What version of the Bible do you do your personal reading out of?

What version of the Bible do you do your personal reading out of?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=08_KByUwH6c
kingjamesvideoministries.com/NIVOmissions.pdf
youtube.com/watch?v=kFtI_mVOXbQ
chick.com/information/bibleversions/
godsaidmansaid.com/topic3.asp?Cat2=244&ItemID=1324
godsaidmansaid.com/topic3.asp?Cat2=244&ItemID=1325
shamelesspopery.com/did-the-protestant-bible-exist-before-the-reformation/
archive.org/details/GnosticBible
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorship_of_the_Pauline_epistles
christian-community.org/library/revelheresy.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

objectively the best one, anyone who disagrees is a shill

Have an affinity for good old king james. Beautiful and powerful. What are the catholic translations like, for any catholics out there? Same beauty of language?

youtube.com/watch?v=08_KByUwH6c

>What are the catholic translations like

They wouldn't know.

i only read the ancient original dialect, you probably couldn't be saved with it.

I have a KJV but I want the english one thats from latin

My dear friend was a mormon. I have tried reading it, but there are so many inconsistencies. It uses prose styles like first person that were not even prevalent for when it was supposedly written. It literally feels like it is trying to sound like the king james bible.

...

The vulgate?

KJV bible and christian community bible (catholic pastoral edition)

KJV original with a big X over the fake chapters like Mark 16:9-20

>KJV original with a big X over the fake chapters like Mark 16:9-20

How do you know they're fake and it's not just Satan trying to deceive you?

Douay rheims

NIV

...

King james

I use the NAB, but King James is GOAT in terms of the language. "being great with child" is straight up Shakespearean.

i'm not American but use the King James because God recreated the Word of God in English in that bible version.

god bless.

The Knox translation is beautiful.

>toothpaste land
>An Australian Bible

?

I just bought an ESV Bible for reading. After picking through various parts of my NIV text when prompted to throughout my youth, I decided to get a literal translation and read it all the way through. Should have done this a long time ago. I expect to be done by Christmas.

KJV would have been my second choice.

this

KJV, pic related.
The most popular, the NIV, has extremely bad omissions so I recommend staying away from it and "newer" Bible translations (1800AD+).
kingjamesvideoministries.com/NIVOmissions.pdf

>reading the scriptural jew

Dhouay rheims master race

Honestly the King James Bible should be your first and only choice. It's a formal equivalence translation meaning it's very close to a literal translation while still being readable, and it's the preserved word of God passed down from the Greeks and faithfully translated into English. All of these modern versions are based on modern archaeological findings that don't even agree with the actual preserved word of God that was in use for all of history via the Byzantine-line of Greek texts constituting the "Majority Text".

youtube.com/watch?v=kFtI_mVOXbQ

Douay Rheims if youre Catholic obviously. Jubilee 2000 is best option for protties. KJV is good too if you want to fit in with the normies.

>he don't belong to a family where they teach about jesus through oral traditions,completely free of catholic corruption.
shaking my damn head here infidel.

Douay Rheims for casual daily readings, New American, Jerusalem, and English Revised for scholarly study.

The version that wasn't derived from cherry-picked writings that were selectively edited and mistranslated for political purposes by the cronies of a Roman Emperor.

(protip: it doesn't exist)

THAT'S NOT A BIBLE YOU FUCKING DESERT NIGGER! If you want to be mormon fine, but at least learn the difference between a Bible and your ":Jesus is space" fanfic.

NIV

NIV

The Latin Vulgate Bible, son. The only true representation of the message of Christ, Hallowed be his name.

Douay-Rheims
It's got that good old English to it

I have three problems with the KJV:
1). WHile its language is beautiful, and good for preaching, it is not good for scholarly in depth analysis of Biblical content.
2). There were (and still are) mistranslated passages (Eg "Jehovah." They mistranslated the name of God, of all things).
3. The source material. There are more accurate Biblical source materials than the TR.
4. Lastly, its Protestant (in other words, Abridged.)
And no, I'm not Catholic, so don't both with the "Muh Cathcuck" nonsense. I'm Socinian. I just think the Catholic Canon is right. Because it is.

All that said, I do still like the KJV better than most modern translation. I have an old KjV, and I use it frequently.

