Holy Bible

[Anonymous No.20090565]

Read it carefully and avoid the false Christs edition. Last thread: >>20071717

[Anonymous No.20090613]

So long as everyone agrees that Christ is Lord and the sole salvation of the world, does it really benefit anyone besides the great enemy for so much infighting?

Or am I just the historical third party watching God's flock turn against each other while Satan laughs in the distance?

[Anonymous No.20090615]

>>20090565
I only take the gospel of Thomas seriously, sorry. I use the Bible in order to make sense of some of the quotations on Thomas, and even then understanding the New Testament as a highly propagandistic and distorted work.

[Anonymous No.20090623]

Bros I'm gonna need a little help with this chapter
>Numbers 31, set in the southern Transjordanian regions of Moab and Midian, narrates how an army of Israelite soldiers commanded by Phinehas (commissioned by Moses and Phinehas' father Eleazar) waged a war against the Midianites, killing all men and boys including their five kings, and taking all livestock, women and girls captive. Moses instructed the soldiers to kill all women who had ever had sex with a man, and to keep the women and girls who were still virgins for themselves. The spoils of war were then divided between the Israelite civilians, soldiers and the god Yahweh.

[Anonymous No.20090632]

>>20090615
BASED

[Anonymous No.20090647]

>>20090613
No, it doesn't. Sadly not many people get that.

[Anonymous No.20090655]

>>20090613
And i'd say just enemy. No reason for an adjective, even less a ambiguously-positive one.

[Anonymous No.20090688]

>>20090615
Cringey heretic

[Anonymous No.20090695]

>And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth and daughters were born unto them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were fair; and they took for themselves wives of all whom they chose. And the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not always strive with man, for he also is flesh; yet his days shall be a hundred and twenty years.” There were giants on the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men and they bore children to them, the same became mighty men who were of old, men of renown.

Can somebody please give me a non schizo explanation of this passage?

[Anonymous No.20090778]

>>20090688
larper

[Anonymous No.20090783]

>>20090623
Those who were already corrupted had to go, there was no hope for them. They were child sacrificing pagans. Those who were still pure were given the opportunity to become one of God's people.

[Anonymous No.20090790]

>>20090695
Demons were possessing men to enjoy the pleasures of women's flesh through them and raising corrupted children through them. This still happens regularly.

[Anonymous No.20090821]

>>20090783
Why were all the little boys corrupted and the little girls not? Also Yahweh demanded a share of the bounty (the virgin girls) presumably given to him in the form of sacrifice?

[Anonymous No.20090830]

>>20090695
Enoch can.

[Anonymous No.20090839]

>>20090821
One can only guess, and mine is that the boys had been raised from birth with the ideas of their fathers, and the girls were mere "property" who weren't actually taught anything, kept ignorant and compliant. Only God knows the fullness and totality of the situation.

[Anonymous No.20090863]

When did you realize that like 90% of your Bible questions could be answered by using the cross references in your Bible?

[Anonymous No.20091702]

What is the best commentary and why is it Matthew Henry's?

[Anonymous No.20091762]

>>20090695
Non-schizo cope explanation: God didn’t like that the sons of Seth intermixed with the daughters of Cain

Schizo answer: Based on what we see in pagan mythology where gods mate with human women and produce demigods and other creatures, this is likely what Genesis is alluding to here, and a proliferation of abominations and demigods and other freaks of nature led God to hit the reset button, so to speak.

[Anonymous No.20091876]

>>20091702
Ronald Knox had a good 3-volume NT commentary, Bernard Orchard had a really good full-Bible commentary in a single volume, and the IVP is a solid 2-volume background commentary.

[Anonymous No.20092078]

>>20090615
Filthy attention seeker
Go proclaim your false gospel elsewhere
We discuss the Bible here. You know, the book you don't believe in.

[Anonymous No.20092127]

>>20091873
Bump of *blessing*, not bump of unbumpable thread. I wanted it to archive on a blessed note.

[Anonymous No.20092153]

>>20090695
Neanderthals? According to genetics there actually was a lot of human male - neanderthal female interbreeding.

[Anonymous No.20092205]

>>20090695
'Sons of God' could be a reference to the kings alive at the time (ancient records also call their kings as 'sons of God'), and given the theme of the fall of man in the early Genesis chapters, it makes more sense for this passage to talk about man's sin rather than fallen angels intermixing with men

[Anonymous No.20092654]

>>20090695
What's the issue?

[Anonymous No.20093055]

>>20091702
>best
Patristic. This isn’t a debate. The NPNF volume sets is the place to start, even though they are far from complete.

[Anonymous No.20093076]

https://pastebin.com/HLwj8VpE
New religion board

[Anonymous No.20093220]

american protestantism is so bizarre to me
these protestants worship jews, and even wish they were jews
they believe it is a moral good to be jewish

it's like they don't read the new testament

[Anonymous No.20093303]

>>20090863
>cross references
ROFLMAO

I see what you le did there.

Here, have some gold on the house.

[Anonymous No.20093784]

Bump

[Anonymous No.20093810]

>>20090565
I recommend this edition if you want the untarnished.

