Best English Language Bible?

godfather dust

Ostrich
Gold Member
I'm a King James man going way back (like the dramatic prose.)

What is the most faithful to the original material though?

If there are better Old and New Testaments list them. Break it down even further (this is the best Gospel, these are the best versions of Paul's writing etc) if necessary.

I've also heard the Orthodox use more than 66 books. Thoughts?
 

Mage

 
If you really believe that Bible is the word of God then you must do your best to learn ancient Hebrew and Greek.

All those people who are Bible thumpers but don't care to master original languages are hypocrites.
 

Super_Fire

Kingfisher
Mage said:
If you really believe that Bible is the word of God then you must do your best to learn ancient Hebrew and Greek.

All those people who are Bible thumpers but don't care to master original languages are hypocrites.

Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.

:angel:
 

Tex Cruise

Kingfisher
Super_Fire said:
Paracelsus said:
PM AnonymousBosch, he reckons he spent the last 6 months looking into different Biblical versions and who influenced them.

Please post publicly if you do.

Don't post PMs publicly without permission.

I've been reading World English Bible online lately. I find it nice and easy to read. Is it reasonably accurate though? I've been meaning to try and get a paperback copy just for ease of reading (outside, in bed etc).
 

Bolly

Pelican
Mage said:
If you really believe that Bible is the word of God then you must do your best to learn ancient Hebrew and Greek.

All those people who are Bible thumpers but don't care to master original languages are hypocrites.


Totally false, and I would go so far as to illogical. This is the same argument Muslims put forth saying "in order to truly understand the Qur'an you must learn Arabic."

If God wanted his message to be exclusive to one people, one region of the world and in only one language, he wouldn't have dispersed people into nations and confounding their languages. The Gospel would be difficult to give and follow God's order to spread it to the world if at first you had to sit people down and say "oh but first you need to learn ancient Hebrew and be a part of our elite linguistic club."

God can do everything but somehow couldnt successfully get his message to the people of the world in each of their respective languages? I don't think so.

Someone above mentioned God controls everything as if we're puppets. People do some pretty sick and twisted shit. Is God controlling a cracked out mother who throws her baby onto the freeway? If God controls everything he's one sick son of a bitch. We have free will. But thats off topic.
 

heavy

Hummingbird
Gold Member
My dad was a preacher, and a pretty obsessed one about historical integrity (he nerded out on it, his only hobby).

He always said, while we all had NIV bibles because they were the most common, the NASB was the most accurate when referenced to all his concordances and dictionaries.
 

YoungBlade

Hummingbird
Spectrumwalker said:
Mage said:
If you really believe that Bible is the word of God then you must do your best to learn ancient Hebrew and Greek.

All those people who are Bible thumpers but don't care to master original languages are hypocrites.

If God wanted his message to be exclusive to one people, one region of the world and in only one language, he wouldn't have dispersed people into nations and confounding their languages. The Gospel would be difficult to give and follow God's order to spread it to the world if at first you had to sit people down and say "oh but first you need to learn ancient Hebrew and be a part of our elite linguistic club."

Then Jesus said to the woman, "I was sent only to help God's lost sheep--the people of Israel."

Matthew 15:24
 

rotekz

Ostrich
Gold Member
I didn't know which to get so started out with the C.S.Lewis NRSV, then acquired an Oxford NIV Schofield Study Bible and now have The Orthodox Study Bible as I'm leaning that way.
 

debeguiled

Peacock
Gold Member
If God wanted to, he could reach you with fortune cookies and candy hearts.

His spirit reaches men in many ways and can flow through any Bible as long as it isn't designed to deceive.

On person connects with the grandeur of the language of the King James.

Another might need the accessibility of the New Living Bible.

It is easy to get into the mindset of the Bible as just another text to read and debate about.

Or to nitpick over phrasings and definitions of specific words.

Spectrumwalker is on the right track.

God is for everybody, Jesus is for everybody, the Bible is for everybody.

The muscular Christianity of the people saying you have to know Aramaic or Hebrew or Greek is not in line with the spirit of Jesus at all. It is more of a way to discourage people or make them doubt themselves and the veracity of their spiritual experiences.

I have read accounts, long ago, sorry no references, of missionaries who had translate the Bible for aboriginal people who had never even seen a sheep. So how do you describe the Lamb of God?

Many problems like this crop up when you try to communicate spiritual truths to different people of the world. These missionaries made many changes and paraphrases in order to reach the people they were ministering to in language and metaphor they could understand.

According to an academic Biblical scholar, these Bibles are highly inaccurate and to be dismissed.

According to the spreading of the good news of the gospels, a long way from home, in trial and sacrifice, leaving all that you know to reach out to an alien people and share with them the most important thing you know, these translations of the Bible are more valuable than a million translations worked out in comfy reading rooms of respected universities by dusty scholars who don't like their routines interrupted.

