I read somewhere that R.C. Sproul originally wanted to use the NIV for the Geneva Study Bible, but then reluctantly settled for the NKJV. I have noticed, now that I have a little collection of reformed books, that the majority of them use the NIV for their scriptural references. Authors such as Ferguson, Riddlebarger, Dever, Guiness, Ryken, Boice, Bridges, Pratt and Sproul all have books that primarily use the NIV.

So I was wondering if this were a personal author’s selection of translation? Or does it have to do more with which translation was easier for them to use in their book as far as copy rights and all?

Now I’m just a simple layman and I know very little about the original manuscripts and proper translation methods. But I have taken a look at some online interlinear bibles (I believe both Textus Receptus and Alexandrian texts) and It doesn’t take long for me to see why I prefer a more literal translation. I am not going to point out any versus that are questionable but It seems to me that when it comes to more important versus in my opinion for doctrinal purposes that the KJV, ASV, NKJV and NASB are the translations that most closely represent the original texts.

The more I see the differences between the literal English translations and that of the dynamic equivalent and paraphrased translations, the more I am just naturally drawn to reject the non-literal English translations.

In my opinion, when it comes to the essentials of the gospel, the more literal translations are quite understandable for even small children. So why go with a thought for thought approach?

Anyway, even though, I most likely will never come to use the KJV as my primary bible (only because I’m not comfortable with its style of old English) I have taken a liking to the ASV very much and use it with the unrevised NASB as my bibles. In fact I have come to appreciate and enjoy the readability of the more literal styles much more then the dynamic equivalent styles.

So my question is, why do you suppose that so many reformed authors continue to use the NIV for their books? Is it because they believe that the more literal translations are just a turn off or too hard to understand? <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/shrug.gif" alt="" />

Dave.

Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. - Galatians 2:16