engu Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 I'm trying to make up my mind about the KJV, NIV and NLT Which would you use with your dc and why (my dd is 4.5yo)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirch Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 Personally, I'd use the NIV. KJV is harder to understand, especially for a kid. NLT is easy to understand, but wordier than NIV. NIV is relatively easy to understand and more to the point than NLT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celia Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 We use the KJV. I explain any words that the kids don't understand. I figure it's a great way to increase their vocabulary, and I think the language is beautiful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RayDad Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 NASB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vonfirmath Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 I find KJV easier to memorize personally. So far we've used whatever version the verse for the week is in AWANA/church because that is where the verses have come from Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La Condessa Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 I would say the KJV. If your kids are regularly exposed to the older language from a young age, they won't have any difficulty understanding it, and it will greatly increase their vocabulary and lay a foundation for them to understand word derivatives and differing grammar structures more easily later on. Also, in my personal opinion, it is both more beautiful and more accurate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
engu Posted February 20, 2011 Author Share Posted February 20, 2011 (edited) What version of the NIV would you recommend? Also dd is 4.5yo, isn't the KJV version too wordy for her? Edited February 20, 2011 by engu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CLHCO Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 I would say the KJV. If your kids are regularly exposed to the older language from a young age, they won't have any difficulty understanding it, and it will greatly increase their vocabulary and lay a foundation for them to understand word derivatives and differing grammar structures more easily later on. Also, in my personal opinion, it is both more beautiful and more accurate. :iagree: I seem to remember reading an article (ambleside online?) that explained the advantages from an educational standpoint. In my opinion, it's easier for a child to get used to the KJV vocabulary than for an adult. I know many adults who won't even use the KJV as an alternate translation because the wording intimidates them. I hope to avoid this with my children from earlier exposure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hooahwife Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 I like the KJV. It is more elegant. You can always explain things if she doesn't understand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hedgehog Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 What version of the NIV would you recommend? Also dd is 4.5yo, isn't the KJV version too wordy for her? 1984. FWIW, we recently had a talk at church by a scholar of Bible translations. His basic viewpoint was that all versions are useful, but one should bear in mind that the modern translators have the advantage of a great many more original texts; therefore, they are more likely to be accurate. I think I'm right in saying that the translators of the KJV used less than 10 original texts; the translators of the NIV used something like 500. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnMomof7 Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 We use KJV because it is EASIER to memorize. It isn't work-a-day language, so it's more memorable, it doesn't get mixed up with stray/random pieces of language floating around in the brain. The most important thing though, is to be consistent. Scripture memory CDs that draw from...5 different versions drive me bonkers :O! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greta Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 Also dd is 4.5yo, isn't the KJV version too wordy for her? Personally, I don't think so. If you expose children to beautiful, rich language from an early age, they will grow up with an ear for it. If she learns the KJV, she will take more easily to Shakespeare and other older literature. I have heard that in generations past, children learned to read and write with a blue-backed speller and a KJV. Kids are capable of a lot when they are challenged. :) We use the Orthodox Study Bible for our Bible study (because we are Orthodox!) but the KJV for copy work and memory work, because of the beauty of the language. Personally, I do not care for the NIV, but I'm not familiar with the other translation you mentioned. The New Jerusalem Bible also uses beautiful language, but would be easier than the KJV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LidiyaDawn Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 KJV here. :) I remember hearing somewhere before that despite it seeming like the KJV was "harder" to read & understand, that the average reading level is only grade 5 or something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angel Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 We have always used KJV. That is our Bible version and therefore that sets the standard for memorization. My dd's have done scripture memorization from it as early as 3yo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angel Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 KJV here. :) I remember hearing somewhere before that despite it seeming like the KJV was "harder" to read & understand, that