Socinian here.
Douay Rheims > Anything else imo

>Only true representation of Christ
>A translation into a language Christ didn't even speak
>AND a form of said language that didn't exist when the last books of the NT were written

Dude, you just went full pre-proddy Catholic. Never go full pre-reformation.

I appreciate the reply. I do still respect KJV greatly and may turn to it in the future after more research.

What is even in the apocrypha? Are there any lessons or teachings unique to them?

The orthodox study bible and KJV

thats where catholics derive a few different beliefs, like the idea of purgation after death (purgatory)

>(protip: it doesn't exist)
>implying Greek-Coptic manuscripts that got them excommunicated by Rome don't exist

Honestly I absolutely LOVE the Book of Sirach. The prayer in cahpter 36 is one of my favorite. Real wisdom in there. Wisdom (the book) is also pretty great, lots of interesting things to think about. Tobit is an allegorical history, Judith is regular history, and is similar to Escher is some respects. 1 and 2 Maccabees record the one and only time in post-exile history that the J00s were without question badass, and based (nationalist). The additions to Daniel, Eshcter, etc, are hard to fit into the rest sometimes, but worth a read. Good points made therein. Especially in the additions to Eschter. 1 and 2 Esdras . . . I've read them, but I don't remember what in them because they are actually NOT part of the Catholic Canon. The Prayer of Manassah is some really weepy emo prayer about "I'm sorry God muh mistakes muh sinfulness!!1!).


tldr:
Philosophy: Sirach, Wisdom,
Additions: Jeremiah (Baruch) Daniel, etc
History (def. real) 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, Judith
History (allegorical?) Tobit
I don't remember: 1 and 2 Esdras (Orthodox only.)
Emo : Prayer of Manassah

This, the NAB dosen't have quite the beauty of language as the King James.

the 3-ply version

Edgy

To be fair, I DO read the passage before I wipe my ass with it....

I also have lavender scented koran in 3-ply
and frankincense scented Torah in 3-ply for really heavy shits

In god we shart

1) Wrong, it contains every detail of God's words, and can therefore be used for in-depth analysis. The Bible says "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness".

2) There are no mistranslated passages in the 1769 KJV (1611). I'm sorry, but that's a fact.

3) Not true. The TR is God's word passed down through the ages. The Alexandrian texts are satanic and you're a fool if you trust the "new" discoveries (that by the way conform with the KJV, like 99.9% of all manuscripts). They discover new manuscripts every year, and every year there's a new "discovery", like Jesus not resurrecting or some other heresy from the pits of hell.

4) No, the Catholic canon contains many false scriptures, like the Apocrypha and other things like Tobid or something. What the heck is a Socinian?!

I'll just leave this here:
chick.com/information/bibleversions/

It's a consensus though. Mark's gospel ends at 16:8

KJV, it's been proven time and again to have the most accurate translation.

godsaidmansaid.com/topic3.asp?Cat2=244&ItemID=1324

godsaidmansaid.com/topic3.asp?Cat2=244&ItemID=1325

> complains about inconsistencies
> reads a bible

wew lad

Those digits tho

Btw, many is the correct answer.

Mostly memorized by kjv

Mostly read niv

Mostly studied uhhhh, proper study requires many

>He is me just stating the counter point to the exact same statements with no elaboration, evidence or anything.
You're just a dickhead mate.

Authorized KJV 1611, that's the only Bible you need.

My family that made me grow up in church are completely in love with the Jews. There's no convincing them otherwise.

The adult class during Sunday School is always the same Pro Israel garbage every single Sunday.

What do?

NABRE, ESV, HCSB, NIV in order of most liked to least liked

Tell them Israel and Jews actually need to follow God, and subsequently Jesus. All the Jewish early Christians are already Christians, the leftovers are people who sided with the corrupt Jewish leadership.

I'm on my phone now, but you can find passages in the law where failure to follow its commandments would get an Israelite kicked out of its community. Meanwhile, many Jews are atheists and believe that doing the tradition is "good enough"

t. Converted Jew

bump

NRSV Catholic Edition for daily reading, Douay Rheims for memorization, Didache for study

The Douay-Rheims has similar language style to the KJV. If you REALLY can't hack it they make KJV with the Deuterocanon in them.

