Which bible?

[Anonymous No.18963539]

>QRD I was raised in a devoutly Catholic family but was already disillusioned as a young teen and had completely left the faith by the time I was twenty.
I'm looking to do some independent bible reading and study, but I'm unsure which I should begin with. I have a copy of the Catholic NRSV on my shelf but I can't see how I would ever return to the church. I have a lot of negative memories of the Catholic Church and find myself shaking my head whenever I hear any of the bullshit they're up to nowadays. Lots of globalhomo pandering to maintain congregants and the like. Should I just read the bible I have, or is there a more individual/Prot/"neutral"(???) version I should look into. I'm open to schizo editions as well.
>Christshits again on /lit/
Yes yes but there is no /god/ board yet, so cope and seethe.

[Anonymous No.18963572]

a schizophrenic woman cornered me in an aisle of whole foods yesterday and told me that the King James bible is the only real one. she told me who was controlling the world and said "Man conceals, God reveals" which I thought was pretty clever.

[Anonymous No.18963587]

>>18963572
One point for KJ from the Walmart schizophrenic.

[Anonymous No.18963590]

Why do you people always start with "I lost my faith in my early teens"? All it shows is that you have the same mindset as a dumb teenager and never developed mentally. Anyway, read Knecht.
https://www.ecatholic2000.com/knecht/untitled-198.shtml

[Anonymous No.18963598]

>>18963539
Come home, Orthobro
Seriously though, pic related is based on the NKJV and the Septuagint, good stuff. Good protestant translations to me are NASB, NKJV and KJV for historical/poetical reasons. Remember they don't have all the books from the Orthodox/Catholic canons though.
Catholic NRSV is the go-to for Catholics.
Stay away from NIV, ESV and any versions that mark themselves as easy to read or paraphrasing versions.

The most important advice I could give you, and that you could receive in your entire life, is read the Bible (especially New Testament) and pray everyday.

>Yes yes but there is no /god/ board yet, so cope and seethe.
Blessed and, dare I say, breadpilled.

[Anonymous No.18963613]

>>18963590
>Why do you people always start with "I lost my faith in my early teens"
Because I'm not special. My parents were overbearing and I resented them for forcing religion down my throat. As an adult I realize that, while their faith is pretty bare-bones and inherited, they were only doing what they thought was best for me. I want to try again. If I, of all people, can have a relationship with God then I want to at least TRY.
>>18963598
So you've read multiple editions? Which have you settled with? How would you describe yourself (denominationally speaking)?

[Anonymous No.18963647]

>>18963613
I've read from multiple different editions (NKJV, NASB, KJV, NIV, ESV) but haven't read the whole of each. I'm an Orthodox so I've settled with the Orthodox Study Bible because it has all books of the Orthodox canon in one edition and a translation I like (NKJV). When I was protestant I used the KJV, and I still enjoy it very much even if it has some issues; translating Hades/Sheol into Hell and being the only one with unicorns in it is all I can think of off the top of my head.
That being said all translations have the same New Testament, so don't get too stressed up on versions and just start reading it.

[Anonymous No.18963712]

>>18963647
>That being said all translations have the same New Testament, so don't get too stressed up on versions and just start reading it
Well put. I'll just stick to my Catholic Edition for now. On the topic of "just reading it", do you have any advice? Start to finish? Random passages?

[Anonymous No.18963716]

Read the ESVCE. >>18963598 doesn't know what he's talking about if he's naming the ESV as something to avoid, because the NRSV/CE butchered a lot of wording, and the NKJV is just as flawed as the original KJV. He is right that the NIV sucks, though. The ESVCE released just last year is the most accurate and yet still beautifully readable Bible currently available. The RSV2CE is always a solid secondary, but its wording can be a bit more difficult and less flowing. BTW, the OT is useful for context, but you really only need to read the New Testament, and then Psalms and Proverbs for additional material; alternatively, look into one of those "Bible in a Year" guides, which are designed to jump you between the OT and the NT so the parallels are clearer, as opposed to just reading it from Genesis to Revelation, cover to cover.

[Anonymous No.18963787]

>>18963712
Not him but the books are arranged a certain way on purpose, read the NT chronologically.

[Anonymous No.18963796]

Don't forget that every Catholic Bible will have all the books that Luther threw out in a sperg fit, while a lot of Protestant Bibles won't, though there are some exceptions.

>muh sola scriptura
>fuck James, he disagrees with me, OUT HE GOES

[Anonymous No.18963815]

>>18963712
New Testament, then Old Testament, then New Testament again. Please don't skip books and read in order as >>18963787
said. You can always check notes or the Wikipedia page for the book for context, such as who the author is and when it was written if your edition doesn't have that.

>>18963716
>because the NRSV/CE butchered a lot of wording
Still the go-to for Catholics
>the NKJV is just as flawed as the original KJV.
It fixes archaic and inaccurate language of the KJV while still being a mostly word-for-word translation. It also adds some textual criticism of older manuscripts that were not available at the time of the KJV.
>BTW, the OT is useful for context, but you really only need to read the New Testament, and then Psalms and Proverbs for additional material
Sorry to put it this way but this is a retarded take, the NT is the fulfillment of the OT, the OT is not just "context". The books you mentioned don't even include the Mosaic Law...
You sound like a protestant youth pastor.

>>18963796
Haha

[Anonymous No.18963817]

>>18963712
this guy (
>>18963787
)
is a fucking moron. they are organized by literary style. Unless you want to read 150 psalms and then wisdom literature back to back, you should split your reading up. I'd advocate reading 1 psalm, then some of one of the histories. Once you finish samuel i'd start mixing in prophets too. You can chug through the NT straight though.

[Anonymous No.18963892]

>>18963817
I wasn’t talking about the OT.

The NT was arranged by the Church a certain way, on purpose.

source: Eusibius - Ecclesiastical History

It would have better for you to just keep quiet, without exposing how much of a “moron” you are.

[Anonymous No.18963946]

>>18963796
>Luther got rid of the Book of James
Know how I know you are retarded?

[Anonymous No.18964046]

>>18963946
https://www.biblestudy.org/question/why-did-luther-reject-james.html

[Anonymous No.18964098]

>>18963539
Oxford Annotated Bible for a scholarly Bible
Get a King James Bible with the Geneva notes if you want to become a Calvinist.

[Anonymous No.18964539]

>>18963716
>>18963539
ESV is satanic shit. Period.
Observe.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXjwAOG1H9Q

[Anonymous No.18964918]

>>18963539
Douay-Rheims or Knox
You are a Catholic. Go to the Traditional Latin Mass. They don't like what the Vatican is up to either.

[Anonymous No.18964959]

>>18964918
>You are a Catholic. Go to the Traditional Latin Mass. They don't like what the Vatican is up to either.
I am intrigued.

[Anonymous No.18964966]

>>18963539
KJV is the only true Word of God in the English language.

[Anonymous No.18965002]

>>18963716
>BTW, the OT is useful for context, but you really only need to read the New Testament, and then Psalms and Proverbs
At the risk of sounding uncharitable, this is horrible advice. I could agree with you if you told him to merely start in the NT, but claiming that the OT is somehow unnecessary is ridiculous. You literally cannot fully comprehend some parts of the NT without the context of the OT, it's not just "useful". All of God's Word is of the utmost importance for both learning and teaching the Gospel.

> All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
>That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
2 Tim 3:16-17

[Anonymous No.18965115]

>>18964539
>KJVOnlyist
Cringe and Satanic. Go back to your
>Thou shalt commit adultery.

[Anonymous No.18965548]

Orthodox should read... uhh, not super sure. Orthodox Study Bible isn't endorsed by the church and is NKJV with Septuagint additions, rather than a proper translation of the LXX. For NT there is the Eastern Orthodox Bible translated from the official patriarchal text of 1904, but not sure of any definite answer for OT.
Catholics should read DRC, Knox, RSV-2CE, or ESV-CE.
Prots should read KJV, RSV, ESV, or a Geneva fascimile if they're a Calvinist and don't mind the older spellings.
I think a good catch-all bible is the New Oxford Annotated Bible in RSV with Expanded Apocrypha, it's ecumenical and includes the deuterocanon used by Catholics, AND the deuterocanom used by Orthodox.

[Anonymous No.18965671]

>>18965548
>Catholics should read DRC, Knox, RSV-2CE, or ESV-CE.
I agree with this collection completely. If you're a Catholic, all four of these are great Bibles to own, read, and compare. Knox's notes are some of the best I've ever read in a Bible and will give you insight that might shed new light on old verses, which is always a treat; the DRC is your go-to old school Catholic Bible; the RSV-2CE is the closest you can get to a modern Bible, with all the recent scholarship, while still retaining the full Catholic structure; and the ESV-CE is the most recent, is the easiest to read imo, and has a fresh translation of Tobit, however some verses that are usually worded differently in Catholic Bibles vs. non-Catholic Bibles retain their non-Catholic translations, whereas some don't. A good indicator when noting a Catholic Bible is that 3/4 of those listed (sans ESV-CE) render Luke 1:28 in the traditional Catholic form "Hail, full of grace!" sometimes with the alternative "Hail/Greetings, O favored one" as a footnote.

[Anonymous No.18966157]

>>18963598
Why especially the New Testament?

[Anonymous No.18966173]

>>18966157
Because it's the fulfillment of the OT and Jesus is in it

[Anonymous No.18966227]

>>18966157
Because you're a Christian and not a Jew, hence why the Christian book is more relevant to your life, even if the Jewish book informs the Christian one.

[Anonymous No.18966228]

>>18963712
I was told by an old Coptic who frequents the hookah bar I go to to read the Gospels, then Genesis, then Isaiah, the rest of the NT, the rest of the Torah, the history books in order, and last whatever you like.

[Anonymous No.18966242]

>>18965002
>All of God's Word is of the utmost importance for both learning and teaching the Gospel.
This. The early Christian's still read from the Pentateuch, and most early churches were lucky to have just one Gospel available to them.

[Anonymous No.18966275]

>>18966228
>read the Gospels, then Genesis, then Isaiah, the rest of the NT, the rest of the Torah, the history books in order, and last whatever you like.
Hmm, I might try that sometime.

[Anonymous No.18966302]

How often do you guys reread the NT, or at least the Gospels?

[Anonymous No.18966352]

>>18966302
At least once a year

[Anonymous No.18966394]

>>18966157
Jesus was the perfection of everything that came before religiously. Hebrews 12:2 calls him ‘the perfecter of faith’

[Anonymous No.18966409]

>>18966302
I study scripture everyday. Rotate about 10 different translations before moving on to the next chapter.

[Anonymous No.18966482]

Honestly if you aren't wedded to a specific form for a specific reason and you have /lit/ tastes, the King James is very beautiful and worth reading once. The only reason I wouldn't recommend it is if it might scare someone away from reading, if they're newer to reading and intimidated by the slightly archaic language. If you aren't, it's gorgeous.

I used to worry its "stodgy" old fashioned archaic English would dilute the power of the Bible but, first, it's not stodgy, second, its austerity and richness enhances the text.

