Bible Wars
For this week’s Discus
sions Ahoy, I’m asking about Bibles (and yes, this is the most violent picture I could find).
Everyone has their favorite Bible, and some are VERY opposed to some. I have had the same Bible for some time, and… well… some people were saying that it’s geared towards teens. This would make sense because I’ve had the same type of Bible (not the exact same Bible, but the same type because I swiped a new one when mine fell apart) since I was in middle school.
My Bible has been awesome for me though. It’s the Quest Study Bible (NIV). The footnotes are tremendous and really help me out when I’m trying to work some stuff out. It doesn’t have those teen-purposed pages on racy subjects like SEX and LUST or anything like that, but… frankly, pages are falling out again, and I think I need a new one.
So, with that knowledge, and the knowledge that Bibles are expensive, I want to have a good idea of what I want when I head over to the book store or Christian book store (might be cheaper at the regular book store).
The most information that I have on different Bibles was from Jon Acuff at Stuff Christians Like in his post about Bibles comparing to G.I. Joe characters. I’m a fan of Snake Eyes, so I’m leaning towards the English Standard Version…
What Bible do you use? Why do you use it? Why not others? What are the pitfalls?
RSV Ignatius Bible
http://www.catholiccompany.com/catholic-gifts/100...
I am Catholic. The Ignatius Bible contains what we call the Deuterocanonicals (you might call them Apocryphal). I am not trying to start a fight, but you asked.
Back in the day, when I went to a Nondenominational Church, I was rather fond of NIV, and sometimes still choose to quote from it.
Personally I use the NIV for devotions. I usually carry my NIV thinline around because it is small. Well, I used to now I have a Bible on my BlackBerry so I use that. I used to use a parallel study Bible for sermon prep, but now I use Biblegateway.com.
I have a couple devotional Bible, two Greek NTs, a Promise Keepers Bible, an a Septuigent with Apocrapha (Greek OT) that get used from time to time as well.
I like all the versions I've used for specific reasons, but generally I prefer the NIV for day to day reading and quoting while preaching because it is accessible+reasonable accurate and the NASB for studying because I have found it to be most accurate to the original accounting for modern English grammar.
the RSV, or more modern NRSV, is a great Bible translation. It is very accurate to the original. It uses an older compilation of the text that could use some updating though. The NASB uses what I feel to be a slightly better text as a basis for translation. The differences are extremely minor though so both read very much the same excluding wording choices.
I don't have a strong opinion. I'd actually like to hear what you decide. But this guy does… http://michaelhyatt.com/2009/10/religion-in-the-w...
Ok so I think the "KJV only" crowd are usually ignorant (as in do not know not stupid) but these people are down right idiots. I don't know if there is enough education in the world to save them.
haha. I actually posted that same video earlier in that same day that Michael Hyatt posted it. Someone told me he got the video from me… haha I doubt it. Oh well.
Yeah, I have strong opinions against the KJV for a multitude of reasons. Feel free to search around the links in here to go over my reasoning. I'm pretty black and white on the issue… mainly because of people like the guy in the video.
Yikes. There's enough education in the world, but I'd dare to say the only thing that's going to save them from their ignorance is a good helping of Jesus and a hard look in the mirror at what they're saying.
I just started listening to Rob Bell's Velvet Elvis (for my 30min ride to work) and he said something that made me think, "Is this the BEST God can do?" He wasn't meaning that the Bible wasn't the word of God, but that you can twist it to prove just about anything you wanted to say or believe in, and then asked, "Why would He make it so confusing?"
Ooh, the Apocrypha, eh?
I'm not judging, but why do you prefer a version that includes the non-canonical texts? I'm intrigued.
The RCC Bible has these texts. Some people are upset over teh whole thing but 2b honest I think they are great as historical reference. One of my Bibles includes them. The Maccabees are indispensable. I also love how Daniel takes out the dragon. That's some frigintastical stuff there.
I'm not anti-KJV. I think it is a great Bible and has served it's purpose well. It is very faithful to the text available to it with a couple of minor, but culturally shaping exceptions.
I greatly dislike that "James" doesn't appear in the original but was translated from IAKOB (Jacob) because of the king. I also don't care for the way the Textus Recepticus was compiled, but not enough to hate on the KJV.
What really bugs me is the way some people hate on everything else as if God wrote the KJV. Freak jobs.
Ah..but they are canonical….you just don't accept that!
bman, they are canonical. You just don't accept that!
Nick, I probably am not using intense debate correctly. I am not picking a fight with you, but with b-man. (Just so you know…)
I read NIV for every day use & nine times out of ten, if I quote you something, it's gonna be from the NIV. My Dad's a Methodist minister and although they have RSV in the pews, when I went through confirmation, he got me an NIV Bible. Lo this many years later, I'm still a fan of the NIV. HOWEVER, since I got saved (about ten years after my confirmation) I have started using other translations to study by. I have a KJV that I use right much, I keep a Living Bible on my desk, and I have The Message paraphrase bookmarked in my web browser.
