How To Choose A Bible

Talk about anything in here.

Postby ShiroiHikari » Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:33 pm

mysngoeshere56 (post: 1449242) wrote:Yeah, the form of a unicorn has pretty much changed over time... I'm pretty sure they were originally viewed closer to powerful oxen or goats with horns instead of the sparkling and frilly sort of unicorns you'd see from My Little Pony. XD


Image










...Sorry, I couldn't help myself.

Back on-topic, I use the NLT, NASB, and NIV versions.
fightin' in the eighties
User avatar
ShiroiHikari
 
Posts: 7564
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 12:00 pm
Location: Somewhere between 1983 and 1989

Postby Nate » Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:34 pm

From Wikipedia:

An animal called the re’em (Hebrew: רְאֵם‎) is mentioned in several places in the Hebrew Bible, often as a metaphor representing strength. "The allusions to the re'em as a wild, un-tamable animal of great strength and agility, with mighty horn or horns. This view is supported by the Assyrian rimu, which is often used as a metaphor of strength, and is depicted as a powerful, fierce, wild mountain bull with large horns." This animal was often depicted in ancient Mesopotamian art in profile, with only one horn visible.

The translators of the Authorized King James Version of the Bible (1611) followed the Greek Septuagint (monokeros) and the Latin Vulgate (unicornis) and employed unicorn to translate re'em, providing a recognizable animal that was proverbial for its un-tamable nature. The American Standard Version translates this term "wild ox" in each case.

So that you don't have weird verses like Numbers 23:22 which says in the KJV "God brought them out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn."

Also, "an unicorn" is totally bad grammar. Unless the people of that time pronounced it "oonicorn." Which sounds dumb. XD
Image

Ezekiel 23:20
User avatar
Nate
 
Posts: 10725
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: Oh right, like anyone actually cares.

Postby mysngoeshere56 » Wed Jan 05, 2011 11:19 pm

Nate (post: 1449246) wrote:Also, "an unicorn" is totally bad grammar. Unless the people of that time pronounced it "oonicorn."


Wow! I never saw that before... Come to think of it, I wonder if they did pronounce it like that. XD A lot of older writings I've found have said "an heritage" instead of "a heritage", because the "h" was originally silent.
-Sno
User avatar
mysngoeshere56
 
Posts: 1245
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 5:42 pm
Location: My heart and my body live in two different places.

Postby Falx » Thu Jan 06, 2011 1:26 am

Why choose just one bible? If you do a search for E-sword you can get free multiple translations in one package deal. Some of them you need to pay for but a lot of them are free.
Blessed be the LORD my strength which teacheth my hands to war, and my fingers to fight:
My goodness, and my fortress; my high tower, and my deliverer; my shield, and he in whom I trust; who subdueth my people under me.


神はそのひとり子を賜わったほどに、この世を愛して下さった。それは御子を信じる者がひとりも滅びないで、永遠の命を得るためである.

My MAL Profile. Please check out my Dad's Christian eBook on Facebook.
User avatar
Falx
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2009 4:05 am
Location: South Africa

Postby Warrior4Christ » Thu Jan 06, 2011 3:35 am

ChristianKitsune (post: 1449060) wrote:I have a couple NIV translations as well as a tiny NLT. I mostly use my small NIV translation because it's small enough to carry around. If that's what you're looking for book stores have smaller bibles you can carry around too.

Ditto - I like my small NIV. Can't go wrong with the NIV - it's good for studying. The TNIV just has some gender-neutral language and other stuff which I don't think is essential (I'm just used to mentally translating "men" to "people" anyway, and I don't need the extra political correctness they might try to use).
I like the NLT as a more of a paraphrase version.

Does the NKJV use the more recent manuscripts? I would assume so, since they had a perfect opportunity to...
Everywhere like such as, and MOES.

"Expect great things from God; attempt great things for God." - William Carey
User avatar
Warrior4Christ
 
Posts: 2045
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2005 8:10 pm
Location: Carefully place an additional prawn on the barbecue

Postby rocklobster » Thu Jan 06, 2011 5:29 am

I have the NRSV Catholic Study Bible. It has great articles that help you understand the text by putting it in perspectives relevant to today.
"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you. I appointed you to be a prophet of all nations."
--Jeremiah 1:5
Image
Hit me up on social media!
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100007205508246<--Facebook

I'm also on Amino as Radical Edward, and on Reddit as Rocklobster as well.


click here for my playlist!
my last fm profile!
User avatar
rocklobster
 
Posts: 8903
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2004 1:27 pm
Location: Planet Claire

Postby Atria35 » Thu Jan 06, 2011 6:19 am

Falx (post: 1449261) wrote:Why choose just one bible? If you do a search for E-sword you can get free multiple translations in one package deal. Some of them you need to pay for but a lot of them are free.


Because I have issues with eyestrain already, and even a half hour in front of a computer screen starts to irritate it. And when I read, I like to read for long periods of time.