Check out R. Grant Jones on Youtube. He does some great reviews but mostly for specific Bibles, not for translations afaik.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRhxB46f5ak
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjzl-YjImrk

Also good to note KJV for historical reasons like another poster said. You'll start to see English phrases you know by heart and realise, those are from the KJV? Like Shakespeare.

There are also some nice audiobook versions available oddly enough.

>>18963712
>On the topic of "just reading it", do you have any advice? Start to finish? Random passages?
Read the Pentateuch as a unit, but give yourself a break for the obviously legalistic and ritualistic parts of Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. Those have important chunks but no you do not have to memorise every single minor kippah construction manual point for Jews.

I agree with the other poster that you should read bits of psalms and proverbs as you go or as you like, not in a single chunk. Read one for every couple chapters you read or something.

Once you're done with the Pentateuch you can read the History books as the natural continuation of the story. These are mostly enjoyable and can be read in a chunk again, however, probably after you get past Solomon, Saul, and David, start looking at a chart or map of Hebrew history that divides things up. Yes it's normal that it's alternating between shit kings and okay kings, yes it's normal that it's a bit chaotic. It's recounting real history remember, history that didn't end well, so it's messy. Ezra and Nehemiah are coming back after the exile and the restoration by Cyrus. That's the cap-off unless you read Maccabees (which can be read now if you like). Be warned it's a bit long, so again looking up background info in the form of a Youtube video or something might help.

Read the apocrypha (Judith etc) and the standalone wisdom or poetic books (Lamentations, Song of Songs, Job) as you please.

Read the short and the fun (compare the numbers of chapters.. you'll see) prophets and the fun (Daniel) prophets next. Then brace yourself for interesting, but repetitive, major prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah), and the crazy merkabah prophet Ezekiel (you'll see).

[Anonymous No.18966485]

>>18963712
Continuing >>18966482

Then read the Gospels (unless as a Christian you prefer to do that first to draw you in, then bump it to the top of this whole list obviously), then whatever books of the NT interest you by topic. I recommend looking up a philosophical discussion or two of Paul's background as it will make you realise he was far more than an underlabourer of Christianity, he is a philosophical heavyweight and full of strange mysteries that still puzzle interpreters, mysteries in both the colloquial sense and the original Greek sense of sacred symbols with hidden levels of complexity that draw you in. There is a whole debate about how Paul synthesised Greek philosophical and Jewish theological thinking, and that only opens onto deeper issues of what sort of Jewish-Hellenistic-Zoroastrian (yes seriously) religious synthesis had been going on in the Holy Land since Cyrus and the events of Maccabees (so you may see why Maccabees is worth the slog).

The number one thing is to stop viewing the Bible as a single concrete slab to be digested over a century. The point of this post is to break it up into manageable distinct chunks: the Pentateuch (which has its slog parts and you are allowed to skim a little over those), the history books (which are fun and neglected only because people assume it's all slog after Leviticus and Deuteronomy), the wisdom books (great and either bite-sized or snack-sized), the apocrypha (great and mostly bite-sized), and the New Testament which is much easier and shorter. There's your whole itinerary. No "oh god the middle 2000 pages where it's just genealogies and legal prescriptions."

>>18966302
I read it every day in any language I'm learning as a way to get more practice in that language and to read the Bible daily.

[Anonymous No.18966526]

>>18964046
>Luther rejected James! Ignore the fact that he put it in his Bible!

[Anonymous No.18966575]

>>18963539
At my church everyone was always pushing the pastor to water down the message. One of the leaders was embezzeling money from the collection plate. He was contantly convincing the other leaders to sell off church property just so he could take the money for himself. He was the treasurer so he got away with it. He eventually turned the pastor into the police on false charges. I just can't believe how messed up the church is. How can anyone be a member? That pastor's name, by the way, was Jesus. (gasp)

[Anonymous No.18966716]

>>18963539
I've read from NASB, NRSV, ESV, NLT, KJV, NKJV. Liked some more than others.

I've been enjoying the New English translation (NET) quite a lot. It has an incredible amount of translator notes, explanation, info, etc. throughout each chapter. I've been sticking with this one for awhile along with KJV.

Use biblegateway and keep up two different versions side by side. Easy way to compare.
Definitely try the NET.

[Anonymous No.18966746]

Not related to OP but is there a good English-edition of the Peshitta Bible?

>>18964959
"The Catholic Church" isn't some fucking monolith and they constantly debate internally about how to approach issues. There's a lot of pushback against Francis's quasi-liberalism that the media doesn't cover.

[Anonymous No.18966750]

OP if you like Greek don't forget about looking into interlinear editions.

[Anonymous No.18967056]

>>18966575
sounds like what judas did in the bible lol

[Anonymous No.18967097]

>>18963539
Douay-Rheims. If you want a more modern English sounding translation, go with NABRE (something to keep in mind with this translation is that it’s generally seen as more liberal, but the English is easier to follow)

[Anonymous No.18967168]

On a similar note, does anyone know where to buy a good copy of the King James bible online? All the ones on Amazon seem to be shit with transparent paper and very small dimensions.

[Anonymous No.18967278]

>>18963598
>>18963647
>>18963716
>>18963815
>>18964539
>>18964918
>>18964966
>>18965548
All of you are retarded. I am a capable reader of Hebrew and Aramaic and am learning Latin and Greek. You really can't study the Bible in translation. You have little idea of what they are talking about. Also NTs are not all the same across all translations. There are huge differences between manuscripts, and translators, one way or another, must make choices as to which manuscripts they use. Perhaps you've heard of the Neighbor of the Beast controversy. The earliest Revelation manuscript gives the Number of the Beast as 616. It's earlier, so it must be better, right? Not necessarily. Early copyists made tons of mistakes and did not always correct them, meaning that we can't be certain of what the original authors wrote, much less what Jesus actually said. Now, you want to debate what's the best English translation? Are you fucking crazy?

[Anonymous No.18967301]

>>18967278
Meds

[Anonymous No.18967306]

>>18967168
cbd.com might. For the KJV I’d look to the Protestant stores for one. That’s their specialty.

[Anonymous No.18967314]

Get KJV, it has based unicorns

[Anonymous No.18967378]

>>18967314
LXX sees your unicorns and raises with donkey centaurs.

[Anonymous No.18967545]

>>18964539
>ESV is satanic
based!

[Anonymous No.18967852]

>>18967168
Cameo Reference KJV with Apocrypha, I got it on amazon but it's easily the nicest KJV I've seen.

[Anonymous No.18968152]

The orthodox bible has over 10 additional books compared to the protestant canon. How do we cope with this bros?

[Anonymous No.18968302]

>>18963539
You want a deep dive?

Read Karl Adam, Two Essays: Christ and the Western Mind; Love and Belief.

There are some used copies out there (see abebooks), or maybe you could get it from a library.

Concise, eye-opening. Or try the following:

Karl Adam, The Spirit of Catholicism
Dietrich von Hildebrand, Transformation in Christ
Frank Sheed, Theology and Sanity
Frank Sheed, Theology for Beginners
John Bergsma, Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls
John Henry Newman, Apologia Pro Vita Sua

[Anonymous No.18968344]

>>18963539
What languages do you speak, OP?

[Anonymous No.18968398]

>>18963539
Biscuit Tin Version, Luganda language
https://www.wdl.org/en/item/18411/view/1/2158/

Also
>Lots of globalhomo
Never happened

>251. In discussing the dignity and mission of the family, the Synod Fathers observed that, “as for proposals to place unions between homosexual persons on the same level as marriage, there are absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way similar or
even remotely analogous to God’s plan for marriage and family”. It is unacceptable “that local Churches should be subjected to pressure in
this matter and that international bodies should make financial aid to poor countries dependent on the introduction of laws to establish ‘marriage’ between persons of the same sex”.
>AMORIS LÆTITIA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1S6chGy674
They speak about "diversified" families, but THE Family in the Image of God is one only, Man and Woman

Read the fucking books

[Anonymous No.18968411]

>>18963590
>Why do you people always start with "I lost my faith in my early teens"? All it shows is that you have the same mindset as a dumb teenager and never developed mentally
Really dumb take, excellent.
Before losing my faith, I remember crying myself to sleep thinking about the Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ, sincerely suffering for His Suffering. If I still felt that way, that would mean I have the same mindset of a 9 year old, according to you

[Anonymous No.18968455]

Learn Latin first, then read it in Latin.

[Anonymous No.18968472]

I like this one a lot.

[Anonymous No.18968490]

>>18968455
postis basilaris

[Anonymous No.18968542]

>>18968411
Anon, I come from a position and an experience much like what you sketch in the OP.

Pray. Ask God for light. Trust that God is good.

This is very important, and really the first step, before diving into the books. That said, my further remarks, step two as it were, are here: >>18968302

[Anonymous No.18969101]

>>18968152
I cope by reading them

>>18968472
>NIV
lol

[Anonymous No.18969905]

>>18965548
Best recommendations in the thread for Orthodox, Catholics, and Prots.

[Anonymous No.18969969]

>>18964966
The only true word of God in *any* language. It is even more inspired than "the originals" which were mere steps along the way towards the full revelation.

[Anonymous No.18970050]

>>18963539
RSVCE for general reading
KJV to feel olde

don't bother with English for quibbling over meanings of words

[Anonymous No.18970129]

Thoughts on Bible tabs?

[Anonymous No.18970209]

>>18970129
I have a first pressing ESV Study Bible that I put tabs on. They are very useful and I am glad to have them, but would prefer an indexed one were I buying anew.

[Anonymous No.18970257]

Lads, seriously, I've been researching which bible to get for days now.
I have a headache. I'm tired. I'm frustrated. Frustrated because no version seems to be perfect. How can this be? How can every version be flawed? For fuck sake.

Help my indecisive ass out or this will be yet another thing that I talk myself out of buying because I can't handle any imperfections like the turbo autist retard that I am.

To tell you the truth, I wanted to pick this up.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Reference-Personal-Genuine-Leather-Letter/dp/0785215603/ref=sr_1_8?dchild=1&keywords=KJV+Premier+Edition&qid=1630610616&sr=8-8
But the top rated review has put me off by saying that many verses have been changed from his old KJV bible version he owns (He has pics too), however I googled the verses in question and basically all of them show that the '''''new'''''' verse is correct and that the verses in his old bible are the outliers.
Now I don't know which is right and which isn't because I'm only just getting into this stuff now, but I don't want mans unreliable fucking opinons of the Lords word, I want the truth ffs.

If someone would have told me that I'd be having a banging headache and blowing days doing nothing but watching and reading bible reviews I'd have not believed it but here I am.

I have too many questions and I don't know who to fucking trust.

KJV was what seemed to be the most reliable but I'm not sure. What does the NKJV change? Is it for the better or the worse?
FUCK

[Anonymous No.18970368]

>>18970257
Church Bible Publishers, get a reference KJV of whatever size and form. The only thing perfect is the underlying truths of God. The KJV will put you in touch with them. Church Bible Publishers even tells you that they are hand assembled Bibles and that if you want a perfect Bible then order one from Heaven. I think that speaks to even deeper implications, truly.

