To discuss Bible Translations, Study Bibles & commentaries.
Hello,
Is anyone interested in discussing various Bible translations, Study Bible, and Commentaries?
Please share your preference and what are your reason(s).
I understand some Christians prefer only King James Version (KJV)
and I respect the choice made.
I wish this thread could be open as a general discussion for the above.
Let us respect each other in the body of Christ and have a civil discussion and sharing.
Thank you very much :)
@FreemanMG Warm greetings! I'd love to discuss anything about the Bible with you. Different translations show just how different our language is from other parts of the world or from centuries past. I, personally, prefer the KJV due to finding other versions missing certain verses but I do understand that the KJV is harder to read/understand if you're starting out. Everyone has their preferences which is completely fine. The main goal is to serve The Lord and to love him with all of our hearts while loving our neighbors just as much.
God Bless!
Thank you for your warm greetings.
I am aware of the missing verses including for example 1 John 5:7.
The Johannine Comma phrase is still a theological debate
about whether it should be quoted as a basis for the Trinity discussion.
See also Matthew 28:19 & 2 Corinthians 13:14
The verse was not found in Erasmus' first & second Greek New Testament.
It is also pointed out that the Johannine Comma
was found in some Latin manuscripts between the 5th & 7th centuries
and was not in older Greek manuscripts.
Whether the verse was removed by subsequent translations or
it was actually an add-on to justify as a basis to quote for the Trinity debate/discussion;
it is a highly contentious topic.
It can be true that some whose first language is not English
may find the King James Version (KJV) challenging to use.
But I doubt many today really use the original 1611 authorised version,
most modern printings are probably based on 1769 so-called "standard text".
Many probably do not even realise there are
variant readings published by Oxford and Cambridge.
E.g. 2 Chronicles 33:19 sin vs sins & Nahum 3:16 flieth vs fleeth
There is a verse in Isaiah 45:7 in KJV;
the Hebrew word רע (ra‛, Strong's Hebrew Lexicon Number H7451)
was translated as "evil" which is not wrong but may create certain misunderstandings.
Hence, KJ2000 revised it with the word "calamity" instead.
The International Standard Version (ISV) uses the word "disaster".
The Tree of Life Version (TLV) uses the word "calamity".
The Expanded Bible provides both options such as "disaster" and "calamity".
If you read both Isaiah 45:7 with Jeremiah 32:30 side by side,
I believe some may find it hard to reconcile both verses.
For your reference.
@AnalystINTJ I havent figured out how to edit a post on here so I will just make a new reply for study Bibles.
Hello @yssah,
I use the Logo Bible app with the LEB and The Greek New Testament in the SBL edition.
I have a copy of the NIV Study Bible (I believe it is a 2002 full revision)
although it is not the one that I look up first.
I prefer NKJV and HCSB Study Bibles.
I have some reservations about the Zondervan Study Bible edited by Don Carson.
I have the Hebrew-Greek Key Word Study Bible in KJV and NASB based on the 1977 text.
And yes I also have the Archaeological Study Bible edited by Walter Kaiser.
I am still using the eSword app today which contains a lot of gems :)
I do use NLT Study Bibles as well as NLT Life Application Study Bible
but this translation went through several revisions in 2004, 2007, 2013 & 2015;
users are about to lose count :)
The Living Bible is a little rare to be available on my end but still managed to get a copy of it.
The Message? Hmm... I respect anyone who reads or loves it...
I have my reservations that it is an ideal paraphrased bible.
I would recommend NIrV, ERV & NLV in simplified English translations instead
for anyone whose first language is not English.
I am interested to know what are "errors" found in NIV...
I may have also come across as well.
I am not so much a fan of ESV :)
ESV derived from RSV text... more like a revision instead of a translation.
Of course, RSV is not without its controversy e.g. Isaiah 7:14 uses virgin or young woman...
Once again, thank you for your kind sharing so that we may learn from each other :)
@AnalystINTJ replying to your other post. looks like there's no more reply button under it. anyway..
idk sbl? and many other acrostics but im guess they are just religions and I can live without the specific knowledge of their meaning so you dont have to explain. just dont want to pretend like I know everything that you are saying lol.
im not particularly in favor of Peterson, I just parroted the intro of the book. in any case, there is no perfect minister and they are sadly the best targets for the enemy. we need to pray for them or all the good ones will be taken down. you dont have to like em to pray for em. it's just super duper sad when I hear about a big name minister go down in flames. but im guessing for every big name that is taken down, many other no name ones are also put out of commission, such is the enemy that we have unfortunately. oh my heart breaks for all of us! it is certainly not easy to abide constantly while we live in this flesh.
Hello @yssah
SBL is another Greek New Testament (SBLGNT)
published by Logos Bible Software & the Society of Biblical Literature.
LEB based its Greek text on this one.
While NASB & its editions are based on the Nestle–Aland Greek New Testament.
I believe you are being humble, :)
you have at least attended seminary,
I am a layperson in Theology.
