/lit/ - Literature

>>17700690
no, i have two.

>>17700690
Have any of you guys bought this edition from book depository. Is it nice? I really don't want something incredibly gaudy, but I still want a nice edition. It seems good but can anyone vouch for it.

All a man needs in life

>>17700708
I have that edition. It's pretty decent, nothing special. I'd personally invest in a really nice edition, like the Cambridge turquoise

the only bibles one should own is cambridge, RL allen, or schuyler

>>17700690
literally who cares about the binding

>>17700711
All my bibles (other than DBH) come from second hand bookshops

>>17700742
t. modern library hardcover purchaser

Yes my family has had this one for a while.

Who's copping?

>>17700751
Same. Got a 1977 nasb today for $2

>>17700690
And make sure you get an uncensored version. Many modern versions cut out most or all of the warthog-related passages.

>>17700762
lol i have a 1977 nasb as well, it's brown cover

>>17700767
Right now my search is for any ASV. They are entirely out of print, but I appreciate the use of thee/thou while using a modern wescott/hort textual base

nabre

>>17700765
What "warthog related passages"?

>>17700690
Sorry, as an illiterate member of the servile community, scripture is recited to me by members of the clergy. I can carry the gospels on in oral and musical tradition if necessary, but, because of my lack of formal education, I must rely on the mother Church's clerical hierarchy in order to gleam it's mysteries and sacraments. Now I must make haste to the cattle which have grown malcontent with my lapse in daily chores, blessed day.

>>17700854
Except that's entirely ahistorical, it took vernacular scripture for the average layman to memorize and recite scripture. That's literally the meaning of the name lollard.

>>17700869
Mine is not the historical assertion, by rather a dictation of the present. Further talk will cause my hand to be idle in work, and my termagant wife will have both our ears for it. My friend, these pigs will not corral themselves nor will the ground be tilled if my duties are further delayed. Blessed day.

>>17700690
wrapping the Lord's word in decaying flesh is disgusting

I just have a Gideon's Bible I got for free.
Don't really care for flashy things.

I have a 1968 Bible whose black spine has been almost completely washed out by the sun, and a 1925 edition that has fallen apart.
The former was owned by my grandfather, the latter by my great-grandmother. Both translations were of great cultural importance in my country. I also have a small New Testament in softcover with 2/3 of the pages taken up by commentary.
Basically, who cares about the binding? God would certainly care the least.

>>17701033
Leather binding has been a common thing since the antiquity.

>>17701053
>Leather binding has been a common thing since the antiquity.
How does that make it less disgusting? Shitting on the street has been around since antiquity

>>17701071
Actually, since the antiquity we've had sewers and toilets. Even in the worst times, I'm pretty sure that white people would rarely be forced to return to such practices.
Besides, the leather is not decaying, it's dried and can remain functional for centuries.
You sound like a v*get*rian.

All my bibles are paperbacks. Deal with it, fuckers.

>>17701106
>You sound like a v*get*rian
Based on the earliest historical Christian documents we have outside the bible so was Jesus.

>>17701156
Interesting! Got any sauce?

>>17701189
The earliest historical Christian documents outside of the Bible?

>>17701267
Which are? Which can be read where?

>>17700690
I have the Barnes & Noble, Doré illustrated, KJV bible

>>17700690
What's more important is to get a bible with the illustrations by Gustave Doré.

>>17700690
I have a bible from 1909 but the cover is just black leather, it's also a direct portuguese translation of the Vulgata

>>17700690
>ESV
>quality
dood

>>17701475
>I don't mean the translation I mean the book binding

>>17701370
are you a child? you can search "early Christian writings" and the second result after Wikipedia is called earlychristianwritings. There isn't just a single document, various ones describing Jesus and several apostles as a vegetarian.

>>17701512
>doesn't understand that i was to intend to say that there is no quality binding from ESV

they should make bigger bibles that aren't so wobbly imo

>>17700690
I really like the Ignatius Bible.

>>17700690
Average-tier desu, but I'm happy enough with it

>>17700854
>>17700940
Highly based post and probably providing grain for me as I type this

>>17701691
It looks nice, but
>RSV
oof

>>17701753
The RSV is a good translation, I like it.

>>17701552
>I'm not here to educate you!
Yep, it's a v*get*rian

>>17701753
The RSV is great, probably the best scholarly translation around without veering into political correctness like the NRSV or distorting the text due to theological bias (even though the RSV-2CE does that somewhat).

>>17700690
I have multiple bibles, but the study bible takes the most abuse, so the well made ones will last even longer

KJV Reformation Heritage Study Bible is very nice.

>>17700690
Of Course

idolaters

>>17700690
Yes.

