I was KJVO for 5 years. Changed my view and began reading the modern versions for about 2 years but now I’m starting to come to the conviction that maybe I should have stayed with the KJV. Maybe not be an “Onlyist” but atleast preferred. Just from my own studies in the modern versions I think that they at times have some serious problems and are doing more harm than good. Not that I’m saying they are completely useless and are of no value but I’m starting to think that maybe some KJVOnlysists weren’t as crazy as they seemed.
I was raised on the NIV, and then went to the NASB for a while, but now I'm very nearly KJVO. I do still occasionally crack open other translations for various reasons but the KJV is my primary.
I read the book "51 Reasons Why The King James" by David W Daniels and I think he makes some pretty valid points. Now I am almost KJV only and use the other translations mostly to understand the old English; preferably Textus Receptus ones.
@@DiligentOvercomer Daniels has written some interesting books. I have read "Is the 'World's Oldest Bible's A Fake"? I'm not sure if his hypothesis in that book is correct but he builds a compelling and thought-provoking case.
Did I miss the kjv? I use the nkjv and nasb95. Glad to hear they rated higher. Is there a byzantine bible out there? I will certainly check out this guy's UA-cam
My brother gave me The Living Bible translation when I was probably at the lowest point in my life. I was so desperate for help so I read it and sure enough, the Lord used that translation/paraphrase and the Holy Spirit brought me to my knees. My point being, I don't really think the Lord is partial to which translation we are using if your heart is in the right place seeking the Lord. Saying that, today I prefer the KJV but still have a copy of The Living Bible I keep around to remind me of what Jesus can do when we call out for help.
The first thing a new born again believers should do is pray to the Lord and ask Him which bible to read. Scripture is inspired by God and is God's word. A translation is man's opinion of what they think God is saying and is man's word. The problem "Christians" have is not understanding 2 Tim 3:16. Scripture has to be God inspired. And ONLY scripture is valid for doctrine, instruction, etc. if you aren't reading scripture, you are wasting your time and just practicing intellectual Christianity. It also shows the person has more faith and trust in academia than they do in God, for providing God's word.
I listened to a majority text guy (Phillip Kayser) and he said that if you want the majority text and get best quality, reading both ESV and NKJV is the way to go. Been doing so ever since and it’s been a blessing and a blast.
You guys have great energy together! I was hoping to hear about the translations that don't get a lot of coverage - the Geneva, Matthews, Jay P. Green's Literal, WEB, the Majority Standard Bible. I know that you were trying to cover the mainstream translations but it would be nice to see where you guys think these stack up. Since you left out the KJV, the only way you guys can redeem yourself is to do a part 2. Thank you both!
I would've liked to see your opinions on the EOB eastern orthodox bible I believe it's A Byzantine/Patriarchal Text English translation with alot of footnotes and resources
Is there a translation in the same tradition as the NKJV that is a little easier to understand? I use it for study, but at times I find it is difficult for some to grasp.
The NKJV's advantage is also it's weakness in this regard. I think it's worth persevering with to get the meaning by practice and prayer, similar to the KJV.
Nice work, gentlemen! It's funny, I'd probably be a lot more enthusiastic about the ESV if it just had the large number of unbiased/honest marginal translation notes found in the NKJV.
Adam Boyd's translation is the one that convinced me that an individual translator can do an excellent translation. And no longer believe committees are better. The reverence and carefulness that Adam exhibits gives me higher confidence in the quality of the translation. And do love the variant notes.
What is your opinion on the use of " Jesus" instead of the "Lord" in Jude verse five? I've noticed that a few versions do this. I don't read Greek so I'm not sure what the word for that verse is in Greek. I know that "Jesus" is used in the ESV, LSB, CSB, and in the NRSV updated version but not in the original NRSV. It's also used in the Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible, and in the old Wycliffe Bible, both of which are based on the Latin Vulgate. I checked on Bible Gateway and it has the Mounce Reverse Interlinear New Testament. It has the Greek text with the English translation. In Jude verse five, it shows the Greek word for Jesus, but in the English above it says Lord. I'm not sure why, but since I don't read Greek, maybe you brothers could elaborate on this. I watch both of your channels and always enjoy your videos. God bless.