Well, what is canonical anyway? Who says what works and what doesn't?
I've always wondered what the Bible would look like if we had the scholars nowadays researching which of the books belong in the Bible like the council of Nicene did. I'd be interested in that Bible.
Is there one of those?
You know, I'm a Methodist (well, at least that's what church I'm a member of… that's a different discussion altogether!), and our pew Bible's are all RSV, but I got an NIV Bible at my confirmation.
Interesting. I'm not saying that I don't like the NIV at all. Like I said, I very much like the Bible that I have, and it's NIV. I wish I could have a physical copy of Biblegateway.com that I could carry to Bible studies. That would be the ultimate way to go.
Don't get me started on that! Did you ever hear about the Jesus Seminar people who voted on whether Jesus Resurrected or not, and they decided no…I have never been so angry in my whole life…well, maybe once, but it was with people I knew who said Jesus's Resurrection was "spiritual" not "physical" and I had a cow!
Scholars nowadays scare the daylights out of me…
I think that some terms need defining here. The books of the Deuterocanon are accepted as canon by the RCC and classic Orthodox churches. They are not part of the accepted Jewish scriptures though which is a big part of the debate. Generally Protestant churches do not accept them as strict Canon for this reason.
The Apocrypha does include the Deuterocanon but also some other works that are not accepted as Canon.
From a strictly numerical approach, those Christians who accept these books as Canon significantly outnumber those who do not. Personally I do not, but I do not begrudge them either. I hold them in much higher regard than, lets say Tertullian. These books were approved at the Council of Trent and were part of the Septuigent (Jewish Bible translated into Greek). This makes a strong case for the significance of the books even if not given the same weight as the rest of the Old Testament books.
I might call them "practically cannon" if pressed.
You know, I think I DO want to get you started on that! Maybe that will be the next Discussions Ahoy! haha!
Honestly, I've been on some church councils, and there's nothing worse than a bunch of people trying to work stuff out. Christians can be some ugly people (metaphorically).
I left that denomination 13 years ago when I turned 18. Not because I was angry at them or anything. Just because I was looking for a more expressive style of worship. I now work for the International Pentecostal Holiness Church and attend one of their more contemporary churches…
If I left the NIV, I believe I'd try the NKJV. I've studied from it several times and was pretty impressed with it. The biggest reason I stay with my NIV is that it's so "marked up" and it's easy for me to find stuff in. I've had it so long that I know exactly where most of my favorite scriptures are. (Ex: "Oh, yes, that's highlight in pink on the bottom right hand corner of the page.")
Interesting take on that. I didn't realize that they had been accepted at the "meeting that decides what the Bible will look like forever".
Wow. When you want a more expressive worship… you go all out!
Really? The NKJV, eh? Well, I've been nothing but open about my KJV sentiments, but you're right, the NKJV is better. I just don't like the old style language and the mythological creatures that ONLY make an appearance in the KJV. Don't get me wrong, it makes for great stories, and makes it easy to prove that dragons and giants and leviathan existed… but… it's not in ANY other Bible…
Bro, I just go where God sends me. Before He sent me to the IPHC, He sent me to three nondenominational churches–one of which was a home church. And honestly, the church I attend is contemporary and charismatic but is not freaky at all. No rolling in the floor, foaming at the mouth, handling snakes, or running on the pew backs. It's perfect for me and is probably the most atypical PH Church you've ever seen… In a good way, of course… Sorry for getting off topic… Okay, not really.
)
What do you think about the Amplified Bible?
Haven't had too much experience with it, but as I've been listening to Velvet Elvis (as I mentioned earlier in a comment to Nick) by Rob Bell, he's been talking about how the Bible is meant to be interpreted.
Without interpretation, it just leads to more questions. That's what the Rabbis did was interpret the Bible for people. And that's why when Jesus came, he said things like "You've heard it said… but I say…".
Fascinating read (or listen if you're audio'ing it like me)!
Jason likes his Reformation Study Bible (ESV), and I always steal it from him so I guess I prefer it too! I like that translation. Supposedly it's got the best combination of accuracy in translation and literary beauty…
In other news, there is a church in North Carolina holding a Halloween Bible burning event. They believe any translation but King James is the work of satan…weigh carefully dear brother.
Ooh! Finally, someone recommends the ESV! Yay!
About the church in NC: Yeah, I posted about that too… it's a sad day. All we can do is pray for them.
Nice topic. I have been using ESV for this time thru the Bible. Last time, I used the CEV which was ok, but I grew up with KJV. Love the poetical style/sound of it still, but really need modern English.
Would love to find a modern translation that includes the Deuterocanon/Apocrypha. I have been reading Justin Martyr, Augustine, and other early Christian writers and they use those books a lot.
Thanks for adding to the discussion. I wound up getting an ESV, and I love it. It would be cool to find a modern translation of those early books. I've been wondering what the Bible would look like if they were to assemble the Canonical Bible in this day and age. You know?