Stereotypes about the KJV, ESV, NASB, NIV, CSB - How We Respond

[@chris2fur401]

KJV: I will never leave thee nor forsake thee. The MSG: Never gonna give you up Never gonna let you down Never gonna run around and desert you

[@igregmart]

LOL. I''ll also take the KJV over any so-called "modern" translation.

[@williamnathanael412]

_"Just kidding, it isn't a Bible"_

[@jixxytrix1705]

You guys don't like the MSG translation?? I absolutely love that translation! I'm reading it right now. KJV is the important one. ESV is the poetic one (and the best one), but MSG is the cool one, the charming one. Think of them as preachers. KJV is the old wise man that thinks jokes are for kids. ESV is the wordsmith that loves to wax poetic. One of Paul's Super Apostles. MSG is the guy who really knows how to connect with people and make the message (pun intented!) palatable....

[@chris2fur401]

@@jixxytrix1705 It was a joke lol. I read from it some. He was talking about stereotypes so that fit perfectly 😂

[@brett5636]

LOL

[@mkfort]

Stereotype of the NLT: it's a paraphrase or translation for children. I've found it to be a sound translation that's easy to read aloud with the family, with good notes where things are taken less formally for the sake of clarity.

[@Birdie_]

I've heard it's a good one to read the Old Testament for the first time.

[@savedbygrace463]

I agree. It's a very good translation and excellent for reading completely through the Bible. It keeps things simplistic and very easy to understand. I enjoy the NLT as well as other translations.

[@gen_lee_accepted5530]

Whoever was in charge of the prophets did an excellent job.

[@philtanics1082]

NLT is absolute garbage. They played waaay to loose with God's Word. I understand its "easy for beginners" but thats man thinking he knows better than God. God said what he said the way he said it for a reason, is it always simple to comprehend? nope. But thats the point. Even in the original languages at the time it was given most couldnt understand it. His Word has always been for those that are his to dwell on, meditate, and think deeply on, with those that love Him and His Word coming to understand and love His Word and commandments. It's the same reason Christ spoke the way He did and taught in parables - He could have just as easily said in plain speak what it all meant, but He didnt, and for the same reason. Those that are His will hear it, think and dwell on it and understand. Maybe not the first time, or even second or third, but the elect will seek it out and spend the time and effort to grasp its rich meaning. Loose translations like the NLT is man trying to confirm Scripture to the world - and the world can never understand or love it or God. All Bibles like that are good for is creating false converts and pastors, further mixing tares in the wheat.

[@mkfort]

@@philtanics1082 nope

[@deniemarie5010]

Thanks, Brother Tim. That was a fun video. I'm doing a read through the Bible in the ESV and NASB right now. Last year, I read through the CSB. I used to read KJV and then switched to NASB. At this point, I don't know which translation I want for my main Bible. 🤷‍♀️ I have been enjoying spot reading in NIV and NET also. Our freedom to access God's word in our country is a Blessing. God Bless you, Brother.✝️📖🙏🤍

[@carben9143]

Tim, your content is always solid but also some of the most fair minded analysis out there.

[@brendaboykin3281]

You were super productive this week, Brother Tim. I truly been blessed by your work for the Body of Christ. 🌹🌹🌹

[@josephbenzjr.2849]

I really like the CSB. I use that as my main Bible. Every once in a while I will reference the ESV, NLT, and NKJV.

[@Blakefan2520]

As a Reformed in Doctrine believer, I have always used the NASB, ESV, RSV and the older NIV. I picked up a copy of the CSB some weeks ago, and I absolutely love this version of the Bible. It is accurate and just feels comfortable to read. That is the best description. It is comfortable.

[@fnjesusfreak]

That might not necessarily be a good thing.

[@BMB125]

One would think a “Reformed in Doctrine believer” would read the Geneva as the Reformers or KJV as the Puritans and other Reformed teachers.

[@Blakefan2520]

@@BMB125 Most Reformed Churches today use the ESV. Few have gone back to the KJV because of Textus Receptus vs Critical Text issues.

[@dayetonlarson8477]

Thanks for a very balanced "Perspective" on the different Bible translations! Really enjoy those videos!

[@trishahamrick7062]

The one stereotype I heard for the HCSB was "Hard Core Southern Baptist".

[@Tax_Buster]

LOL! This comment rocks! 🤣

[@stevecochran9078]

I've grown to like the NKJV. It's the translation used for the Orthodox Study Bible, but the one I think I like the most is the NRSV. I recently downloaded a bible app that has several translations that can be used in combination offline to compare verses. For those complaining about the KJV, they should try reading its predecessor the 1599 Geneva Bible. I have a copy of the Patriots' Edition of the 1599 Geneva Bible. I find myself reading a sentence and translating it into modern-ish English in my head.

[@mb9484]

Parallel Plus?

