Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Which Bible?

NIV--It's easier for my poor brain to memorize, and easier language for people who aren't familiar with the bible to understand.

But I also use the NKJV a lot. My pastor uses it so I take that to church with me.

Karen and I use the New American Bible, although there are several in our Scripture class that use different versions.

All Catholics use bibles that include the seven books that Luther disagreed with: the Book of Burach, Maccabees I and II, Tobit, Judith, Ecclesiastcus (Sirach) and Wisdom. By the way, at the time of Christ, these seven books were considered to be of inspired status.

Steve

Well, yes, the Greek speaking Jews did include them in their Septuagint (The Greek Bible), but there is debate whether they considered them sacred text. They were never included among the sacred texts which were treasured for worship purposes in the temples of worship.

I'm not a regular reader of the Bible, but I like the King James Version because the language is more poetic. It's not that hard to understand, especially if you read a lot of Shakespear in school, since the two are more or less contemporary.

We had a class when I was in College on the Old Testament. It was a required course, which gives you an insight into the college I went to.

The Bible, the Old Testament, apparently was modified a lot, with three distinct threads (or modifications) running through it. I can't remember what they were called, just that they were all religio-political, based on the Powers that Were, and done at different times by different groups, for thier own purposes. Biblical scholars seem to recognize them from the language used or the themes emphasized (or whatever) but I don't have a clue.

So, we really don't know the entire story, and I don't believe every word of the Bible. Sorry, it may be God's book, but anything translated so many times is going to lose something in translation, and that tanslation is done by man, and continues to be in the different versions. Assuming that it was copied by men, it is therefore capable of containing error, and some Biblical ideas and concepts just do not have an English translation. I don't think God proof-read it.

Sorry about your god, Gene....

I like KJV for the poetic flow, and because it's familiar to me. But I mostly use the NIV because it's more understandable to others (meaning, my kids and others unfamiliar with the Bible). I use a parellel NIV/KJV and cross-reference often. There may be differences in details, but I see no contradiction in the meat of it. No doubt in my mind that the gist of each book is inspired truth.

The bible reads us, thats what makes us uncomfortable. However the blessings come when we do what it says.

King James version for English and Luther's translation in German.

I like the King James Version best. I am most familar with it so I can find things easier in it. I have a Dake KJV and it has a wealth of information along the sides and bottom of each page. Checking each note and paging back to cross-references (interesting pun) takes much longer to get through it all but is very valuable to a better understanding. I have other versions too but for those, I typically use a software package called Bible Soft. Mine is version 4.

Bible Soft is an absolutely wonderful package that allows the user to display multiple versions on a page, cross reference to like topics, gives the Greek and Hebrew at a click and references multiple commentarys for a given passage with just a click. I love it and would highly recommend it to anyone wanting a full presentation at your fingertips. I'm on my third version and use it most every day.

I believe the Bible is without flaw. That's not to say there may not be an issue or two that cannot be explained to a believers satisfaction. But that may well be God's plan to try and strengthen our faith. The Jewish leaders did not like the Words of Jesus. He told them if they didn't believe what He said, believe on what He did. I think the same is true with Christianity. Those who take issue with minor aspects of the writings as they are found, should look to the greater good the church has done thoroughout it's history. Certainly many will point to the excesses and attrocities of that history, and ignore that the church is simply made up of men and women susceptible to the same human failing all are. But the essense of Christianity of Love, Brotherhood, Humility, Grace and Salvation are unique and without reproach. If there be errors in the translations, there are certainly none in the message.

Ricky,

I fully agree that the Churches have done a lot of good over the years, but the good acts are not limited to the Churches nor are the bad acts. I have yet to find a Bible that accurately reflects the God I believe in. It is troublesome to see how man has violated the text of the Bibles aforementioned to justify his own bad behavior.

One thing that I do find fascinating is how consistent the text is over the years and from version to version. You would think that there would be a lot more variations of significance, but there really isn't.

Kind of like the whisper game we played in grade school where everyone would sit in a big circle and the message given to the first child would be "There is a black dog outside." By the time it got all the way around it would come out as "My bicycle has been stolen."

As the books of the Bible have been passed down and translated it is no more different than getting a response of "There are dogs outside."

uh oh ...

I grew up with the King James version and so the way the words and verses are , how they flow ...are the ones I have hidden in my heart and remember...and use as part of the whole armour of God daily as I endeaver to serve Christ..

That said, a person needs to be willing to HEAR the Holy Spirit of the Living God and be willing to submit himself to the Creator if he is hoping to get much from the bible no matter which version he opens and reads...otherwise it's like reading someone else's mail..or letters of love and admonitions sent from someone else's father to their children..Jim

The Bible may be without flaw, but those who read it and intepret it are definitely WITH flaw. And lots of flaw.

Don't you think that comparing using another translation to throwing the KJV in the trash is a little strong? I've never disrespected the KJV and, as another poster said, I've never implied that the word 'gay' is in Scripture. I merely used that as an example of how the meanings of words change with generational usage. I think I'll just bow out of this and go blow dry my gerbil.

You're reading something into it that I didn't say. I used that as an examply of how the meanings of words change over the years and nothing more. I'm surprised you didn't get that.

Really? I find the Bible helps aquaint me with God more and more each time I pick it up. He just keeps getting bigger, better and more amazaing with each revelation found in His Word.

Sure it is! But anyone of them who disappoint all share the same fatal flaw of humanity. But I agree totally that it's particularly egregious to see people use the Word of God, that is intended to save us from our sins, to commit more and bigger sins than the unsaved might ever consider. Much as I blame the flesh and our fallen nature for much of it, I can't help but think the devils working overtime on the big stuff. Still no excuse but you just have to consider the sources and the Bible is no legitimate source of bad behavior, and I know you didn't say it was.

Absolutely! I see the Lord in that for sure!

Everyone has flaws. It's the only real commonality of humanity. But you seem to be saying that those who read the Bible have more flaws than those who don't. I don't believe that is necessarily true. But if you do, no worries here.

KJV.....also have and read the New English Bible, but rarely. The KJV and Shakespeare are the foundation of the canon of English literature, and the fact neither are studied in schools to any extent any more is one reason Americans are so illiterate.


Two Sundays ago our rector was reading the Gospel story in Matthew where Jesus calls Simon Peter and Andrew from their fishing and tells them "Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men."

the horrible translation he was using rendered that beautiful sentence as "Follow me, and I will make you fish for people." I nearly heaved in church. Of course, the new Book of Common Prayer gives me that gag reflex on a regular basis.

So, you're an Episcopalian?

Everyone has flaws. It's the only real commonality of humanity. But you seem to be saying that those who read the Bible have more flaws than those who don't. I don't believe that is necessarily true. But if you do, no worries here. [/quote]

Don't see that, myself, but sometimes I miss such things. Show me where it is?

I don't think Bible readers have any more or any less than anyone else.

In fact, I always thought that the Bible was written especially for those of us who have flaws.

This is the version that (in part) - changed my life - and for the better too!

I'm SO thankful I found it - and STUDIED it! Thoroughly too!

If you have many unanswered questions yourself - spend some time REALLY studying this version too - you might, like me - be thrilled with what you learn.

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/

..."and the truth shall you free"