[Anonymous No.18970429]

>>18970257
Every Bible available to you has been made by man, we can hope it was made by the influence of the Spirit but there is no guarantee for us. I have a Cambridge Cameo Reference KJV and it uses some of the verses he complained about in the review, but not others. To me, it is the finest KJV I could find, especially since it could come leatherbound with the Apocrypha and sits very well when open without any difficulty unlike some Bibles which will struggle to lay flat.

[Anonymous No.18970630]

>people make fun of KJV for its use of the word unicorn in reference to a rhinoceros
>nobody has anything to say about Jerome's horny Moses that was preserved into DR
Interesting double standard.

[Anonymous No.18970665]

>>18970257
Thomas Nelson is usually a good publisher with good build quality, it's kind of weird the changes in that review. I have their KJV Study Bible and it's pretty good. Maybe the Amazon description failed to mention it's the KJ21 and not KJV 1769?
>KJV was what seemed to be the most reliable but I'm not sure.
As I mentioned earlier KJV is beautiful but more inaccurate than many others for specific words, and was politically influenced. Don't let KJV-onlyists fool you.
>What does the NKJV change? Is it for the better or the worse?
https://biblereasons.com/kjv-vs-nkjv-bible/

You'll probably read many versions throughout your lifetime. For now just stick to one that looks good. I like NKJV and NASB but RSV seems good too. Jsut stick to a word-for-word instead of thought-for-thought or paraphrase translation. Just stick to one and read it, much more important than eternally pondering on which one to choose.

[Anonymous No.18970838]

>God, at the beginning of time, created heaven and earth.
Credit to the Knox Bible for being the one Bible to break the mold.

[Anonymous No.18971025]

Read The Confessions then get an Ignatius study bible and start going back to mass.

Stop thinking that you're intelligent by being a dummy.

[Anonymous No.18971053]

>>18971025
Why are 4chan Catholics always so cunty sounding, like they think they're too good for you and don't even want you to consider their faith

[Anonymous No.18971064]

>>18971053
This guy knows his faith and is trying to do all sorts of gymnastics to reject it. Yeah, I'm going to be a little harsh.

[Anonymous No.18971303]

Dig through this channel. He's saved me a lot of time and money by actually showing the things you can buy and comparing them.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC6UAzFU6GZgix5ojuRZqNrg
He goes point by point, through Bibles of all kinds, sharing their positives and drawbacks.

[Anonymous No.18971846]

Rate my Bibles:
>Douay-Rheims-Challoner, Baronius Press, Black Leather
>Knox Version, Baronius Press, Black Leather
>Revised Standard Version Second Catholic Edition, Ignatius Press, Burgundy Leather
>The Didache (RSV-2CE Study Bible), Ignatius Press, Green Leather
>New Testament and Psalms: Revised Standard Version Second Catholic Edition (Travel Bible), Ignatius Press, Dark Blue Leather
I use each for different purposes, but acknowledge that the RSV-2CE Bibles have become my mains, though the DRC is a family staple that I always compare with, and the Knox brings a very unique flavor to the text. I'm also interested in the English Standard Version Catholic Edition, but I've heard a Study Bible version is forthcoming, so I'm holding off for the time being; also waiting for one in genuine leather. I've also contemplated the Great Adventure Catholic Bible from Ascension Press, but I've heard mixed reviews of it.

[Anonymous No.18972654]

>>18967278
>whole lotta bullcrap about how wrong everyone else is and how much extra you know about it
>literally not a single mention or example of what exactly you know is different, or any backup for this
always the same with pseuds

[Anonymous No.18972660]

>>18968152
By converting to the church that wrote and compiled the scriptura

[Anonymous No.18972668]

>>18970257
Someone already gave you the answer, it is the only complete bible in English, Orthodox Study Bible

[Anonymous No.18972789]

Question: Is it true that, when quoting an English verse in a scholarly sense, Prots and secular writers are virtually required to quote the NRSV (or sometimes the NIV, which I've seen in museums) whereas Catholic writers will instead typically quote the RSVCE/2CE for their own similar works? I seem to have noticed this split quite a bit and want to know if this really is how the scholarly divide is?

[Anonymous No.18972822]

>>18971303
Another thumbs up for Grant. I like how he compares several translations to the Greek, but I think his system of picking verses at random to be a bit flawed, especially when it can miss many verses of theological significance.
>>18972668
The EOB is better, and the OSB has several mistakes, especially in the OT, but since the EOB translation of the Septuagint is up in the air, I'm sticking to LES for the time being.

[Anonymous No.18973501]

>tfw the RSV2CE gets some stuff right from the Vulgate but other stuff wrong
>tfw the ESVCE gets some of that wrong stuff from the RSV2CE right but gets other stuff wrong even if the RSV2CE had originally gotten it right to begin with
It sucks, but this is why, as good as the RSV2CE as a Catholic Bible, or as good as the ESVCE might become over the coming years as a Catholic Bible, the Vulgate should always be compared to throughout the NT.

[Anonymous No.18973516]

>>18963539
>Which bible?
Wrong question. Sola scriptura is not sufficient, you either turn into a mutt Hovindist or an Anglo Dawkinist. Read Hegel's "Phenomenology of Spirit". Most important of all, don't stop reading. If you have to wander around like Jesus in the desert to come back to faith, then wander around. The last book I read before faith was Carroll's Alice in Wonderland. Luther and Gutenberg's printing press were put on Earth by the Holy Spirit for a reason. Never stop reading.

[Anonymous No.18973517]

>>18963539
>Should I just read the bible I have, or is there a more individual/Prot/"neutral"(???) version I should look into.
The standard secular translation used in academia is the NRSV. The most popular secular study version of the NRSV is the Oxford Annotated version.
Get the Oxford if you want scholarly footnotes. If you don't want footnotes or want Catholic perspective footnotes for some reason just read your existing copy.

[Anonymous No.18973518]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUdzhFh9yXc

[Anonymous No.18973533]

>>18973518
totally unbiased source

[Anonymous No.18973536]

>>18963539
I suggest the King James Version - Authorized. Specifically this one. I suggest this after spending years looking for the least ZOG'd edition I could possibly find.

https://www.bpsmilford.org/store/Hand-Size-Bible-p2517045

I also suggest reading Rudolf Otto's "Idea of The Holy" and Kierkegaard's works, maybe "Sickness Unto Death" and his other religious works. I found that Rudolf Otto book tremendously inspiring when I was returning to Christianity 8 years ago

[Anonymous No.18973538]

>>18973533
There's nothing wrong with a Catholic teacher comparing verses between 5 Bibles and offering commentary. In fact, he actually praises the KJV for most of it, so it's not a typical anti-KJV Catholic bias.

[Anonymous No.18973545]

Spent the entire evening last night researching french bibles. Cath: traduction liturgique looks good.

Prot: Bible de semeur is probably fine but I don't think it's literal enough. I will probably choose Segond 21 it's mostly literal and modern but on the other hand la NBS is a VERY literal translation which could be more interesting.

[Anonymous No.18973557]

>>18973545
Just read it in Greek.

[Anonymous No.18973565]

>>18973557
I didn't even learn latin yet.

[Anonymous No.18973576]

>>18973565
Then learn Latin and read the original Vulgate directly while comparing to the Greek for the New Testament. As for the Old Testament, read the Greek version because the Hebrew "Masoretic Text" is a medieval forgery.

[Anonymous No.18973715]

>>18963539
Just read the Vulgate. You do know Latin, right? There are two main versions of it. The Stuttgart Bible is the best edition of what St Jerome wrote. There is also the nova vulgata which is controversial to some in that it took the above text and did some tweaks based on current knowledge of Greek and old Semitic languages. It is not a pure edition of St Jerome's texts.

If you know Greek, just go for it. The Textus Receptus from the time of Erasmus is still often edited but if you aim for accuracy it has some flaws. The Novum Testamentum Graece is often taken as the basis today, but there are infinite disputes about preferences for this or that manuscript. It's extremely specialized research on minute details. I can more or less decipher Greek so I can't comment beyond that.
Note that the Apostles and Evangelists quoted from the Septuagint and wrote in Koine Greek. Jerome had access to older Hebrew and Aramaic books that have been lost.

If you want to go deep you can read the remnant Hebrew Masoretic texts but they are dated a millenium after the Greek texts, are written in a slightly different language than the og, have a butchered canon for no reason (that most protestants somehow took as authoritative) and comical "reinterpretations" of a few passages in blatant contradiction with the Greek and Latin, as well as divergences from the other Hebrew/Aramaic texts available. I admit I know nothing of Hebrew but those comments are hardly controversial.

Anyone shilling something else than the above as "scholarly" is lying to you plain and simple (already several ITT). The Oxford Annotated a shit, simple as.

What languages do you speak anon? I'm afraid English is really not the best.
The King James Version is an object of historical study of English speaking countries more than anything, it has become a sort of sacred cows for many of them. Unfortunately it tainted every English Bible that came after it until Knox finally broke the mold.

[Anonymous No.18975302]

bump

[Anonymous No.18975437]

>>18973715
>have a butchered canon for no reason (that most protestants somehow took as authoritative)
the earliest known Christian canons also were lacking the deuterocanon, check out Melito's canon and the Bryennios list

[Anonymous No.18975457]

Why isn't Dante in the biblical canon?

[Anonymous No.18975475]

>>18975457
Milton would make more sense

[Anonymous No.18975495]

>>18973715
>The Stuttgart Bible is the best edition of what St Jerome wrote.
This one?

[Anonymous No.18975701]

[SPOILER]all of them[/SPOILER]

[Anonymous No.18975851]

All based on the MT are corrupted, so keep that in mind. Even the Douay.

[Anonymous No.18975874]

>>18975851
So what do you recommend?
NETS, Lexham English Septuagint, or the Brenton Septuagint?

[Anonymous No.18975930]

>>18975874
Brenton. NETS carried over some of the MT alterations.
For example, Psalms 39:7 from the first example:
>θυσίαν καὶ προσφορὰν οὐκ ἠθέλησας, σῶμα δὲ κατηρτίσω μοι· ὁλοκαυτώματα καὶ περὶ ἁμαρτίας οὐκ ἐζήτησας.
Here's the Brenton LXX:
>Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not; but a body hast thou prepared me: whole-burnt-offering and sacrifice for sin thou didst not require.
Source: https://ebible.org/eng-Brenton/PSA039.htm
And here's the NETS:
>Sacrifice and offering you did not want, but ears you fashioned for me. Whole burnt offering and one for sin you did not request.
Source: https://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/nets/edition/24-ps-nets.pdf (Page 567)

I can't speak to the LES, as I don't have a copy to compare. But check and highlight those above verses whenever necessary, and be very critical of texts that try to remove the original Christological signs from the LXX that were quoted in the NT.