[@stevecochran9078]

@@mb9484 It's called Bible (offline, multi-version) by ZionSoft.

[@haileyneel8426]

I love the NASB and LSB. However I’ve heard for memorizing verses, something like the KJV can be an advantage, because it stands out and is more poetic.

[@robertrodrigues7319]

Very well said Brother Tim Great video Thanks

[@nateragis896]

Good job Tim.

[@AFrischPerspective]

Thanks!

[@dougbaker2755]

I really appreciate your generous attitude on this subject of Bible translations. If Christians had this attitude toward every topic--even on those that we hold strong views--then all Christians would actually be really Christian!

[@dahelmang]

Amen!

[@gracemonkey2393]

My NIV is 1984. My NASB is 1977. Ok, I’m an old geezer and my library shows it. 🤓

[@Me2Lancer]

Thanks for sharing, Tim. As for the stereotypes I consider most of them uninformed. I have come to appreciate the myriad of translations from Formal to Dynamic equivalent. I see little difference between mixed translations and referring to commentaries. In fact, I tend to compare translations before looking up a passage in a commentary. By the way, I grew up on the KJV as well and I'm especially fond of the NKJV.

[@philtheo]

If English Bible translations were Star Wars characters. 😊 * ESV = Yoda. Knowledgeable and wise, comes from a long and venerable heritage (Tyndale-KJV), but sometimes talks backwards. * NASB/LSB = C3PO. Technically precise, popular with fellow robotic eggheads, but often too literal-minded and woodenly awkward. * NET = R2D2. Said to be the robot's robot (the translator's translation), plugged in and interfaces with the latest gadgets and gizmos, but no one actually reads it since too many beeps and boops to tolerate, they mainly just use it for the technical tools (NET notes). * CSB/HCSB = Mace Windu. Boldly willing to take risks, even if it breaks with tradition (e.g. John 3:16, Rom 3:25), has a strong fan base within certain factions (SBC), but otherwise less popular than one might think. * NIV = Han Solo. Broadly popular, plain spoken and easy to follow, effectively gets the job done without any fancy acrobatics, but sometimes seems to be shady, and may even be smuggling illicit pronouns. * NLT = Ewoks. Communicates with simple expressions, not the most technically proficient, but heart is in the right place and once in a while pleasantly surprises everyone. * KJV/NKJV = Darth Vader. Thought to be the chosen one for many years, speaks in a commanding voice, but turned to the dark side and now lords it over people who don't fall in line with the one true imperial text, King James Only. * NRSV = Kylo Ren. Let the past die, forward thinking and progressive, but lack of faith is disturbing. * Biblical Hebrew and Greek = Chewbacca. The most powerful warrior in terms of brute strength, but a bit woolly sounding to most people and as such needs a translator to understand.

[@jasonbryan3135]

I've been really enjoying the 77 NASB and I'm a KJVp(referred). The 77 NASB gives me vibes of KJV in how it reads plus it keeps the "thee, thou, thine", etc when addressing God.

[@eclipsesonic]

The RSV (Revised Standard Version) does the exact same thing as the NASB 1977, when it comes to using "thee, thou and thine" in reference to God, which I love.

[@SAY.8.18]

NASB 77 never got enough press. What a great translation!

[@colonelj2020]

I have jumped around a bit through different translations over the past few years and have notced different aspects stick out more to me in different translations. Not sure how much of that is the different translation and how much is me growing in my faith. I think at this point I have enough translations and can start to reread in others again and see what I highlghted and noted versus the past time. Might be an interesting experiment. I much agree we need to be kind to others who use a different translations. I like the recommendation to have a more literal one and a more modern one to use together.

[@petermillist3779]

‘Wooden’ cannot be said of NASB 2020. It’s very smooth, even more enjoyable read than ESV!

[@mariolis]

I have heard a lot of 1995 fans really disliking the 2020 I wonder why that is ?

[@petermillist3779]

@@mariolis because it’s not the 1995! Probably the use of ‘brother and sisters’ in place of brethren.

[@petey80]

@@petermillist3779 I really like brethren in the 95 and the KJV. I've actually love the LSB now.

[@DavidIstre]

Good and sound advice. I will say, as a pastor, that when I've encountered KJV readers, often times they will say "well I don't have a hard time understanding it", and then I'll ask them what certain words in certain verses mean, and in many cases, they're answer is wrong. Sometimes they're using a modern definition of the word, or, sometimes they're using what their preacher told them the word means. Obviously, ANY translation that someone reads and understands is the right translation for them (okay, almost "any", I'd say stay away from ones like the Passion Translation, but I digress). But it is key that they actually understand. Because thinking that one understands what one is reading when one doesn't is a very dangerous thing.