[Anonymous No.20093811]

>>20090613
Yeah basically - this is the moral dilemma America solved with its constitution and Catholics still haven't figured out

[Anonymous No.20093817]

What do you guys think of Jonathan Pageau?

[Anonymous No.20093835]

>>20093810
It is indeed untarnished heresy.

[Anonymous No.20093851]

>>20093810
Isn't translating the Quran a sin?

[Anonymous No.20093858]

>O believers! Do not enter the homes of the Prophet without permission and if invited for a meal, do not come too early and linger until the meal is ready. But if you are invited, then enter on time. Once you have eaten, then go on your way, and do not stay for casual talk. Such behaviour is truly annoying to the Prophet, yet he is too shy to ask you to leave. But Allah is never shy of the truth. (Surah 33:53)

So this is the power of the Quran...

[Anonymous No.20093865]

>>20093858
Al-Autism

[Anonymous No.20093869]

>>20093858

[Anonymous No.20093896]

>your denomination (or religion, if not Christian)
>your preferred version
>your least preferred version, if any

[Anonymous No.20093917]

>>20093896
>Protbro
>NIV
>the others that don't hold to the original meaning especially, the "same sense other words" reasoning.

[Anonymous No.20093977]

>>20093896
Catholic
Clementine vulgate
King James

[Anonymous No.20093987]

>>20093977
what's your issue with the KJV?

[Anonymous No.20094012]

>>20093896
>Orthodox
>ESV
>NRSV
>

[Anonymous No.20094015]

>>20093987
It has unicorns.

[Anonymous No.20094016]

>>20093810
This book is truly one of the most obvious products of demonic inspiration on earth. It is fascinating.

[Anonymous No.20094060]

>>20093896
>hellenist
>LXX
>any mutilated protestant Bible

[Anonymous No.20094079]

>>20093810
>thematic english

[Anonymous No.20094092]

>>20093896
>undecided, former Mormon
>KJV
>none

[Anonymous No.20094101]

[Anonymous No.20094108]

>>20094016
>demonic inspiration

It seems you don't understand the history of the West

[Anonymous No.20094157]

>>20094016
>demonic inspiration

Have you forgotten that the Christ himself was a Jew? He reminds us that Jews, including himself, are "Children of the Devil"?

Your inability to translate the snake-tongued duplicity of a man admitting to be a demon, a child of the devil, only serves to delegitimize any cries for sympathy when you complain that you are currently enslaved by these same children of the devil...

If you cannot understand the demonic lineage of the Messiah, or his role as the son of Lucifer, who rebels against the Canaanite pantheon just as his father Lucifer rebelled against Yahweh's pantheon, you are missing the point of the bible.

Jesus teaches us that even when the world has succumbed to complete evil and forsaken God, that it is evil, pride, that will cause the most evil forces imaginable to backstab and betray the authority of evil. The desire to backstab and betray for personal gain is what compels these people, and this is what compelled Jesus to backstab and betray the Canaanite pantheon that rules above him.

Jesus was consumed by his desire to bathe in the blood flowing from the backs of those in society who were above him. Jesus became the Messiah for Yahweh because he ultimately uses an abandoned and derelict faith as the platform for his betrayal, and in doing so, he resurrects this entire faith. Jesus martyrs himself simply to reignite the Holy War against Canaanites which is the driving purpose of the Bible. Though Jesus does this because he is a Jew, a Child of the Devil, tempted by the pride of Lucifer, seeking to rebel against the Gods above him, ultimately, the Gods who he betrays are the mortal enemies of Yahweh, and this is how Jesus became "the right hand of the father".

There is a reason why Jesus descended into hell when he died, it was because he was a Jew, he was going back to where he came from. It took God 3 days of contemplation to redeem Jesus, and only did so once he knew for certain that the martyrdom of the Christ would indeed result in the following 2,000 years of persecution of the Canaanite Jews who had forsaken him and prostrated themselves before his enemies.

[Anonymous No.20094184]

>>20094157
>Gnostic fan fiction
Yes, that's nice, anon. Whatever you say.

[Anonymous No.20094185]

>>20094157
I too suffer from schizophrenia.

[Anonymous No.20094206]

>>20093303
>I see what you le did there.
I don't think you did.

[Anonymous No.20094487]

>>20094092
>former Mormon
Better than before, at least.

[Anonymous No.20094518]

>>20093896
>Christian
>there are no "versions", only the Authorized King James Bible

[Anonymous No.20094523]

>>20094518
t. dumb creationist prot that believes in unicorns and doesn't know who the Maccabees were

[Anonymous No.20094540]

>>20090565
Just picked up my first bible. KJV obviously. What is a based reference guide instead of relying on jewoogle for answers? I’m on the first page and the part about “firmament” solidified the flat earthers theory. I want to read it slow and take my time trying to understand what the bible is saying, hence the need for a based reference guide to help me through the process

[Anonymous No.20094549]

>>20094540
Get a copy of the ESV Study Bible. It's one of the better modern translations and has an extensive set of footnotes that all from a conservative theological perspective. The KJV is very nice but it's going to cause you problems frankly.

