/lit/ - Literature

I have the orthodox study Bible and it’s pretty good, the NT is nkjv and the OT reads like kjv. The commentary is sparse but it generally gives you the opinions and thoughts of the Orthodox Church. There are added essays and prayers throughout the book if you’re interested in that. I’d recommend it.

>>22067733
>leather-bound
>between $20-$40.
You won't get a decent leather bound Bible for that price. You should get a faux leather one. I am not sure if there are editions with the Apocrypha but Holman has excellent Bibles for a relatively low price.
Your best bet is probably the New Oxford Study Bible in RSV but I remember that it's way beyond that price point.

>>22067997
>>22068028
Bought the Ortho study bible. I appreciate both your help. Will probably delete post now. Best regard.

>>22067733
>Comes in either the KJV/NKJV or RSV/NRSV
All fine except NRSV, don't know the opinion on ESV but evangelicalists and calvinist sects shill it hard.

>>22067733
>which, has a large amount of reviews for what should be such a niche church in the US
It's on the rise especially with online prescence and it's sold in book stores in my country.

>>22067733
>Ortho Study Bible translates the Old Testament from the Septuagint
I heard it's just the NKJV OT with only the differences of the Septuagint added when they occut, it's not really a new translation.

>>22068769
Did religious studies in college. We used the NRSV and the JPS Tanakh for most stuff. Specifically I recommend getting the New Oxford Annotated Bible w/ Apocrypha: NRSV

that ortho study bible has been completely disregarded by the actual Orthodox Church and the only reason it keeps selling is because it is the first result on amazon. you larpers are something else.

>>22067733
Oxford study bible is good
I like the ESV. I am a seminary student and it is my go to for the most accurate English translation because it takes into account older text than the Masoretic (Dead Sea scrolls, Septuagint). But there is no Apryophal tanslation. Also don't be scared to invest some money into a bible. 40$ is a little cheap. If you pay for it it will last you a long time.

buy my book on Amazon for an analysis of the problem of Evil

>>22068925
1977 edition with RSV is best

>>22068933
>that ortho study bible has been completely disregarded by the actual Orthodox Church
Proof? I see it in church shops and recommended by priests online.

The covid "vaccine" is a forerunner of the mark of the beast, as prophecied over thirty years ago by Saint Paisios.
According to Fr. Savvas Agioritis, it was made in a Masonic ritual and it has demons inside it.

https://youtu.be/5O2wrqcOOvg

https://youtu.be/7kJytiN4f8s

https://youtu.be/QVCtkoqE7Cc

>>22067733
NRSV/RSV. The latter if you care about the gender neutral language.

The NRSV changes the meaning of verses in the sacred texts claiming to be for inclusion.
The Revised New Jerusalem Translation has more natural gender neutral pronouns reflecting the Greek: the singular pronoun ‘one’ is better than the plural ‘they’ or - even worse - ‘you’.
http://helpmewithbiblestudy.org/5Bible/TransWhatsWrongGenderNeutralBible_Grudem.aspx

>>22068983
http://orthodoxinfo.com/phronema/review_osb2.aspx

>>22067733
Get the NRSV-CI Catholic Bible. Checks all your boxes besides its price (which isn't too much higher.)

https://secure.holyapostlesconvent.org/hacwebstore/searchresults.zul;jsessionid=77F92ACC043274C37B5DC17C50A28E1D?categoryID=2

>>22067733
You want a "Pure Cambridge Edition" KJV (essentially the "final perfect form" of the original 1611, but with every single last typographic quirk & error corrected. It truly is *THE* Holy Bible.

I'm sure that you can find a cheaply bound copy, but that wouldn't be very cash money of you, so just drop some real dollars on this, you filthy casual, and know that you have purchased the best & only Holy Bible you will ever truly need:

https://www.thekjvstore.com/kjv-cameo-reference-bible-with-apocrypha-cambridge/

Otherwise, if you're trying to save money (and carrying capacity), literally just install the KJV on your phone.

>>22071941
thanks for the link. i've been using norton critical editions but have always wanted something like this.

>>22071941
Good resource for understandinh KJV english? I know there are words that have different meanings now.

$28.99
https://www.christianbook.com/kjv-1611-bible-hardcover/9781565638082/pd/631609

The 1611 is my favorite because of the Capitalizations, Grammar, and Margin notes. But it is a little difficult to read and basically impossible to speedread.

>>22072496
I prefer to just use the 1611 PDF on my phone. With your phone, you can read at night.

>>22072496
>>22072501

>>22072158
You're very welcome, my Brother in Christ; may others find it so, as well.

>>22072426
Offhand, I don't really know of any sort of singular "magic bullet" resource(s) to help with understanding Ye Olde Englishe; tbqh, I don't find the KJV english difficult to understand at all, but I also don't just speed-read through it: I quietly read in silence, deliberately, resonating with each & every single word, savoring its poetic flow. Even the "boring" parts of Leviticus & Numbers, such as when the building of the tabernacle or the complements of each tribe are detailed, I savor, imagining assembly of the temple in my mind according to its instructions -- which I feel is an important, secret means of attaining deeper connection with the divine here, as *imagining* building the temple (in your mind) is actually *building* the temple (*within*/inside your mind)...