[@mariolis]

The NIV was what enabled me to read the bible all the way through I almost fell for KJV onlyism once in the past , but all it did was to make me procrastinate about reading the bible because it was hard for me to read , had to take it really slow with a dictionary app in the background (I use my phone to read the bible , especially useful when Im outside) With the NIV I did not have that problem, i was able to read at my normal reading pace and understand everything, and more importantly I did not procrastinate , since it was actually enjoyable

[@81JeremyHughes]

I've noticed they use different words in translations for example Esther 10:1 refers as King Xerxes in the NLT & NIV, but in most literal translations such as ESV he's referred as King Ahasuerus. Why is this such a different use of names?

[@tinaanderson2953]

According to the Faithlife Study Bible from Logos Bible Software, Ahasuerus is what the Persian king was called Hebrew, but that he is better know by his Greek name, which is Xerxes.

[@BBC600]

@@tinaanderson2953 I wonder why it isn't like Thomas who had both names mentioned in John 11:16?

[@tinaanderson2953]

@@BBC600 Good point.

[@fnjesusfreak]

They ultimately come from the same name. Ahasuerus is a Latinization of the Hebrew form of his name, while Xerxes is a Latinization of the Greek form. Apparently in Old Persian it was "Xšayār̥šā".

[@BBC600]

@@fnjesusfreak it would be a niche Bible but it would be interesting if there was a translation printed using the original names (per the manuscript) but keeping the rest of the text in some form of English translation. Obviously, we couldn't necessarily pronounce them but it would be an interesting document to look at.

[@cmiddleton9872]

I am so sick of people trashing perfectly good bible translations. It almost makes me want to leave thr Everything Bibles facebook page. The NIV and NASB2020, and somewhat the ESV and NLT, get trashed so often youd expect them to be horrible heresy filled drivel. But they're as good or better than the translations Christians have used for millennia. Certainly they're all at least as good as the Septuagint used by some of the NT authors.

[@dahelmang]

Yeah it's not like it's the Mormon version or the Passion translation, or the Mirror Bible.

[@BBC600]

I would say some of the issues with the NIV would have been more so with the TNIV. If you haven't already you should do a video on that translation which was withdrawn. I don't know why but I'd be curious to get my hands on a copy of it due to its obscurity.

[@timcarr6401]

I have three copies of the TNIV --full canon. One copy of the N.T.

[@TradWolverine]

Like how the RSV is liberal. But you read it now and it is a refreshing transition when compared to others today. I consider it ahead of its time.

[@garythomas3150]

I always took “wooden” to mean “bland” or the opposite of beautiful/poetic. I would say that the NKJV is the opposite of “wooden,” it is literal but beautiful sounding. Are we sure that “wooden” refers to how closely the English follows the original language, vs. how pleasing/poetic or boring it is to the ear? Maybe I’m wrong, but I always took “wooden” to mean something different.

[@AFrischPerspective]

Some people do use "wooden" in the manner you mentioned. But often in a literary sense it means stiff, awkward wording.

[@AFrischPerspective]

Note for example in this article from Bible Giveaway: "The downside is that Bible texts translated in this way can be more difficult to read. Until one gets used to the style, it can seem stiff, wooden, and unfamiliar-but one can certainly get used to it." www.google.com/amp/s/www.biblegateway.com/blog/2014/11/what-about-bible-translations/amp/

[@garythomas3150]

@@AFrischPerspective I guess I learned something new. Congrats on the success of the channel. 👍

[@chris2fur401]

@@AFrischPerspective that’s how I take it as well

[@AFrischPerspective]

@@garythomas3150 thank you!

[@dahelmang]

The big problem I have when reading the ESV is when the New Testament quotes the Old Testament. I'm reading on my phone and it doesn't have footnotes to tell me what passage it is quoting from. So I search for the words in quotation marks and it's translated differently in the Old Testament than it is in the New Testament.

[@sdhute]

Tim your expertise would be appreciated. What's the name of the zondervan Color coded Bible that was before the rainbow bible? From around 2000.

[@Fourwedge]

I started on the NLT. Then in the last few years I was ESV. Now I'm trying and loving the LSB and the NASB. what else should I try?

[@PennyThompson618]

Thanks for this. I've always advocated for having multiple translations just because it helps me when I run across a scripture that doesn't immediately seem clear. Reading that same passage in another translation or several other translations makes give me a more clear understanding. E-Sword is awesome for this. I use it in conjunction with my physical Bibles. Lately, my go to's are the NLT and NKJV but I also like the ESV, NRSV, NIV, etc. To each their own. Just be happy the Bible is being read, regardless of the translation.😉

[@artsymusicae]

I’m looking for a translation of the Bible I can understand but that is accurate. Im looking into csb which told a pastor friend of mine they called it too watered down. Im not a great reader and have reading challenges that why I’m considering it. But his comment made me rethink about the csb.