the average reading level is only grade 5 or something. I have heard this too. My dh did a study on versions. Angel, who should have read the other posts before chiming in ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meena Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 We tend to use either the NIV (1984) or ESV for memorization. For us, it is easier to share and to apply the Word to our lives when it is written on our hearts in a translation that is more similar to how we and those around us speak and think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirch Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 But because they are modern, they also have a tendency to reflect a specific "bent" of interpretation. Original manuscripts are nice and all, but translation is a very difficult work, at best, and modern translations reflect the beliefs of those who translate. As an example, the NIV is written by those who eschew tradition. Therefore, when they translate the word "tradition" and it is used in a negative sense -- "traditions of man" -- they used the word "tradition." But when the exact same word was used in a positive sense, they used the word "teaching." That is reflective of the belief of the translator, not a translation. Students will gain greater spiritual and literary benefits by using the texts that have been used in English for a long time, or those which adhere most closely to them. In addition, the language was written for beauty, which makes it easier to memorize. I certainly agree that translations are going to reflect the beliefs of those who translate, but that would have been just as true of those who created the King James translation. Filtering the world and your work through your own lens of perspective is just how human beings work, and just the fact that the KJV has been around a long time doesn't somehow make the creators' perspective(s) better (or worse) than modern translations. If anything, it clouds the issue because most of us have no way of knowing what their priorities or biases were. At least with modern translations you have a chance of being able to discover some of those things. IMO some of the newer translations (NASB and ESV) are better than the NIV because the goal was to translate as literally as possible. The NIV is easier to read, but I personally use both NASB and ESV precisely because I want to wrestle with some of the knottier translation issues (i.e., where more than one interpretation or understanding is possible) on my own rather than having one perspective chosen for me, which is what generally happens with NIV and other phrase-by-phrase or "idea" translations. I will give you the literary benefits and the beauty of the language with KJV. I hadn't considered those when choosing a translation for my kids to memorize. I suppose I was just focused on what would be most straightforward and clear--my priorities are to get God's word into their hearts and minds for now and the future and something they could grasp easily even as small children. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurie4b Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 We used the NIV for a number of reasons. 1) We were memorizing for spiritual reasons, not lofty language. The biblical authors had a choice between writing in classical Greek or koine Greek (Greek spoken by common people). They wrote in koine. While KJV is beautiful like Shakespeare is beautiful, we preferred memorization in current commoner's English. Part of the reason is that one can speak Scripture in conversation in a natural way. 2) We definitely wanted to use an adult version 3) the pastor at our church used NIV for preaching at the time, we used it for adult reading at our home, and its use is widespread. If you have a chance, listen to Max McLean recite the gospel of Mark, Genesis or Acts. These are done from memory and it sounds very natural. I've had my kids memorize big chunks of text as well as specific psalms or verses. We started at age 3 with Luke 2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Endorphins Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 My boys had zero interest in reading the Bible on their own when we were using the KJV. I picked up some NLT's for them and their eyes lit up and they immediately dug in. Because it interests them now and they can understand it without my explanation, memorization is SO much easier for them now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evergreen State Sue Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 Awana uses NIV and Bible Quizzing uses NKJV. NKJV seems to be easier to memorize when you have passages to memorize vs. just a few verses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mims Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 We used the NIV for a number of reasons. 1) We were memorizing for spiritual reasons, not lofty language. The biblical authors had a choice between writing in classical Greek or koine Greek (Greek spoken by common people). They wrote in koine. While KJV is beautiful like Shakespeare is beautiful, we preferred memorization in current commoner's English. Part of the reason is that one can speak Scripture in conversation in a natural way. 2) We definitely wanted to use an adult version 3) the pastor at our church used NIV for preaching at the time, we used it for adult reading at our home, and its use is widespread. If you have a chance, listen to Max McLean recite the gospel of Mark, Genesis or Acts. These are done from memory and it sounds very natural. I've had my kids memorize big chunks of text as well as specific psalms or verses. We started at age 3 with Luke 2. It is easier not to jump around in translations. If you attend church see what your pastor and children's programs use. I would personally suggest ESV for modern language and accurate translations. We've used NIV because it is in a lot of curriculum etc. Someone commented on AWANA and they give the choice of NIV, KJV, or NKJV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8circles Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 KJV for things like The Lord's Prayer or others that are more culturally known. NIV for AWANA or basic verse memorization. NLT when they read scripture in church - I think it's generally easier for them to understand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happypamama Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 KJV for things like The Lord's Prayer or others that are more culturally known. Yes, this. The Christmas story from Luke just doesn't sound right to me if it's not from the KJV! But we use NIV for most memorization work, and it's generally my go-to for Bible study as well, since it's what the church where I grew up used. I have noticed that occasionally, the kids get a hybrid of versions (which probably isn't great), usually because I copied it for their cards (we used the method from simplycharlottemason.com for a while) from the NIV, but they or I might also have learned/heard it frequently from another translation. One thing I like about a more modern translation is that when relating a verse/passage to non-Christians, the more modern speech might be more accessible to them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smithie Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 My stance is, MORE pieces of the KJV need to be culturally known! It causes me actual physical pain, like an ache in my chest, to quote the KJV to my (Christian) students and have them stare blankly back at me. It's happened quite a lot over the years... so my own kids do KJV memory work from both the OT and the NT. And the Talmud. And the Greeks. And everything else I enjoy :tongue_smilie: Seriously, though, I think that familiarity with the KJV is a necessary component of college-level literacy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirch Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 I'm truly not meaning to be combative...It is true of the time of the KJV, however, that there were fewer denominations and splits than there are today, and we *can* know what their biases were by reading the history of the time. The biases were distinctly Protestant, but there were fewer divisions among the Protestants at that time than there are now. The KJV was commissioned to minimize the extant differences. I really don't have a dog in this fight...I think it is interesting history, and something I read about, and thought a lot about when I was making the same decision you are now, so that is my reason for chiming in. Kind regards, Patty Joanna Thank you for the kind words. :) It's definitely true that there were fewer denominations and splits then. But I guess what I'm trying to say is that even if there were none--if there was only one protestant church at the time--the translators would have still worked from their beliefs/biases. Just because those beliefs/biases had little or no competition doesn't inherently make them better or more correct than modern translations. Neither does the fact that the translation was done a long time ago. Modern translators will also be influenced by the times in which we live--but so were the KJV translators. The fact (which I didn't know--thanks!) that the KJV was intended to minimize the differences is certainly in its favor. Some of the modern translations have also been produced by cross-denominational scholars as well, though, which would help to reduce bias and an undue influence by any one denomination. This combined with the greater resources at the disposal of modern translators is why I personally prefer a modern translation for study (ESV or NASB). I certainly don't believe that the KJV is wrong or bad, and I know that many people love it. More importantly, many people use it to grow in their faith, which is the goal, whichever translation you use. I just believe that some (not all) modern translations are at least as good. I hope you don't mind the discussion--I'm enjoying it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erica in PA Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 I'm trying to make up my mind about the KJV, NIV and NLT Which would you use with your dc and why (my dd is 4.5yo)? I would not use KJV. I have worked with so many children at various ministries who simply could not understand those words, and it broke my heart that so much understanding was lost just so we could say we were using the KJV. For some of those kids, it might have been the only Bible they were ever exposed to, and they would have benefitted so much more from hearing those words in modern English that they could understand and apply to their own lives. Imo, understanding is more important than tradition or beauty. In our family, we use ESV, and our church uses NKJV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LinRTX Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 My children started memorizing from the NKJV from the time they were about 2 1/2. They never had a problem. Linda Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrissiK Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 When I was little I memorized the KJV. When I was in high school (Christian school) we memorized from NASB, which is an excellent translation. Now I only use the ESV (English Standard Version) and that is what we memorize from. My two preferred translations are the NASB and the ESV. Though for Bible time we do read out of the Living because... well, because they boys understand it better. Is that clear as mud? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.