Most Greek manuscripts and NT’s use the Greek word κύριος, which is “Lord”. (Both Stephans TR, and NA28 say κύριος).Some manuscripts do contain Ιησούς, which is “Jesus”. The verse in question though, regardless of translation, is saying that Jesus was the One who delivered Israel out of Egypt, since in verse 4 Jude says Jesus is our only master and Lord. 🩷
Good video! I used the NKJV for 21 years then switched to the ESV. It is now my favourite, but I still highly regard the NKJV and it is the only translation I use for for Scripture memorisation. I agree the NET notes are very helpful. NASB 1995 (& it’s footnotes) is one I regularly use for sermon preparation, while I preach from the ESV.
Guys, the problem with your analogy is that some translations are better in the NT but not as good with the OT. Regarding the NT portion I prefer the NKJV but the OT doesn’t incorporate the Dead Sea Scrolls. Regarding the OT portion I prefer the ESV since it incorporates the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Thanks again for a great presentation concerning this topic. As a "Biblical" expositor I'm sure you would agree translation's are at the fore-front of importance here. Reliability must take precedence over personal favoritism when counseling "The Chosen of God." At 71 yrs young and a "Christian" 44 yrs of them, I've watched the "Translation" debate wars for quite a while. I must say contention rarely produce good corresponding actions. And as a personal opinion it would seem we've advanced little by these ideals. Also I think a quote from "Albert Einstein" would be applicable here. He said; " We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." On a personal note I'll share the "Translation's" which work well within the confines and scope of my ministry. KJV, ESV, JP Green KJ3/NT, and Byzantine NT Robert Boyd. Thx.
Passion "Translation" = -10 Interesting perspectives. The NKJV is #10 for me! For a CT base, I agree with Stephen: LSB. The LSB preserves the poetic imagery connections between the OT and the NT. Thanks & Blessings! 🙏📖
I love formal equivalent and functionally equivalent translations. Not everyone is on the same reading level. Of course, the goal is to improve our reading so that we move up to a word for word translation, but I think there’s a place in the body of Christ for both kinds.
I’m a little surprised that the MEV didn’t rate higher. I also lean Majority Text and since the MEV uses the TR and I find it both more readable and in many cases more literal than the NKJV (based on the NKJV footnotes, the MEV seems to follow the rendering that is listed as “Lit.” In the footnote). Yes there were a few misprints and printing errors in the MEV (which are all now fixed, 2024 update live on YouVersion) but this is an excellent translation I believe. The NKJV, while great, uses some awkward word choices, often putting the better (more sensible/intelligible) alternate in the footnote or using a less literal rendering when the more literal one (again in the footnote) is better, and literal. I realize a lot of this is subjective personal preference, I just really enjoy the MEV. It’s both very readable and very literal in my experience.
I enjoyed your guys comments. LSB is better than NASB 95 IMO 😊. Plus Yahweh is restored! I have more but these are the ones I use most. LSB-10 NASB 95-9 NKJV-8 KJV-7 ESV-5 NIV 1978-3
The King James version is THE HOLY BIBLE for all English speaking people. It gets a 10 for best English bible. All others get a zero for complete failures.
DBH is my go-to for New Testament translations. It’s by far the most superior IMO. As far as the OT goes, I like Alter for the Masoretic and for the LXX Sir Lancelot C. L. Brenton’s translation.
The original 89 edition of the NRSV is brilliant. From what I have seen, the updated edition of the NRSV is not an improvement. Some of the changes in the NRSVue are shocking. It's best to avoid it and stay with the NRSV (the original 89 edition).
