Any here aware of KJVO views?

[YeshuaFan]

Not necessarily. Your question, to me, suggest an oppositional approach to the topic (i.e. formal versus functional). I don't see them as oppositional forces competing against one another. Both are necessary and helpful. If someone is happy with the NASB (i.e. formal), I say that is just fine. If another says I prefer the NLT (i.e. functional), I say great. Just keep reading your Bible no matter which translation it is you choose. Stay in the Word.

However there are some so-called translations or paraphrases I would certainly tell people to ignore (i.e. NWT and the Message).

I am not against using the more Dynamic Equivalent translations, such as the Niv/Nlt, just was stating that for serious bible studies believe that one would be better served to use a more formal and literal translation such as the Nasb and the Nkjv, so not either /or, but more like when to use each one

 

[YeshuaFan]

Yeah I am sorry about that.

The Passion is by Brian Simmons a nut case, in my opinion, who claims divine inspiration for his so-called translation.

Message and Passion so called translations should not be used that much, except as the Living Bible was, for children and those just saved and who never read a bible

 

[Origen]

for serious bible studies believe that one would be better served to use a more formal and literal translation such as the Nasb and the Nkjv, so not either /or, but more like when to use each one

I conduct serious bible studies, and I understand your point. So again I say to each his own.

 

[YeshuaFan]

I conduct serious bible studies, and I understand your point. So again I say to each his own.

Agreed, as they are definite places for either formal or more DE translations to be used