Last edited:
What would you say is the best version for Bible study closest to the original text?
- Thread starter 5Wolves
- Start date
-
- Tags
- bible-version transation
Perfectly OK. I appreciate the input because someone else may be looking for something not so. 
I mostly have the KJV that's been handed down, a few of them actually. While online I found a great website , biblegateway.com.
I enjoy the Amplified there. A KJV with an Amplified beside would be a good read I think.
Biblegateway also has an Aramaic to English translation. That's fascinating. Aramaic being the language of Christ. At least that's what I understand to be the case.
ETA: I have a wonderful Aramaic Lords Prayer music video I'd love to share. I checked the rules but wanted to confirm I can add it to this thread?
I know someone else that may be getting a kjv/amplified side by side Bible soon. And agred it is a really good read.
I mostly have the KJV that's been handed down, a few of them actually. While online I found a great website , biblegateway.com.
I enjoy the Amplified there. A KJV with an Amplified beside would be a good read I think.
Biblegateway also has an Aramaic to English translation. That's fascinating. Aramaic being the language of Christ. At least that's what I understand to be the case.
ETA: I have a wonderful Aramaic Lords Prayer music video I'd love to share. I checked the rules but wanted to confirm I can add it to this thread?
Blessings
lol
Just kidding!
love you so much
love you so much,lol
Just kidding!
yes, now you are right. I can not finish the last reading of the bible because God has other plans, I'm excited!!
don't look up the originator of kjv, stay innocent , lol
I mostly have the KJV that's been handed down, a few of them actually. While online I found a great website , biblegateway.com.
I enjoy the Amplified there. A KJV with an Amplified beside would be a good read I think.
Biblegateway also has an Aramaic to English translation. That's fascinating. Aramaic being the language of Christ. At least that's what I understand to be the case.
ETA: I have a wonderful Aramaic Lords Prayer music video I'd love to share. I checked the rules but wanted to confirm I can add it to this thread?
Just clicking
There are two main branches of texts, I think. Someone correct me if I am wrong, but I think there is the majority text (Textus Receptus/Byzantine) and the Minority text (Alexandrian). The Byzantine has more manuscripts, but some of the Alexandrian are older. Some people think older means more accurate, but I don't think that is necessarily so. In fact, I prefer the majority texts. Yet I don't think there are really not enough differences in the various texts to worry about. They were copied by hand, but they were copied very meticulously and carefully.
The King James and NKJV is closest to the Majority text
As far as I can tell, the American Standard and New American Standard is closest to the Minority text.
I use the King James, New King James, New American Standard, and sometimes the New Living translation.
Last edited:
For memorizing scripture, the King James is the best. The KJV, ESV, and amplified are my favorites.
I enjoy the Amplified at the site, Biblegateway.com. They have a huge selection of versions to choose from when seeking out a particular scripture on their search page.
They even have an Orthodox Jewish version. And Bible Hub.com has an Aramaic to English translation.
The language Jesus spoke translated to English! Very exciting. That was the best part of "Passion of the Christ". The Aramaic language spoken aloud. Oddly enough it sounds like Lakota and Japanese languages today.
They even have an Orthodox Jewish version. And Bible Hub.com has an Aramaic to English translation.
The language Jesus spoke translated to English!
Very exciting. That was the best part of "Passion of the Christ". The Aramaic language spoken aloud. Oddly enough it sounds like Lakota and Japanese languages today.
I trust the ESV apart from the Kjv, Nkjv. I rigidly exclude paraphrases such as the niv, nlt, the ausie bible and other similar compilations of the ideas of man....but that is me.
Studying the Bible involves a great amount of comparing scripture with scripture. Doctrine is developed this way. It is too easy to misinterpret one verse or passage by itself. Scripture must agree with other scripture to form the Truth. And that is what we seek.
To do this, one must have reliable translation of the original texts. This means having the original translated into the most precise language which you understand. For English, KJV tends to fit that bill. But God's Word is not just precise terminology. It is also ideas and concepts which need to be understood. This can get difficult with only a literal translation. Most people today have not planted seeds, been a servant, grafted trees or understand the events leading up to a marriage in Jesus' day. Yet these are paramount concepts in New Testament teachings.
One needs to have a literal translation and a conceptual translation. I have come across too many discrepancies in the NIV, so I would not recommend that version. The literal version should be used as the authoritative source. The conceptual version should be used to help understand the literal version when needed. Use multiple sources to double check the conceptual version. Concordances come in handy as a source to check differences in versions. Trusted commentaries also help in this area.
When it all comes down to it in the end, the Holy Spirit must be the final guide to lead you.
God Bless
To do this, one must have reliable translation of the original texts. This means having the original translated into the most precise language which you understand. For English, KJV tends to fit that bill. But God's Word is not just precise terminology. It is also ideas and concepts which need to be understood. This can get difficult with only a literal translation. Most people today have not planted seeds, been a servant, grafted trees or understand the events leading up to a marriage in Jesus' day. Yet these are paramount concepts in New Testament teachings.
One needs to have a literal translation and a conceptual translation. I have come across too many discrepancies in the NIV, so I would not recommend that version. The literal version should be used as the authoritative source. The conceptual version should be used to help understand the literal version when needed. Use multiple sources to double check the conceptual version. Concordances come in handy as a source to check differences in versions. Trusted commentaries also help in this area.
When it all comes down to it in the end, the Holy Spirit must be the final guide to lead you.
God Bless
I exclude paraphrase too. I don't trust them, it leaves too much up to the interpretation of the paraphraser. I prefer word for word translations. I don't know if the NIV and NLT are paraphrases though. I am not comfortable with the NIV though.
I agree with what Big Moose said in his last post for the most part, but would add that Interlinear Bibles, Strong's concordance numbers, and a good Greek Lexicon are a tremenous help too. You can look up the strongs number to find the Greek or Hebrew word, then use the Strong's number to look it up in the Lexicon.
Blue letter bible is a tremendous resource. You can look up a passage and click the tools box next to it, and it will give you Strong's references, Vines expository references, concordance tools, Lexicon tools , commentaries, etc.
https://www.blueletterbible.org/
Last edited:
The Niv is simply not a faithful version of God's word. To call it a paraphrase is being overly charitable IMO.
Today in Church, one of the readings included Romans 8:14.
Now the Greek is quite definite that those who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God.
Mr. Niv esquire decided that he knows best and has changed God's word to read that those who are led by God's Spirit are children of God. I'm quoting from memory so........
The thing is that there are those who want Gen 6 to read that a bunch of randy angels married women (human type women).
Without the wise council of God's word to keep people on the 'straight and narrow', this erroneous thinking is going to become more and more enhanced by the quagmire of demonic lies and deception.
The only apologetic I have heard in defence of this outrage is that the compilers of the niv wanted to show the heritage of those who are Spirit led.
I would like to offer that Gen 4:26/b through to Gen 6:4 is rich with the heritage of men who are Spirit led
This is a facet of the truth of God's word that is being eroded by such paraphrases as the niv.
Whenever mankind takes it upon themselves to change God's word, no matter how altruistic yet misguided their motives may be, there will be unsavoury consequences for those ensnared by their folly.
So, this whole question about versions must be confined to versions of God's word and not versions of man's word.
Last edited: