King James Version(1611) vs New International Version which is best? No other suggestions please!?

Question

I'd like to hear from others who have used both of these, and eventually chose one over the other. If you have not chosen either, this question does not apply to you.

Which do you feel is the most accurate between these two? Where would someone find a KJV that is word for word from the 1611 edition?

Please do not recommend other translations such as the New World Translation by Jehovah Witnesses, The Amplified, and others, as I will skip your message once I realize your answer is not about the KJV or NIV. Thanks.

I've studied from various translations, and have personally found these two the most accurate in my opinion. That's why my question is only about these two.

Answer 1

KJV is best, the others is too revised and the meanings are not the same.

Answer 2

The King James Version is well respected and loved... but it has mistranslated some Greek and Hebrew words... the most notable is "Sheol" which it renders as "hell" - this has caused much confusion on the doctrine of hell among many denominations.

I LIKE reading the New King James but I would prefer to use the NIV for Bible Study.

Frankly, if I have no time to do my own translation, I always use the NASB (New American Standard Bible), which in my opinion is the closest (literal) translation.

Why skip answers if its not about the KJV or NIV? I am no Mormon or Jehovah's Witness or any such - I am a Baptist, and a serious Bible student. In fact,

I am a Biblical Studies Major (M. Div.) and I know quite a bit about translations becuase that's part of my job!

Answer 3

Both versions are generally accurate, though for the 1611 version of the KJV Bible, you may need to have a high level of proficiency in Old English to get the most out of it. With the evolution of the English language, there are many words in Old English that have left circulation, many that had definitions or meanings that are no longer in use, and some phrases with colloquial meanings that are no longer used / generally understood. There is a newer version of the KJV Bible (appropriately known as the New King James Version) that makes adjustments to adapt to the current use of English.

There is a key difference between the method of translation between KJV and NIV; King James Version uses a 'word-for-word' translation, whereas the New International Version uses a 'phrase-for-phrase' or 'verse-for-verse' translation. The former is more accurate with regards to closeness to the original Hebrew / Aramaic / Greek in terms of word placing and word definition, while the latter is more accurate to adjusting it to our use of grammar and some phrases.

Personally, I am able to read between both versions interchangeably. I find no difference between them when it comes to spiritual efficacy, and I think it is a matter of English proficiency and usage of the Bible that will determine the more appropriate version. I find that the KJV is more suitable for one who is studying the Bible, whereas the NIV is more suitable for one who is reading the Bible.

Regardless, there should be no difference other than the ones I've mentioned.

Answer 4

Both speak the message of Christ! So it's a hard question to properly answer. But I have used both and have found the NIV to be easier to read and more accurate to the original Greek and Hebrew. The KJV is an awesome version and really opened the door for every translation we now have, but I would go with NIV anyday!

Answer 5

Mya, it really depends on which version most appeals to you.

As far as accuracy goes, virtually all versions have either some mistakes, mistranslations and the like. The major emphasis and meaning appears to be the same, overall though.

Reading the versions will not tell you how accurate they are. You need to get a good history book on how the Bible was put together and read that. What you are reading in the Bible is a translated, edited version of what had been the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts.

And I would suggest you do not put limitations on which answers you read on this site. You might very well skip over the more truthful, scholarly answers (from men and women who have studied the history of the Bible) not from readers of the Bible who accept any version on face value or on faith alone -- and know little if anything about translations, editing, history, etc.

Answer 6

Check out Dr. Thomas Waite and his organisation the Bible for Today. He has compiled and done quite a bit of research on the Textus receptus, the Wolcott and Hort texts and the Mazuratic texts. He firmly believes that the KJV is the only way to go and he sells them. Dr. Waite claims, as do many other biblical scholars, that the NIV is purported from texts taken from a rubbish heap and that the deity of Christ is maligned within. Further, Dr. Waite, et al asserts that as much as two books of the Bible (in length) is missing from the NIV and other deemed corrupted texts. I do not completely agree with all of his assertions, but he may be a good starting point for you. For many, the language of the KJV is a stumbling block and other versions are helpful. Even if the language is not a stumbling block, there are many versions that help to flesh out Scripture. Personally, I enjoy the language of the KJV, but I was raised using the KJV. Additionally, I use many versions on a daily basis. Do some web-searches for Dr. Waite, textus receptus, wolcott & hort, mazuretic text and etc. Food for thought, I recently spoke to a practicing rabbi, not a messianic jew, who firmly beleives in the KJV as being the inspired Word of God and who deemed the NIV and all other translations to be corrupted.

Answer 7

KJV! The NIV is just someone's interpretation of the KJV! I think you can lose the meaning of some things with the NIV because of that. But I think you can use the NIV as a reference if you feel you don't understand something in the KJV.
True, both have gone through a series of translators and so I'm sure both have inaccuracies about them. But I think the KJV is the closest of the two!

Answer 8

NIV is the only version of the Bible that actually got me interested in reading it with any sense of understanding.

Occasionally I check things in the KJV to ensure that my understanding of the NIV is realistic. But the NIV seems to be pretty much in line with the KJV from the spiritual respective.

Answer 9

Of the two, I would pick NIV simply because it is in modern English and mis-understandings/ interpretations due to the archaic language and slang are minimized, however, the mistakes in translation from the original language and the omission of God's name are carried on because of it being a rehash of the KJV.

Answer 10

King James Version rules... though I do use paralles just to see what else may be waiting for me to feast on... God's Word is cool that way. I was at the main library in Tacoma, Washington that actually has one of the original handwritten King James on display. History extraordinary. I like using the KJV along with Strong's Concordence to really dive deep.

How interesting for you to ask... right on... and Praise the Lord.

Answer 11

I'm more partial to the NIV since it's easier to understand and plus that's the version that our church uses a lot in our Bible studies. If you really want old school, fire and brimstone type Bible study stick with King James.