/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

ESV, NASB, KJV or NKJV

>>568666

Also, don't get a study bible. Read the pure word

Woops, don't know why I had a flag on. D-don't mind me.

>>568670

>don't get a study bible

what's the reasoning behind this?

>>568666

>What version should I get to have the most reliable source of god's word?

Anything with stamped nihil obstat and with an imprimatur.

So that means, DR, Knox, RSVCE, RSV2CE, NAB, NABRE, TJB, NJB, NSRVCE, CCB, etc.

Pastor Anderson is an Independent Fundamental Baptist and he hates study bibles. Many study bibles are filled with trashy "lessons" that are facile or a strained or ideological interpretation of a given text. Or else they are full of useless "historical" notes that are only of interest to the professional and do nothing for the layman but subconsciously impress upon him his own stupidity.

Many will suggest you stick to the line of Bibles that include and descend from the KJV, and in fact for a start the KJV is not a bad choice since it has the most iconic literary style in English.

However I would suggest the consensus is that as long as you understand what kind of translation you are reading - literal vs dynamic being the main split - and keep in mind that any translation has limitations, whatever Bible you enjoy reading the most is the best to use for you.

Also, Catholic and some Protestant Bibles actually contain different sets of books. The books that are in Catholic bibles but not in Protestant ones are called the deuterocanon by Catholics, apocrypha by Protestants.

>>568670

Worst advice of all time.

You must realize how easy it is to misinterpret Scripture, don't you? Let's use Matthew 24:36 as an example – someone new to Christianity could read that without a good understanding of Christ's two natures and become a die-hard Arian.

>>568685

>Worst advice of all time.

<don't read that bible goy, read what (((scholars))) say that bible says instead

>>568687

>“And Philip ran thither to him, and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest? And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.”

‭‭Acts‬ ‭8:30-31‬ ‭KJV‬‬

Those who know are to feed the sheep, just as the Lord instructed Peter, and also instructs us

>>568690

Sounds like Philip didn't need some (((study bible))) to tell him what Isaiah really meant

>>568687

I fail to see how you're addressing my point. There are obviously very bad study Bibles (like the Scofield Reference) but there are also very good ones with quotes from the Church fathers or theologians throughout the centuries providing context and historical information.

>>568697

If you want the word of man, then read men. If I want to see what some theologian has to say about a passage, I'll go read him. But when I read the bible, it's not because I want to read a theologian, it's because I want to read the word of God.

>>568687

<don’t worry about how the disciples of the Apostles understood scripture, just make up your own Original™ interpretation based on a Bible you struggle to understand anyway because it uses archaic language

>>568666

Go with KJV/tradition. NRSV is too liberal. They take verses out and alter many wordings. The reason they do this is because the verses in question may not be attested to in the (((earliest))) manuscripts. What they fail to understand is that the additions are often extrapolations which were added to clarify the existing text and are thus welcome.

It's not at all hard to learn Early Modern English. You just need a good dictionary. Google is acceptable, but tbh, the real world product is better for this purpose. Google or even wiktionary won't always list the archaic usages of words. So get a good college dictionary with six and seven different usages of a given word.

In addition that, you need the one weird trick to speaking Early Modern English: 'its' is not a word yet. 'His' is used in place of 'its'. So sometimes when you see 'his', check the context of the sentence to see if it's referring to a man or a gender-neutral object.

Oh, and study guides are gay, but Bible dictionaries are acceptable. You could probably make it with just the internet, though.