose them. "

Note that it does NOT say, "Please explain why you think translations that you don't prefer are inferior to your preferred translation." Instead of simply answering the question, you immediately went on the attack. YOU poisoned the thread. YOU started the argument. YOU are the divisive one.

The only appropriate response from you is a humble apology to the OP and silence thereafter.

 

[Dino246]

Umm...this is the very reason why they were omitted in the later editions of the KJV because of the rule 6. Well, the KJV had to work on the Bishops Bible and not Tyndale and the argument “Or” and sometimes indicated by “Al.” simply means the “other reading” or from the “other copies” that were discussed, scrutinized before going to final words to be used in the KJB text.

"Al" would be an abbreviation for "alternate", which doesn't mean, "rejected" in any sense.

 

[Truth7t7]

Yes, off topic. Here is the topic of the thread:

"I am curious to know some favourite Bible translations of other Christians and why they chose them. "

Note that it does NOT say, "Please explain why you think translations that you don't prefer are inferior to your preferred translation." Instead of simply answering the question, you immediately went on the attack. YOU poisoned the thread. YOU started the argument. YOU are the divisive one.

The only appropriate response from you is a humble apology to the OP and silence thereafter.

My favorite translation is the KJV, because the new bible versions are corrupt

You want to silence the truth on this corruption, or even a mention about it, sorta like the Leftist in response to conservative Christian's?

Sit down and shut up, racist, racist, racist, homophobic, misogynist

Try Finding The Verses Below In Your NIV, ESV,

Matthew 17:21
Matthew 18:11
Acts 8:37
Roman's 16:24

Time Honored King James Version, 409 Years And Going Strong

A Masterpiece, The King James Bible and its translators, all confessing Christian's, scholars beyond comparison!

For a closer look at the King James Bible and its translators, check out the attached link

 

[Dino246]

The Translations Are Not That Far Off?

You omitted a key word from Ahwatukee's statement. That makes you either careless or malicious.

 

[Dino246]

My favorite translation is the KJV, because the new bible versions are corrupt

You just don't get it.

 

[Truth7t7]

You just don't get it.

You dont get it, you arent going to silence a persons opinions on bible translations, and their explanations of various translations

Go through the thread and see the multiple posters that reference multiple translations

You dont want to hear about Adulterer Kurt Aland, and his corrupt Greek Text (Novum Testamentum Graece) that supports new translations

You sit silent on negative critiques of the KJV in this thread in bias, Smiles!

 

[Dino246]

You dont get it, you arent going to silence a persons opinions on bible translations, and their explanations of various translations

Go through the thread and see the multiple posters that reference multiple translations

You dont want to hear about Adulterer Kurt Aland, and his corrupt Greek Text (Novum Testamentum Graece) that supports new translations

You sit silent on negative critiques of the KJV in this thread in bias, Smiles!

I'm tired of your blind, hypocritical stupidity. Have a nice day.

 

[Truth7t7]

I'm tired of your blind, hypocritical stupidity. Have a nice day.

How can I have a nice day, when you depart calling me blind and stupid?

1. Are new bible versions supported by the Greek Text (Novum Testamentum Graece) 100% (Yes)

2. Did (Kurt Aland), (Barbara Ehlers), And (Carlo Maria Martini) create the Greek Text above 100% (Yes)

3. Did (Kurt Aland) who was a college professor in Germany, run off with his student (Barbara Ehlers), divorcing his wife (Ingeborg) 100% (Yes)

4. Did (Carlo Maria Martini) write books supporting Homosexual Unions 100% (Yes)

5. Was (Carlo Maria Martini) a Roman Catholic Cardinal, And Jesuit Priest 100% (Yes)