These translations are more valuable than a perfect Greek gospel written down a day after the Ascension which no one can read.

Jesus said, "Follow me."

He also made the point of describing the kingdom of God with many different metaphors and similies, and sometimes he would even say, as if having exhausted his creativity, in Mark 30:

What shall we say the kingdom of God is like, or what parable shall we use to describe it?

That was NIV.

Would it be better with the New Living Translation?

How can I describe the Kingdom of God? What story should I use to illustrate it?

Or the English Standard Version?

With what can we compare the kingdom of God, or what parable shall we use for it?

Are these differences really worth being concerned with? Jesus was trying out all sorts of different ways of communicating an overarching truth so he could connect with the different sensibilities of different people, not so we could argue over whether faith is a mustard seed or the ability to calm the waves and walk on water.

Sometimes I think people get so wrapped up in the minutia of textual analysis that the miss the forest, the forest being Jesus, and the spiritual concepts he is trying to convey, the personal connection he is trying to make.

My favorite Bible is a paraphrase Bible, and it is my favorite because when I was a teenager who didn't feel like anyone cared about him, a local youth pastor took me aside before a meeting and gave me a copy of the Bible telling me how special it was for him.

Which is more important? The accuracy or the connection with a person who in turn connects another person to Jesus?

Knowing Hebrew or making a pimply kid feel noticed?

What is the spirit of this whole enterprise, and what is really important?
 

Mage

 
Super_Fire said:
Mage said:
If you really believe that Bible is the word of God then you must do your best to learn ancient Hebrew and Greek.

All those people who are Bible thumpers but don't care to master original languages are hypocrites.

Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.

:angel:

I admit I can't read that, but I don't hold Bible as the highest or only source of truth. If I decided to bet my everlasting life on Bible holding a truth not found anywhere else I would learn original languages. I actually plan to learn some Hebrew in future when I have more free time. Not interested in Greek parts of Bible that much.

Spectrumwalker said:
Totally false, and I would go so far as to illogical. This is the same argument Muslims put forth saying "in order to truly understand the Qur'an you must learn Arabic."

If God wanted his message to be exclusive to one people, one region of the world and in only one language, he wouldn't have dispersed people into nations and confounding their languages. The Gospel would be difficult to give and follow God's order to spread it to the world if at first you had to sit people down and say "oh but first you need to learn ancient Hebrew and be a part of our elite linguistic club."

God can do everything but somehow couldnt successfully get his message to the people of the world in each of their respective languages? I don't think so.

Someone above mentioned God controls everything as if we're puppets. People do some pretty sick and twisted shit. Is God controlling a cracked out mother who throws her baby onto the freeway? If God controls everything he's one sick son of a bitch. We have free will. But thats off topic.

I also believe that God can reach everyone, regardless of language, but that only means that the truth is found outside religions that rely on single book. So we both have the same theses but arrive to different conclusions. We both understand the limitations on scripture based religion, but while you double down on it - I seek broader alternatives.

Both Christianity and Islam uses the language argument for the same purpose. Muslims want the power center of their faith to remain in Arabia, while Catholics trough Latin and Orthodox trough Church-Slavonic want to retain the source of power within Rome and Constantinople/Moscow respectively.

Bible certainly holds deep insights and truths, but much is lost in translation and much is twisted in traditional as well as modern translations. I believe that all of these truths can be learned trough other spiritual practices as well and religions interpreting books don't have monopoly.
 

godfather dust

Ostrich
Gold Member
rotekz said:
I didn't know which to get so started out with the C.S.Lewis NRSV, then acquired an Oxford NIV Schofield Study Bible and now have The Orthodox Study Bible as I'm leaning that way.

The Schofield Bible is a satanic Zionist trick Bible. It is the reason many "Christians" believe we exist to serve Jews and should start WW3 on Israel's behalf.
 

debeguiled

Peacock
Gold Member
godfather dust said:
rotekz said:
I didn't know which to get so started out with the C.S.Lewis NRSV, then acquired an Oxford NIV Schofield Study Bible and now have The Orthodox Study Bible as I'm leaning that way.

The Schofield Bible is a satanic Zionist trick Bible. It is the reason many "Christians" believe we exist to serve Jews and should start WW3 on Israel's behalf.

I have heard this before. Any links?
 

AnonymousBosch

Crow
Gold Member
YoungBlade said:
Then Jesus said to the woman, "I was sent only to help God's lost sheep--the people of Israel."

Matthew 15:24

Also Mark 23:30.

This is a selective interpretation, taken completely out of context from the text around it. Keep reading.