>>17703397
God I hate protestants

>>17703122
Hey, very nice, I have that set too. They really are some beautiful books

I also have a comparative study bible, an old KJV, and a never NIV too

this is extremely soi, they should exclusively make cheap plain bibles, or else you get these “christians” you see here that obsess over and indulge in the quality and expense of their special book

>>17702444
>scholarly
jew

I'm not a consoomer but I'm really longing for this monster

>>17701564
As in Crossways, the ESV's copyright holder? Sure, you're right enough, Crossways makes average/ok Bibles, nothing stellar. However, you can get nicely bound ESV Bibles if it's not a Crossways-bound one.

>>17700690
I've had Allans and Cambridge bibles before but my favorite remains the TBS Westminster. It may be a paste down but its reinforced and it can't be beat at 80 usd. The Meriva calfskin is the same you get on an Allan.

>>17704430
>POOritan
Lmao

The nicest one I have is a readers edition of the Greek New Testament. It has a soft imitation leather so it feels nice but it's not something I can put in a pack. I'm looking for a small hardcover I can take on a hike.

The most expensive one I have is the Didache bible which was a waste of money because the commentary on the Old Testament is so sparse, and that's the only reason I bought it.

>>17700690
no, i have a paperback that some boomers gave to me one day on the street.

>>17700854
>>17700940
absolutely based

>>17704284
prove it. i'm waiting

>>17701802
We are on a literature board, I gave you something to read. Read it if you actually care, sad enough that you are unaware of some of the most important Christian texts to begin with.

>>17704844
https://www.bibles-direct.co.uk/products/?c=95
Here are some ESVs done by Allan, which is generally considered a very nice Bible
https://evangelicalbible.com/product-category/cambridge-bibles/esv-2/
Here are some ESVs done by Cambridge, including the Clarion, which is a nice Bible as well

>>17700706
If you're still here will you take a picture of the inside of the ESV? I'm looking for a good quality version to read cover to cover

>>17705018
not him but i highly recommend single column for long reading, if you haven't thought of that. It's so much more pleasant.

This one is very well made, not too big and looks very nice as well.

>>17705009
>https://www.bibles-direct.co.uk/products/?c=95
too flat, uninteresting and soulless for me, also those markers look fucking long
>https://evangelicalbible.com/product-category/cambridge-bibles/esv-2/
you already know it's from cambridge. terribly self-replicating

>>17704589
>he got filtered by the Puritans

>>17705041
Yeah that was my plan. Crossway makes a super high quality novel style edition of ESV but it's several hundred dollars

>>17705229
>>17705018
>>17705009
>>17704844
>>17704651
>>17704284
>>17704004
>>17703563
>>17703122
>>17702444
>>17701788
>>17701121
>>17701040
REMINDER: not all bibles lead you to truth, the newer translations are usually twisted

>>17705572

>>17705572
Spread the word

>>17705572
Mine is a Hebrew Bible so it doesn't have that verse or that book at all, so I don't have to worry about that.

>>17705590
>>17705606
this is infuriating and im not even particularly religious. altering texts, and Holy texts of all things, is vile.

>>17705572
σῳζομένοις
sōzomenois
present participle middle or passive - dative masculine plural
being saved
https://biblehub.com/greek/so_zomenois_4982.htm

We're doing Judges in bible study this week, made this for the occasion

*utterly mogs your bible in content and translation* there's an english version anons, you have no excuses

>>17705719
What is this specific translation called? I'm on the publisher Eunsa's site but I don't see anything in English.

>>17705645
You should be upset at these goofy protestants for misleading you. They're taking a small collection of late manuscripts and considering them a baseline for what the bible is, and then they try to argue that earlier manuscripts are wrong. This is while they're ignoring the very strong evidence that the manuscripts used for their KJV were corrupted and has verses added into it, like 1 John 5:7.

This is all pointless anyway because protestants have no intellectual foundation for scripture. For Catholics they initially consider scripture to be nothing more than historical documents which show Jesus Christ rising from the dead and founding an earthly Church and giving it the authority to determine which human writings also have God as its author. Protestants have no reason to consider any book scripture, they just assume it, so they really have no right to quibble over manuscripts. They have much bigger problems with the bible.

>>17705018
it's the wide-margin esv. great for taking notes

I have a goatskin ESV pocket Bible.
Just the right size for me.

>>17705645
The translations already altered them

>>17705590
>>17705572
>>17705606
Got anything further to say about this, besides pointing out that, dear God!, biblical textology and translation has developed over the last 400 years?

>>17705847
Now that's an idiotic hot take
Protestants and catholics alike consider scripture to be the very word of God at the time of writing, the autographs. Both profess inerrancy but protestants to a higher degree.
Both engage in textual criticism.

Roman catholics do not consider scripture to be merely a creation of their institution, obviously. Most of scripture predates the roman church. Midwit catholics on 4/pol/ and apparently here assume scripture is valid because the roman church says its so, which has never been the position of the catholic church.

>>17705827
navarre

>>17705919
Thanks fren. Looks neat.

