Which Bible version helped you the most?

[Gail]

When you first decided to become a follower of Christ, which Bible version was instrumental in that decision?

For me, it was the KJV... a neighbour kid invited me to his Baptist church and they gave me a used one for free. I cherished that book for years :)

[John317]

Same for me. The KJV was used at the evangelistic series I attended and a copy of it was given to everyone who came. I marked mine up good. I have many translations now but I still love the KJV.

[carolaa]

When I first made a decision for Christ, there wasn't much out there besides KJV and RSV. So I don't credit any version for helping with that decision. But as an adult, I have found the NIV to be most helpful to me spiritually. I really like how careful NIV is to make footnotes where translations differ - it's quite interesting I think. But most of all I like it's readability.

[Woody]

I was brought up being told that the KJV was the only one blessed by God. So, I've stuck with that one all these years. Well ... and the fact that the KJV is the one that I have the most memorized.

[phkrause]

during our worship's these last number of years we've read all different versions. NIV, Clear Word, Living Translation, New English Bible, KJV, NKJV. Right now we're reading the New Living Translation. I've never enjoyed the KJV, it leaves me tongue tide. I have a very hard time reading and understanding this version. pk

[Gail]

pk, the New Living Translation is the one my boss likes to recommend to those desirous of an easy-understanding version.

So don't feel bad!

[Bravus]

I did all my scripture memorisation from the KJV when I was a kid, so that's the one whose language still rings most strongly in my head.

[Bravus]

Not into the conspiracy stuff about all the others being false, though.

[delta]

REVELATION 22:14 King James Version:

"Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city."

Anyone help me this important verse, Revelation 22:14, from "New International Version" and "New Living Translation" please?

What about "Contemporary English Version" says about the Rev.22:14?

Oh well, it doesn't matter of the wordings or the rewordings; All of the versions of the Bible are holy and good, and nothing to do with subtle-twisting of the translation on purpose, right? Especially in our post modern era in which the Christians are now living under His grace, but not under the Laws anymore....until Jesus comes. His Grace will enable us receiving the right to the tree of life, and His Grace also that will allows us entering in through the gates into the city....but again not the Laws.

What do you think?

[John317]

Virtually all of the ancient Greek manuscripts (hundreds) read the way it does in the KJV and NkJV. These are based on the Majority Text, or Received Text.

Most modern translations are based on what is called the Critical Text. It is based on a different view of how to arrive at the correct reading. Rather than being based on the majority of Greek manuscripts, the editors of the Critical Text have chosen to base it on the readings they get from a small number of 4th and 5th century manuscripts, along with some portions which date from the second and third centuries AD.

As far as Rev. 22: 14 is concerned, the reading given in the NIV and NLT and CEV, etc., is based fundamentally on the Sinaiaticus and Alexandrinus, along with about half a dozen later manuscripts.

When you consider the meaning of "washing their robes" (a phrase in Greek which is very close to the spelling and sound of the Greek of "do His commandments"), you will see that they are saying the same thing. One cannot wash his robes in the blood of the Lamb without keeping His commandments. Therefore there's a sense in which it doesn't matter which reading is adopted. Even most Adventist scholars (see SDA BC) believe that the original reading is probably the one adopted by the Critical Text, or the one you find in the NIV, etc.

CEV-- 14 God will bless all who have washed their robes. They will each have the right to eat fruit from the tree that gives life, and they can enter the gates of the city.

Robert Young's Literal Translation-- 14 Happy are those doing His commands that the authority shall be theirs unto the tree of the life, and by the gates they may enter into the city.

[John317]

Actually there were some people who made changes in the Greek texts for various reasons-- including trying to bring them into harmony with a particular view-- but fortunately there are enough manuscripts that it isn't too difficult to identify those in which these kinds of changes were attempted.

[missionlady]

I was raised on the KJV, because that's about all we had. So of course that's what was the most familiar and what I had memorized the most.

When we had kids though, we wanted them to understand what they were reading and memorizing, so we mostly used NIV.

Since then I have read through about 6-8 different versions. NIV is still my favorite, although this year I am reading the NASB. I like it pretty well.

When one translates, it is so hard to find exact words to convey a word or thought (and as I understand it the Greek is known for its words having multiple meanings). But the translators must choose one word. So I like to read various translations to try to find the complete meaning.

[Gerr]

I started with the KJV. Never heard of any other translation while I was in the academy eons ago. Got tired of the "thou, thine, -eth, suffer the little children," and so many other archaic words. So I graduated to the RSV But the RSV was not totally divorced from the "thou, thine", so I tried the NASB. Somehow I felt that the flow of the language of the NASB was somewhat awkward, which made memorization difficult for me. Then I switched to NIV. It is a good contemporary translation. But when I got into serious Bible study in Hebrews, I found that the translators were too fast and loose when translating the Greek "sanctuary", thus confusing the reader as to where Jesus went when He ascended to heaven. I then went to the NKJV which I used for quite awhile. When I went to a Logos seminar, I found out about the ESV and the fact that it has a Greek & Hebrew interlinear. That's when I switched again as my main study Bible. So far I am very happy with it. It is the most accurate translation I have seen to date.

Gerry

[Taylor]

LOL Gerry, I agree with your assessment of the "thine and suffereth' etc. But you know what, it is easier for me to memorize the KJV just because of it's uniquiness but yes for reading purposes I prefer other translations.

[Gail]

For those who have a real problem with the Middle English of the KJV, try the KJVER, or the Easy Reading KJV. It is the KJV without all those archaic words but yet not a different translation as the NKJV is.

[John317]

I'd like to get the KJVER. It sounds like it could be a real advantage.

The KJV is in Early Modern English. Middle English was used in England from between 1066 and to about 1470.

Which are the three top best sellers among Bibles at the ABC?

My guess would be the KJV, NIV, and NKJV.

[Gail]

Yes, you are right- those 3. God's Word Translation is starting to catch on. We also sell some NLT and ESV and NASB.

Of course people still buy the Clear Word.

Thanks for the info about just what English the KJV uses.

[John317]

I was brought up being told that the KJV was the only one blessed by God. So, I've stuck with that one all these years. Well ... and the fact that the KJV is the one that I have the most memorized.

There's certainly nothing wrong with the KJV, and it's no doubt the single most popular translation still. It was the one in use when Christianity was strongest, too. I do believe that there's no question God has used the KJV like no other translation. But of course God has used many different translations to communicate His message.