I am wondering whether what bibles you give some new converts who are not very good at reading. I like to get the KJV and I would most but it is about reading it.
Also where is the cheapest that you can get bibles in bulk and for cheap
I'd give them the ESV. I would really caution giving a new believer, especially someone not good at reading, a KJV. It tends to throw people off.
For Bibles in bulk, go to:
http://www.bibles.com
ESV Bibles in bulk:
http://www.bibles.com/Templates/ProductList_Bibles.aspx?Catalog=ABS_NEW&Category=Bibles_English
Jordan
NASB is my favorite, but you probably won't be able to get them for below $11 or so each.
Check with the gideons, I think they do NKJV full Bibles for about $5, though I could be wrong...
I am english and dont have a credit card
:-) thats funny
I have been told 'the Message Bible' is good for new converts its just the New Testament and I think it comes in different languages too...I think its not to expensive but dont quote me on that...Bless Ya.
I'd recommend the New Living Translation (NLT). The English is very simple, and specifically designed for people who have limited english reading skills.
KJV... nothing else. Why? Because I am convinced that the modern versions are based on corrupt texts. Why would I give a new convert (even one who is not a great reader) a Bible that I believe is corrupted? No, I'll give them what I believe is the real deal. People are capable of learning, even elderly people. If they need to read better then what better place to start than with the book that is considered the masterpiece of English literature?
Besides, the KJV is written at a 7th grade reading level. Most people can read at at least a 7th grade reading level. It is a complete myth (and lie perpetrated by the publishing companies) that the KJV is too hard to read.
Krispy
Krisp,
Do you have 100% proof that those texts were corrupted?
I have found none
I would defintely recommend the NKJV more than anything. I buy those little leather bound bibles at the book store for about $9, but the people I give them to are always really appreciative at the fact I will give them a Bible. I have also found some of those little pocket NASB personal workers new testament, but I dont care too much for them, because they only contain the NT, psalms and proverbs, but I think that will be okay to give out.
May god bless you all!!
Hi deltadom...
I prefer to give the NIV to new believers. I started reading the NIV, and quickly progressed to reading the KJV. Over time, I eventually tell new believers that it is a good idea to read the KJV too. Here is a [url=https://shop3.gospelcom.net/epages/IBSDirect.storefront/445a2ecf05e2e940271d45579e7b0694/Product/View/920_921_922_923_924_925]great place
As for the statement that the KJV is on a "7th grade English reading level," I have read the opposite. In his book [i]The Reading Ease of the King James Bible[i]length[i]common use[i]familiarity[i]The Bedford Guide
I personally had difficulty with many of the words of the KJV when I met the Lord. Even now, as a post-graduate student, I still have to sometimes rely on a dictionary or Strong's Concordance from time-to-time for clarity. It was the intent of the translators of the KJV to provide a commonly understandable version of the Bible, where readers did not have to rely on such explanations for the Scriptures.
:-)
Do you have 100% proof that those texts were corrupted?I have found none
Then you probably have not looked very deeply into the subject. But this has been debated at great lengths here, and it's not my intention to start another. Get in the way-back machine and look at past threads.
As for Chris' comments about certain words being difficult in the KJV, and having to sometimes rely on a dictionary or a Strong's... thats called "studying", and when you have to research certain meanings it can also open up other doors of understanding into God's Word as well... and I do not see that as a bad thing. If someone has truly been born again then the Spirit will instill in them a desire for the deeper things of God, and not just read the Word, but study it and delve into it like it was a treasure chest that they just found on a sunken pirate ship at the bottom of the sea.
Krispy
I can read those threads till my brain explodes.
But we werent there. All we can do is speculate, although I do think it is odd that certain verses are omitted in the newer version, we should not tell people which version they can read or not.
I have read all of those posts, and actually defended the King James version, but all we can do is talk. We were not there. Can you tell me 100%, 100%, 100% that those manuscripts are corrupted.
As for these bible versions, I think TNIV, and the message are really watered down versions. But the NKJV, NASB and maybe NIV(thats pushin it) are the best for me. I would recommend they read something like that. When I handed the KJV out, people did complain they didnt want to read that. So what are we gonna do? tell them they cant be saved? I would just hand them a newer version like the NKJV.
I hope this helps everyone,
God Bless you Krisp, I am not trying to get in any debates about the scriptures, I have read them all, and I am not trying to challenge your walk at all.
May god continue to bless you all....
When I handed the KJV out, people did complain they didnt want to read that. So what are we gonna do?
So we give the unsaved what they want, or what they need? Does someone who just got saved know anything about the KJV... or even read it? How do they know it's too hard to read? I wish I had a dime for every new believer I've either discipled or led to the Lord (or both) who told me the KJV would be too hard to read or understand who came to me later (after I challenged them to give it a chance) and admitted they had very few troubles reading and uderstanding it.