[Anonymous No.20094563]

>in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with King James only and the Word was King James only

[Anonymous No.20094576]

>>20094523
>creationist
What are you implying? Everyone knows Genesis is literal

[Anonymous No.20094581]

>>20094540
How do you read it so badly you become a flat earther?

[Anonymous No.20094593]

>>20094540
The KJV accurately translates the Heb word into firmament, the LXX has the equivalent in Greek. In other words, we are working with the premise that Moses is speaking of a domed world, like a snow globe. The NAB and the NRSV simply call it a dome.

[Anonymous No.20094612]

>>20094593
>flat earth
dropping the KJV defense, yikes

[Anonymous No.20094631]

>>20094593
>using the NAB and NRSV as parameters
What are the three heavens mentioned in the Bible then?

[Anonymous No.20094633]

>>20094523
>my salvation depends on the Maccabees
The only persons I need to know are the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.

[Anonymous No.20094654]

>>20094540
Firmament = pre-flood water canopy

[Anonymous No.20094662]

>>20090565
What's the most violent books of the Bible?

[Anonymous No.20094672]

>>20094654
JW tier theory

[Anonymous No.20094677]

>>20094631
I dunno anon. I’m just another sinner who will perish without God.
>3 heavens
pic related? The ancients always spoke of the luminary system as a significant and influential part of our ecosystem which is made up of layers i.e. the heavens.

[Anonymous No.20094682]

>>20094662
Juda and Judges
Basically just a collection of massacres.

[Anonymous No.20094700]

>>20094662
Genesis 3.

So long paradise

[Anonymous No.20094724]

>>20094677
first one atmosphere, second one space, third is actual Heaven.
That was to have you realize it doesn't fit with that flat earth weirdness.

[Anonymous No.20094725]

>>20094540
Space is a physical thing, it's not just empty nothingness. It could almost be described as a "liquid solid". It holds all heavenly bodies in their places, yet things can move through it. It itself is subject to gravitational forces. Firmament was simply the best single word available to fit in 1:1 and is a pointer towards the underlying actuality. Lrn2seetheforestthroughthetrees.

[Anonymous No.20094735]

>>20094677
Also that image is even weirder, get down to earth lad. That's some weird and wrong stuff

[Anonymous No.20094747]

>>20093896
>Reformed (Presbyterian)
>KJV
>(((ESV)))

[Anonymous No.20094770]

>>20094724
I know and my problem with that particular dogma is the door it opens for evolution.

[Anonymous No.20094772]

>>20094662
Judges, Joshua

[Anonymous No.20094777]

>>20094770
It opens no doors for evolution.
Where are you seeing one?

[Anonymous No.20094811]

>>20094633
>The only persons I need to know are the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.
1 John 5:7-8 doesn't say that in the original text.

[Anonymous No.20094813]

>>20094811
And?

[Anonymous No.20094821]

>>20094813
Not Biblical.

[Anonymous No.20094822]

>>20094777
Because the solar system has to evolve over how many billions of years.

The Church simply says, 6 day creation.

[Anonymous No.20094825]

>>20094811
What's it say?

[Anonymous No.20094826]

>>20094821
Matthew 28:19

[Anonymous No.20094835]

>>20094822
God made the planets. atheist scientists just try whatever they can to deny the word of God.
Why would they be there otherwise even.
It's the same deal of evolution where it's a theory full of holes but people are conditioned to take it as solved and done.

[Anonymous No.20094838]

>>20093896
>Anglo-Catholic
>KJV
>New World Translation, the Message

[Anonymous No.20094840]

>>20094825
>For there are three that bear witness: the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree as one.
The Catholics falsely added "in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness on earth" in the Latin after "witnesses."

[Anonymous No.20094864]

>>20094838
>is the single most retarded denomination
>disparages the translation of a denomination slightly less retarded

[Anonymous No.20094870]

>>20094840
I'm quite confused, how does that change the meaning? It's saying the same thing twice

[Anonymous No.20094871]

>>20094835
>implying they’re lying
So am I crazy for questioning their dogma? Why is it when the Dead Sea Scrolls were first discovered, two complete MSS of the Book of Enoch were instantly auctioned of? The text of which the public has no access to. Whats in them that we don’t know about? There’s Enoch and book of Giants fragments with what is available, but they are incomplete.

[Anonymous No.20094895]

>>20094871
>implying some obscure conspiracy theory is actual truth (and that God would allow that)
As far as everyone agrees, Enoch is a pseudepigraphy.

[Anonymous No.20094917]

>>20094871
>Why is it when the Dead Sea Scrolls were first discovered, two complete MSS of the Book of Enoch were instantly auctioned of?
Citation needed.

[Anonymous No.20095216]

>>20090565
So what makes Christianity so good when all it does is excuse evil people to continue doing evil things? A person can get away irl with doing abhorrent things to a lot of individuals but so long as they pray to the man in the sky, that puts them in the good books?

[Anonymous No.20095260]

>>20095216
Explain irl evil. Whats your definition?

[Anonymous No.20095278]

>>20095216
>it's another strawman of Christianity being criticized
Come on, try something new.