Note the woman in question is identified as both Greek and Canaanite, a tribe previously-marked in the Old Testament for extermination by the Jews. Jesus has retired into the Gentile Territory of Tyre and Sidon after challenging the Pharisees, where his safety is not guaranteed due to the Canaanites being known by readers of the era as being bitter enemies with the Jews.

A conflict is expected by readers, and inevitable.

Seemingly out of character, Jesus calls her a 'Dog' when she begs for a demon to be cast out of her daughter. Note that this was a Jewish Insult, for the animals were thought of as being 'unclean'. Also note, that this incident happens directly after Jesus challenges the Scribes and Pharisees on matters of ritual 'cleanliness' at the start of the Chapter, leading to the teaching of Verse 11:

"Not that which entereth into the mouth defileth a man, but that which proceedeth out of the mouth, that defileth a man".

So, with this context already in place, and the reader understanding this, he dismisses the woman as 'unclean', and therefore, not worthy of his care.

But, there's a twist.

Due to the doggedness of the woman's faith; her humility (where wisdom grows as promised by the Holy Spirit); her lack of anger in being denied in her hour of need; and her quick wit, she - not Jesus for once - gets the last word, which similarly offers him enlightenment. Understanding that she speaks the Truth, he is humbled (and, with that, wiser), so he expels the demon from her daughter.

She has, in her humble way and knowing not the former context, reminded him to practice what he just preached so as not to be a Hypocrite. (I've often noticed the Father has a way of setting these kind of incidents up to humble us soon after any admissions of our own virtue).

An important point to remember, seeded throughout other points in the Old Testament: the Lord can change his mind due to the pleas and arguments of the Faithful. Remember also, that Jesus' Wounds in his hands and his side continue to exist even in Heaven, as an enduring plea for mercy on our behalf to the Father.

Understanding all of this, this incident with the Woman seems to be a key turning point in the Ministry of Jesus. Note how the Chapter ends: he feeds the Multitudes.

Do you see the logic now in why these three incidents, in progression, form a complete Chapter?

Later, he similarly heals the Centurions son for his great faith, to the concern of his Apostles, since the Romans wee oppressing the Jews; then, with his Passion close at hand, tells the Parable of the Wicked Husbandmen in the Temple to the Pharisees, saying that their consistent rejection of their Lord's Prophets and now, the Son - understand that 'stone' also meant 'Son' in Hebrew - means the Kingdom will now be taken from them and given to others; creates a New Covenant at the Last Supper for all men who believe in him and 'signs' it with his Passion, (as the Blood Sacrifice); and then, after his resurrection, enlightens his Apostles with the Holy Spirit and dispatches them to the four corners of the earth to preach the good news to all nations.

All of this follows logically from the words of the Canaanite Woman.

Understand one sentence is just part of the whole. It's important to note the patterns and progression of events.

----

Give me some time, I'll write up the Bible research I can remember, including the Scofield, the Westcott-Hort, and the dangers of any 'multi-faith' interpretation. It's hard though, in that it's not just a question of WHICH, it's the progression of experience that lead me to the WHY.
 

debeguiled

Peacock
Gold Member
This all operates on many levels.

Jesus wasn't being taught not to be a hypocrite, he was providing an opportunity for a person to display great faith.

He was also shaming his fellow Jews by showing that outsiders had more faith than they.

He was also taking away bullshit excuses later down the road for the Jews. They couldn't say he never gave them a chance because in several places he says that he has come specifically for them.

He is also setting up the ultimate meaning of his parable of the banquet where the guests don't come so he goes out into the streets and invites whoever is out there.

There is just so much going on with any single verse, including ways that we aren't even aware of, that trying to contradict someone else's argument by quoting a single verse at them almost never works, tempting thought it is.
 

rotekz

Ostrich
Gold Member
godfather dust said:
rotekz said:
I didn't know which to get so started out with the C.S.Lewis NRSV, then acquired an Oxford NIV Schofield Study Bible and now have The Orthodox Study Bible as I'm leaning that way.

The Schofield Bible is a satanic Zionist trick Bible. It is the reason many "Christians" believe we exist to serve Jews and should start WW3 on Israel's behalf.
I didn't know that before I bought it but after seeing Brother Nathaniel slate it I bought the Orthodox Study Bible instead.
 

rotekz

Ostrich
Gold Member
debeguiled said:
godfather dust said:
rotekz said:
I didn't know which to get so started out with the C.S.Lewis NRSV, then acquired an Oxford NIV Schofield Study Bible and now have The Orthodox Study Bible as I'm leaning that way.

The Schofield Bible is a satanic Zionist trick Bible. It is the reason many "Christians" believe we exist to serve Jews and should start WW3 on Israel's behalf.

I have heard this before. Any links?
 
Top