I am from Psychotherapy and Counselling and
I had worked in a psychiatric welfare home.
I volunteered myself with a Helpline as a Telephone Counsellor in my country.
Concerning the "big time" minister got into flames...
I only have this to say... James 3:1.
Remember the Parable that Christ Yesu shared in Luke 18:9-14?
I think this is good enough to summarise what God is looking for in sinners like us. :)
I do not look upon any priest, pastor, and/or minister as a role model,
having said the above,
it does not mean they have nothing to guide in the body of Christ.
See Hebrews 4:14-16
For your reference :)
@AnalystINTJ Hello! I'm not very well versed in this subject, but I find it fascinating! Eager to learn more!
My experience is that I was raised with a non-English Bible (the version published by my local bishop conference of the Roman Catholic Church). Later on, for my studies, I started using the KJV, which is very different and excludes full books that are part of the Catholic canon (like Machabees 2, where praying for the benefit of the dead is described). Ultimately, my studies led me back to a more Catholic version of the Bible, the DRV, which I used as aid while I was working on medieval literature, and which is now my preferred version.
(Personally, I can't part with some passages that were read aloud to me as a child, especially from Wisdom and the Ecclesiasticus. My studies have made me familiar with the Challoner DRV, although with a lot of caveats and revisions when it comes to applying it for medievalism. I have found it good to read and I think it happily joins my early experience of scripture with my current preference for English. I'm still glad I've handled the KJV also and sometimes read passages from it, although mostly for academic purposes)
Hello @rhodawoolf :)
Welcome to the discussion and let us learn together :)
Similarly to you, I am not well-versed on the subject,
I am a layperson in Theology simply having an interest.
Speaking of the King James Version (KJV),
The initial version in 1611 actually contains
80 books instead of what we usually see 66 books.
The usual 39 books in OT, 27 books in NT & 14 books of Apocrypha.
Some years ago,
Hendrickson Publishers printed a facsimile copy
of the 1611 original authorised version of KJV
which contains the Apocrypha.
The current printed copies in circulation that are in use
are probably based on 1769 "standard text" &
the Apocrypha section is excluded or sold separately.
The reason is due to theological differences &
many non-Catholic traditional churches do not quote the extra books.
Another interesting point is the Luther Bible in German
contains the entire OT, NT as well as the Apocrypha. :)
I have an electronic copy of The Douay–Rheims Version (DRV),
a printed copy is very rare to be found in my country.
Similar to the KJV,
the printed ones I found are usually based on Challoner Revision.
Although I am a non-Catholic,
I do keep various Catholic Bibles for study reasons.
E.g. New American Bible Revised Edition (NABRE),
Revised Standard Version Second Catholic Edition (RSV-2CE) &
New Revised Standard Version, Anglicised Catholic Edition (NRSV-CE).
And I do read The Early Apostolic Fathers' Writings
such as Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp and Clement etc.
Concerning the canon :)
many believers in faith probably are also not aware that
the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox have different canon as well.
E.g. Psalm 151 & Prayer of Manasseh etc.
Last but not least,
The Roman Catholic Church is based on the Latin Vulgate for its OT
and Eastern Orthodox uses Greek Septuagint instead.
To complicate the subject matter,
there is the recent Dead Sea Scrolls that were found &
as well as Masoretic Text (MT) are always compared with
Greek Septuagint and Latin Vulgate etc.
There is a lot to pick up and be updated on the subject matter.
It is both challenging and fun to learn :)
For your reference.
And thanks for sharing with us/me. :)
@AnalystINTJ wow, very interesting!
Hello @yssah,
I believe the term "Hebrew Scripture" can mean different things.
A fellow Jew in faith considers there are 24 books
instead of 39 books found in the Old Testament (OT).
The way that the books are grouped together is different.
And fellow Jews in faith will not consider
the 27 books in the New Testament (NT) as canon.
The Messianic Jews will be an exception;
they generally consider the entire Christian Bible
consisting of the 66 (i.e. 39 + 27) books to be sacred Scripture.
I do not remember seeing many academic
books published on the Dead Sea Scrolls,
maybe I need to be updated.
These are some titles that I have:
- The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible
- The Meaning of the Dead Sea Scrolls
- The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English Revised Edition
Well, I am not a Catholic or Orthodox,
I am from a fundamental Conservative denomination,
but I do not consider myself a Protestant.
I only consider the 66 (i.e. 39 + 27) books as canon.
Welcome back :)
@AnalystINTJ you do not consider yourself protestant. That is interesting. Rebelling against the beginnings of the movement? He was pretty bad huh.
Hello @yssah,
Who was pretty bad? Martin Luther? Zwingli? King Henry VIII?
What should all non-Catholics and/or non-Orthodox be categorised as Protestants?
The Reformation is one part of the Church's History,
not all believers-in-faith have their origin from the Reformation.
> Many Messianics also do not like to use labels?
I believe it is the traditional Jewish that object to that label.
But that's another topic for another day,
This thread is not about different sects within Judaism.
For your reference. :)
