The "right" bible translation

The first Bible I ever read cover-to-cover was the NIV. All the KJVO rhetoric ("demonic", "new age", "dangerous", etc) guff motivated me to read other translations to see if I were "going wrong." Well, I found out for myself, I was OK. The NIV is a good, though not a "formal", translation.

We use the KJV in our church. I've almost read it cover-to-cover (its a little harder).

For my own personal use I prefer the NASB, NKJV and ESV. With some combination of these, I can make sure I know what the KJV is saying. Of course, if the KJV was easier to understand, it would probably be everyones favorite. The words just "flow" effortlessly off your tongue like a song.

If I had to choose one, it would be the ESV. It is almost as formal and accurate as the NASB, and is in many places more literal. The ESV and the NKJV are the closest to the literary quality of the KJV. A Bible version that is accurate, understandable and enjoyable to read is a blessing.

 

You're welcome! Happy Reading!

 

The Satan never exist?

 

How do you draw that accusation from Michael's post?

 

The lies changed the modern world.

 

The lies changed the modern world. </font>[/QUOTE]What???

 

What lies are you talking about Askjo?

Michael was saying (from what I see) that KJVO rhetoric that all MVs were "demonic, new age, and dangerous" are what drove him to look into the MVs and that after that investifationhe has found them helpful to his study.

To deny that MV are New Age or demonic is not to deny the New Age or demons exist. There is no logic in your argument.

 

Yes, that's what I was trying to say, but you said it better - thanks C4K.

Demons certainly do exist. If we allow them, they may lead us into all manner of strange doctrines. Thankfully, if we diligently, humbly and sincerely seek the truth, we may find it.