I would be quite rich.
Krispy
There are many people I know that I was good friends with in the world, that at least had a little knowledge of the word to know that the king james version was hard to read.
I am not giving in, but if there is a new translation that could help clarify things to them, I would use it.
You still didnt answer my question about you knowing 100% that those manuscripts were corrupted?
God Bless you brother, :-D
You still didnt answer my question about you knowing 100% that those manuscripts were corrupted?
sigh... this is a trap question. Do you know with 100% certainty what kind of gas mileage your car gets.
Do you know with certainty that the manuscripts are not corrupt? One of them has to be corrupt because they are so different.
But I'm not going to debate this any further, as this was not my intent. And you said it wasnt your's... so there ya go.
Krispy
God Bless ya Brother
by the way, I get 29 miles per gallon, well depending on city or country.(just kidding)
Krispy, I don't believe it's giving the unsaved what they want, but when someone askes to find out more about God is it WRONG to give them anything other than the KJ? It's like giving a hungry man a Big Mac, it's not the best but it will put him on for now. To follow your thinking, (and I do agree with all you said and I only read the KJV)- God can't save anyone who doesn't read the King James.
Myself, I am tomorrow going to see a guy who wants to know more about Jesus (Please pray for me, his name is Ian), and I will be giving him a KJ Gideons bible I picked up very cheap. But I question weather or not the hard line approach is straining at a gnat a bit. God can save people when they read a Jehovah's Witness bible (NWT) so I'm sure He can speak to someone through a NIV. (the Message or Street bible :-( I wouldn't buy if they were a dime a dozen!) May God forgive me if I am wrong.
Ste
I will pray brother, god bless
Hi Dom,
I used to teach reading to adults who had slipped through the education net, often because of lack of opportunity, or, undiagnosed / helped learning difficulties.
These people know how to get by. Their spoken English and knowledge of how to get what they need without being able to read, depends on their [b]listening[/i] and their courage to [b]speak[/i] up - questions - till they understand they have their answer.
When I saw the question in the title of this thread, I immediately thought 'an audio Bible'. They are not particularly expensive on ebay, and, even if someone spent £10 on a cheap cd player, and £30 on a really good dramatised KJV on several discs, they would have spent less than one good leatherbound study Bible, such a Newberry. I picked up a cd with the whole KJV on it (with no music or actors taking parts), for £4 (from ebay).
There are several versions on cd and also on cassette.
While there may be disadvantages to not seeing the verse and chapter breaks when listening only, if the Bible is read out intelligently, it actually conveys the meaning very well.
And, at the back of my mind I'm thinking that if the listener is really taking in the word of God this way, then it is going to help clear their mind, and make them [i]more
Often, people with a learning difficulty have developed a wonderful memory, because they can't make notes to themselves, or get information they need, any other way. But, others, who find reading hard but have a very visual memory, may not enjoy listening to scripture, unless they have the words in front of them. Then, it would be important to buy a cd and a cheap copy of the same translation, so while they are trying to read it, the audio can be helping them out with some of the tricky words and long sentences.
Krispy, I don't believe it's giving the unsaved what they want, but when someone askes to find out more about God is it WRONG to give them anything other than the KJ? It's like giving a hungry man a Big Mac, it's not the best but it will put him on for now. To follow your thinking, (and I do agree with all you said and I only read the KJV)- God can't save anyone who doesn't read the King James.
Myself, I am tomorrow going to see a guy who wants to know more about Jesus (Please pray for me, his name is Ian), and I will be giving him a KJ Gideons bible I picked up very cheap. But I question weather or not the hard line approach is straining at a gnat a bit. God can save people when they read a Jehovah's Witness bible (NWT) so I'm sure He can speak to someone through a NIV. (the Message or Street bible I wouldn't buy if they were a dime a dozen!) May God forgive me if I am wrong.
allhavesinned... I never once said that a person can only be saved by reading the KJV. While there are some misguided people who believe that... I do not. I myself was saved in a church that used the NIV, and on top of that, it was a Word of Faith church. There is no doubt in my mind that I was saved.
However, as I grew in the Lord I came to a place where I rejected both the NIV (and other modern versions) AND the Word of Faith doctrines. But for several years I was taught rank heresy in that church. I was taught the "name it and claim it" doctrine, I was taught that God doesnt want any believers to be sick and all we needed to be healed was enough faith, I was taught that being slain in the Spirit was scriptural (even tho it's never mentioned in scripture), I was taught that tongues was a required sign of being Baptised in the Spirit, I was encouraged to read Benny Hinn's garbage, etc etc.
This church chose experience over sound Biblical doctrine. Biblical doctrine must confirm or reject experience, not the other way around. But one doctrine they did manage to understand well was salvation... and thats how I came to know the Lord.