Translations you listed I've used and recommended when I teach ranked: ESV NKJV NET translations you listed I've used otherwise ranked: YNG NRSV (not updated) MEV ASV Translations you listed I've forbidden my students when I teach (ranked by badness): NIV (orig) AMP Translations you listed I have not used: NLT LSB NIV (updated) Boyd's translation NRSV (updated) CSB Translations not mentioned that I like: WEB RSV2CE Douay-Rheims NETS LES2 LXX2012 Positives for me: I like formal equivalence translations, translations that use the LXX to supplement, complete Bibles, and Byzantine Text or Textus Receptus NTs. Even if it's a critical text vs a Byzantine Text, a complete Bible will always beat an incomplete Bible if all things are equal. I'm rather neutral on committee-based translations vs individual. The NIV was committee-based, for instance, but it still snuck in heretical alterations to the text that translations by individuals usually don't. Committees are no better than individuals without proper accountability and mixing of view points, and most committee-based translations do not meet that requirement. On the other end, the ASV has a couple of renderings I would consider border-line heretical that no individual would put in because the committee was too diverse (though unlike the NIV, they *can* be justified from the text but are just wrong).
I was KJVO for 5 years. Changed my view and began reading the modern versions for about 2 years but now I’m starting to come to the conviction that maybe I should have stayed with the KJV. Maybe not be an “Onlyist” but atleast preferred. Just from my own studies in the modern versions I think that they at times have some serious problems and are doing more harm than good. Not that I’m saying they are completely useless and are of no value but I’m starting to think that maybe some KJVOnlysists weren’t as crazy as they seemed.
I was raised on the NIV, and then went to the NASB for a while, but now I'm very nearly KJVO. I do still occasionally crack open other translations for various reasons but the KJV is my primary.
I read the book "51 Reasons Why The King James" by David W Daniels and I think he makes some pretty valid points. Now I am almost KJV only and use the other translations mostly to understand the old English; preferably Textus Receptus ones.
I read KJV, YLT, Brenton, and like to check ESV. YLT is my preferred. Love that it is challenging to read. Causes more thinking and pondering. 😅
@@trappedcat3615 YLT is definitely helpful!
@@DiligentOvercomer Daniels has written some interesting books. I have read "Is the 'World's Oldest Bible's A Fake"? I'm not sure if his hypothesis in that book is correct but he builds a compelling and thought-provoking case.
You two have hit on something with this video. Any chance there could be a part two?
Did I miss the kjv? I use the nkjv and nasb95. Glad to hear they rated higher. Is there a byzantine bible out there? I will certainly check out this guy's UA-cam
I COMPLETELY forgot to ask him about KJV. I would give it a 9.5. I’ll ask him. Adam Boyd’s translation is a Byzantine text one.
@@BiblicalStudiesandReviews I didn't hear your NKJV rating - what would you give it?
I appreciate hearing both your opinions. One note, it’s ok to just not have an opinion on something if you haven’t read or used it.
My brother gave me The Living Bible translation when I was probably at the lowest point in my life. I was so desperate for help so I read it and sure enough, the Lord used that translation/paraphrase and the Holy Spirit brought me to my knees. My point being, I don't really think the Lord is partial to which translation we are using if your heart is in the right place seeking the Lord. Saying that, today I prefer the KJV but still have a copy of The Living Bible I keep around to remind me of what Jesus can do when we call out for help.
The first thing a new born again believers should do is pray to the Lord and ask Him which bible to read. Scripture is inspired by God and is God's word. A translation is man's opinion of what they think God is saying and is man's word. The problem "Christians" have is not understanding 2 Tim 3:16. Scripture has to be God inspired. And ONLY scripture is valid for doctrine, instruction, etc. if you aren't reading scripture, you are wasting your time and just practicing intellectual Christianity. It also shows the person has more faith and trust in academia than they do in God, for providing God's word.
I listened to a majority text guy (Phillip Kayser) and he said that if you want the majority text and get best quality, reading both ESV and NKJV is the way to go. Been doing so ever since and it’s been a blessing and a blast.
Continuing to watch to see if he Geneva Bible is mentioned..................