[Anonymous No.18975946]

>>18975930
Good to know, much appreciated.
I don't know too much about the LES, but I just read that it is missing verses because it very closely follows the Codex Vaticanus to the point of not filling in the blanks that other texts have in them.
I saw some complaints in reviews of the LES about missing verses, but now I know why, and I hope this knowledge will be helpful to you and other Anons as well.

[Anonymous No.18975973]

>>18975946
Don't stress too much. I personally use the RSV2CE and the Douay despite knowing full well they've used these MT corruptions because they otherwise are strong translations. As long as you're aware of the issues, you can highlight the verses in your Bible and possibly make quick notes to "refer to LXX". Even as a Catholic, I've considered getting the Orthodox Study Bible if only to consult for these matters.

[Anonymous No.18976057]

>A New English Translation of the Septuagint and the Other Greek Translations Traditionally Included Under that Title (NETS), an academic translation based on the New Revised Standard version (in turn based on the Masoretic Text) was published by the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies (IOSCS) in October 2007.
>A New English Translation of the Septuagint
>(in turn based on the Masoretic Text)
Holy shit then what's the fucking point?

[Anonymous No.18976077]

>>18976057
it's the same thing as the Orthodox Study Bible but based on the NRSV rather than the NKJV

[Anonymous No.18976097]

>>18976077
Well, then that means Brenton is still the only credible LXX, because NETS gets Psalm 39:7 wrong specifically because of MT influence.

[Anonymous No.18976131]

>>18975874
>Lexham English Septuagint
The LES Psalm 39:7 verse says "You did not want sacrifice and offering, but you restored a body to me." So, it properly says "body" instead of "ears", which puts it above the NETS, but its use of "restored" instead of "prepared" makes the strange suggestion that Christ, therefore, was restored to human form and thus was human before he was divine.

[Anonymous No.18976147]

>>18968398
>no answers
ngmi

[Anonymous No.18976149]

>>18964959
Douay-Rheims seconded.
Traditional Latin Mass seconded.
Seriously, look up latin mass in your area (also called Tridentine Mass or Mass in the Extraordinary form.)
I go exclusively to a Latin Mass church now. It's like night and day compared to modernist NO churches. Beautiful baroque architecture, reverent mass, absolutely zero wishy washy BS, sermons that actually talk about theology and reference church fathers, etc.

[Anonymous No.18976406]

>>18963716
unbased and Marcion-pilled

[Anonymous No.18976937]

i'm pleased by how christpilled /lit/ has become in the last few years

[Anonymous No.18977026]

I'm learning greek and biblical hebrew to read it in the original. Shouldn't be too difficult. I'm a few months into greek and can already get the gist of the gospels. There are versions with running vocabulary and grammar notes for both the old and new testament.

[Anonymous No.18977054]

>>18976937
Despite the shortcomings of the translations mentioned in this thread, recent strong sales for the ESV-CE and the Great Adventure Bible please me, as well. Though I still wish there was an English LXX with just the Brenton translation, as the existing book's old age and 6pt English text makes it more of a hassle than it could be.

[Anonymous No.18977070]

>>18977054
>Great Adventure Bible
Never heard of this until now. Think I just found the perfect bible for my wife.

[Anonymous No.18977096]

>>18977070
Ever since I realized how prominent the RSV-2CE in Catholic circles, both in terms of scholarship and the everyman as a companion to the DRB, I added 4 copies to my planned list (the regular RSV-2CE, the travel-size NT+Psalms, the NT Study Bible, and the Didache). In the midst of that, I also heard about the Great Adventure Bible; it's 90-day Bible plan really intrigues me, so I might give it a go once it comes back in stock.

[Anonymous No.18977111]

>>18963539
KJV, no I won't elaborate on that, goodbye

[Anonymous No.18977152]

>>18963539
The Knox Bible is beautiful

[Anonymous No.18977158]

>>18977152
This, but it was specifically designed as a companion to the Douay Bible, so you shouldn't have one without the other.

[Anonymous No.18977356]

>>18963590
>"I lost my faith in my early teens"? All it shows is that you have the same mindset as a dumb teenager and never developed mentally.
It's pretty much the same reason why people start smoking in their early teens: peer pressure

[Anonymous No.18977386]

>>18963539
>english
King James
>spanish
Reina Varela

Simple as

[Anonymous No.18977389]

>>18977356
I've always noticed that new Catholics seem to pop up either just after graduating high school, while in college, or immediately after grading college. Then, and only then, they start cracking open the Bible or asking about translations, commentaries, seeking out lectures or YouTube videos, etc. Before then, they either become lapsed or reveal they were just larping initially but now are serious.

[Anonymous No.18977455]

>>18975437
Melito (and Origen) intended to record what was considered canonical by Jews in Palestine, and there is nothing surprising that it diverged. He ended up messing up anyway.
However, aside from the writers of the new testament and the apostles using the extent Septuagint, there is no reason to particularly value to opinion of Jews on the matter, even if a few Church fathers did. The people responsible for the rabbinical canon ended up doing >>18975851. There are arguments against some of the books but "the Jews did this" is hardly receivable (and what I referred to).

>>18975495
Yes, beware it's a small book size for some reason.

[Anonymous No.18977494]

>>18970257
Is this your first Bible? Don´t get a super premium one bound in human skins yet, get one that costs like 25$. I have a Holman KJV Ultrathin Reference Bible that is great. It's synthetic bound and printed in China (as most Bibles) but it's very nicely made. It's the right size, font is very legible, reputable company so I doubt there are "revisions" although I'm not sure since I just got it to read the Bible.
You will not get just 1 Bible anyway, you'll get a bunch over time. I use the one I mention to read at the bedside and I'm fine with mistreating it a bit. I have a fancier one in leather that I read at the desk.
No point in being married to a specific version and don't fetishize the book. I'm not sure to what degree it happens but it surely does happen since there's a whole lot of buzz around the book side of the Bible and there's this "premium" aspect to the way Bibles are advertised that is disguised under practical ruggedness. There's even some crossover between the smaller Bibles and the EDC community who are the poster boys for male consumer fetishism. Don't get caught in this stuff or console wars.

[Anonymous No.18977596]

>>18977455
So, is the DR/Vulgate the final authority, even when it matches the MT, or does the LXX then take priority?

[Anonymous No.18977626]

>>18975851
How is the Douay based on the MT? Its a translation of the Vulgate which predates the MT by at least 5 centuries. I do agree that the MT cannot be trusted, only the LXX is the word of God.

[Anonymous No.18977635]

>>18977596
Not him but if the the NT quotes the LXX, and the NT is the word of God, that would make the LXX the word of God.

[Anonymous No.18977690]

>>18977596
The MT as we know it was not yet a thing when the vulgate was made, so it depends how much you trust Hebrew and Aramaic texts as they still were accessible around 400 (earlier texts would have been available) and whether the Latin was closer to them than the Greek.
If it really comes to make one decision, I'd say the LXX takes precedence because that's what the New Testament quotes. The vulgate still has its authenticity from this earlier contact with "originals", that makes it hard to relegate as just being a translation of the bible among others.

[Anonymous No.18978148]

If anyone has these reader's editions of the Septuagint, would they be able to look up >>18975851 these verses and what the translated notes say for them?

[Anonymous No.18978853]

To anyone who would like to mark up/highlight their Bibles with references to the LXX, I found R. Grant Jones' LXX notes which note every instance where the NT quotes the LXX against the MT.
https://www.areopage.net/PDF/LXXNotesFeb06.pdf
If you exclusively want to just see the comparisons in favor of the LXX, skip to Appendix C on page 52. However, I'll say the entire document is worth a read. Additionally, he notes the reverse, where NT verses align instead with the MT, so it's not a purely MT-bashing document.

[Anonymous No.18978854]

>>18978853
If you don't want to bother with the PDF, here's the section of the PDF in an old web form, modified to post:
https://www.geocities[dot]ws/r_grant_jones/Rick/Septuagint/spindex.htm
Use the table of contents on the left for anything else you might want.

[Anonymous No.18979955]

Catholics ITT, what are your thoughts on Byzantine Catholics/Eastern Catholics?

[Anonymous No.18981066]

>>18979955
What do you mean? They're still Catholics in full communion with the Latin Church, so they're still my brothers.

[Anonymous No.18981356]

>>18981066
>They're still Catholics in full communion with the Latin Church, so they're still my brothers.
I am happy to hear this, I was worried that there would be an alien view of them.

[Anonymous No.18981379]

>>18981356
I've never heard such a thing. Then again, my best friend since diapers is a born and raised Greek Orthodox lad and we haven't killed each other yet.

[Anonymous No.18981558]

>>18963539
I'm surprised no one has brought it up, but I would recommend checking out the literal standard version (LSV). It is a new translation from older Sanskrit, Greek, Hebrew texts. They have a free epup online.

[Anonymous No.18981592]

>>18981356
I haven't seen animosity towards alternative rites. I think there were issues in the United States a long time ago. As long as they don't promote heresies and don't flaunt schism.
Moreover the byzantine rite is esthetic.

[Anonymous No.18982581]

>>18971846
>>18977096
how do you like the Didache?
considering getting the leatherbound version as a treat for myself when my next paycheck comes in

[Anonymous No.18982699]

>>18982581
The thing is, all my RSV-2CEs each are for a specific purpose. The regular RSV-2CE is, naturally, a main Bible; the NT+Psalms is for long flights and general travel; and the NT Study Bible is pretty self-explanatory. The primary reason I have the Didache is that it explicitly ties everything into the CCC by aligning verses back to specific paragraphs in the CCC, so for that purpose, it's extremely useful. So, if you want to see how the Catholic teachings are drawn from the Bible, the Didache is a great resource. If you just want a typical "Study Bible" then the others for the RSV-2CE might be more useful to you, be it the Navarre or the standard "Ignatius Catholic Study Bible".

[Anonymous No.18982777]

>>18981558
>Sanskrit
U wot?

[Anonymous No.18982790]

>>18982777
Just a daring synthesis.
Checked

[Anonymous No.18982810]

>>18982699
>So, if you want to see how the Catholic teachings are drawn from the Bible, the Didache is a great resource.
sounds like just what I'm looking for then, thanks for responding!

[Anonymous No.18983183]

https://www.baroniuspress.com/category.php?wid=73&cid=hardbackclassics
Are all of them essentials?

[Anonymous No.18984052]

>>18983183
Imitation and the Rule of St Benedict are most important to me.

[Anonymous No.18984292]

>>18963539
There is no definitive bible
I can recommend three in order of importance
1) The NRSV Oxford Annotated Bible to learn the most up to date scholarship on the textual history of the bible and notes on the true translation
2) KJV for the most sonorous / best English and literary influence in Engish
3) Robert Alter's Hebrew Bible for a great translation of the OT and for his great notes on the literary significance of the Hebrew

[Anonymous No.18984794]

Am I set, lads?

[Anonymous No.18986139]

Is this a bad method to figure out what Bible you should read:
>Take great Christian man you feel inspired by
>Check what kind of denom he belonged to
>Check what Bible that denom would read
>Use that Bible

[Anonymous No.18986151]

>>18973545
TOB is pretty good in french, it even has the orthodox books.

