/lit/ - Literature

>>13909390
The original languages, otherwise King James version

Douay-Rheims desu

>>13909390
Objectively speaking, the original Hebrew-Greek Bible. But for English-speakers, Douay-Rheims. Douay-Rheims + Latin Vulgate is ideal for Western Christians though. Catholics should know a good deal of Latin.

>>13909402
>>13909395
I mean sure if you're catholic, but generally speaking for literary value can't beat KJV.

>>13909436
Naturally, since Protestantism is more widespread in the English-speaking world and KJV is a protestant Bible. But OP's question was which Bible is the best. Suffice it to say that a protty Bible, however influential among heretics, objectively speaking cannot be the /best/.

World English Bible or New Heart English Bible.

>>13909449
But many Catholic and Orthodox people use KJV (among other versions too of course)

>>13909482
And many billionaires call themselves Christian.

>>13909482
And there are many Catholics who support abortion, not sure what your point is

>>13909482
They're misinformed then. Douay-Rheims is the standard in English for Catholics. But as I said, all Catholics should be learning Latin and reading the Vulgate. That's the standard for all Catholics regardless of tongue.

>>13909497
KJV is a useful translation for understanding the bible? Which is why its used by Orthodox/Catholics. If I am wrong can you explain why, I am not an expert but rather pointing out what I have observed.

>>13909512
KJV is only useful if you want to interact with protty art/culture, which is sometimes worth the effort (people exaggerate how much this will actually help you; it'll just make direct quotes from KJV more recognizable). I'm only trying to stress that Douay-Rheims is better and should be read FIRST.

>>13909390
Authorized Version 1611

>>13909512
Because it was translated by Protestant theologians and therefore contains error? Saying that it's useful for understanding the Bible is ridiculous from a Catholic point of view. Why would you read a Protestant interpretation of the Bible when there are authorized Catholic Bibles?

>>13909514
Thanks. I actually started the DR bible because I wanted to read a real Catholic bible (though there seem to be other more popular Catholic translations). I was misinformed and it appears that Orthodox members seem to enjoy the KJV and NKJV versions for some reason?

>>13909393
>>13909436
>>13909482
>>13909512
KJV is flooded with grammatical errors, whoever translated it was a brainlet. I'll give examples.

Let's take the Lord's Prayer:
"Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name."
>which art
This depersonalizes God, treats him like a non-living object. Douay-Rheims uses "who art" here, which is suitable for a personal God.

"Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven."
>in earth
Geez, this is an embarrassing error. IN earth?? Really? Ah, but obviously the spacial-location to which Jesus was referring was not inside the earth, humans don't live there. Douay-Rheims renders this "on earth", which is most logical.

"Give us this day our daily bread."
>daily bread
Douay-Rheims renders this as "supersubstantial bread", highlighting that this "bread" is the metaphysical stuff of life! The flesh of the Blessed Sacrament, and therefore supernatural bread that fuels all life on earth. This error can be forgiven though since St. Luke made it too.

Next line is fine.

"And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen."
Translation added a bunch of stuff to Jesus' words here, which is a sin. Douay-Rheims ends with "from evil."

Anyways as you can see KJV seems like it was written by a peasant; it's full of grammatical errors, liberties taken by the translator(s), and things that take away from the full metaphysical depth of the text. These are just a few lines! Almost every line contains such faults! Sad! Protties are heretics but with Bibles like this they don't stand a chance.

>>13909552
Imbecile.

>>13909528
See >>13909552.
>>13909531
I think there is an Orthodox Study Bible which uses the NKJV for the New Testament. This Bible hasn't been approved by the Eastern Orthodox Church from what I know. There are Catholics Bibles that aren't approved either. I know at least some Orthodox have rejected that study Bible because its NT is protty. The Orthodox are hardcore and I don't think they've accepted any English translation of the Bible. From what I've heard, they've only recognized the Greek translation of the Old Testament and the Original Greek NT. Maybe some other translations, I don't know. English-speaking Orthodox can probably find a better translation of the Bible than that popular NKJV study Bible. (If any Orthodox anon can correct me on any of this, go ahead, I'm not an expert on Eastern Orthodox).

>>13909568
Good counter-argument, heretic.

>>13909584
Orthodox churches in America will use the KJV for liturgy in English since it comes from the same text line tradition they use

>>13909587
>worships a wafer
>calls me a heretic

>>13909552

How do those compare to the original Greek? It's obvious that Catholics would prefer a Catholic translation, and that they would claim this is reason enough for its superiority; as primitive as they are arrogant. But I'd like to hear the explanation for "supersubstantial bread".

>>13909598
>Every Christian from the 1st century to the Renaissance was a heretic

>>13909622
The original Greek here is "tòn árton hēmôn tòn epioúsion"; "árton" is bread. "Epioúsion" is rendered by KJV as "daily", but by St. Jerome as "supersubstantial."

If you break the word down, you get "epi", as in "on, upon, in addition to" and "ousía" as in "substance, nature" and some other meanings. Saint Jerome gave a somewhat literal translation with "supersubstantialem" ("above-substance, meta-physical"). I think he captured the meaning quite nicely. The bread is that which supernaturally feeds us, the life given to us by God himself, and the power related to the Blessed Sacrament. "Daily" doesn't capture the meaning well enough.

>>13909552
>supersubstantial bread
Wtf do papists really holy shit LMAO

>>13909686
See >>13909680. It's the best translation of the Greek, not that you'd care about faithfulness, heretic.

>>13909694

>>13909698
Wtf I'm a Catholic now.

>>13909686
That's the rendering given in Matthew. I'm not >>13909680, but see that post. We say "daily bread" during the Our Father at Mass (or "panem quotidianum" at Latin Mass).

>>13909698
Holy shit its real
>as Jesus takes a break from feeding, the Virgin squeezes her breast and he is hit with a squirt of milk, often shown travelling an impressive distance. The milk was variously said to have given him wisdom, shown that the Virgin was his mother (and that of mankind generally), or cured an eye infection.

>>13909698
Shit bait and low-quality propaganda.

>>13909704
Actually based.

>>13909705
Those are actually venerated saints of your cult lmao

>>13909680

Since "ousia" itself is already metaphysical, not meaning substance in the Empirical or "worldly" sense but in the "Platonic" sense, wouldn't the "epi" mean redundancy, as in superfluous to the metaphysical, as in "worldly", as in daily?

>>13909711
Some of that is outright false and the true parts of it are blatantly misrepresented using vulgar language in order to slander good people who dedicated their lives to God. You should be ashamed of yourself. And you also forget that Saints have often been the greatest victims of diabolic activity. No doubt if something strange happened to them, the purpose is to deceive weak-minded people like you into abandoning Christ's mission on earth or else denying the authority of the Church founded by Christ himself.

>>13909720
>his cult murders Jan Hus
>tells me I should be ashamed
lmao

>>13909720
>Church founded by Christ himself.
The one in the Holy Bible or the Roman Catholic Church?

>>13909719
>Since "ousia" itself is already metaphysical
I don't think that's the case. The word has had many meanings, but the most common in Koine Greek was "substance" as in physical substance. Maybe if it was written in Ancient Greek where the word had more commonly used meanings like "essence", I would agree with you.

>>13909724
>>13909729
Poor bait.

>>13909737