Who has made a switch from the KJV to another translation?

[JonathanHunt]

Who has made a switch from the KJV to another translation?

Me

What was the result?

I liked it and actually read the Bible more than before

What version did you switch to?

NKJV

What was your purpose in switching?

It was the version in use at the church I moved to.

 

[DonP]

Me Me me I did. Went alllll the way to NKJV. Been trying the ESV but they cut so many places where elect is used and other clear distinct reformed language I bagged it. They soften it with chose or something else. Other words similar. Surprised since so many reformed men were involved.
And I lean toward TR anyway or maybe against the critical text. I am afraid they will find some old text in a trash can in some archeological dig that is a week older than what we have and change the word of God again.
What I do believe for sure is, God preserved His word for all His church throughout all ages. And we are not to add to it or change it or what point is there in this whole thing?? Arguments from heretical liberal textual scholars do nothing for me. When they have a different nuance, fine, but to remove whole verses saying some scribe added it??? Ruins the whole concept of scribal accuracy and inspiration.
Just my opinion. Maybe ignorant, but faithful!

 

[DMcFadden]

Of those three translations, the conventional wisdom is that the NLT would be on one end of the continuum and the ESV on the other with the NIV in the middle.

 

[matthew11v25]

NIV to KJV to ESV

In all fairness, the NLT has been railed on a lot but I think it has a lot of value. I would not use it as a primary bible by any means but try reading Ecclesiastes in the ESV then the NLT … it is very enjoyable. The NLT’s English is very natural. I have heard it read publicly and it shines. But again…its purpose is different…it does not keep the “form” of the text. I would not use the NLT as a primary church text by any means. If you have people that can barely read, give them an NIV, HCSB, or NKJV!

I work with Ethiopian teenagers (some of which can barely read) and they ALL struggle with the ESV – mainly the word order. I think the NKJV, HCSB, and NIV flow much better and those struggling are more apt to actually read it.

Our church officially changed to the ESV recently and I think that is great. I use the ESV as my primary bible.

Aside from certain word order issues, etc, my only beef with the ESV is that it is called “essentially literal” which I think is misleading. I think it is simply a Formal equivalent translation…period! I would call the HCSB an “essentially literal” or how they prefer “optimal equivalent” translation.

 

[refbaptdude]

KJV to nas to NKJV

I really like the NKJV.

 

[Brian Withnell]

Escape from the Vulgate

But, because these original tongues are not known to all the people of God, who have right unto, and interest in the Scriptures, and are commanded, in the fear of God, to read and search them, therefore they are to be translated into the vulgar language of every nation unto which they come, that, the Word of God dwelling plentifully in all, they may worship him in an acceptable manner; and, through patience and comfort of the Scriptures, may have hope.

While Smith Island might still understand the English in the KJV, the common language today is not the language of the KJV Bible. From a confessional standpoint, I switched from the KJV years ago (before the NKJV was even on the drawing board) and now use the following versions: NASB, NIV, TR greek with Strongs numbers, Weymouth NT, Young Literal, ASV, ASV 1901, Amplified, CEV, ESV, Good News, (yes, I do occationally use KJV yet). My most consistent use is NASB and NIV ... one a formal equivalence the other dynamic equivalence. (I have no experience with Hebrew other than Hebrew word studies, but I cannot do anything with it.)

I felt many years ago those that are fixated on the KJV sound like what the RC church did with the Latin Vulgate (pronouncing it the word of God absolutely) and then insisting people learn the language (Latin in the case of the Vulgate, 17th century English in the case of the KJV). The arguments are eerily similar to the RC arguments for the Vulgate.

Forgot my one plug. I use the Spirit of the Reformation Study Bible when I can't take the computer with me to a Bible study.

 

[steven-nemes]

I don't know much about what makes a good translation, or what the big hooplah is all about, really, but I have used an ESV since I became a Calvinist, just about...

 

[The Deeps]

Forgot my one plug. I use the Spirit of the Reformation Study Bible when I can't take the computer with me to a Bible study.

For a guy like me this is one of the best bibles out today! I wonder if they will ever come out with a good leather ESV version?

 

[DMcFadden]

If you want an ESV study Bible, you pretty much have to go with either the Reformation Study Bible or the ESV Study Bible. Both are EXCELLENT!

 

[Edward]

I am a fan of the NKJV, and that's what I prefer from my primary use.. For corporate worship our church uses the ESV.

NKJV does a good job of balancing the majesty and poetry of the KJV with the lower literacy level of modern society.

 

[The Deeps]

We do have some very good options with the ESV.

I would like to see the Spirit of the Reformation Study Bible in ESV.

-----Added 3/6/2009 at 12:23:47 EST-----

I wonder what would have happend if they would have poured as much money into the NKJV as they did the NLT?

The NKJV seems a little to awkward for my reading.

 

[Grymir]

I was a long haired hippie liberal drunk when I picked up the KJV and read it from cover to cover. God used it to convert me. I understood it completely and have tried other versions, but they just don't cut it for me. If I need another translation, I use the 1599 Geneva.

 

[The Deeps]

I think in ministering to others I have never found it useful to think they are all like me.

 

[JonathanHunt]

The NKJV seems a little to awkward for my reading.

Compared to the AV I find it a breeze. Because of my views on the underlying text the ESV is not an option for me. But if my views were different, I'd definately be there. I love and use the ESV privately.

 

[DMcFadden]

The NKJV seems a little to awkward for my reading.