[Anonymous No.18986326]

>>18986151
The Jerusalem is the most poetic recent translation in an important spoken language and had the best side apparatus when it released. Translations from it to English and Italian have been made but not on par.
The Dhorme-Grosjean-Léturmy in the Pléiade is interesting for the translation even though the notes are a compilation of all the most bizarre theories that were going around in the mid-20th century. There's also an "inter testament" tome and two volumes of post-Christ apocrypha in the collection that are good additions.
That's the two I've read.
The TOB is also very good, or so I've heard, and the recent editions with the complete Septuagint thanks to bringing Easterners on board is welcome. For those that consider the Jerusalem too free there are autistic ultra literal translations in French.
It's interesting that Germans have dominated the edition of texts (Greek, Latin, Hebrew, Aramaic) but have disappointing German translations while the French that never bothered much with the "originals" have the best.

[Anonymous No.18986351]

>>18984794
Skip the Didache Bible. The commentary is extremely sparse, especially in the OT, and then there's random apologetical inserts throughout the bible. It's just poorly crafted. I would get the Little Rock bible or some other commentary instead.

[Anonymous No.18987034]

>>18986351
But based on what >>18982699 said, it's the one Bible that actually cites the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Isn't that its chief purpose? The black-covered one is already the main commentary one, right?

[Anonymous No.18987078]

>>18987034
Just get a catechism. They have notes and references if you want to see what scripture is used to support whatever doctrine. The black cover is the study bible.

[Anonymous No.18987130]

>>18987034
>>18987078
I opened it up to a random page and there's just a single not on it. This is the book of Kings too so we're not talking about some obscure book in the bible. I was so annoyed that I spent 40 dollars on this thing.

[Anonymous No.18987182]

>>18987130
Did you try turning the page?

[Anonymous No.18987205]

>>18984794
Remove the Didache. It'll bump your order below $100, you'll still get your free book, and you can decide to order the Didache at a later time. I just don't think it's worth the upfront cost given its material. You'll get more out of the other 3 there.

[Anonymous No.18987286]

>>18987182
What's the going to do?

[Anonymous No.18987356]

>thread about scripture turns into console wars
>probably thanks to atheist trannies who never went to church but want to sow discord
>random switch in the consensus because of spam, at one point overwhelming majority is KJV protty, then KJV is shit and everyone should be Catholic, then both are shit and everyone should be Orthodox
Everyone's being gamed by a bunch of trannies who hate religion. It's the only explanation as to why opinions seem to sway so hard on a community-wide scale overnight.

[Anonymous No.18987397]

>>18987356
>It's the only explanation as to why opinions seem to sway so hard on a community-wide scale overnight.
You sure? It just seems like the thread started with Prots shilling the KJV as usual, then the Orthodox poster came and recommended the Orthodox Study Bible, and finally the Catholics came in and recommended some combination of the Douay and the Ignatius. The only real consensus formed in the thread was reverence for the LXX. I'd argue that opinions are swaying because, and hear me out here: Prots, Catholics, and Orthodox recommend their own Bibles.

[Anonymous No.18987413]

>>18987356
>religious people are schizophrenics and submit everything to their dogma of choice (that they modify every now and then to stay on the cutting edge of online christian LARPing)
>it's the trannies' fault!!!! reeeeee
lol

[Anonymous No.18987426]

>>18987397
I will never be able to prove it but the way these religious threads feel is always very inorganic.
There's always a mix of creeds and opinions but there's a very heavy-handed narrative going on at all times, and it constantly switches. I remember that Catholicism wasn't nearly as prominent, then suddenly Catholicism is set aside and it's all Orthodoxy. All this in a relatively short time span.
It could also be that I'm becoming jaded because this fucking board is constantly under raids by trannies.

[Anonymous No.18987429]

>>18987413
You will never find God.

[Anonymous No.18987449]

>>18987356
>consensus
/lit/ isn't one person.
>>18987413
>larping
Of course...
>>18987426
/lit/ is a small board. A random few anons being active for a few weeks is all it takes. Those people change over time as they spend less time here for a reason or other. Guenonfag was able to single handedly turns 1/20 of all /lit/ discussion to perennialism for over a year. Before that /lit/ was also around 1/20 stirnerposting because of three spammers.

[Anonymous No.18987489]

>>18987426
I agree that many of the posts feel very inorganic, but that's mainly either from unnecessarily aggressive replies to innocuous posts or when someone is shilling far too many different versions that they obviously haven't read or just out-of-left-field choices. Or if they unironically shill the NRSV to anyone. The discussion stemming from >>18975851, however, was probably the most genuine the thread got, along with the other LXX stuff. Doesn't help that the OP of the thread doesn't really come off as genuine, so that might've tainted the flavor of all discussion.

[Anonymous No.18987565]

>>18987489
>unnecessarily aggressive replies to innocuous posts or when someone is shilling far too many different versions that they obviously haven't read or just out-of-left-field choices. Or if they unironically shill the NRSV to anyone.
This is the kind of stuff I am talking about. There have been a few rare mentions of the ESV before but all of a sudden there have been a bunch of very hostile posts whenever it's mentioned.

[Anonymous No.18987654]

>>18987565
>There have been a few rare mentions of the ESV before but all of a sudden there have been a bunch of very hostile posts whenever it's mentioned.
My guess is that KJVonlyists have an extreme hatred for the ESV for some reason, and Catholics feel the ESVCE is too recent to have a desire to set aside the Ignatius for it, especially since the Ignatius already has so much supplementary material available (Study Bibles, the Didache Bible, the endorsement from and usage by all the prominent Catholic scholars, etc.). I heard the ESVCE Study Bible is currently being made, so that might start shifting Catholic opinion.

[Anonymous No.18987690]

>>18987426
That's because Catholicism and Orthodoxy are memes and people here are driven by memes because they are of their *FATHER*, who is more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made.

[Anonymous No.18987716]

Hey >>18987356, I found one of the trannies who hate religion you were talking about: >>18987690

[Anonymous No.18987741]

Catholics ITT, what are your thoughts on Charismatic Catholics?

[Anonymous No.18987750]

>>18987741
>It began in 1967 when Catholics from Duquesne University attended a Protestant worship service and claimed to have been "baptized in the Holy Spirit". It is heavily influenced by American Protestantism, especially Pentecostalism, with an emphasis on having a "personal relationship with Jesus", deep emotional experiences, and expressing the "gifts of the Holy Spirit".
Yep, sounds heretical.

[Anonymous No.18987808]

>>18987716
The only religion I hate is false and Satanic paganism, wafer worshiper.

[Anonymous No.18987875]

>>18987750
They don't profess heresy or schism.
Large emphasis on charismatic gifts can be suspicious though. The life of saints shows how suspicious they were of their own experiences of similar nature. Karen claiming to be illuminated isn't ill meaning but it is annoying.

>>18987808
t. flesh of Christ non eater that shan't have life in him
Bet you aren't even evangelical,

[Anonymous No.18987916]

>>18987875
It's an infiltration of Pentecostal practices into a Catholic setting designed to loosen a Catholic's identity and make it easy for them to convert to a Pentecostal Church. Pentecostal preachers even admit this.

[Anonymous No.18988537]

Would it be rude to load all of my Bibles into my backpack, bring them to church, and ask the pastor to bless all of them? I know priests have no problem about blessing Bibles, but I feel kinda embarrassed thinking about handing 7 Bibles to the guy and asking for blessings on all of them.

[Anonymous No.18988577]

>>18988537
Does it matter if the Bible is blessed? Genuinely asking.

[Anonymous No.18988599]

>>18975946
Where did you read these reviews of missing verses, and did they say which ones were missing. I have a LES, and I think it's pretty good so far, but besides skipping most of Enoch, I don't know what was left out.

[Anonymous No.18988768]

>>18988577
No, but I was going through boxes of childhood stuff and found the Bibles I'd been given for sacraments (NABs), and recalled the memories of my parent's making sure I got them blessed before we went home from the church, made me ponder getting all the Bibles I've gotten in adulthood blessed (Douay, Knox, NJB, and a few Ignatius), as well, just to follow that trend.

[Anonymous No.18988859]

>>18988537
If I were a priest, I would bless them all, on the condition you use those Bibles to smite atheists, trannies, and fags.

[Anonymous No.18988878]

>>18988537
Why would you assume that their blessing is any better than your own? I just ask the LORD God to bless mine.

[Anonymous No.18989128]

>>18987356
Our console wars are more entertaining because we have different historical and philosophical perspectives rather than just arguing about ram and libraries.

I do as a Catholic think that we and the Orthodox should stop having so much of a petty culture war between us when we agree on like 99% of shit.

[Anonymous No.18989169]

>>18989128
>I do as a Catholic think that we and the Orthodox should stop having so much of a petty culture war between us when we agree on like 99% of shit.
This.

[Anonymous No.18989575]

For me it's the ESV Study Bible.

[Anonymous No.18989636]

>>18989575
I'm hoping for this but adapted from their recent Catholic Edition. I recall some articles saying it was in the works, with one initially saying it was intended for release this December, but I'm not sure if le virus delayed it. It doesn't seem difficult; just sounds like copying the new ESVCE text into the existing one, with the same pictures, and removing the explicitly protestant study notes.

[Anonymous No.18989641]

>>18989575
Far from perfect, but probably the single overall greatest volume ever produced.

[Anonymous No.18989655]

>>18989636
>Catholics coopting Protestant tools again
Make your own modern translations reeeeeeeeee

[Anonymous No.18989693]

>>18989655
I already have the Ignatius Study Bible.
>inb4 but muh RSV
We fixed Luke 1:28 and all the study notes are Catholic-written, so it's Catholic now. Plus, it's just a companion, because the DRC and the Knox are the actual Catholic Bibles.

[Anonymous No.18989695]

>>18989655
Well, it wasn't done by Crossway, they just licensed some Indians to modify the text into this edition. I agree though that they should just do their own. The Orthodox used the NKJV, so it seems that Catholic and Orthodox can't do their own translations from scratch despite all of their "but we are the ones who gave you the Bible" lies.

[Anonymous No.18989737]

>>18989695
>The Orthodox used the NKJV, so it seems that Catholic and Orthodox can't do their own translations from scratch despite all of their "but we are the ones who gave you the Bible" lies.
Because we can save time by just fixing your mistakes and putting out a corrected version. Same reason the 1971 NT revision of the RSV that came after the RSVCE basically took all the edits the CE made and inserted them into the newer protestant version.

[Anonymous No.18989834]

>>18989737
>save time
Exactly the expected attitude towards God's word from those who hold their own teachings above His, those who attempted to keep it from the common people's possession and view 1500+ years. Protestants put the work in while Satanic pagan wafer and Mary worshipers throw together quick remixes.

[Anonymous No.18989870]

>>18989834
Meds.

[Anonymous No.18989873]

>>18989834
>not learning Latin
No wonder you can't be close to God.

[Anonymous No.18989967]

>>18989695
And if they try to make their own modern translation they would have to use Protestant Greek and Hebrew resources lul. You just know Catholic seminarians are probably using Machen's greek grammar.

