[Traditional Anglican]

OK, just for fun, (or torture ) Say you are placed on an Island for 20 years, you are provided with food, shelter, and potable water. Not a bad Island all in all! ONE CATCH, you can have one book! Must be a Bible and MUST be CT based (having fun yet ). I will have a Poll, BUT, I would like ou to give a reason for your selection! Some might say :I would rather not have one at all!" Play along, this is 20 YEARS! In that time I would rather have a flawed Version than NOTHING! I will go first: I would select a NASB, flaws and all, it is pretty much faithful to the text, even Vance admits that it is a conservative Version and it is pretty low in the Paraphrase department. SO, if I had to select....that wold be it. What say ye?

[Traditional Anglican]

In case you are wondering....my wife and I watched our Cast Away DVD not long ago, I figured I would make a Christian edition of the "ordeal".

[Here Am I]

Geneva.

It preceded the King James.

[Traditional Anglican]

Originally Posted by Here Am I

Geneva.

It preceded the King James.

BUZZZZZZZZZZZ.....NO COUNT! LOL! The Geneva used the Received Text! Your "forced" choice MUST be a Critical Text. Nice Try However.

I'd choose the Reina-Valera Spanish version. The original Valera was based on the Receptus, but Reina's later edition incorporated some of the Alexandrian readings, much as the "New Scofield" in English. But Reina-Valera is still probably closer to the correct text than the modern English versions.

No, I don't speak Spanish. But I'm familiar enough with the layout of the Bible that I'd have a pretty good idea of what I was reading, and I've memorized just enough scripture that I could do some word-for-word translating. And, that way, I'd learn Spanish, which I am unlikely to do unless I'm on an isolated island for 20 years!

[Traditional Anglican]

Originally Posted by Vendetta Ride

I'd choose the Reina-Valera Spanish version. The original Valera was based on the Receptus, but Reina's later edition incorporated some of the Alexandrian readings, much as the "New Scofield" in English. But Reina-Valera is still probably closer to the correct text than the modern English versions.

No, I don't speak Spanish. But I'm familiar enough with the layout of the Bible that I'd have a pretty good idea of what I was reading, and I've memorized just enough scripture that I could do some word-for-word translating. And, that way, I'd learn Spanish, which I am unlikely to do unless I'm on an isolated island for 20 years!

I will let this one slide since you selected the newer Reina.

Originally Posted by Traditional Anglican

I will let this one slide since you selected the newer Reina.

That's good of you. Actually, I'd prefer a French version, but I don't know as much about them (the various French versions) as I do Valera and Reina-Valera. And, since Spanish will probably be the official language of the United States before long, I really should learn it....



I'm surprised you didn't include the so-called New King James on your list. I think a lot of us would prefer that to the others.

As for "The Message," I can categorically state that it is tied with the New Living Translation, in my estimation, for the title of most damnable, hideous corruption ever printed in the English language. It is truly vile.

[Traditional Anglican]

Originally Posted by Vendetta Ride

That's good of you. Actually, I'd prefer a French version, but I don't know as much about them (the various French versions) as I do Valera and Reina-Valera. And, since Spanish will probably be the official language of the United States before long, I really should learn it....



I'm surprised you didn't include the so-called New King James on your list. I think a lot of us would prefer that to the others.

As for "The Message," I can categorically state that it is tied with the New Living Translation, in my estimation, for the title of most damnable, hideous corruption ever printed in the English language. It is truly vile.

Remember, I could not include the NKJV, even though it deviates from the TR and has CT notes, the text proper is, by and large that of the TR and not CT. In fairness I could not count it a "true" CT Version. Blessings. (As for the Message, I have a copy, I think I could only bear about 3 Chapters! It is in a drawer someplace.)

[MC1171611]

Originally Posted by Vendetta Ride

I'd choose the Reina-Valera Spanish version. The original Valera was based on the Receptus, but Reina's later edition incorporated some of the Alexandrian readings, much as the "New Scofield" in English. But Reina-Valera is still probably closer to the correct text than the modern English versions.

No, I don't speak Spanish. But I'm familiar enough with the layout of the Bible that I'd have a pretty good idea of what I was reading, and I've memorized just enough scripture that I could do some word-for-word translating. And, that way, I'd learn Spanish, which I am unlikely to do unless I'm on an isolated island for 20 years!

Good choice!! Check out the Sociedad Biblia Valera (I made the site ); they're likely the foremost defenders of the 1602 (interestingly adds up to 9...like the 1611! ) Reina Valera Spanish Bible. There are some that malign it or use the 1960 instead, but as you said, it's very corrupt and Alexandrianized.

I'd probably choose the ESV; it was the first new English translation and closest to the King James in its reading as far as I can tell. I know enough Scripture (I think) to be able to at least remember the KJB passages while I was reading through it.

Could I just take my MacBook Pro and a solar charger instead?

[stephanos]

I voted Other since I'd take a Geneva over the NIV, NASB, or ESV anyday.

Peace and Love,
Stephen