Maybe next round
You guys have great energy together! I was hoping to hear about the translations that don't get a lot of coverage - the Geneva, Matthews, Jay P. Green's Literal, WEB, the Majority Standard Bible. I know that you were trying to cover the mainstream translations but it would be nice to see where you guys think these stack up.
Since you left out the KJV, the only way you guys can redeem yourself is to do a part 2. Thank you both!
Great idea!
I would've liked to see your opinions on the EOB eastern orthodox bible I believe it's A Byzantine/Patriarchal Text English translation with alot of footnotes and resources
I grew up Kjv only and found a book of common prayer and discovered the psalter was from Coverdale version of the psalms.
Is there a translation in the same tradition as the NKJV that is a little easier to understand? I use it for study, but at times I find it is difficult for some to grasp.
Probably the MEV would be.
The NKJV's advantage is also it's weakness in this regard. I think it's worth persevering with to get the meaning by practice and prayer, similar to the KJV.
Nice work, gentlemen! It's funny, I'd probably be a lot more enthusiastic about the ESV if it just had the large number of unbiased/honest marginal translation notes found in the NKJV.
💯
I didn't hear your NKJV rating - what would you give it?
I would put it at a 9.
@@BiblicalStudiesandReviews yeah, agreed, 9...or maybe 10 😊
Adam Boyd's translation is the one that convinced me that an individual translator can do an excellent translation. And no longer believe committees are better. The reverence and carefulness that Adam exhibits gives me higher confidence in the quality of the translation. And do love the variant notes.
What is your opinion on the use of " Jesus" instead of the "Lord" in Jude verse five? I've noticed that a few versions do this. I don't read Greek so I'm not sure what the word for that verse is in Greek. I know that "Jesus" is used in the ESV, LSB, CSB, and in the NRSV updated version but not in the original NRSV. It's also used in the Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible, and in the old Wycliffe Bible, both of which are based on the Latin Vulgate. I checked on Bible Gateway and it has the Mounce Reverse Interlinear New Testament. It has the Greek text with the English translation. In Jude verse five, it shows the Greek word for Jesus, but in the English above it says Lord. I'm not sure why, but since I don't read Greek, maybe you brothers could elaborate on this. I watch both of your channels and always enjoy your videos. God bless.
Most Greek manuscripts and NT’s use the Greek word κύριος, which is “Lord”. (Both Stephans TR, and NA28 say κύριος).Some manuscripts do contain Ιησούς, which is “Jesus”.
The verse in question though, regardless of translation, is saying that Jesus was the One who delivered Israel out of Egypt, since in verse 4 Jude says Jesus is our only master and Lord. 🩷
Good video! I used the NKJV for 21 years then switched to the ESV. It is now my favourite, but I still highly regard the NKJV and it is the only translation I use for for Scripture memorisation. I agree the NET notes are very helpful. NASB 1995 (& it’s footnotes) is one I regularly use for sermon preparation, while I preach from the ESV.
I've been an ESV guy since it first came out but the CSB is creeping to my top spot.
Guys, the problem with your analogy is that some translations are better in the NT but not as good with the OT. Regarding the NT portion I prefer the NKJV but the OT doesn’t incorporate the Dead Sea Scrolls. Regarding the OT portion I prefer the ESV since it incorporates the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Thanks again for a great presentation concerning this topic. As a "Biblical" expositor I'm sure you would agree translation's are at the fore-front of importance here. Reliability must take precedence over personal favoritism when counseling "The Chosen of God." At 71 yrs young and a "Christian" 44 yrs of them, I've watched the "Translation" debate wars for quite a while. I must say contention rarely produce good corresponding actions. And as a personal opinion it would seem we've advanced little by these ideals. Also I think a quote from "Albert Einstein" would be applicable here. He said; " We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." On a personal note I'll share the "Translation's" which work well within the confines and scope of my ministry. KJV, ESV, JP Green KJ3/NT, and Byzantine NT Robert Boyd. Thx.