Now, thats not all because they used the NIV. But my point is, if I can spare someone from the gross error that I was exposed to as a new believer, then I will do it. And I firmly believe that Bible versions is a crucial issue... and I personally can not in good conscience hand anyone a version that I believe with all my heart is corrupted.
In my own personal discipling of new believers I have taken the effort to teach them how to study the Bible, and how to make good use of commentaries and concordances to help them understand God's Word. I've discipled people who were not great readers, but who have learned to study the KJV just fine with little trouble. It's a myth that people can not understand it. It's more than a myth... it's a lie. Having to rely on a dictionary from time to time is a GOOD thing because it means they are taking the time to understand and not just read.
And besides, the questioned as it was posed on this thread was about what Bible to give to NEW CONVERTS. So we are talking about people who are already saved.
Krispy
Krisp,
Thanks for sharing that. I know you have a true heart for christ. I also went to a Word of faith church for about 6 months, and was taught the same stuff as you were about slain in spirit, tongues etc. However, I dont feel that if someone reads another version of the bible, they are in error. My church (calvary chapel) uses NASB, however I use KJV, and the NKJV, and many people get fed by all of them. I will never question my pastor on this issue.
I appreciate your sincere concern on this subject, but we will have to agree to disagree.
god bless ya krispy
If you attend a Calvary Chapel Church, then you should check out a couple sermons by Chuck Smith concerning his stance in favor of the KJV. I know CC is not dogmatic on it, but Chuck Smith explains why he believes the modern versions (and he particularly rails against the NIV) are corrupt. Quite interesting.
Here's the link:
http://server.firefighters.org/kjv/html/sermons.htm
The sermons you'll want to download are:
[b]The Basis For Our Bible
Foundation of the Word, Parts I & II
Krispy
Thanks Krispy, I will check them out
God Bless
I don't there is any problem giving a new convert a KJV. You hand it to them, tell them to read it, believe it, and live it, and they won't have any problem with it. It is billed as "hard to read" b/c Americans can't read. TV has made us stupid. It has nothing to do with the antiquity of the language. The NASB and NRSV are in "common" English but are still billed as 11th-12th grade reading level. Nonsense. Ravenhill told a story of elementary students reciting entire OT books.
Besides, if it's challenging but you believe it to be the Word of God, you will study it harder.
I really wouldn't recommend NIV b/c if later in life they pick up a NASB or KJV, they will notice drastic changes and entire passages will take on different meanings than what they learned as a babe in Christ (for proof, pick up a NASB/NIV/Greek Interlinear and read through some of Paul's epistles).
I also wouldn't touch the Message or NLT with a 40 ft. pole.
So anywho, I'd give out the good ol' KJV (NASB or NKJV are good as well).
Hi Krispy...
I have actually had a similar experience. I was saved after reading a passage in an NIV (Matthew 11:28-30). But the Church that I attended was primarily a KJV Church. From time to time, someone would preach a sermon about the supremacy of the KJV, and how other versions were severely flawed. Of course, the "sources" they used were questionable in nature. However, as a young believer, I simply "listened to what I was told." However, I did notice some inconsistencies in the sources. As I grew and matured as a believer, I began to question many of the things that I had been taught. One of those things concerned the supremacy of the KJV.However, as I grew in the Lord I came to a place where I rejected both the NIV (and other modern versions) AND the Word of Faith doctrines. But for several years I was taught rank heresy in that church. I was taught the "name it and claim it" doctrine, I was taught that God doesnt want any believers to be sick and all we needed to be healed was enough faith, I was taught that being slain in the Spirit was scriptural (even tho it's never mentioned in scripture), I was taught that tongues was a required sign of being Baptised in the Spirit, I was encouraged to read Benny Hinn's garbage, etc etc.
I studied this extensively while still in High School, but I was limited to the sources available at the local University library and archives. But I have continued studying this matter ever since. Over the last year, I have actually spent quite a bit of time studying both sides of this issue. My conclusion is that there has not been enough credible source material to prove the superiority of the KJV (and the Textus Receptus) over other serious academic versions like the NIV or NASB (and the sources that they used). There is alot of biased material that seems to be speculation based upon more speculation. Yet I found very little (if any) credible source material that seemed to indicate flaws within the sources used in the NIV. In my opinion, it is simply a different set of source texts. My conclusion has been that the KJV is a wonderful translation taken from the Textus Receptus (although it is slightly archaic in its linguistic usage -- whereas many individuals find it difficult to understand). I also feel that the NIV is a good academic translation taken from the other sources.