...thusly preparing your mind to receive deeper wisdom.

>protip: carefully read every word, savor every sentence, and imagine construction of the temple within your mind in order to prepare your mind to receive deeper wisdom

Back to your question: there are so many resources; although I'm not terribly multilingual, I am aware of a variety of translations of certain words between the languages used over time, and the way phrases turn, and certain allusions.

For example: when God commands us not to "commit adultery," it's not "adultery" in the sense of extramarital sex; it's "adultery" as in when you "adulterate your wine" (by pouring water or juice into it), this making it no longer *PURE* wine.

God hates that. He goes on & on about how you should never wear a garment of two different fabrics, or plant two different species of crops together. This is largely to set the tone on the big one:

"Do not commit adultery" means "DO NOT RACEMIX!"

How many times did someone offend God or his Chosen People by marrying a filthy Canaanite or other alien? God hates that. It may not be very "progressive" in today's distorted popular perspective, but, hey, God's a champion breeder, and doesn't want to ruin these choice bloodlines with muttery. This is *not* my call; these are some of the rules God set forward.

Sad... this totally invalidates Steven Anderson. :/

....HOWEVER, Moses did marry a Midian, which pissed off Aaron's wife, but then God smited her (clearly taking the side of Moses and his niggerwife), so IDK man, OT God seems a bit inconsistent, as discussed already in this thread; maybe she was a special case, genetically, or something.

I had further thoughts; I'll post them if they return soon.

can anyone recommend a douay-rheims bible that is leatherbound with sewn binding instead of glued? i have found a hardcover version but i'd prefer soft leatherbound

>>22072543
You prots are schizo. The meaning of words and verses is intrinsically different if you do not know the Elizabethan English you cab't just meditate to suddenly learn it. The Holy Spirit cannot make you read Spanish Bibles like that. KJV onlyism goes against the point of the gospels, to evangelise among the peoples, textual criticism has always exisyed in christianity's history before Christ came to earth. An updated kjv like 3rd millennium or even the new nkjv is fine enough (it only notes the deviations from other sources) but you guys have to have the 1611 edition and only the proceeding typographical corrections like King James' line is the head of the church.

>>22072596
If your Bible isn't King James, you have a fake "Bible" with error in it. You are probably some Kike sowing discord.

>>22072615
What protestant denomination do you go to that isn't liberal or zogged or feminized?
>Presbyterians
gay liberals (plus I don't agree with Calvinism)
>Methodists
gay liberals
>Episcopalians/Anglicans
even gayer liberals
>Baptists
cuckservative zogbots

>>22072753
Doesnt exist.

>>22072976
what do

https://youtube.com/@NIFBexposed
https://youtube.com/@OnoDiamante (possibly ZOGGED based on Romans 11 confusion)
https://youtube.com/@JackHylesLibrary (ZOGGED)
https://youtube.com/@FamilyAltarProgram (ZOGGED)
https://youtube.com/@YankeeArnoldMinistries (possibly ZOGGED based on Romans 11 confusion)
>The Gospel of Nicodemus
https://archive.org/details/pdfy-5lijplxCkA4qdCgY/page/n17/mode/1up

>>22072979
I deleted the 1st half. I said:
Someone who meets the qualifications ought to start a church. Here's some resources >>22073039

>>22072615
Who do you think canonised scripture? Sola scriptura is self-contradicting because it took a prior traditional church who did not believe in the protestant larp of that, multiple valid interpretations and things like apostolic succession but a single unified orthodox faith to organize what scripture is for you to say you to even need scripture alone. And the exclusion of many books as apocrypha in the reformation came underway because Luther found contradiction to his five solaes but his justification for the solaes were supposedly built upon sola scriptura. You can't say you only need the scripture to properly interrpret scripture and then remove the bits that disagree with your interpretation! Who are you to decide it is not canon? Clearly your interpretation is wrong if your own scripture refutes you!

>>22073121
*for you to even say you just need need scripture alone
There is not scriptural basis for sola scriptura. All justification comes from outsise scripture because it is a protestant innovation contradictory to the history of the apostolic faith.

>>22073121
>>22073126
John the Baptist was Sola Scriptura
Josiah and his kingdom were Sola Scriptura

God's Word is sufficient.

>>22073569
But with that said, a Prophet speaking by the will of God (and it will not contradict Scripture) can rebuke those that swear falsely by God's Name and misuse the Scriptures.

>>22073569
>John the Baptist was Sola Scriptura
For Judaism before the incarnation.
>Josiah and his kingdom were Sola Scriptura
For Judaism before the incarnation.

The apostolic church is not sola scriptura.

>>22073569
>>22073612
It's called the New 'Testament' for a reason.

>>22073612
>>22073617
God's Word didn't suddenly become insufficient. You sound like JIDF attempting to reuse what they get hit with. It doesn't apply here.

>>22073679
>God's Word didn't suddenly become insufficient.
It didn't but the new covenant with man means the prior covenant was now the 'old' and superseded by the new. Circumcision for example is no longer required nor are other Mosaic kaws and rituals because the bew sacraments and the incarnation and subsequent crucifixion and resurrection have either replaced or 'fulfilled' them.

