[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / animu / diy / fa / lewd / marx / strek / vg / vichan ]

/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Email
Comment *
File
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.


The Lord is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear? the Lord is the strength of my life; of whom shall I be afraid?

File: 469661bb4d92911⋯.jpeg (445.15 KB, 2048x1661, 2048:1661, read your bible.jpeg)

e37d59  No.740084

A Bible for all Christians. I ask because I went through a phase a while ago where I was drawn to both unitarianism and trinitarianism. I only knew two things: God is obviously real, and God obviously sent Jesus. I realized that unitarian Christianity basically meant God had failed, as every major Christian sect was trinitarian and the unitarian Christian sects were embarrassing messes (Jehovah's Witnesses are a discredited death cult, and Unitarian Universalists are a ragtag group of contradictory liberals who's whole theology is based around the LGBT "community" and Black Lives Matter). This finally led me to a logical conclusion: the only proper religion that was unitarian and accepted Jesus was Islam. So I got that "read the Bible in 30 days" chart posted here a bunch, and I took the 30 Juz of the Quran, and decided to read them both. Before each reading session, I prayed something along the lines of "God, I know you exist and I know you sent Jesus, please reveal to me your nature. Are you a trinity of Father, Jesus the Son, and Holy Spirit, or one person in one being?" I read both of them, and I truly felt the Holy Spirit guide me to the truth: I am a Christian, Jesus Christ is God.

The Bible I used was a King James, and I loved it. However, I am now even more divided than I once was over a different issue. I legitimately have no idea if I should become Catholic, Orthodox, or Protestant. Some of my family is Orthodox, some of my family is Catholic, and my friends are Protestant. I see strong arguments for all three, the Catholics have a good claim to miracles (Fatima etc.) even though I don't like the leadership, the Orthodox have a good claim to legitimacy based on historical issues (filoque et al), both the Catholics and Orthodox have a good historical claim to the faith, and the Protestants have a good claim based on Biblical authority (certain verses, even when I check Catholic translations, just scream "PROTESTANT" to me. To be perfectly honest if it weren't for John 6 and James 2 I'd renounce all apostolic Christianity and become the biggest prot you've ever seen)

What I really need is a good neutral Bible, one that isn't very biased for any church. Like I said, I read the King James. I also read David Bentley Hart's New Testament once but didn't get much out of it. I own an OSB and a RSVCE but haven't read either in full.

I don't want to read three conflicting Bible translations. I want to read one unbiased word and pray to God every day to help me understand it. I'll also check some commentaries from different sects if you can point me in a direction. After that I have a download of the Ante-Nicene, Nicene, and Post-Nicene Fathers that I might read.

Please don't respond with "just read whatever Bible bro the best Bible is the one you read" or "well if you watch this 3 hour documentary by the Holy Mary Virgin Monastery of Presbylutheranism you'll understand that the true faith is and always has been mine." I really need an unbiased Bible I can read a bit at a time to clear my head and rest my soul.

0d5b39  No.740099

There is no such thing as an unbiased Bible, except perhaps for the writings in the original translation.

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/churchfathers.html

Read some of the works of the early church, and listen to all three points of view. Pray, see where God wants you.


e37d59  No.740104

>>740099

>Read some of the works of the early church, and listen to all three points of view. Pray, see where God wants you.

I plan on that, but thank you

>There is no such thing as an unbiased Bible, except perhaps for the writings in the original translation.

I'm sure there is one closer to the original than others. I don't know Greek, but even I can see that the King James is better than the Message. There must be either ecumenical Bibles or Bibles translated by scholars who don't care about denominational differences. Even if I need to read different translations for different books, I'm really aching here for English scripture


4cfc45  No.740135

File: 0d56a7654d91110⋯.jpeg (59.08 KB, 781x444, 781:444, versions.jpeg)

NASB


f24be0  No.740144

Wow what huge text wall.

Anyways, the Bibles in the KJ family along with other translations that were contemporary with it are pretty much the only ones to follow traditional texts.