[Anonymous No.18990097]

I read ESV and David Bentley Hart NT translation.
All serious Christians on internet use ESV for quotes and discussions.

[Anonymous No.18990379]

>>18990097
>All serious Christians on internet

[Anonymous No.18990542]

>>18963815
>New Testament, then Old Testament, then New Testament again.
Objectively the best way. The OT paints god as a psychopathic asshole. It also literally contradicts itself in the first two chapters of Genesis which doesn't exactly inspire confidence in the work as a whole. As mentioned elsewhere in the thread, the OT is best read as a collection of the beliefs and legends that Jesus and the people he interacted with would have been familiar with.
>INB4 midwits reeing about how the entire bible should be read literally and any other interpretation is heretical.

[Anonymous No.18990557]

>>18990542
For me, I read the OT, then the NT, then specific verses from the OT that Jesus quoted, and then the NT at least once a year. Aside from the shorter books, I haven't reread the entire OT again, but I've read the NT many, many times.

[Anonymous No.18990823]

>>18963572
Who controls the world?

[Anonymous No.18990891]

>>18975475
based and protectorate-pilled

[Anonymous No.18990903]

>>18976149
i was under the impression that popa franky and the jeese-its had banned the practicing of the latin mass without direct authorization from rome, and then only in cases where a significant community pre-exists the restoration of the latin mass?

pretty sure this was a big catholic flashpoint like a month or 2 ago. has something changed or is my info incorrect?

[Anonymous No.18990938]

>>18981356
i mean, maybe in 1054 this was the case, but the eastern orthodox and roman catholic churches have made significant ecumenical strides in the last couple hundred years, see the eastern rite churches in full communion with rome for examples of full reunification into one (albeit roman catholic) church.

there were always far fewer differences between the roman and eastern orthodox churches than both of those and protestantism, and those differences have narrowed and, iirc, largely limited to 1) Mary and how she is referred to (i.e. theotokos); 2) clerical organization and primacy of rome vs other communities; and 3) cultural practices such as orthodoxy's practice of baptism/first communion/confirmation at once vs roman catholics experiencing the sacraments individually over several years. those all pale in comparison with a lot of the protestant nonsense such as sola scriptura

[Anonymous No.18991304]

>>18990823
Idk, you should ask /pol/

[Anonymous No.18991310]

I was about to go on a rant after seeing some posts ITT but judging by the time of the posts and the trve-protestant sound of them (Lutherans wouldn't make those comments and they are the schismatics that can be taken seriously on the subject), it's obviously just Americanos.

>>18990938
>made significant ecumenical strides in the last couple hundred years, see the eastern rite churches in full communion with rome for examples of full reunification into one (albeit roman catholic) church.
It was already started by the council of Florence, the first eastern reunited church were the Maronites in the 12th century. Reunification have been spread over the centuries since.

>>18990903
You need authorization from the local bishop. As far as I know it has been given when it was asked but it's unclear how it is followed. It is considered as biritualism for using the 1962 missal. That's usually what it meant by traditional mass. Some Latin can be used in the current liturgy but the missal imposes large parts in vernacular languages.

[Anonymous No.18991419]

>>18991310
>You need authorization from the local bishop. As far as I know it has been given when it was asked but it's unclear how it is followed.
Seems to be the case. Despite the aforementioned discussion, the TLM at my local cathedral, Wednesdays at 3 pm, hasn't changed. Maybe they'll attempt to phase us out, but our bishop hasn't shown any indication of putting an end to our mass.

[Anonymous No.18991794]

>>18973545
I believe the Martin Bible looks more faithful to the source text than Segond but I'm not really fluent in French.

[Anonymous No.18991836]

>>18988878
Could be because not everyone has adopted an anti-officiation stance on all things like you.

[Anonymous No.18991837]

>>18973545
The best Catholic study Bible in French is La Bible de Jérusalem.

[Anonymous No.18991852]

>>18977635
Divinely inspired not divinely penned.

[Anonymous No.18991857]

Catholics have to read the church fathers, the summa and thousands of papal letters just to be saved. While the grace and the word of GOD is enough for the rest of us. Really makes you think.

[Anonymous No.18993197]

bump

[Anonymous No.18993508]

>>18991857
Sola scriptura in and of itself is hardly sufficient for the extremely worldly life (and it gets more worldlier by the second) to comprehend divinity. Quite possibly, the dissonance between scripture and the world is the easiest path to unbelief and its despair. "Elementaria scriptura", that is wide, personal, individual reading away from the New Atheists' negativity and support for imperialism and the synagogue of Satan is the rule for seeking the Trinity's persons within and without.

Personally, I found the Spirit through Hegel, Christ at the Jungian psychological junction between Carrolls' Wonderland, Looking Glass and the Judean desert and the Father in Robert Service's biography of Stalin. "Ruthless criticism" is the "truth that shall set you free".

[Anonymous No.18993518]

>>18991836
I'm not "anti-officiation" as an ideal, but I know too well that that "priest" is probably on Grindr and doing meetups everywhere he goes until he gets exposed. Here in Babylon I put no trust in man, only God.

[Anonymous No.18993628]

>>18993518
You are a truly democratic man I see, you were born in the right time then, you get to enjoy the realities of your beliefs.

[Anonymous No.18993931]

did the Ignatius company ever get round to doing a full Study Bible, or is it still stuck in the NT?

[Anonymous No.18994075]

>>18993931
I recently watched an old 2012 interview with Hahn where he was promoting the NT Study Bible, and indicated the plan was to have the OT Study Bible done around 2014-2015. Cut to 2021 and, while it's still not out, the separate one for Wisdom and Sirach came out earlier this year. As of now, this is the most recent news:
http://catholicbibletalk.com/2020/07/update-on-ignatius-catholic-study-bible-progress/
>Last year, rumors were spreading in the Catholic Bible world that the remaining Old Testament volumes of the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible (ICSB) would be released in 2020. A few commenters mentioned this in a post on the ICSB Isaiah volume. One of the commenters referred to a video of Scott Hahn, which indicated a publication date of late 2020 or 2021.
>A reader recently emailed Ignatius Press for clarification. Ignatius responded with a brief statement that they authorized to be shared on the blog:
>"No, it is not correct – we hope to have it out sometime next year, but because there is still a lot to do, there is no way to give a date yet."
So, it's still trapped in the endless "Coming Next Year™" position it's been in for the last decade. I'm going to assume they'll just blame COVID this time. But I also think they might be concerned about the ESVCESB supposedly in development. Who knows? They might even be concerned about the coming NAB revision due out in 2025, too. Imagine spending the last decade working on this SB, only to have someone else come out with a better resource the very next year or so.

[Anonymous No.18994090]

>>18963539
the masoretic is rabbinic subversion

[Anonymous No.18994114]

>>18993931
Actually, scratch this. >>18994075
Here's the actual latest:
http://catholicbibletalk.com/2021/07/update-on-ignatius-catholic-study-bible/
>A reader recently reached out to Ignatius Press to inquire about the status of the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible (ICSB). Over the past year, a few people involved with the project have commented that the remaining books of the Bible have been completed and should be published after the editing and review process is completed. Here is the latest statement from Ignatius Press:
>Thank you for your patience, but it’s (the complete Ignatius Study Bible) not going to be ready this year. Editing and getting imprimaturs for all the books takes a very long time. We hope (for) the Fall of next year (2022), but there is no specific date.

[Anonymous No.18994115]

there is no good english translation

[Anonymous No.18994340]

>using the masoretic text as main basis of OT
>artificially writing in an antiquated state of the target language at time of edition to ape a previous translation or sound dignified
>using gender-inclusive language
>literal translation reading like a learning exercise rather than a genuine text of the target language
I seriously hope you guys don't do this.

[Anonymous No.18994452]

>>18994340
Allowing the Jews to convince Bible translators to use the Masoretic Text instead of the Septuagint, in my opinion, should be regarded as the single greatest mistake in the history of OT Bible scholarship. Discovery of the DSS, with ancient Hebrew text differing from the MT and confirming the LXX translations, makes it all too clear that the MT was created specifically to expunge Christ from the OT's prophecies, and all the Christians who went along with it should be ashamed of themselves.

What the world needs is a full Bible, translated from both the Greek OT and Greek NT, with footnotes indicating specific instances where the MT corrupted the text to attack Christ. The age of relegating the LXX to footnotes should end; either the MT should be the one relegated to footnotes where it should be roundly mocked, or it should be expunged entirely.

[Anonymous No.18994709]

>>18994114
thanks o7

[Anonymous No.18994797]

>>18994452
>either the MT should be the one relegated to footnotes where it should be roundly mocked
The EOB New Testament does exactly that. Well, maybe not so much as mocking the MT part.

[Anonymous No.18994843]

I love the KJV and I have the ESV. I like both. Since I can read Latin well enough to understand it, should I get the Vulgata? Imagine that I can only buy one other text and only one.
I don't know where I am ideologically yet, I just like the KJV a lot and I think the Reform makes a lot of sense, so there's that. I wouldn't mind reading something Catholic. Just sell me on whatever you think is the best complementary text I can get.

[Anonymous No.18995085]

>>18994843
Currently, the chief Catholic selection is the Douay, the Knox, the RSV-2CE, and maybe the ESV-CE, although that one is still pretty new and there hasn't been too much discussion about it. The Knox is really only a companion to the Douay, so getting it on its own is really just for the interpretive notes than anything. If you want the Vulgata with the Douay in one book, Baronius Press sells a Douay Rheims-Clementina Vulgata side-by-side Bible, but the price is steep. The RSV-2CE is used by Catholic scholars and has gotten the most attention in terms of supplementary study materials from the Catholic world. And finally, the ESV-CE, as I said, is still too new to really tell; some say it's leaps better than the RSV-2CE and "more accurate", with others saying the ESV-CE is "certainly not a bad choice to make, but it is still less good than the RSV-2CE," in the words of one Catholic theologian.

[Anonymous No.18995166]

>>18994843
Douay-Rheims if you want something Catholic to compare with the KJV, and the RSV2CE if you want something Catholic to compare with the ESV. Simple as.

[Anonymous No.18995369]

>>18994452
The cope I've heard is that the Dead Sea Scrolls belonged to Essenes and the Pharisee-Saducee Sanhedrin had different texts. The current Jews, as successors of the competing old sects, can always claim that the texts were already corrupted before Jesus Christ.
Still the texts are a millenium anterior to the MT, and most of them certainly pre-Christian. They agree with the Septuagint more than the MT in spite of being in the same language. They also show that at least several books of the deuterocanon were indeed in ancient Hebrew collections in apostolic times and were cast aside by rabbis later.
To reject the MT outright is too harsh but the fascination is has on some is questionnable. The hebraic bible is still very useful in the crushing majority of the text. The Septuagint and Vulgate couldn't be perfect translations (if there is ever one), and having Hebrew is not something we can reject.