[@kevinguidry7194]

I got the NLT but I prefer the ESV because it seems interesting and it is more for everyone to enjoy

[@gregb6469]

New King James is my translation of choice.

[@j.woodbury412]

I love the KJV translation, but I do have trouble understanding Paul's letters.

[@sarahjesusisgod]

I recently started reading the Kjv after using the esv for years and I actually think the kjv is more yoda like than the esv lol.

[@raiders345]

Is Shakespeare hard to understand? Opinions vary.

[@petermillist3779]

Yes it is

[@billiamnotbob]

My prefered two are the Berean Bible which is similar to the CSB, and the ESV. I also like the NLT and the NKJV. I've never been a fan of the KJV. I don't dislike it, I just prefer others. I also don't get KJV Onlyism. You want some fun? Read the Geneva Bible! LOL

[@davemitchell116]

The NASB, NKJV, NIV and CSV are all good modern translations. However, the ESV is definitely biased toward Reform doctrine. If you can't see that, you're either clueless or you're a Calvinist.

[@OrsvikEnnin]

The NIV is my main translation and it is no way liberal or politically correct. It has some of the best, if not the best, scholarship behind it with its use of the LXX and DSS and has a very high level of accuracy to the original languages. I also appreciate the gender-accurate language as the Greek "anthropos" doesn't mean "man" but instead "human being/person" and the NIV adheres to that accurate rendering.

[@baglady4949]

Can't agree with you more. Love the NIV! It was what I read when I found Christ. I also read the KJV, ESV, NASB, CSB and NKJV. But nothing resonates with me more than the NIV.

[@Sirach144]

The NIV is horrible. It purposely translated to preach the Trinity. Look at John 1:18 "who is himself God ". The Greek doesn't read like this. That's trinitarian biased This is not a real translation. It's extremely biased and gender neutral a lot of things.

[@mkfort]

@@Sirach144 you saying 'the Greek' for a passage that's notoriously difficult to translate and exists as several variations in the manuscripts makes me think you have no idea what you are talking about and have your own strange and biased view.

[@OrsvikEnnin]

@@Sirach144 Actually the NIV's translation of John 1:18 is very accurate to the Greek.

[@SaltyPalamite]

The NIV is not a serious translation. It uses politically correct gender language. Even worse it uses plural pronouns when a singular pronoun is called for. And it displays a blatant evangelical Protestant bias in the different ways it translates "traditions" in the NT, e.g., 2 Thessalonians 2:15.

[@Sirach144]

The ESV to me the is Karen and Becky of translations. So basic.

[@BramptonAnglican]

I read the KJV. It’s easy to understand. I love reading.

[@gen_lee_accepted5530]

The biggest sterotype is The Message. Because it is so often used in memes and jokes people assume its written in crayon by children. Meanwhile its an amazingly thoughtful, helpful paraphrase that would serve every Christian to read through.

[@j.woodbury412]

Personally, I wouldn't read the Message or The Living Bible, but neither would I condemn anybody else for reading them. If it brings someone closer to God, or if someone is led to accept Jesus as their Savior by reading the Message, or The Living Bible, then how can it be bad?

[@ghostl1124]

I would assume that anyone who reads any of these English translations can be led to repentance, saving faith, and sanctification, and assurance in their eternity in heaven with Christ, and for now can follow his command to disciple others in Christianity.

[@Sirach144]

I love the American Standard Version. Uses God's name. (Not here to debate Yahweh vs Jehovah) keeps the old English thees, thy, thou, and fixes many KJV errors.

[@jamessheffield4173]

The Revision Revised by John William Burgon

[@procop4063]

The NIV is not liberal....it is very accurate.

[@SaneNoMore]

The ONLY group I have seen be arrogant, harsh and demeaning about Bible translations is the KJV Only group. While exceptions exist, for the most part everyone has a preference but the KJVO people are the only ones who idolize and deify a translation and try to make every Christian use it. As someone who was trained in a KJVO Church I know how toxic that teaching can be. Unfortunately the old men who invented that standard have died off only after they made a great many young men buy into their error.

[@kndvds1492]

If you have difficulty understanding the KJV, try praying prior to reading it. Don't be afraid of going back over the last verse you just read. The ESV had so much promise, but went down the liberal "woke" path from where there is no return. The CSB is just far too liberal and woke. The NIV from the 80s was ok for kids.

[@petermillist3779]

AV: reading regularly doesn’t = enjoyment.

[@berglen100]

Doesn't matter flesh and blood can't grasp till they wake inside themself and its not learned its free. Luke 17:20And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: 21Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.

[@DaughterofZion4483]

The King James 16:11 with Apocrypha was written by the Hebrew for the Hebrews only for the Hebrew

[@igregmart]

If GOD wanted the Bible to be easily read by everybody he would have written the Bible to be as easy as "Dick and Jane." "For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known." (ICor. 13.12)