The newer ones like the RSV all tend to follow the Alexandrian text, not that it's flaw in my opinion but something to take into consideration if such an issue is of concern.

Even so I find myself preferring modernized KJ style renderings of it to other translations.


f76cf5  No.740145

File: 96380722d458259⋯.jpg (21.85 KB, 854x480, 427:240, 480.jpg)

>>740084

Pastor Rick Wiles used to do a daily morning Bible study called Morning Manna, he raised some good points regarding Apostolic traditions and how modern-day Christianity (i.e. Protestanism) goes too far off the mark. You should check it out.

https://www.trunews.com/neighborhood/morning-manna


e37d59  No.740167

>>740144

>Wow what huge text wall.

It looked better in the text box, I thought I had kinda separated it out. But I didn't. Sorry


d743e0  No.740175

>>740135

>literally has New and American in the name

>unbiased

Sure.


e37d59  No.740192

>>740175

What is it biased forwards? Which one would you recommend?


d743e0  No.740209

>>740192

Nevermind that comment, after some research it looks surprisingly legit.

Mind pointing out differences between that and the KJV version tho?


a80bec  No.740235

>>740209

NASB is just a very literal version. It often sounds clunky because of it. Doesn't sound too majestic when read out loud. KJV was a literal version when it was written. The problem is that English has changed since. If you don't know what is meant, you can be misled a little. Good examples would be the one word Hell used to render all different terms like Hades, Gehenna, etc. or the commandment "Thou shalt not kill" when the commandment is more like "thou shalt not murder" (because English didn't yet distinguish between the two terms). KJV sounds beautiful read out loud, though.


52afa3  No.740237

File: 83cb7c3ed76b50a⋯.jpeg (28.31 KB, 327x499, 327:499, B1157B5C-D8A0-4067-BE36-A….jpeg)

Closest thing is probably the RSV with “Apocrapha”, since although it has issues in following the Alexandrian text and taking the single Jewish translater’s desicions way too seriously for a Christian project, and was considered by many to be the first real sign of liberalization in the Church, it’s still way better than its bastard child the NRSV and contains all the books Prots, Catholics and Eastern Orthodox read (note I said EASTERN and not oriental. You won’t find Enoch or Meqabyan). The best bet is to just have multiple Bibles (which you should in any case), and if the reading isn’t traditional, the traditional reading is probably in the footnotes.


4cfc45  No.740253

>>740192

The KJV's word choice is sometimes antiquated but still totally trustworthy, you only have to look up what those terms mean

>the quick and the dead

means

<the living and the dead

The NASB uses the same translation method of "formal equivalence", as opposed to relativist and marxist "dynamic equivalence" where translators are given license to allow their theology to affect word choice (exactly what you're trying to avoid)

read here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_and_formal_equivalence

The NASB has a superior set of source texts compared to the KJV and uses contemporary english. It's based on the 1901 ASV


f7ab86  No.740259

>>740084

>if it weren't for John 6 and James 2 I'd renounce all apostolic Christianity and become the biggest prot you've ever seen

https://biblehub.com/commentaries/calvin/john/6.htm

https://biblehub.com/commentaries/calvin/james/2.htm

welcome to the kingdom! :)


d743e0  No.740265

>>740259

Are these the commentaries of John Calvin? If so, he's reaching damn hard to justify himself.


e37d59  No.740270

>>740259

Hahaha, I don’t think it’ll be that easy, but I’ll definitely keep John Calvin’s commentaries in mind

Actually, while we’re here, what are some good commentaries on the Bible from different denoms?

>John Calvin (Calvinist)

>George Leo Haydock (Catholic)

Who else is good? keep in mind I already have some volumes on the church fathers, so people like St John Chrysostom would be redundant. I’m asking for later commentary recs


64c20e  No.740368

>>740084

>the Catholics have a good claim to miracles (Fatima etc.)

kek




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Cancer][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / animu / diy / fa / lewd / marx / strek / vg / vichan ]