It is impossible to ignore the fact that many people have difficulty with the early 17th century language of the KJV. Many of those old English words have changed their commonly accepted meaning. In fact, if you were to look up the word KNOW (or KNEW, etc., as found in passages like Matthew 1:25) in an American dictionary, you will hardly find a dictionary that proclaims it as referring to [i]sexual intercourse
My girlfriend (Mireya) was born in Mexico. Her family immigrated legally to the United States when she was still a child, and her parents do not speak English very well. Mireya's entire family worked as migrant workers nearly all of their lives, but every one of her nine siblings graduated from college (with the exception of the two youngest that are still attending high school). Mireya earned a Bachelors degree in Bilingual Education (with a minor in Math) and a Masters Degree in Peninsular Literature. She currently works as a teacher, but she taught for two years at the University. Yet Mireya often has difficulty with the English found in the King James Version. She does not tend to find that it is verbally "poetic" or "majestic." Rather, she feels that it is simply English that is [u]difficult
During our Bible Studies, she felt that using the KJV often turned into a time-consuming 17th Century English lesson. So, she borrowed an NIV Bible from her little sister. She told me that it revolutionized her understanding of Scripture in English. She still studies the Word using a Spanish-language Bible that was originally published years before the KJV. But as the Spanish language has changed drastically (even more so than English), she tends to use modern "revised editions" of the same version. I have explained to her the differences in versions, as well as the arguments from both sides of the Bible translation debate. And of course, we still often read the Scriptures from the KJV during some of our Bible studies. The Church that we attend usually reads the Word from a Spanish translation.
The original question posed by deltadom concerned which Bible translations we would recommend to new converts that are not good at reading. The intent of the translators of the KJV stated explicitly that they wanted a version of the Bible that would be understandable by the most common of men (Section 5 of the Preface). They stated:
To the translators, they considered the fact that the Church of Rome had terribly forced people to rely on"Translation it is that openeth the window, to let in the light; that breaketh the shell, that we may eat the kernel; that putteth aside the curtain, that we may look into the most holy place; that removeth the cover of the well, that we may come by the water, even as Jacob rolled away the stone from the mouth of the well, by which means the flocks of Laban were watered [Gen.29:10]. Indeed, without translation into the vulgar (common) tongue, the unlearned are but like children at Jacob's well (which was deep) [John 4:11] without a bucket or something to draw with: or as that person mentioned by Isaiah, to whom when a sealed book was delivered, with this motion, Read this, I pray thee, he was fain {compelled by circumstances} to make this answer, I cannot, for it is sealed. [Isa.29:11]"...
"We affirm and avow, that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English, set forth by men of our profession... contains the Word of God, nay, is the Word of God. Though it be not interpreted by every Translator with like grace, the King's speech is still the King's speech; no cause therefore why the word translated should be denied to be the word, or forbidden to be currant, notwithstanding that some imperfections and blemishes may be noted in the setting forth of it."
Interestingly, the translators of the KJV sometimes actually quoted verses from"Another thing we think good to admonish thee of, gentle reader, that we have not tied ourselves to an uniformity of phrasing, or to an identity of words, as some peradventure would wish that we had done, because they observe that some learned men somewhere have been as exact as they could that way. Truly, that we might not vary from the sense of that which we had translated before, if the word signified the same thing in both places [polushma.] (for there be some words that be not of the same sense everywhere) we were especially careful, and made a conscience, according to our duty. But that we should express the same notion in the same particular word; as, for example, if we translate the Hebrew or Greek word once by purpose, never to call it intent; if one where journeying, never travelling; if one where think, never suppose; if one where pain, never ache; if one where joy, never gladness, etc.; thus to mince the matter, we thought to savour more of curiosity than wisdom, and that rather it would breed scorn in the atheist than bring profit to the godly reader. For is the kingdom of God become words or syllables? Why should we be in bondage to them, if we may be free? use one precisely when we may use another no less fit as commodiously?
But we desire that the Scripture may speak like itself, as in the language of Canaan, that it may be understood even of the very vulgar."[i]Section 17 of the Preface[/i]
Does the KJV still live up to the intent of the translators? Are the words and grammar contained in it understood by vulgar (commen) men? Some individuals would honestly say no. They are by no means saying that the KJV is no longer needed or a viable source. But if a poor reader cannot understand the language of the version, why is it not plausible to find (or if necessary, to create) a translation that is better understood today? If you do not accept the NIV or NASB due to a belief that its translations or sources are flawed, that is your own viable conclusion, and you should act accordingly. I actually feel safe in giving different versions of the Scriptures to individuals based upon their reading level (whether this is English, Spanish, etc...). Since I feel safe with the NIV, I feel secure enough to give it to individuals that I feel could learn from it.
:-)
With the bible I would love it to be cheap enough to get everyone in each door not only in book form but audio form aswell.
As I do not have much money, I have been thinking about resources that help people, how to get it cheaper the bible and how to get the price down, as paper is the main resource.
What I have also wanted is something to get people from a new believer to a firm strong christian.
It would be nice to download the whole of sermonindex and other books and have them all in one resource.
Everything we make is available for free because of a generous community of supporters.
Donate