Which Translation Do You Prefer?

Which Translation?

  • Total voters
    14
Hello Origin;

I use the ESV and several cross reference translations when I'm preparing a sermon, study or presentation. This Saturday I'll start teaching a new Bible study to a group on the distinction between hermeneutics and application, and how they work together.

For many years (mid to late 1990s) I used the Amplified Bible but took me forever to prepare my paper. lol!

I have been blessed to know Christians who used the Message (referred to as the Freedom or Paraphrase translations, call it what one will) and gone on to introduce new believers to Christ Jesus. I have also been blessed to know seasoned Christians who have studied the Bible closest to the Hebrew and Greek (God bless them for their increased knowledge) but did not apply their witness and introduce others to Christ. There have been so many other variable cases in a disciple's walk.

My point as you mentioned early in your thread, I don't instruct disciples which translation they are led to use. In time most students end up moving on to other translations.

As long as a growing believer is studying the Word with an acceptable translation (the Bible that the Jesus People used in 1970 was in error and was not an acceptable translation) and remain obedient to the Commission, then we are to give glory to God in all He does with each of us who love and seek Him diligently.

God bless you, Origen and thank you for sharing this thread.
 
bobinfaith said:
Hello Origin;

I use the ESV and several cross reference translations when I'm preparing a sermon, study or presentation. This Saturday I'll start teaching a new Bible study to a group on the distinction between hermeneutics and application, and how they work together.

For many years (mid to late 1990s) I used the Amplified Bible but took me forever to prepare my paper. lol!

I have been blessed to know Christians who used the Message (referred to as the Freedom or Paraphrase translations, call it what one will) and gone on to introduce new believers to Christ Jesus. I have also been blessed to know seasoned Christians who have studied the Bible closest to the Hebrew and Greek (God bless them for their increased knowledge) but did not apply their witness and introduce others to Christ. There have been so many other variable cases in a disciple's walk.

My point as you mentioned early in your thread, I don't instruct disciples which translation they are led to use. In time most students end up moving on to other translations.

As long as a growing believer is studying the Word with an acceptable translation (the Bible that the Jesus People used in 1970 was in error and was not an acceptable translation) and remain obedient to the Commission, then we are to give glory to God in all He does with each of us who love and seek Him diligently.

God bless you, Origen and thank you for sharing this thread.
Click to expand...
And thank you for your comments and words of encouragement.

Which translation did the Jesus People Movement used?
 
Last edited:
Origen said:
Which translation did the Jesus People Movement used?
Click to expand...

Hello Origen;

The translation was called The Way in 1973. It was published by Tyndale but the origins of this translation were mish mashed with other translations and remained a paraphrase Bible, later connected with the Living Bible. Still, the translation didn't give direction between the Greek and Hebrew, (if any) and in it's text the scholars and publisher found difficult to approve. Since the early times of the Jesus People Movement, the Book's teaching influenced a zeal for evangelical fervor, commune living and emotional experience, over correct doctrine.

I'm sure there is more to this and various findings but this was my understanding during our seminary class study of early acceptable translations and the Jesus People Movement.

God bless you, Origen.
 
bobinfaith said:
Hello Origen;

The translation was called The Way in 1973. It was published by Tyndale but the origins of this translation were mish mashed with other translations and remained a paraphrase Bible, later connected with the Living Bible. Still, the translation didn't give direction between the Greek and Hebrew, (if any) and in it's text the scholars and publisher found difficult to approve. Since the early times of the Jesus People Movement, the Book's teaching influenced a zeal for evangelical fervor, commune living and emotional experience, over correct doctrine.

I'm sure there is more to this and various findings but this was my understanding during our seminary class study of early acceptable translations and the Jesus People Movement.

God bless you, Origen.
Click to expand...
Oh that's right, I remember. You are taking me back to my teenage years.

It had this cover.

51e2tcDP7OL._SX280_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

It is a paraphrase (not a translation) and used the American Standard Version as the base text. It was the product of one guy Kenneth N. Taylor.
 
Last edited:
Origen said:
Oh that's right, I remember. You are taking me back to my teenage years.

It had this cover.

View attachment 8849

It is a paraphrase (not a translation) and used the American Standard Version as the base text. It was product of one guy Kenneth N. Taylor.
Click to expand...

Yes, Origen;

When I discuss the translations the paraphrase falls within the category of the Free Translations. But just the same the acceptable translations is separated from the paraphrase as you pointed out to me. I'm good with that, brother.

Regardless, The Way is not an acceptable teaching of the Bible.

God bless you, Origen.
 
I chose NKJV, NIV, and the NRSV. The NKJV is the first Bible that I read all the way through. The NIV, specifically Men's Devotional version as that is the first Bible that I ever owned and was given to me by my ex-wife. The NRSV, specifically the Catholic Edition as I enjoy the deuterocanonical books.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top