[Anonymous No.20095282]

>>20095260
Bring up a nice topic other anon in the thread, i'm bored and the guy you replied to will probably take time

[Anonymous No.20095287]

>>20095216
You better hope forgiveness is available because if it isn't you are going to be punished for every wrong thing you've ever done in your life.

[Anonymous No.20095313]

>>20095282
The light relieves boredom anon, there is much to do when there is nowhere to hide.

[Anonymous No.20095314]

>>20095216
God knows if the person is intentionally trying to exploit His mercy. If the person has earnestly seen the error of their ways and repents then yeschad.png.

[Anonymous No.20095323]

[Anonymous No.20095342]

>>20094735
>weird images
Isn’t electricity, the coiled flame that is, a natural phenomena? So why am I paying for this shit then?

I want FREE energy

[Anonymous No.20095377]

>>20090565
I'm gonna read maccabees for historical info for Era between OT and NT
Anything I should know going in? I've read some about the Diadochi wars and Alexander the Great

[Anonymous No.20095425]

Deuteronomy 28, what a belter.

[Anonymous No.20095434]

>>20095377
Not really. 1 Maccabees largely picks up generally where Ezra-Nehemiah leaves off and, along with 2 Maccabees, provides a good branch to show how the Judea of Nehemiah turned into the Judea of the time of NT. 1 Maccabees was likely written by a scribe of the court of John Hyrcanus, likely as a propaganda "history" in order to bolster the credibility of the Hasmonean dynasty in the eyes of the Jews. 2 Maccabees, meanwhile, is a Greek retelling of the same events by a diaspora Jew living in Hellenistic Egypt, likely as a patriotic/religious piece for Jews in the diaspora to rally around in order to cope with being separated from the Holy Land; this is also why 2 Maccabees has far more spiritual content, including the intervention of angels and a lot more moralizing and focus on Jewishness (something that would be very important for Jews living in the diaspora, separated from the Temple and whatnot), while also de-emphasizing the essentialness of having to physically be at the Temple in order to fulfill Jewish obligations, whereas 1 Maccabees is comparatively written more as a sober-minded, chronologically-told history (albeit a state-approved history).

[Anonymous No.20095444]

>>20095434
Should also add that the Maccabees introduces the Romans into the Bible, and how the Jews initially teamed up with them to gain their independence from the Seleucids. When you know that Rome is going to annex them just a century later, it's really interesting to see the early interactions.

[Anonymous No.20095475]

>>20095425
Wow.

[Anonymous No.20095479]

>>20095444
Any talk on it of how the romans received the Gospel?

[Anonymous No.20095491]

It's up.
https://youtu.be/GfByQcQ4i8U

[Anonymous No.20095565]

>>20095434
>>20095444
>Should also add that the Maccabees introduces the Romans into the Bible, and how the Jews initially teamed up with them to gain their independence from the Seleucids.
Did not know that they did that. Speaks volumes about the power struggle at the time on the world stage. Iirc one of the seleucid kings when riding into ptolemaic Egypt, was met by a Roman messenger telling him he had to stop his Invasion or it would mean war with Rome and his life.
Seleucid said he needed to consult with his advisors so the Roman messenger drew a circle around the king and told him he had to make a decision from inside that circle
King backed down and left. Sparta also appealed to Rome due to an issue over land between them and another city. They were a genuine superpower even then.

Anyway what about 3rd and 4th maccabees? They worth reading or no? Seems they exist but I've not really heard of them

[Anonymous No.20095570]

>>20090790
sounds kinda gay, sounds like """God""" was internalizing some issues he had with getting the ladies

[Anonymous No.20095577]

>>20095216
Blame Prots. Next!

[Anonymous No.20095593]

>>20095577
Gotta be a special kind of heresy to go that far.

[Anonymous No.20095596]

>>20095565
3 Maccabees has nothing to do with the Maccabean Revolt at all, but rather persecution of the Jews under Pharaoh Ptolemy IV 50+ years before the Maccabees were a thing. It's part of the Eastern Orthodox deutercanon. 4 Maccabees is basically a homily/commentary that comments on part of 2 Maccabees with occasional reference to 1 Maccabees to support their thesis. The Greeks put it in an appendix and didn't consider it canonical at all.

[Anonymous No.20095600]

>>20093896
Anglo-Catholox
KJV
Any less literal than the ESV

[Anonymous No.20095657]

>>20095596
I may read those as well then
I'm wanting to read them for more info not just for the gap between OT and NT but the succession wars too.
Policy of potlemaic pharaohs toward would be interesting, since as time went on Macedonian power dropped while priests power rose in Egypt

[Anonymous No.20095691]

>>20094631
Per pastor I know, 3 heavens are
1) the sky
2) the level of the stars planets etc
3) the domain of God
I cannot verify this myself as I have not researched it much but he said this was the meaning in reference of Paul speaking to a man who was caught up to the 3rd Heaven

[Anonymous No.20095701]

>>20095691
Pretty much. Also Paul was talking about himself (on the road to Damascus)

[Anonymous No.20095725]

>>20095701
Wording in most translations is he says he knew a man it happened too
It's pretty clearly paul but I was just paraphrasing scripture

[Anonymous No.20095744]

>>20095725
Oh, cool. It's one of my favorite passages.
What are some of yours?

