Which bible version do you prefer?
Some readers prefer the "old language" tradition of writing and speech of the bible while others find some versions easier to understand if written in "plain English." Do you prefer the English Standard Version (ESV), Revised Standard Version (RSV), King James Version (KJV), New International Version (NIV), red-lettered, etc. Please explain.
I mostly use the KJV, but I keep other versions (NIV, NLT, Amplified) when I'm stuck on a passage and need other translations.
I read and study the Bible from the King James Version. I also memorize scriptures from it, but sometimes I compare passages of scripture to the Amplified and Revised Standard Version.
For just reading, I prefer my NIV. If I'm doing a more in-depth study, I also have my KJV with me so I can compare verses.
I prefer the CEV version. It is written in every day words and very easy to understand. I can relate it to my life. Quite a few years ago I had a friend who had no clue on religion and needed an easy Bible he could relate to. I found one called The Find and bought one for myself. Now it is the main one I use. I find that I can look up difficult verses and actually understand them in a real way. You might check it out. I'm sure online somewhere there are excerpts from it so you can see what I mean. Great question! Michele
I have not read all versions, but I prefer to have all versions.
Truth is not in the literal word! As 2 Corinthians 3:6 warns, the letter (literal) leads to death; only the spirit of scripture leads to life. This should be apparent in the difficult parables Jesus used. They were difficult for a reason. Those who clamor for easy are being lazy and God does not honor and respect laziness.
All versions have their flaws. Some leave out words. Some put in words. Some alter the original meaning. But none of them do this for all passages.
I've read KJV the most, but I see other versions of some passages that connect more deeply with me. Where KJV talks about charity, NIV talks about love.
The KJV version of 1 John 5:7 seems to talk about the Trinity, but the NIV leaves out this "trinity" wording. Why? The NCV has a footnote which explains that someone in the early church had added the extra wording, but does not explain why.
While researching for my most recent book, "The Bible's Hidden Wisdom: God's Reason for Noah's Flood," I used many versions, most available at http://BibleGateway.com. I also used the Lamsa version which supposedly has a more logical and understandable rendition of some otherwise confusing passages. And it seems to explain why the change was made -- because a misplaced dot in Aramaic or dot misread from a line above changed a word to the one ultimately used in most other versions.
There is a great deal of wisdom hidden in the Bible and some of it is lost with some translations, because the translator or scribe did not understand what they were writing. Or, in the case of the "trinity" passage, an overly eager scribe decided to add his own ideas. Oops!
Some people can think they are in the spirit and not be. I've done that numerous times. It's getting easier to spot it, but I'm far from perfect. When I'm in-spirit (Holy Spirit), the ideas flow, are full of love, and reveal wisdom that even I did not know when not in-spirit. It's humbling and sometimes a bit frustrating, but if we remain humble and hungry for God's answers, then we can find value in every interpretation of scripture, even those that may shock us or confuse us.
Each of us are looking at various versions of Truth, through our own filters. But there is only one Truth. The important thing is not to think that we have arrived, but to remain humble and hungry.
I prefer the King James Version or the New King James Version and the Amplified Bible for reference
My favorite is the Hebrew bible- Ha-Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (BHS) and the Tanakh
I don't trust any but the Hebrew bibles
Authorized "King James" Version only. It is the only, and I mean only, bible that preserves the literal structure of word usage from Hebrew and Greek into English. Even the most adamant scholar who says that all bibles are good versions, will also admit that the KJV is the only one that is a very "wooden" or "literal" translation. (Been researching this whole "KJV" thing for the past few years now, and I can't deny the arguments in favor of KJV-Only).
Knowing Hebrew and Greek is fine and dandy, and understanding the definition of the words being translated helps a person to understand the process of "how" or "why", but it is not necessary to salvation. If you believe in your heart and confess with the mouth that the Lord is Jesus, who died for your sins and was raised from the grave, then you're saved. It doesn't take a bible (or church attendance) to get saved, just a powerful witness, someone willing to point people in God's direction.
by Eric Dierker 8 years ago
What is your favorite Bible version and why?I just asked someone what version of the Bible they studied. They refused to answer but insisted it was not certain versions. I admit, I like them all, I even like some Coptic stuff. I do not dislike any version. But are versions like politics? Do we need...
by Ann810 7 years ago
Do you trust the New International Version (NIV) Bible?It's said that the name Jesus Christ is taken out of the NIV Bible many times.
by Insane Mundane 10 years ago
Here of late, I've run across several people (online & offline) that were spouting that only the King James Version of the Holy Bible contains the absolute truth. Even though the beloved dogma and ancient writings claiming to be inspired by the almighty God himself, it still has to be...
by CarolineVABC 11 years ago
Which bible version do you read/follow? Why?Many people stick to one version/translation, particularly KJV (King James Version), but some people don't mind other versions or have at least two or three other bible versions for studying the Word of God. I am just curious if there are some people who...
by nightwork4 12 years ago
Why was the unicorn removed from the christian bible?i just found out it was removed in the 18th century and i'm curious as to why people think it was removed completely.
by Robert Erich 11 years ago
I have noticed that many atheists and anti-Christians (as can be seen from the most active forums on Hubpages), have a huge distaste for Christianity primarily because of the contradiction between there being a loving God and an eternal hell-fire for those who do not do what he wants.From my study...
Copyright © 2024 The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of The Arena Platform, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID
|This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
|This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
|HubPages Google Analytics
|HubPages Traffic Pixel
|This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
|Amazon Web Services
|Google Hosted Libraries
|Google Custom Search
|Google AdSense Host API
|Amazon Unified Ad Marketplace
|We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
|Conversion Tracking Pixels
|We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
|Author Google Analytics
|Amazon Tracking Pixel