Compared to the AV I find it a breeze. Because of my views on the underlying text the ESV is not an option for me. But if my views were different, I'd definately be there. I love and use the ESV privately.

Ah ha! Jonathan has a dirty little secret. Guilty pleasure, brother?
Maybe we can find you a 12 step group for recovering Bible addicts.

 

[Igor]

I used the NIV for years but can hardly stand it today -- too many other translations do a "better" job however you conceive the "job" to be.
* AND, if you want a critical text in the dynamic direction, why use the NIV? The NLT is probably the BEST dynamic equivalent type translation in English of the Critical Text. It is up-to-date, idiomatic, and grounded in LOTS of solid NT scholarship.

Years ago my American brothers I worked with spoke very highly and endorsed the NLT (my first and the only translation has always been the NIV - up to now, I mean). I did try it, but... I am tooooo conservative to adopt anything that looks or even may seem to look like gender-neutral, egalitarian, or "politically correct". And this one is gender-neutral:

the NLT carefully avoids the use of "male-oriented" language

the editors have carefully avoided the subject of womanly submission

(see The New Living Translation - A Critical Review)
So I discarded this option right away. Besided, it is a bit too simplified even for me.
If I were to choose between the KJV or the NLT I would, without any hesitation, choose the first one.
Just my personal opinion.
BTW, I am thinking of making a switch TO the KJV some day, when I am more proficient in the Early English - I am studying it now.

 

[forgivenmuch]

I switched from the NAS (which I don't think anyone else has mentioned) to the ESV, and I love it. I was reluctant at first to leave the NAS, but now am very glad I did. When I was a teenager I used the NLT. All of its deficiencies have already been mentioned so I won't bother. I suppose it has possible value as a "reading Bible," as it definitely sounds good. However, I still have reservations with the whole concept of "reading Bible" v.s. "study Bible."

 

[BlackCalvinist]

Who has made a switch from the KJV to another translation?

Me!!

What was the result?

Understanding and bible reading increased.

What version did you switch to?

NKJV, a little NIV and then ESV.

What was your purpose in switching?

I wanted to understand the text quicker.

Today, I can read a KJV if need be, but prefer an NKJV. I'd love to see a revision of the ESV with the Majority Text used instead of the CT.

Main reason: people don't talk like that anymore. Language has changed and what's now considered the 'vulgar tongue' is not KJV revision 5 or 6 (the 1789 or 1859 versions) language.

My old lesbian co-worker said that she tried to read the bible but couldn't understand the words. So I gave her an ESV....after 2-3 passages she was like 'wow! i understand this. why didn't they just do this before ?' Keep her in prayer.... the few seeds I was able to plant and water over the years....hope they sprout.



-----Added 3/19/2009 at 09:16:02 EST-----

I used the NIV for years but can hardly stand it today -- too many other translations do a "better" job however you conceive the "job" to be.
* AND, if you want a critical text in the dynamic direction, why use the NIV? The NLT is probably the BEST dynamic equivalent type translation in English of the Critical Text. It is up-to-date, idiomatic, and grounded in LOTS of solid NT scholarship.

Years ago my American brothers I worked with spoke very highly and endorsed the NLT (my first and the only translation has always been the NIV - up to now, I mean). I did try it, but... I am tooooo conservative to adopt anything that looks or even may seem to look like gender-neutral, egalitarian, or "politically correct". And this one is gender-neutral:

the NLT carefully avoids the use of "male-oriented" language

the editors have carefully avoided the subject of womanly submission

(see The New Living Translation - A Critical Review)
So I discarded this option right away. Besided, it is a bit too simplified even for me.
If I were to choose between the KJV or the NLT I would, without any hesitation, choose the first one.
Just my personal opinion.
BTW, I am thinking of making a switch TO the KJV some day, when I am more proficient in the Early English - I am studying it now.

The only thing the NLT got right was its' translation of Romans 9, if I remember right.

 

[TomVols]

I grew up KJVO, IFB.

Thank God I'm not where I used to be

 

[Parsifal23]

-----Added 4/1/2009 at 01:41:13 EST-----

I do not much about NLT can anyone expound?
Does anyone here use it?
Does it have staying power?
Is it a better translation than the NIV?
Does anyone preach from it?

My Grandma used the New Living Translation for years it's the only translation I ever remember her using. I used to jokingly refer to it as the totally aw some "Dude"!! version because the way it came of written Jesus sounded like some beatific surfer

 

[yeutter]

king James to ASV [1901] and back to KJV. KJV is used liturgically in my Church is the only reason I left the old American Standard Version.

 

[dbroyles]

Somehow, I still find the KJV the most powerful and seemingly most accurate based on the original text. When it says it, it seems to "say it best," at least God seems to have used it that way for me. So, I still do Scripture memorization in that translation, and much meditation on Scripture using it. I tend to use it as the basis of comparison with other translations and occasionally with the Greek, for example. It is particularly useful with a concordance.

However, as good as the KJV is, it is difficult to read or follow along in for personal, family or corporate worship because some of the words are not commonly understood. The NIV, though not quite as good a translation, is very readable and seems to work well for family Bible reading, in Sunday School classes and other devotional settings. To a certain extent, we need to trust that God the Holy Spirit will get through the translation limitations and we can and will understand it according to His purposes for us.

More-and-more I am appreciating the ESV. This is a better translation than the NIV, and also a very readable one.

If I were starting out today, I would still use KJV as a base and probably use the ESV as a standard of comparison, and not be afraid to also occasionally compare with NIV, NKJV or a couple other good translations.

My sentiments exactly!