[Anonymous No.20095755]

Is Lexham or benton translation for septuagint better?

[Anonymous No.20095760]

>>20095744
I like Romans 5 quite a bit. By Adam sin entered into the world and defeated by Christ

[Anonymous No.20095768]

>>20093896
>Latin Rite Catholic Christian
>DRB, then RSV-2CE, then the Knox in third
>NWT, The Message, etc.
I used to shit on the NRSV more, but honestly, since it pulls from the LXX more and has fairly good footnotes, I think it's useful to at least compare to just so long as you don't treat it like a perfect translation like "scholars" do. That said, the only NRSV I own is the text within the Word on Fire Bible series, which I have for the commentary; as such, it's easy to read the commentary along with the DRB or RSV-2CE text (or probably even the KJV, ESV, etc.) and not lose anything. However, I don't like what I've seen from the NRSV-UE changes. All in all, I don't think I'd ever get the NRSV on its own as even a fourth-tier translation but if a commentary series or other supplementary works use its text, then whatever, I'll be exposed to it. As for the ESV, there's nothing I can gain from it that I can't get from just comparing the DRB, RSV-2CE, and the NRSV (or an epub of the NRSV-UE) and then with the Greek/Hebrew, so the ESV-CE can be ignored, especially since Crossway basically said they don't care about creating study supplements with it, so it'll probably just become the new Anglo standard replacing the old JB since they adopted it for their new lectionary.

[Anonymous No.20095785]

>>20095760
Beatiful one.

[Anonymous No.20095824]

>>20095785
*beautiful
Also Ephesians 4:29

[Anonymous No.20095918]

>>20095824
Yeah that's a good one

[Anonymous No.20095937]

>>20095479
A few centuries earlier anon

[Anonymous No.20095951]

>>20095937
Oh, yeah, oops.

[Anonymous No.20095990]

>>20095577
Shame on you

[Anonymous No.20096002]

>3 kind of Catholic ITT
>One Trve Chvrch

[Anonymous No.20096025]

>>20093896
Catholic
I don’t read the Bible, just believe in Jesus
I don’t care

[Anonymous No.20096143]

>>20096002
Yes, glad you understand and will repent soon.

[Anonymous No.20096144]

>>20090565
Proud of this board for finding Christ. God bless.

[Anonymous No.20096153]

Should I read the bible straight through, then start the note taking/interpretation through my second read?
Also, what's a good bible plan? Planning to read the Vulgate alongside the Douay-Rheims.

[Anonymous No.20096234]

thoughts on this idea?

[Anonymous No.20096256]

>>20096234
Gay, read the Bible.
>>20096153
Neither of those are the Bible, they are what Jerome wishes was Scripture instead of what It actually is.

[Anonymous No.20096282]

>>20096153
Use the Bible-in-a-Year reading plan that Mike Schmitz used for his podcast. While he used the RSV-2CE text for his readings, there's no reason you can't follow the same list of readings with another Catholic translation and get the same results: https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/1125/2740/files/the-official-365-day-reading-plan-for-the-bible-in-a-year_2.pdf

[Anonymous No.20096327]

>>20096234
This question was where I started my journey back to Christ from. I even looked into The Message. In the end, I read the first 3 KJV Gospels first. The Action Bible does a good job for that though, would unironically recommend.

[Anonymous No.20096350]

>>20093896
>I'm not entirely sure if I fit into any denomination. I'd like to be part of the catholic church, but it doesn't feel very welcoming
>RVR1960, and in english I like the NKJV (I have a hard time understanding the KJV)
>I don't think I have one either

[Anonymous No.20096465]

>>20090623
Unbelievably based YHWH

[Anonymous No.20096466]

>>20096256
>Neither of those are the Bible, they are what Jerome wishes was Scripture instead of what It actually is.
Sigh. I've heard people tell me the Vulgate and the Douay-Rheims are the only true English translations, and then I've heard people telling me they're both shit, inaccurate, and modified, which means instead I should be reading the KJV, but can't it be argued that the KJV is also heavily edited and not accurate?
WHICH IS IT?!?!?!?

[Anonymous No.20096510]

>>20096466
Well it's a pure fact that Jerome edited Genesis 3:15 to say that the woman would crush the serpent's head rather than her seed, which would be Christ. Jerome saw Eve as a type of "Mary" so he was totally turning a prophecy of the woman's seed, into a prophecy of the woman herself. Jerome had his own cult of virgins, one of which died from following his instructions, and was obsessed with Mary to the point that he use a 2nd century fan fiction (Gospel of James) to bring the "Mary remained a virgin even after Jesus" bs into the church (the Bible plainly states she was a virgin *until* Jesus was born and that he had brothers and sisters). So, pure fact, he altered Scripture in a significant way to support his own wacko sickness, and then around 1400 years later a pope used that mistranslation to issue an official infallible declaration that Mary was a perpetual virgin and ascended into Heaven like Christ.