>>22073679
>>22074039
How do I justify this interpreation? The people that codified scripture and evangelised from the Apostles founding of the Church held this interpretation also.
Sola scriptura also relies on the modern reality of a printing press and higher literacy rates among the masses whicj did nkt exist in the early church's time. Sola Scriptura takes the historical reality and the saints for granted. As long as the church has existed there has been a yradition of the church. Saying we can go off and just start our own rejects that tradition which brought you to the state you coukd rehect it in the first place. Most protestant theology also just takes Catholic innovations of that for granted. If people were going by scripture alone for doctrine, the filioque wouldn't exist among most protestants.

>>22074046
In summary, Sola Scriptura was unsustainable for most of history and could not exist without a prior tradition that contradicts it.

>>22074056
The Gospels were not originally in King James English and they were not intended to only be read in koine but by all peoples. Even in the old testment times, there were Greek Jews that created the septuagint centuries before Christ. Translations and textual criticisns have never reached an end point. That only hapoebs once languages are no longer different and no longer change.

>>22074070
Layer OT Jews still needed an update from the original written hebrew that lacked vowels and oftentimes these transliterations were the earliest manuscripts they had. Their highest level of textural authority was not even the original's copies.

>>22067733
For an easy enough read? Read NIV.

For poetics? KJV

for extreme poetics? The Sidney psalms and similar poetic translations

For maximum accuracy? Interlinear with constant word study.

I would suggest just going through with an NIV though. I’ll post psalm 23 in various translations.

KJV

23 The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want.

2 He maketh me to lie down in green pastures: he leadeth me beside the still waters.

3 He restoreth my soul: he leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for his name's sake.

4 Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.

5 Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies: thou anointest my head with oil; my cup runneth over.

6 Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life: and I will dwell in the house of the Lord for ever.


NIV

1 The Lord is my shepherd, I lack nothing.
2 He makes me lie down in green pastures,
he leads me beside quiet waters,
3 he refreshes my soul.
He guides me along the right paths
for his name’s sake.
4 Even though I walk
through the darkest valley,[a]
I will fear no evil,
for you are with me;
your rod and your staff,
they comfort me.
5 You prepare a table before me
in the presence of my enemies.
You anoint my head with oil;
my cup overflows.
6 Surely your goodness and love will follow me
all the days of my life,
and I will dwell in the house of the Lord
forever.


Sidney

The Lord, the Lord my shepheard is, And so can never I
Tast missery.
He rests me in greene pasture his:
By waters still, and sweete Hee guides my feete.
Hee me revives : leades me the way, Which righteousnesse doth take,
For his names sake.
Yea though I should through valleys stray,
Of deathes dark shade, I will Noe whitt feare ill.
For thou, deere Lord, thou me besett'st: Thy rodd, and thy staff be
To comfort me; Before me thou a table sett'st,
Even when foes envious ey Doth it espy.
Thou oil'st my head thou filFst my cupp: Nay more thou endlesse good,
Shalt give me food. To thee, I say, ascended up,
Where thou, the Lord of all, Dost hold thy hall.

>>22074039
>>22074046
You're conflating Sola Scriptura with Adherance to Mosiac Law. They are not the same. Jeremiah 31 already talks about the New Covenant. You simply don't know the Bible.

>>22067733
>Has Apocrypha along with the Old/New Testaments
Do maps count? What exactly is apocrypha? Do you just want to signal that you have more books in your Bible, or do you care what these apocrypha actually say?

>KJV/NKJV or RSV/NRSV
KJV and NKJV are based on received text, while RSV and NRSV are based on critical text. That's about a 7% difference between the New Testament versions, as the critical (Alexandrian) text removes about 5% of the words from the original Greek base text and substantially changes another 2% of the words.

>the Ortho Study Bible translates the Old Testament from the Septuagint
Not entirely, since the OSB Old Testament follows the Hebrew over the Septuagint in some places, such as Genesis 5:25-26. The OSB has the numbers that the Hebrew Bible uses instead of the Septuagint here (compare with a Septuagint translation such as the Brenton 1844 English Septuagint in Genesis 5:25-26; I think the OSB editors were motivated to revert to Hebrew here because the LXX numbers have Methuselah outliving the flood of Noah by 14 years).

>>22068791
It's a translation of the Septuagint/LXX in the Old Testament (in most places) and a copy of the NKJV New Testament for the New Testament.

>>22072596
There's a reason why all English speakers used the KJV from the 1640s until the modern versions appeared which were based on a different source text (Alexandrian text). Because it is a good and accurate translation of the received text. It wasn't until the ideology of higher criticism caused people to think that the word of God is not preserved that people started using the Alexandrian text, starting with Westcott and Hort in the late 19th and spreading from there in the 20th century. Those who still believe that God inspired the words and preserved them until today use TR translations, and the KJV is a good example of that in English. Everyone used it until the late 19th century, which is when higher criticism took off which contains bias against the supernatural and radical skepticism against Christianity as a whole.