I grew up with D-R, too, which always seemed a little weird – it spells “Noah” as “Noe”, for instance, and the rendering of the Our Father isn’t the same as the KJV that even us Catholic kids used.
When the New English Bible became available, with its more direct translation from the originalsI got it immediately, and have used it ever since.
I have a variety of other translations around, as well, but generally use the NEB.
I own the NRSV, Oxford Annotated Study Bible, which I use for reading and study. I still enjoy reading the King James Version at times.
Mostly New King James- it keeps the rhythm of the KJV while updating the language. Plus, I have a preference for the traditional Greek text underlying it. Too much gets omitted in the more critical Greek text NTs.
For DeuteroCanonical/Apocryphal books, I lean to the RSV. For Catholic translations, I prefer the Jerusalem/New J… to the New American.
I have both the 1917 & modern Jewish Publication Society Tanakh & check those off & on. I wish Everett Fox would complete the Prophets & the Writings- I love his Torah!
Gotta admit to some fondness for the Greek-English Interlinear Christian Scriptures published by the Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is honest in showing where the literal English translation differs from their New World Translation.
In English, RSV/ Gospel of Thomas – Lambdin translation, both at
http://www.utoronto.ca/religion/synopsis/
I don’t usually need the other books (not a believer-- professional research needs); I cross reference with Vulgate for usage (I work on 15th/16th c things, so also Lutherbibel every now and then)
capybara, if you consult Luther’s German translation maybe you can answer a question for me. I’m not a true linguist, although I’ve studied other languages.
The KJV of the Bible had a tremendous influence on the development of the English language. Did Luther’s translation have a similar effect on the development of the way German was used/spoken/written.?
My default used to be NIV, but our preacher prefers to preach from the English Standard Version, so for continuity’s sake, I stick with that one. I also use The Message a lot for posting quotes on Facebook, but seldom do study from it. I do not care for King James, simply because it’s archaic and I would rather study in modern language to easily absorb what I study.
I can’t speak to the German situation but the Dutch equivalent of the KJV would be the *Statenbijbel (1637), or Bible of the Estates. The language from that translation, which served as the basic text for protestant Christians for well over two centuries, shaped and unified the Dutch language. A great deal of modern day idiomderives from that text, although apparently effects on spelling and grammar were not as pronounced (more here).
For speakers of modern Dutch, the Statenbijbel is no longer accessible - including, obviously, the very title 
For those interested, the whole thing including all the translators’ sidenotes in the original first edition has been digitalized and transcribed and can be accessed here.
Baker, sorry but I’m not a German language scholar and couldn’t tell you. I would bet that it standardized some usages, however. And, as with the English translations, some translated bits in these other languages were not uncontroversial (I’ve looked into the various word choice/ division of the ten commandments and the effect on ideas about idolatry in some of the 16th c sects, for example)
I liked the NIV until the 2011 update. It’s not that I object to the update, but that I pretty much grew up on the older NIV and the slight discrepancies just mess with me. I still quote from the NIV, though, because it’s the only popular non-KJV version for which I know the copyright requirements. (Include “(NIV)” after the reference and don’t quote more than 10% of any chapter.) And I do like the scholarship and always read the forwards and stuff.
I do the same as FriarTed with the NKJV. It has some of the beauty of the language, but it is updated both in language and in scholarship. I’d love to have a fully annotated KJV version, like you would with Shakespeare or Alice in Wonderland or similar. But it would also have to indicate bad translations.
The LOLcat Bible always does make giggle, though. It helps when you review parts of the Bible you have a good working knowledge of. An interlinear Bible with that “translation” would probably make it funnier.
I use the New English Translation (NET) Bible. The two things I love about it is 1) it uses English without antiquated or archaic colloquialisms. And 2) it has very extensive notes on how it was translated.
I grew up with KJV, currently use several parallel Bibles (both electronic and paper-based) that offer 10+ versions side-by-side.
I have a couple of other interesting resources, though, for those times that I want to delve deep; a Jewish ex-g/f fluent in Hebrew and steeped in pretty deep study (though never going for Kaballah), and a friend who is pastor of an SBC church, who is serviceable in Hebrew, fluent in Aramaic and Greek, with pretty substantial knowledge of historical shifts in the languages. He’s very conscious about comparing sources and admitting ambiguities, she often reveals subtexts or interpretations new to both him and me. (As for what he preaches in church, NIV is the basic text, but he goes into depth I’ve rarely heard other pastors do. I always wonder what his church members think, as it’s often pretty esoteric or academic, a big change from the fire-and-brimstone of their old pastor… And no surprise that he moonlights as a philosophy lecturer at a local university.).
So, I get (through the filters of friends) access to original-language sources.
He and I rarely see eye-to-eye, but we approach study/debate as an academic thing. And the ex-g/f was an academic partnership gone (briefly) romantic, so we have that academic thing there as well. Pretty nice to have my friends as another parallel Bible.
KJV for the flowery “biblical” language
NIV for actually trying to read and comprehend