Anyway, your call but these are absolute facts.

[Anonymous No.20096528]

>>20096234
>compares it to pagan works
>finds the word of God boring
that's reddit alright.

[Anonymous No.20096537]

>>20096466
>picrel
kek. and they'll backpedal and try to come up with some excuse for it, to protect their strawman to criticize further

[Anonymous No.20096541]

>>20096466
The Vulgate and the Douay are older and based on older manuscripts than the KJV was. That said, in the modern age, the Douay and the KJV have actually become co-dependent on one another in many ways, although Protestants and Catholics will refuse to admit it. For example, in order to justify the Johannine Comma in the KJV (which is omitted from most modern editions), proponents of the KJV will point to the Douay (and the Knox) and the Clementine Vulgate, which have the Johannine Comma, for validation, since the Douay predates the KJV. Similarly, the Douay in its current form was revised in the 1750s to better match the KJV in terms of wording and cadence in many places, at least in instances where the KJV translation aligned with the Vulgate already, so Catholics in many ways should thank the KJV for improving the sound and vocabulary of the original Douay.

In short, pick either the Douay/Vulgate or the KJV with Apocrypha and ignore the bitching from both Catholic and Protestant partisans who will accuse the other translation of being shit or heretical or whatever. It's all console wars.

[Anonymous No.20096544]

>>20096537
Excuse for what? The prayer worked.

[Anonymous No.20096554]

>>20096541
And don't forget to check other translations on hard to understand passages.

[Anonymous No.20096557]

>>20096544
The atheists will come up with an excuse (so as to deny it was the prayer) (so as to keep criticizing their own strawman of Christianity in their blindness)

[Anonymous No.20096576]

>>20096234
Not a fan of this idea. The redditor who wrote this probably expected the Bible to like a novel and opened it up at Genesis 1:1 and tried to read it and was disappointed when it wasn’t a riveting page-turner throughout. My guess is that he got bogged down halfway into the Pentateuch. The Bible by itself conveys everything it needs to perfectly, and there is diverse material in the Bible for every spiritual need and interest.

[Anonymous No.20096587]

>>20096576
called the only book you ever need for a reason, eh?
Yeah, basically that probably. The worst part is them going "maybe something like this pagan work".

[Anonymous No.20096593]

>>20096576
Also
>implying it isn't a riveting read

[Anonymous No.20096600]

>>20096587
In the past I might have put them in the same category myself out of ignorance, but once one really begins to read and study the Bible more deeply through typology, prophecy and many other angles, it really does become laughable to even think of comparing the Bible with such pagan works.
>>20096593
I really struggled to get through exact instructions for the building of the Ark or how to make the tabernacle, but otherwise it is typically a very enjoyable read, more so as time passes and I appreciate it more.

[Anonymous No.20096607]

>>20096593
This, totally and unironically.

[Anonymous No.20096694]

do you guys know what was the first question God asked?
Genesis 3:9
>But the LORD God called to the man, “Where are you?”
so, where are (you), anon?
your Father is looking for you. If you think you're lost, turn to Him. He is, and always will be there and love you.
If you are with God, rejoice and praise Him, and pray for your brothers.

[Anonymous No.20096714]

>>20096694
Usually we are hiding from Him behind something, but just like the fig leaves, it does no good because He still sees every bit of our true selves.

[Anonymous No.20096719]

>>20096694
That verse, and when God asked Cain:
>Where is Abel thy brother?
Made me very emotional for some reason.

[Anonymous No.20096938]

>>20093810
Holy based

[Anonymous No.20097324]

>>20095313
very nice post, anon

[Anonymous No.20097332]

>>20095216
see: >>20095314
Also, many verses in the NT explain our actions also influence our final judgment, but ultimately salvation is achieved through Faith

[Anonymous No.20097338]

>>20096025
why Catholic?

[Anonymous No.20097343]

>>20096002
Different rites/liturgies =/= "different Catholics"; they all belong to the same beliefs and structure but just modify things within bounds they are allowed to

[Anonymous No.20097347]

>>20096234
The Bible isn't meant to be a continuous "story"; it's just the collection of every single text that was deemed relevant/inspired for the ancient Israelites and then the ministry and early church of Jesus.

[Anonymous No.20097361]

>>20096694
>>20096719
I find it heartwarming how God makes these questions even though He is omniscient :)

[Anonymous No.20097368]

>Read Job
>Satan goes up to heaven
>Satan never mentions Job
>God starts shit by bragging about Job
>He gives the devil freedom to do whatever he wants just because
>He does it twice
What the fuck?

[Anonymous No.20097383]

Christbros...

[Anonymous No.20097385]

>>20097383

[Anonymous No.20097391]

>>20097368
Job is pic related in book form

[Anonymous No.20097406]

>>20097368
Technically, it's not stated that the accuser "satan" is actually the Devil in Job. He could be a separate figure, a prosecutor, one of the angels on God's council serving a legal function doing a job for God. Picture the satan of Job as a prosecuting attorney and God as the judge and the defense attorney at the same time.

[Anonymous No.20097459]

>>20090565
what's the best version of the bible to read?