[Anonymous No.18996303]

>>18963539
do you have a family Bible that's been passed down? I would consider reading that. I'm also someone who was raised Catholic (school, less so family) and lost my faith, but recently I've been reading Ecclesiastes in my KJV my grandparents gave me for my first Communion (grandparents were Prot). Tradcaths can argue over which translation is best on twitter all day but I think the one my grandparents gave me is the most "trad" of all. Also it's beautifully written (read the NSAB or whatever in school, always felt very dry)

[Anonymous No.18996388]

Our Father who art in heaven,
Hallowed be thy name.
Thy kingdom come,
Thy will be done,
On earth as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread;
And forgive us our trespasses,
As we forgive those who trespass against us;
And lead us not into temptation,
But deliver us from evil.

Amen.

[Anonymous No.18997234]

>>18993628
>democratic
Again, only because of the circumstances of Babylon. I would prefer the absolute rule of the righteous King, but here, again, men are all too fallible (at the very least) to allow for granting them power of decision.

I have many beliefs, very few of which are compatible with "enjoyment" under any Babylonian circumstances. There is no such thing as a "right time" here, other than the fact that God wills all according to His plan.

[Anonymous No.18997290]

Newrome Press is working on publishing a complete (non-study) Orthodox Bible in English, using the LES for the OT and the EOB for the NT; that way Orthodox Christians can throw off the OSB's usage of the NKJV. As a Catholic, though the Bible won't be for me, I'm happy about this news and I'm awaiting it because I feel it'll be a great gift for my Orthodox friend. Any Orthodox have thoughts on this Bible?

[Anonymous No.18997501]

>>18987429
But you should still pray that he does, dude.

[Anonymous No.18997520]

>>18997501
That goes without saying.

[Anonymous No.18997541]

>>18996303
>I think the one my grandparents gave me is the most "trad" of all.
I like the cut of your jib, Anon.
I still have the NIV Bible that my parents got for my 7th birthday, and I read from it every day. Sure, people like to dunk on the NIV, but what matters is that I have a tangible reminder of the faith my parents passed down to me.

We're overthinking this thread, boys. Read whatever your parents or spiritual mentors gave you. I think the Spirit honors that.

[Anonymous No.18997648]

>>18996303
My Bible wasn't passed down, but my grandmother owned several Bibles and never left home without one. When we were cleaning out her house after she died, each of us picked one out to keep. Mine has an inscription she wrote on the cover page that says "Either this book will keep you away from sin, or sin will keep you away from this book." Like all of her Bibles, she used it for study, and it's loaded with underlines and notes in the margins from cover to cover. I feel at ease from reading from this particular Bible, and I enjoy reading her notes and figuring out her thoughts interpretations on the verses. It is one of my most cherished possessions, besides a quilt she made for me and a bunch of her watercolor paintings.

[Anonymous No.18997682]

>>18997648
That's awesome.
My grandma wakes up at dawn every day to read the Bible, pray, and write her reflections. She's been doing it for years, so there are volumes upon volumes chronicling her walk with Jesus. I'm definitely keeping those safe after she eventually passes.

[Anonymous No.18997751]

>>18997541
My parents gave me an NIV for graduation many decades ago. I trashed it and just read my KJV, but always treasure the memory of them doing their best to keep me instilled with faith. Parental faith/love = good, NIV = Satanic fake and gay.

[Anonymous No.18997764]

My grandmother's Douay from 1945 remained on the living room bookshelf as I grew up. For Christmas one year, my uncle got me one from Baronius, and that's been my main. I did get an NAB for confirmation, but I've never used it due to the stigma of the translation and shitty notes.

[Anonymous No.18997781]

Thoughts on goatskin rebinding?

[Anonymous No.18998087]

>>18995085
>>18995166
Thoughts about the Italian CEI Bible?

[Anonymous No.18998098]

>>18998087
Italian *anything* and *everything* should be burned.

[Anonymous No.18998138]

>>18998087
It's the official liturgical one. It's probably doing the job. If you want a study book there is an Italian translation of the French Jerusalem which is excellent.
The Martini translation is the most important historical one. It's the only one I have but more as a collection item, I don't read Italian very well.

[Anonymous No.18998147]

>>18998087
I don't speak pizza.

[Anonymous No.18998158]

>>18963539
>all of these retards obsessing over a babylono-canaanite fish cult and diet goyim judaism

[Anonymous No.18998160]

>>18998087
>>18998138
If you want you can compare various versions on on https://www.scrutatio.it/bibbia/lettura/it/martini
For some reason they didn't put the Jerusalem in Italian.

[Anonymous No.18998166]

>>18998087
>Pertanto il Signore stesso vi darà un segno. Ecco: la vergine concepirà e partorirà un figlio, che chiamerà Emmanuele.
>Entrando da lei, disse: «Ti saluto, o piena di grazia, il Signore è con te».
It says "virgin" and "full of grace," so it passes the Isaiah 7:14 and Luke 1:28 tests.

[Anonymous No.18999028]

>>18997290
That's not smart at all. LES is done by a small team of people and each individual "translated" entire books on their own with minimal eyes checking the end product, you feel it while reading it, the style switch is radical as you read along.
Basically a single guy made a interlinear for LXX, then a software script re-arranged the words in English order and that team then polished it a little.

EOB is an idiosyncratic translation by a single guy.

NKJV is a collective polishing of a collective translation where multiple eyes did the same sections and then checked each other.

[Anonymous No.18999483]

I didn't know this thread was up so I made unnecessary thread about it, help me out here:

-------

I'm not Christian nor do I wish to become one. However I want to be able to read and understand their holy book.

Whats the best edition of the Bible? Hopefully that covers both historical and theological aspects. More additional information the better.

[Anonymous No.18999536]

>>18999483
oxford annotated bible i guess. you won't understand it anyway

[Anonymous No.18999631]

>>18998158
Still more popular than your favorite book.

[Anonymous No.19000081]

>>18999028
>EOB is an idiosyncratic translation by a single guy.
>NKJV is a collective polishing of a collective translation where multiple eyes did the same sections and then checked each other.
Watching the R. Grant Jones video, I don't see the problem with the EOB. It has a different translation source than the NKJV, the 1904 Patriarchal Text instead of the Textus Receptus, and follows that philosophy in the verse comparisons that were shown.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vx6WTuAvBWw
Here's the entire EOB NT, so if you have any particular examples you take issue with, I'm interested:
https://azbyka.ru/otechnik/books/original/18204/Eastern_Orthodox_Bible-New_Testament.pdf

[Anonymous No.19000103]

>>18999483
>understand
This will be absolutely impossible without approaching with the Spirit.

[Anonymous No.19000175]

>>18963572
Qui controle le monde?

[Anonymous No.19000290]

>>18999483
>Whats the best edition of the Bible? Hopefully that covers both historical and theological aspects. More additional information the better.

KJV, red letter. Criticize it on your own. Now read >>19000103 it alongside with Hegel's "Phenomenology of Spirit" (he is called Protestant Aquinas for a very good reason) to comprehend it on a far larger scale than American Christianity possibly can - it opens an entire new realm of existence. Engage in "ruthless criticism of all that exists", for "ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free". You may even read the general corpus of Western philosophy and literature (biographies of earthly great men to comprehend the Father, literature with good and meek fictional protagonists to comprehend the Son, philosophy in general to comprehend the Spirit) alongside it. A parsimonious solution of Hume's is-ought problem in sin (positively is, normatively should not be), how Plato and Aristotle may have influenced conceptions of the afterlife, why Nietzsche seethed so heavily about Christianity being a slave religion, an identification of historicism with Spirit, a way to comprehend the victory of the Taliban with imperialism viewed as the greatest of all sins. I probably can't think my way out of Christianity now. Hamartiology, pneumatology, theology.

The fastest way to Christianity probably is via Omega. The Bible is the train Central Station, the hub of Western philosophy.

[Anonymous No.19000349]

>>18971053
They’re LARPers. Catholics are modern day Pharisees too

[Anonymous No.19000424]

>>19000290
>red letter
Ignore this person. Always go black letter for words of Christ.

[Anonymous No.19001215]

>>18999028
>small team
>single guy
Why is this an automatic downside? Knox did his version as a solo gig and that turned out beautiful.

[Anonymous No.19001575]

>>19001215
If anything it's a plus.

[Anonymous No.19001627]

Okay, guys. You're tasked with making the "perfect" Bible translation for your faith and don't have to answer to teams or scholars from outside your denomination. How do you do it and what's your base text?

[Anonymous No.19001712]

>>19001627
Brenton's LXX translation is the base text for the OT and the RSVCE is the base text for the NT. From there, the thees and thous and whatnot are maintained/restored, the Vulgate renderings are restored where removed, and all the original anti-protestant footnotes from the 1582 Douay-Rheims NT are restored.

[Anonymous No.19001738]

>>19000081
I've read EOB, I've read Sarah Ruden Gospels, I've read DBH NT, NT Wright NT... my point stands, avoid idiosyncratic or small team projects as your main study bibles. Totally fine for checking over, even my KJV only friends got "corrupted" by me to use such a secondary tool, they're fond of Hart's edition. The task is too difficult for one person to handle.
The EOB guy had a better start because he revised an online open-source translation, but it still has mistakes which surprisingly enough, none of the idiosyncratic translation have but all the collective ones reproduce, so that's odd.
Also the guy knows Greek alright, but he's not a classicist so I don't really see value in his edition. I'd read NKJV more faithfully than his.

[Anonymous No.19001786]

>>19001215
Sometimes it works miraculously for NT, but for OT that'll never be the case.
I'm a guy who mostly read idiosyncratic translations in English and Romanian while listening to podcasts, reading papers of translators etc. Over the years I've moved in the collective projects camp, but at pains.
They're excellent secondary tools to check over but not the main study material.

Complement KJV, NKJV, ASV, ESV, RSV, NRSV with any of those and you'll be fine.

Also it should be obvious, always stay away from dynamic equivalence translations, things like NIV. NT Wright's NT is such a translation, but it happens to be decent overall because the guy is a good scholar and invested in the project.

[Anonymous No.19001856]

I joined the bandwagon hating the NRSV because of the gender shit, but after watching the NRSV vs. ESV video Grant Jones did, I have to admit the notes are worthwhile. Maybe the NRSV isn't the Bible you might want as your prized leather Bible, but it's totally worth getting as a standard hardback just for the notes.

[Anonymous No.19001943]

>>19001627
Benton's Septuagint for the OT, and KJV for NT.

[Anonymous No.19001953]

>>19001627
KJV, done.

[Anonymous No.19001963]

>>19001943
Based.
>>19001953
Cringe.

[Anonymous No.19002159]

>>19001963
>thinks "he" can improve God's word

[Anonymous No.19002194]

>>19002159
The MT was a fraud, which means restoring the Greek OT that was actually used by Christ is an objective improvement.

[Anonymous No.19002247]

>>19002194
The KJV translators used the LXX readings in the necessary spots. Otherwise the MT is *the* OT. The LXX is terrible for the most part, but correctly used "virgin", for example.