Passion "Translation" = -10
Interesting perspectives. The NKJV is #10 for me! For a CT base, I agree with Stephen: LSB. The LSB preserves the poetic imagery connections between the OT and the NT. Thanks & Blessings! 🙏📖
Would love to hear more on LXX and DSS
My daily favourite is the NKJV Reformation Study Bible.
I own the TCENT and love the plural, singular you forms. I would love to see a similar work for the Old Testament between the MT LXX.
Love to know how you feel about the EHV. Supposedly, they tried to eliminate manuscript bias.
I have a copy but I haven’t spent time with it yet. I need to do that.
I love formal equivalent and functionally equivalent translations. Not everyone is on the same reading level. Of course, the goal is to improve our reading so that we move up to a word for word translation, but I think there’s a place in the body of Christ for both kinds.
I’m a little surprised that the MEV didn’t rate higher. I also lean Majority Text and since the MEV uses the TR and I find it both more readable and in many cases more literal than the NKJV (based on the NKJV footnotes, the MEV seems to follow the rendering that is listed as “Lit.” In the footnote). Yes there were a few misprints and printing errors in the MEV (which are all now fixed, 2024 update live on YouVersion) but this is an excellent translation I believe. The NKJV, while great, uses some awkward word choices, often putting the better (more sensible/intelligible) alternate in the footnote or using a less literal rendering when the more literal one (again in the footnote) is better, and literal. I realize a lot of this is subjective personal preference, I just really enjoy the MEV. It’s both very readable and very literal in my experience.
I’ll look at it again and compare some random verses with the Greek. Thanks for your take
@@BiblicalStudiesandReviews That’s very kind of you. I don’t read Greek so it would be interesting to see what you come up with.
I enjoyed your guys comments.
LSB is better than NASB 95 IMO 😊. Plus Yahweh is restored!
I have more but these are the ones I use most. LSB-10
NASB 95-9
NKJV-8
KJV-7
ESV-5
NIV 1978-3
The King James version is THE HOLY BIBLE for all English speaking people. It gets a 10 for best English bible. All others get a zero for complete failures.
DBH is my go-to for New Testament translations. It’s by far the most superior IMO.
As far as the OT goes, I like Alter for the Masoretic and for the LXX Sir Lancelot C. L. Brenton’s translation.
There is 1 more English Bible we NEED.....The MSB!
LSB-7 , ESV-7, CSB-7, NKJV-7, NIV-6, NLT-5
The original 89 edition of the NRSV is brilliant. From what I have seen, the updated edition of the NRSV is not an improvement. Some of the changes in the NRSVue are shocking. It's best to avoid it and stay with the NRSV (the original 89 edition).
What about NIV 1984 🙏
Translations you listed I've used and recommended when I teach ranked:
ESV
NKJV
NET
translations you listed I've used otherwise ranked:
YNG
NRSV (not updated)
MEV
ASV
Translations you listed I've forbidden my students when I teach (ranked by badness):
NIV (orig)
AMP
Translations you listed I have not used:
NLT
LSB
NIV (updated)
Boyd's translation
NRSV (updated)
CSB
Translations not mentioned that I like:
WEB
RSV2CE
Douay-Rheims
NETS
LES2
LXX2012
Positives for me: I like formal equivalence translations, translations that use the LXX to supplement, complete Bibles, and Byzantine Text or Textus Receptus NTs. Even if it's a critical text vs a Byzantine Text, a complete Bible will always beat an incomplete Bible if all things are equal.
I'm rather neutral on committee-based translations vs individual. The NIV was committee-based, for instance, but it still snuck in heretical alterations to the text that translations by individuals usually don't. Committees are no better than individuals without proper accountability and mixing of view points, and most committee-based translations do not meet that requirement. On the other end, the ASV has a couple of renderings I would consider border-line heretical that no individual would put in because the committee was too diverse (though unlike the NIV, they *can* be justified from the text but are just wrong).
Thanks for sharing these thoughts! Very thorough
The LSB is way better than the NASB
If you can't read Shakespeare or Chaucer in only the penguin classic version you don't understand the KJV.
KJB and LSB
Best,✌️