[Anonymous No.20097486]

lurk moar

[Anonymous No.20097643]

>>20097486
:(

[Anonymous No.20097773]

>>20097361
It's to expose them.
They know He knows. It's obviously not a geographical question of place.

[Anonymous No.20097777]

>>20097383
>>20097385
Please tell me this isn't serious
And they allow these people to preach

[Anonymous No.20097783]

>>20097777
Who is "they"? Protestants just do whatever they want to do. There's no authority that can stop them from doing anything.

[Anonymous No.20097795]

Anyone in the thread?

[Anonymous No.20097800]

>>20097783
they as in the parishioners. I'd lynch that guy.
And that could just as well have been in a liberal catholic church

[Anonymous No.20097811]

>>20097783
Also here's a proper argument about how the Catholic church is wrong: they literally have homosexual priests, and they haven't been defrocked.

[Anonymous No.20097815]

>>20097811
Your argument is Donatism.

[Anonymous No.20097816]

>Who is the LORD, that I should obey His voice to let Israel go? I do not know the LORD, nor will I let Israel go.

[Anonymous No.20097823]

>Rise and go out from among my people, both you and the children of Israel. And go, serve the LORD as you have said.

[Anonymous No.20097825]

>>20094015
Vulgate has horned Moses

[Anonymous No.20097827]

>>20094523
KJV has deuterocanon, if you had ever picked up a 1611 version you'd know this.

[Anonymous No.20097832]

>>20097827
What relevance does that have? 99% of editions of it that are published do not include it.

[Anonymous No.20097834]

>>20097832
What relevance does that have? The KJV has deuterocanon.

[Anonymous No.20097839]

>>20097834
How many people today who own a KJV own one that includes that? How many have read the KJV deuterocanon?

[Anonymous No.20097848]

>>20097815
>saying having a priest spout blasphemy at the churchgoers isn't wrong

[Anonymous No.20097867]

>>20097848
There's a difference between a failure to implement discipline and the inability to implement discipline.

[Anonymous No.20097878]

>>20093810
La ilaha illa Allah Muhammad Rasool Allah

La ilaha illa Allah Muhammad Rasool Allah

La ilaha illa Allah Muhammad Rasool Allah

[Anonymous No.20097886]

>>20097867
What do you even mean.
the problem here isn't the priest, it's that he wasn't defrocked the moment he came out. I bet they'll never read the Epistles or Revelation in sermon so as to not end up called out on their sins.

[Anonymous No.20097924]

>>20097886
I mean what I said. If you remove a Protestant minister he can just start another church somewhere with no loss of legitimacy.

[Anonymous No.20097929]

Why is Κύριε sometimes translated as sir or master? Is its translation as Lord a trinitarian lie?

[Anonymous No.20097941]

>>20097924
And how does that validate the church with alleged legitimacy not removing their problems?

[Anonymous No.20097944]

>>20097929
No, its use as Lord is correct.

[Anonymous No.20097947]

>>20097941
Because the Church stands based on the promises of God which cannot be nullified by human failure.

[Anonymous No.20097955]

>>20097944
Okay

[Anonymous No.20097960]

>>20097947
but why doesn't the institution cut off the priest preaching false teachings?

[Anonymous No.20098000]

>>20097839
My grandfather and I both, his was a 1611 fascimile and mine a Cambridge Cameo reference Bible.

[Anonymous No.20098005]

>>20097878
> La ilaha illa Allah Muhammad Rasool Allah

[Anonymous No.20098012]

>>20098000
Wow, fucking congratulations. They do exist, which I know, but they are not commonly used. Assuming that just because someone uses the KJV that they would possess one is retarded.

[Anonymous No.20098016]

>>20098005
I'll make dua for you akhi, that you see the truth soon.

[Anonymous No.20098018]

>>20098012
Freely available on the internet too, ya know?
And thanks man, yeah they're nice Bibles.

[Anonymous No.20098092]

>>20098016
Praying to a jinn who lives in a cave won’t help you, friend. No one comes to the Father except through Christ

[Anonymous No.20098655]

Help me buy a bible, anons.
Options:
KJV: New Cambridge Paragraph Bible. Hardcover ($40) or Leather ($200)
RSV: New Oxford Annotated Bible, RSV Expanded Addition with the Apocrypha ($60) or Schulyer Quentel with Apocrypha ($215)
ESV: Cambridge Diadem Reference w/Apocrypha Hardcover ($45) or Leather (summer release, $300)
Knox: Baronius Press Flexible Cover ($60)
NRSV: Zondervan Premier NRSV with Apocrypha, goatskin ($110), NRSV-Catholic Edition Leather with thumb indexing ($70), NRSV-Catholic Edition Illustrated Bible ($80-$120)
New Jerusalem Bible: CTS New Catholic Bible, hardcover ($40)
Revised New Jerusalem Bible: Study Edition Hardcover ($30)
These are the only translations I like the feel of. Deuterocanon/Apocrypha is mandatory.

[Anonymous No.20098667]

>>20098655
KJV leather if you're okay with comparing most passages which you will not understand (mind the change of sense of some words)
get neither of those JBs, the original one isn't great and those are worse.
try giving the NIV a look? i found it quite nice as it is what i'm directed to when searching verses.
not sure on any of the others though.