[Anonymous No.19002282]

>>19002247
>The KJV translators used the LXX readings in the necessary spots.
Change "necessary" to "all" and the KJV would be fixed.
>Otherwise the MT is *the* OT.
No, the LXX is *the* OT. The MT was written 1000 years after the LXX.

[Anonymous No.19002288]

>>18995166
>>18995085
>>18994843
What would this be for Orthodoxy?

[Anonymous No.19002293]

>>19002282
Imagine believing
>The MT was written 1000 years after the LXX

[Anonymous No.19002300]

>>19002288
>Orthodoxy
The Satanic Bible, same as Catholicism.

[Anonymous No.19002356]

>>19002293
This is the proven timeframe. At least we know it was written in its current form long after.

[Anonymous No.19002378]

>>19002356
I guess that's just why the MT and DSS are in 60% agreement.

[Anonymous No.19002421]

>>19002288
Orthodox has no "official" English Bible, since the LXX and the NT are both in Greek. The Orthodox Study Bible uses the NKJV and some, but not all, of the LXX, but often chooses the stick with the NKJV text even where it differs from the LXX; it's widely used, but not official and has many Orthodox critics mainly stemming from being viewed as trying to bend Orthodoxy to the NKJV text. The EOB is new (2011) and only covers the NT, but apparently intends to use the LES OT to create a complete Bible, though the release on that is still pending from Newrome Press. So as of now, I guess I'd recommend the EOB NT and a Greek NT to compare, and the LES LXX translation of the OT. Ask your clergy for their recommendations.

[Anonymous No.19002456]

>>19002378
Among other things. Calling the MT "the" old testament is disingenuous at best. It's a piece of a puzzle the solution of which has long disappeared.

[Anonymous No.19002492]

>>19002378
It has been shown when the LXX and Mt contradict, the LXX most often agrees with the Dead Sea Scrolls. That is a fact.

[Anonymous No.19002768]

>>19002492
The NT quotes the LXX, Church Fathers use the LXX. The LXX holds precedents and prestige over the MT. All other claims are anti-christian.

[Anonymous No.19002783]

>>19002288
Our endorsed OT translation is LXX but if you were to translate it to English and compare with a translation in the same language of the medieval Masoretic text, they would be considerably different.

Vernacular usage is encourage by Orthodox, this has always been the case since day 1. For English OSB is recommended because it's the NKJV with corrections to match LXX. Generally we prefer translations that follow the formal equivalence philosophy.

[Anonymous No.19002802]

>>19002768

[Anonymous No.19002886]

>>19002783
So, is the EOB a meme or does nobody in the Orthodox community actually know about it?

[Anonymous No.19002927]

>>19002886
Everyone and their grandma knows about it. People prefer OSB and send people there.

[Anonymous No.19003010]

>>19002802
I don't trust this guy

[Anonymous No.19003025]

>>19003010
It's somewhat difficult to hate the guy, but he still started another heresy which politicians abused in horrible ways btw.

[Anonymous No.19003445]

>>19002492
And yet despite those few instances the MT and DSS are more in agreement overall than the LXX and DSS.

[Anonymous No.19004399]

>>19003445
The thing is they only found a few fragments of LXX (greek) in the Judean desert caves.
The rest of the documents which are of the Hebrew scripture domain are all in Hebrew, which indeed validate MT overall - but the thing is that among the different readings from modern MT, you have overlap with LXX and other ancient translations/traditions.

LXX itself is not exactly a literal translation so you can't engineer back your way to the original Hebrew, we just know that it used a Hebrew tradition that was different from what became MT, be it originally or modified in Medieval times...

[Anonymous No.19004438]

I've decided on this bible to be my first one.
I'll be honest, I was really adamant on going the KJV route but from the research I've done I ultimately decided to go with this beauty.
It's an NKJV Classic Verse-by-Verse Center-Column Reference Bible, and I love just about everything about it.
Should be arriving over the next few days. I've been eagerly awaiting to read it. Like words cannot describe how much I want to read the word of God.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLpoFOBHYek

[Anonymous No.19004485]

>>19004438
>wanting to read the word of God
>not buying a Bible

[Anonymous No.19004507]

>>19004399
I think the scholarly consensus is there were multiple literary traditions of the OT, not just LXX and MT. The fact that the DSS contains both passages that agree with the LXX against the MT and vice versa shows that using the DSS as a litmus test of authenticity is not adequate.

[Anonymous No.19004512]

>>19004438
Not a fan of the KJV by nature, but that's still a beautiful book.

[Anonymous No.19004519]

>formal equivalence
CEV is a good update over the KJV imo
also stop projecting your reactionary ideology onto christianity

[Anonymous No.19004532]

>>19004519
>CEV
To be honest, I agree. It's great for its purpose. However, in addition to my more literal Bibles, I would prefer one that's explicitly in poetic English.

[Anonymous No.19004578]

>>19004519
>>19004532
hesgoingalloutb8.png
I'd sooner recommend The Message.

[Anonymous No.19004599]

>>19004532
i just need to be able to get the message as quickly and intuitively as possible myself, nothing scholarly or whatever

[Anonymous No.19004843]

>>19004599
Just read a few Chick tracts then.

[Anonymous No.19005213]

r8

[Anonymous No.19005272]

someone please help me out.
I need a KJV Bible that is not an ebook. I need it to be sectioned in 365 readings so I can read it each day of next year but it needs to be from start to end, not mixing the OT and the NT, simply reading from cover to cover.
I cannot seem to locate this.

[Anonymous No.19005347]

>>19005272
https://www.heartlight.org/devotionals/reading_plans/straightthrough.pdf
Got you covered.

As a bonus, here's an alternative that tries to place things in chronological order. With this, you'd jump around within the OT and NT, but never mix the two. Basically, this is so (A) the history doesn't jump around too much and (B) you don't have to plow through 150 Psalms in a row.
http://static.esvmedia.org/assets/pdfs/rp.chronological.pdf

Up to you what you decide.

[Anonymous No.19005398]

>>19005272
You submit to God not God to you, just get a KJV and read it.

[Anonymous No.19005457]

>>18968302
>You want a deep dive?
Fuck off you deranged reddit wop.

[Anonymous No.19005486]

>>19005347
thank you, but I'm searching for a Bible that is sectioned into a year of reading within the book itself rather than referencing from a list.
Genesis 1:1 on January 1st, that sort of thing.

>>19005398
I wonder why the KJV is not made as plentiful as water and not presented as clearly as pure ice for those that seek it. there must be a vested interest in any amount of obscuring it.

[Anonymous No.19005559]

http://catholicbibletalk.com/2021/07/nrsv-updated-edition-release-date-and-sampler/
lol wow the NRSV is becoming even shittier. I didn't even think that'd be possible.
>In English, “leprosy” refers to a specific skin disease (otherwise known as Hansen’s Disease). The Old Testament’s references to skin diseases are less specific, so the NRSV-UE translates these references as “defiling skin disease” or similar equivalents.
>The Greek word adelphoi is a word that can mean either “brothers” or “brothers and sisters.” The NRSV generally translated it “brothers and sisters” with a note saying “Gk brothers” to alert readers that there is only a single Greek word that can be literally translated “brothers.” The NRSV-UE has extended the use of “brothers and sisters” throughout the text and dropped the notes. Since the Greek word does not always refer to male siblings, the translators considered the note unnecessary.
>The NRSV used “servant-girl” to refer to a servant who is a young woman. In modern English, the translators judged that the word “girl” is a pejorative when referring to a young woman, so they revised these references to “female servant.”
>The NRSV-UE will use “prostitution” instead of “whoring” and “sexual immorality” instead of “fornication” to reflect the scholars’ view that “whoring” and “fornication” are archaic.
And more. Looks like, in response to criticism about being too liberal at the expense of the original text, they're doubling down.

[Anonymous No.19005588]

>>19005559
They're just messing with us now.

[Anonymous No.19005653]

>>19004438
My Holman KJV is substantially cheaper than this one and it's very well made. Great publisher. The synthetic covers from Holman and Crossway feel incredibly nice, I would say better than cheap leather. And they're allegedly pretty durable unless you leave your Bible in the sun in the summer. Get a case or at least keep the box, I wouldn't shelf it upright.

[Anonymous No.19005669]

>>19005559
The NRSV is good aside from the gender stuff. Looks like they are accentuating its worst feature. I won't be getting it.

[Anonymous No.19005682]

>>19005669
The NRSV has great notes, but if I want the notes, I can get a Study Bible.

[Anonymous No.19005704]

>>19005669
This is one of the perks of something like the KJV, it's not going to be subject to arbitrary changes over time.

[Anonymous No.19005814]

rsv or esv is good
kjv if you want to study it for its literature influence
robert alter translation of OT if you want specific insights on hebrew language translation and context
david bentley hart's NT translation if you want something very literal from someone very well studied on greek and ancient greek

[Anonymous No.19005822]

>>19005814
>ESV
What's the opinion on it? It looks like a good translation but there's been some backlash against it here.

[Anonymous No.19005842]

>>19005822
for a newer reader I dont think there's enough difference from rsv to get nitpicky about it, if it happens to be cheaper on ebay than a rsv
I've seen a catholic priest say rsv with apocrypha has probably the best balance for modern readers if they want something in the kjv line but they're just not used to kjv

[Anonymous No.19005847]

>>19005822
KJVists hate it because it's an even more modernized version of the RSV which KJVists already distrusted; Catholics are distrustful of it because it's explicitly evangelical, its Catholic Edition concedes important Catholic translation staples (Luke 1:28 being a big one) to the non-Catholic tradition, and because the recent ESV-CE is seen as trying to usurp the RSV-2CE as the new Catholic scholarly standard, which Catholic scholars seeded in the RSV-2CE, not to mention Ignatius Press itself, obviously don't want.

[Anonymous No.19005887]

>>19005847
>it's an even more modernized version of the RSV
isn't the ESV more conservative?

[Anonymous No.19005911]

>>19005887
It's conservative evangelical, but, among other things, it still removed the thees and thous in 2001, a decision which the RSV-2CE followed in 2006; and yet both of these are considered conservative in their theology today. The original RSV is more conservative than both, but recall when it came out in the 50s, it was seen as too liberal by KJV protestants and Douay Catholics.

[Anonymous No.19005941]

>>19005398
And you should submit to a pack of rabid niggers. Gatekeeping the Word of the Lord out of some misplaced sense of superiority? You are not Him, merely His messenger, and you cannot even do that right.

[Anonymous No.19005962]

>>18977111
lovely trips, ghostman

[Anonymous No.19005982]

>>19004485
>biblegateway.com

[Anonymous No.19006077]

>>19005982
>kingjamesbibleonline.org

[Anonymous No.19006373]

>>19006077
>kringemsbabol.oid

[Anonymous No.19006845]

>>19005911
Depends what you count as liberal and conservative. The RSV follows the Hebrew for Isaiah 7:14 ("young woman") while the KJV, ESV, and RSV-2CE follow the Greek ("virgin").

Most modern translations are prettt good. If you're seriously studying the text you do it in the original languages anyway.