King James Version or RSV or NIV, etc. does it make a difference?

I've been to churches that utilize only one version and other churches that utilize several versions. For me, I like to read them all. Especially when I run into a scripture that touches me in that moment.

I prefer New Living Translation but I also cross reference all the time. In my bible study group we represent and read from several versions. I believe it's the version that speaks to you in a way that you can relate. As long as it is fully representative of the Truth.

Yeah, I like to refer to the King James if it's one of my favorite verses. I love the language in that one.

King James version reminds me of jail so it's a little harder for me to enjoy. It is my sponsor's favorite though.

Yikes. One day you'll heal from that and be able to enjoy it. I'm sure.

Jail, it's what's for sinners! In this life anyway. Never goin back and don't recommend it

I like to compare the several versions. I sometimes have a problem with the differences in the words used because the new versions use words that do not always mean the same as the ones in King James version. However, I am always open to learning the Bible in any form.

worshipfreely wrote:

Jail, it's what's for sinners! In this life anyway. Never goin back and don't recommend it

Yes, but it is still a very traumatic experience, as it should be, but can leave behind a scar in a reformed soul.

And I'm like you Cleo. I like to compare the different versions too. Sometimes you get a little something more out of it.

Therre are benifits to using several "translations" One needs to be careful what to read though. If you come awaay more confused than you went in, I would consider cause for pause. The KJV is considered the oldest translation we have and I like the way it was done. I read a lot of other ones to see how they may say a particular passage, but if it doesn't agree and line up with KJV then personally I have a problem with the translators. That may just be a me thing. I have read some that deviate compleely from what the KJV shows and one or two that leave verrses out completely. Just my thoughts. Blessings

Yeah Carl, I know what you mean. I've found that caution is necessary when using several versions too and even using a concordance can be helpful.

So true. You mentioned a traumatic experience can leave a scar. While true in statement, I hope you realize that a scar is a reminder that a healing DID take place. If there was no scar, is the wound healed yet?

I think I was responding to worshipfreely when I said that, and it had to do with emotional scars from having been in prison. And, yes, a scar is an indicator of healing. Perhaps, I should not have used that particular metaphor. Smart as a whip, you are.

Was a great metaphor and I have been healed, made whole by the blood of Christ. I have many scars but do not dwell in the past. I am in the moment as the Lord has commanded, with an eternal perspective.

I am definitely a fan of the KJV (it is what we use in my local church as well). When I am reading aloud with my fiance we tend to use the ESV just because of the "readability" of it but for studying purposes I always resort to the KJV.

Now I say this carefully and hope all will understand what I mean when I say translations are not inspired. This also means that the KJV is NOT inspired. I do however believe we can be absolutely sure of God's hand in getting the Bible to every language while preserving the truth contained! Obviously there are some translations that are more literal and stay closer to the meaning of the text than others. But we must remember the Bible was not written in English or Spanish or French, but in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. We must rely on the godly men who translated the scripture for us (those of us that are not Greek scholars). With that in mind I still stick with the KJV for the balance of truth, readability, and literal translation.