[Anonymous No.20098673]

>>20094157
says something unthinkable true
>>20094184
>>20094185
talks shit because he made a valid observation. christfags always defend a void of information because ignorance is all they worship

[Anonymous No.20098676]

>>20098667
I have a couple old NIV-1984's and I just don't like the pedestrian feel of the prose. I think the current NIV is supposed to add gender neutral language on top of that.
The CTS version of NJB and the RNJB censor the divine name, as The LORD, unlike the original, if that is your issue with them.

[Anonymous No.20098814]

>>20093896
>Orthodox
>OSB, KJV
>NIV, NWT

[Anonymous No.20098819]

>>20098655
I'm going to post a bunch of reviews of most of your list, and occasionally give my thoughts on the ones I've encountered.
>KJV: New Cambridge Paragraph Bible
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_saYeZF0AA
>RSV: New Oxford Annotated Bible, RSV Expanded Addition with the Apocrypha
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Smi6d-rPcY
Good scholarly source, but the faithful Christian will gleefully cross out many of the book introductions and footnotes.
>RSV: Schuyler Quentel with Apocrypha ($215)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxICiv-G5JI
Has known typos in the text, avoid. No $200 book should have typos.
>ESV: Cambridge Diadem Reference w/Apocrypha Hardcover
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyyUhHQCgtY
>Knox: Baronius Press Flexible Cover ($60)
Has known typos in the text (depending on the printing) and definitely still has typos in the notes if it's like the OOP hardback. I bought an old 1954 printing of the Knox for less than $30 which is perfect imo, but good luck finding one now under $90.
>NRSV
With the NRSV-UE edition coming out this year, it's your call if you want to invest in the NRSV, though remember that it's disliked by large segments of the Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant world.
>NRSV: Zondervan Premier NRSV with Apocrypha, goatskin
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWvbUOv2US8
>NRSV-Catholic Edition Illustrated Bible ($80-$120)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXPkaNTrq0g
This one's kinda nice, ngl.
>New Jerusalem Bible: CTS New Catholic Bible, hardcover ($40)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Clb3OlTvG_o
You're better off getting the actual NJB. The CTS notes pale in comparison and aren't any more faithful.
>Revised New Jerusalem Bible: Study Edition Hardcover ($30)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54kxnLeRVpk
Definitely avoid. Glued binding, poor print quality, somehow fucked up the alignment on the footnotes and forgot to update some of them that linked to the NJB text, meaning some RNJB footnotes now refer to stuff that no longer exists in the text. They rushed this revision to compete with the ESV-CE and it shows.

[Anonymous No.20098832]

>>20098655
I'm going to post a bunch of reviews of most of your list, and occasionally give my thoughts on the ones I've encountered.
KJV: New Cambridge Paragraph Bible. Hardcover ($40) or Leather ($200)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_saYeZF0AA [Embed]
>RSV: New Oxford Annotated Bible, RSV Expanded Addition with the Apocrypha ($60)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Smi6d-rPcY [Embed]
Good scholarly source, but the faithful Christian will gleefully cross out many of the book introductions and footnotes.
>RSV: Schuyler Quentel with Apocrypha ($215)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxICiv-G5JI [Embed]
Has known typos in the text, avoid. No $200 book should have typos.
>ESV: Cambridge Diadem Reference w/Apocrypha Hardcover ($45)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyyUhHQCgtY [Embed]
>Knox: Baronius Press Flexible Cover ($60)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbbKCziiw6w
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7Ry_Gs8jmM
Has known typos in the text (depending on the printing) and definitely still has typos in the notes if it's like the OOP hardback. I bought an old 1954 printing of the Knox for less than $30 which is perfect imo, but good luck finding one now under $90.
>NRSV
With the NRSV-UE edition coming out this year, it's your call if you want to invest in the NRSV, though remember that it's disliked by large segments of the Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant world.
>NRSV: Zondervan Premier NRSV with Apocrypha, goatskin ($110)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWvbUOv2US8 [Embed]
>NRSV-Catholic Edition Illustrated Bible ($80-$120)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXPkaNTrq0g [Embed]
This one's kinda nice, ngl.
>New Jerusalem Bible: CTS New Catholic Bible, hardcover ($40)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Clb3OlTvG_o [Embed]
You're better off getting the actual NJB. The CTS notes pale in comparison and aren't any more faithful.
>Revised New Jerusalem Bible: Study Edition Hardcover ($30)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54kxnLeRVpk [Embed]
Definitely avoid. Glued binding, poor print quality, somehow fucked up the alignment on the footnotes and forgot to update some of them that linked to the NJB text, meaning some RNJB footnotes now refer to stuff that no longer exists in the text. They rushed this revision to compete with the ESV-CE and it shows.

[Anonymous No.20098850]

>>20093896
>your denomination (or religion, if not Christian)
Catholic
>your preferred version
The one I have since first communion. Don't know what would be its acronym. pic related
>your least preferred version, if any
Don't have one yet.