>>17705606
kjv is the one at fault here. At the time they didn't have the much older and accurate historical documents we have today so it had some things that likely shouldn't be there. Also my RSV has those in footnotes. Pic related is footnote X for Matthew 17:21

>>17705896
Check yourself before calling somebody an idiot because you don't know how to read. Yes, Catholics and protestants consider scripture to also be written by God from the start, who said otherwise? I'm talking about how we know scripture is scripture and not just something written solely by man. Catholics INITIALLY take the position that these texts are historical documents which record the founding of a Church which then authenticates the writers to be scriptures. I'm talking about an intellectual process and protestants have no authority to appeal to and this is the point. This talk of textual criticism or inerrancy is irrelevant.

>Most of scripture predates the roman church
This is actually hilarious. The recognition of the inspiration of the books that make up the NT and their acceptance on a par with the OT developed gradually. The Catholic church needed to sift through more than 50 Gospels, 22 Acts and many other writings during the gradual process of determining which Christian writings should be included in the NT. This process was completed by a decree of Pope St. Damasus I in 383, and confirmed at the councils of Hippo in 393 and Carthage in 397 and 419. Subsequently, the councils of Second Nicea in 787, Florence in 1441, and Trent in 1546 approved the identical canon of the bible that Catholics still recognize today as divinely inspired. The Church made this determination by drawing on sacred tradition.

I want to get a high quality KJV, brown leather binding. Suggestions?

>>17706156
I have a KJV cameo from Cambridge, they make one with brown leather.

>>17700690
ye my book on how to be a pussy is leather as fk

I would like to buy one but I don't want to spend too much money and I don't want one in animal leather.

>>17706468
get a used cloth over board in your preferred translation

>>17706476
I was thinkin' about doing that, but those aren't always the most comfortable for me to read. I'll make the sacrifice if necessary.

>>17705652
I don't think that invalidates:

John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

Then tell me, when is someone saved? When does a Christian turn from" being" to "saved"?

>>17706595
First of all, we don't make translations based on theological presuppositions.

Salvation is an already and a not yet, in different senses. You're saved when you're born again. You will be saved eschatologically.
In this context "are saved" is wrong, but we don't rely on it being "are saved" to arrive at our doctrine of justification. Same situation as the johannine comma. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannine_Comma

I want to get a nice Charles XII bible but there are no Christians any longer in Sweden so there is also no bible industry.

>>17705893
Older translations are in agreement, while that shouldn't be entirely what someone relies on it definitely should be considered honestly.

>>17705659
none of the stoic parts apply to any part of stoic philosophy

>>17705968
blessed Ignatius Bible poster

>>17700690
Yeah man, got mine when I was properly put into the freemasons (3rd degree ceremony)

>>17706320
I was looking at maybe getting a paragraph layout one like the Clarion. Any thoughts? it seemed like since I'm not religious and would be (re)reading it mostly as a book, the paragraph single column would make more sense than verse

>>17705606
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vK5sNsl3OD8

I have the 19th century family bible that my family's births are recorded in, including mine.

>>17705606
>>17705968
Yeah mine has them all included in the footnotes.

>>17705645
any English translation is already so far removed from the original text that it doesn't matter

>>17706769
Denmark still has the state church right?

>>17708275
Our english translations are superior to the septuagint greek translation and that was good enough for Jesus

>>17705590
dude, stop spreading misinformation

>>17708421
then why are you crying about 'altering the text'

>>17700690
I downloaded the epub of the King James Bible from Project Gutenberg

>>17708592
I'm not, that's an onlyist retard

Why no; in fact, I have the Torah. Why do you ask?

>>17700690
I ordered a lightly used RSV-CE bible for 10$ I thought was just paperback on ebay but I ended up with a stitch bound one. It was a pleasant surprise. Other than that the bible I had before was a water damaged KJV

>>17705590
Yes and the newer one is right.

what does everybody thing about the NJB version?

>>17711787
It's okay but it's one of those bibles that go out of its way to include gender inclusive language and avoids the masculine whenever possible.

>>17711787
it's bad and weird. It is a very good thing that catholics now have the esv

>>17711826
im looking to get a catholic new bible so should I just get the esv?

>>17711835
absolutely. ESV CE.
https://catholicbiblestudent.com/2019/12/esv-catholic-edition-bible-now-available-in-the-united-states.html

>>17711847
thanks, how does it compare to the RSV-2CE? right now im choosing between the two

>>17711852
>>17711847
nvm I just saw that the link you sent addresses that, thank you

>>17711847
>In 2020, the Association of Catholic Priests criticized the ESV for not using gender-inclusive language.

>>17712159
catholics are liberal, news at 11

I have the Schuyler Wide Margin Canterbury and Schuyler journal in slate.

>>17712253
beautiful

>>17712253
Very nice.

>>17712253

>>17712253
jelly

Are there KJV bibles which give the preferred reading of modern translations in the footnotes where there's discrepancies? Like "modern trans read (xyz)"

>>17712253
That's an eye-catching layout. What are the dimensions of that book? My old eyes can't handle small text.

>>17712253
how much did you pay?

>>17712390
Not KJV but as far as I know all NKJV have textual footnotes for where other manuscripts differ.