For a more recent translation but still beautiful try the New Jerusalem Bible

>Implying SpaceJesus IV is worthy of being called a bible

Sveto Pismo

Protestants, post an example of your canon from before Martin Luther threw out seven books because they didn't fit his views. Protip: you can't.
shamelesspopery.com/did-the-protestant-bible-exist-before-the-reformation/

There's absolutely none. Zero.

Guess that whole "lead you into all truth thing" didn't include the canon until the 1500s.

The talmud.

D-R is gnostic, drawing from Vaticanus manuscripts that were altered by Origen.

It's pure heresy. Easily spotted. Look at the difference between the bible when God kicks Adam and Eve out of the Garden, and what the D-R says about the incident.

They never belonged in the bible; they were not inspired by God. They contained errors. They were clearly not adopted into the tanakh, and clearly not adopted into the New Testament.

Nobody gives a shit about what Luther did except for you papists. Protip: Luther WAS ONE OF YOU.

Do the donuts matter, or does the box that holds the donuts matter?

KJV
I usually cross reference passages that have key operating terms with Strong's Greek.

>reading the bible as an adult male

The earliest complete Hebrew Tanakh is from the 10th century, dude. I'd rather believe in Greek texts from before Christ than after. As a Protestant I'm still examining the apocrypha, but I can't just base assumptions and trust in medieval Jews who cursed Jesus constantly as the true bible. Might as well toss the New Testament too, we don't have any complete surviving Hebrew manuscripts and they're not in the Tanakh

>desecrating Sakura like that
I would kill you if I met you.

That's a nice opinion. Too bad nobody had that before the 1500s.

Attacking the Deuterocanon doesn't magically make a Protestant canon appear in history.

Not sure what this means but it's a fact that the Protestant canon doesn't exist before the 16th century.

Good man.

There never was a complete Hebrew New Testament, not even one book except mayyyybe the Gospel of Matthew.

Then you have no confidence in the Holy Spirit's work of inspiring the bible, compiling the bible, maintaining the bible, and teaching the bible.

The Jewish tanakh has been set far earlier than 1000 AD; you're looking at perhaps the best copied document in the history of the universe with the most elaborate checks and balances possible.

Maybe nothing existed before you were born.

That's equally as possible.

>not using the original greek

ESV or NASB

>What are the Dead Sea Scrolls, the post.

Gnostic version with the Nag Hammadi manuscripts.

Inb4 Ialdabaoth

got a pdf?

The Voice is really good for contemporary translation considering it's a strict conversion with no loss or editing of content from the KJV

My point exactly.

I trust full force in the Holy Spirit. I don't trust people who'll just pretend they have god's complete authority and remove books. I didn't say the deuterocanon or apocrypha are sacred, but as I said before I'm reading through them for the first time to give them the benefit of the doubt. Would Christ let us live over one thousand years with the wrong set of books?

I can't take a full polarized stance, but I've read Sirach and Tobit, and so far so good. Jude even quotes from Enoch. They're good cases but I still won't say they're all sacred. I'll need to read them through completely and many times more before I'm certain, but at least I'm examining them

They're pretty cool

I read the KJV and D-R accounts and can't really tell the difference, am I missing something

archive.org/details/GnosticBible

About half of "Paul's" letters and Revelation are proven by scholars to be bullshit yet they're in all modern Bibles and no one cares.

>About half of "Paul's" letters and Revelation are proven by scholars to be bullshit yet they're in all modern Bibles and no one cares.
Sauce it with proof.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorship_of_the_Pauline_epistles
christian-community.org/library/revelheresy.html

Most importantly:
>An Australian Bible
What the fuck even is that? "OY M8 THEN GOD SAID LET THERE BE LIGHT!"

the OP asked for a bible
not some gay outerspace allah jesus orgy fairytale

Started reading the bible for the first time this morning. Went with KJV after an user in a thread this morning posted some videos about it's accuracy.

Should I read the apocryphal texts as well, if only for completion's sake?

the anti gay part

catholic here. but i use King James because Im a christian and not some mary worshiping cultist.

The Satanic Bible

Nestle-Aland.

This.
Thank God it doesn't say anything about traps.

The one where there is no dunecoon cuck teaching everyone to be a submissive goy to the Jews and Muslims.

>everyone is Christian
No Muslims or Jews running everything
>people stop being Christian because it's the 60s
Muslims hordes everywhere

Really gets those synapses firing