Wayne at Better Bibles Blog has posted a question to regular visitors of his blog asking what bible they consider most useful for reaching out to people who aren’t familiar with churchy language. I would unhesitatingly choose the Contemporary English Version for the following reasons:
1. It really does use “contemporary English” and is easily understood even by children.
2. It is available in U.S. and U.K. English versions.
3. It is widely available through International Bible Society.
4. It is inexpensive. If you buy a case they cost less than $1.00 (U.S.) each.
Also, there are a lot of online resources for the CEV including text and audio versions, podcasts, daily readings, and even by SMS!
The CEV is our Bible of choice for family devotions although we sometimes also use NIV. I have written about the CEV before in a post about audio Bibles.
A link to purchase the CEV is available at the Lingamish Lens.
Great choice! It’s my wife’s and my favorite version also. As a Bible translator I have concluded that the CEV addresses and nicely solves more translation issues than any other Bible version. Even though I have more years of education under my belt than I would like to remember, I find that the CEV truly speaks my language. It therefore truly speaks to my heart.
There are many different “Bible” versions today claiming to be the Word of God. Each one tells us that it is the most reliable, most accurate, etc. etc.. But which of them is God’s Word? Since they all disagree with one another, we can’t possibly say that they all are. Can we? Are we to suppose that God has written more than one Bible and that he makes statements in one and then disagrees with himself in another? No, of course not. God only wrote one Bible. How, then, do we go about determining which “Bible” is the Bible? If we look to human opinion for the answer, we will find nearly as many opinions as we find people. One person will like one. Another person will prefer another. Yet a third person will assure us that it really doesn’t matter, telling us that any of them will do just fine. Since we aren’t interested in human opinion here, we need to look to scripture for help in resolving this issue. There are two questions that we will need to consider. (1) Which are the correct manuscripts?
(2) Which is the proper translation of those (the correct) manuscripts? Go to web site for answer. http://www.biblediscernment.com
1. God promised to preserve His words (Psa. 12:6-7; Mat. 24:35). There has to be a preserved copy of God’s pure words somewhere. If it isn’t the KJV, then what is it?
2. It has no copyright. The text of the KJV may be reproduced by anyone for there is no copyright forbidding it’s duplication. This is not true with the modern perversions.
3. The KJV produces good fruit (Mat. 7:17-20). No modern translation can compare to the KJV when it comes to producing good fruit. For nearly four hundred years, God has used the preaching and teaching of the KJV to bring hundreds of millions to Christ. Laodicean Christians might favor the new versions, but the Holy Spirit doesn’t.
4. The KJV was translated during the Philadelphia church period (Rev. 3:7-13). The modern versions begin to appear rather late on the scene as the lukewarm Laodicean period gets underway (Rev. 3:14-22), but the KJV was produced way back in 1611, just in time for the many great revivals (1700-1900). The Philadelphia church was the only church that did not receive a rebuke from the Lord Jesus Christ, and it was the only church that “kept” God’s word (Rev. 3:8).
5. The KJV translators were honest in their work. When the translators had to add certain words, largely due to idiom changes, they placed the added words in italics so we’d know the difference. This is not the case with many new translations.
6. All new translations compare themselves to the KJV. Isn’t it strange that the new versions never compare themselves to one another? For some strange reason they all line up against one Book–the A.V. 1611. I wonder why? Try Matthew 12:26.
[...] A recent commenter on my blog has written a brief defense of the KJV translation stating why they believe that it is superior to recent translations. This comment came on my post Contemporary English Version: My “Better Bible” and while I don’t want to make an item by item response I do want to say that the English used by this commenter was “contemporary.” [...]
Thanks for your comments. I appreciate your positive tone and the way you list your ideas. I’m living in Africa and working with Mozambicans who are translating the Bible into their own languages. Many of them speak Portuguese and are able to use translations in that language to help them write the Bible in their own language. But few of them are able to use any English translation. One of the wonderful things about the Bible is that it has been translated into many languages, more than 1,000!
I, too, support the AKJV for some of the reasons that the writer indicated; however, some 30 years ago, when the Spirit began teaching me, there came a time when I was instructed to research the various versions then available and compare them scripture-by-scripture in critical-need-to-know areas. This I did.
The findings were astounding: critical words deleted, not changed, just flat out deleted; names changed causing Christ’s power of authority to be eliminated. I could go on listing the various problems discovered; however, suffice it to say that I then understood why the Spirit kept me with the AKJV, especially after He showed me that the mere fact that it came into existence was necessary to fulfill one of Revelation’s prophecies of teaching one more time God’s Truth. This began, as the other writer here indicated, in the Philadelphia church age, which ended in 1991 and the Laodicea age began. It will be the shortest age of the other six eras.
Anyway, just wanted to lend my support for using the AKJV. I’m not opposed to people using whatever version they which, but I do advise that they compare it to the AKJV when studying the Bible.
Love in Christ,
http://bonnieq.wordpress.com
Truth Seekers and Speakers, link on blogroll
Unicorn Haven, link on blogroll
I grew up on the KJV and continue to appreciate it. But I do not appreciate the way that this KJV man is spamming blogs with exactly the same message, copied from a post on his own blog.
I don’t see any relevance between his comments and your post about the CEV which is a very good translation of the Bible. The CEV has produced good fruit, as have a number of other modern English translations of the Bible. I am grateful to God for all the good fruit that each translation of the Bible has produced.
I also grew up hearing and reading the KJV. There are numerous reasons why I don’t use it anymore but I’m not really in a position to start a dialogue on the topic since my internet connection is very sporadic. I know Better Bibles Blog and other places have discussed the pros and cons of the KJV. As for the dispensational theories espoused by commenters here I’ll just say that I don’t really interpret history that way but they are welcome to if it helps them make sense of the world around them.
[...] Contemporary English Version: My “Better Bible” [...]