It's a good resource- just not for me.

Besides- I prefer the feel of a good book :grin: Ink and pages help me take it in better.

Looks like the NIV Study Bible is very popular- and very good! I'll be looking at one of those first when I get to the bookstore. I will compare it to others, of course, to see how I like it, but it will be one of the first I pick up and check out!

@ Rocklobster- thanks. I think I'll get one for reading/comparison. Extra information/books is never unwelcome.
User avatar
Atria35
 
Posts: 6295
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 7:30 am

Postby Mr. SmartyPants » Thu Jan 06, 2011 6:59 pm

I don't know why you guys are all discussing on which kind of Bible to choose. Only the KJV is the true version of the Bible. The rest contain lies and heresies. A website told me.
User avatar
Mr. SmartyPants
 
Posts: 12541
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2004 9:00 am

Postby Atria35 » Thu Jan 06, 2011 7:10 pm

Mr. SmartyPants (post: 1449434) wrote:I don't know why you guys are all discussing on which kind of Bible to choose. Only the KJV is the true version of the Bible. The rest contain lies and heresies. A website told me.


:lol:

Regardless, I'm not fond of the KJV- it's beautiful to read, but it's just never jivved with me.
User avatar
Atria35
 
Posts: 6295
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 7:30 am

Postby Kaligraphic » Fri Jan 07, 2011 2:01 am

A side note on the KJV - while many people know that it dates back to 1611, fewer know that it went through multiple revisions, and the version we actually use today is from a 1724 printing. I love pointing this out to people to insist that only the 1611 KJV is accurate. ("Really? Then why don't you use it?")

And, personally, I use a mix of versions - KJV, NKJV, ASV, NASB, NIV, NRSV, Vulgate, and original Greek versions. I have a Hebrew copy of the OT, but I'm still pretty reliant on translations for that. I probably have a few more versions around that I can't think of off the top of my head, too.

I'd say, when you're looking for a Bible, the first consideration is what you want to use it for. For conceptual reading, go further toward the dynamic equivalence or thought-for-thought end of the scale. For detailed study, I recommend going further toward the literal or word-for-word end of the scale. Within those, if you just want a choice, NIV and NASB are pretty popular options. For general reading, you can go with either end, depending on what you like.

I personally tend to use NKJV or NASB for general reading, or KJV for its wonderful properties of being easy to find and out of copyright. (Also, Strong's concordance is indexed to the KJV.)
The cake used to be a lie like you, but then it took a portal to the deception core.
User avatar
Kaligraphic
 
Posts: 2002
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: The catbox of DOOM!

Postby Warrior4Christ » Fri Jan 07, 2011 2:46 am

Kaligraphic (post: 1449488) wrote:I'd say, when you're looking for a Bible, the first consideration is what you want to use it for. For conceptual reading, go further toward the dynamic equivalence or thought-for-thought end of the scale. For detailed study, I recommend going further toward the literal or word-for-word end of the scale. Within those, if you just want a choice, NIV and NASB are pretty popular options. For general reading, you can go with either end, depending on what you like.

This is good advice.

Kaligraphic (post: 1449488) wrote:A side note on the KJV - while many people know that it dates back to 1611, fewer know that it went through multiple revisions, and the version we actually use today is from a 1724 printing. I love pointing this out to people to insist that only the 1611 KJV is accurate. ("Really? Then why don't you use it?")

Yeah, didn't the 1611 have 'v's instead of 'u's and 'i's instead of 'j's? So it would be "Iesvs" (and that would make it the 1611 KIV...).
Everywhere like such as, and MOES.

"Expect great things from God; attempt great things for God." - William Carey
User avatar
Warrior4Christ
 
Posts: 2045
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2005 8:10 pm
Location: Carefully place an additional prawn on the barbecue

Postby Shao Feng-Li » Fri Jan 07, 2011 7:12 am

[quote="Nate (post: 1449246)"]From Wikipedia:

An animal called the re’em (Hebrew: ר]

Heh, cool. Wild ox does sound better.

Aren't you supposed to use "an" before a vowel?
User avatar
Shao Feng-Li
 
Posts: 5187
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2003 12:00 pm
Location: Idaho

Postby ShiroiHikari » Fri Jan 07, 2011 10:18 am

But since we say it "yoo-ni-corn" in English, it doesn't begin with a vowel sound. "Y" is only sometimes a vowel. I think. Someone verify this please.
fightin' in the eighties
User avatar
ShiroiHikari
 
Posts: 7564
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 12:00 pm
Location: Somewhere between 1983 and 1989

Postby Nate » Fri Jan 07, 2011 1:01 pm

Shao Feng-Li wrote:Aren't you supposed to use "an" before a vowel?

You use "an" before a word that starts with a vowel sound, not before all vowels. You use "a" before a word that starts with a consonant sound.

So you sometimes use "an" before a consonant and "a" before a vowel, depending on how they're pronounced. For example, you wouldn't say "This is an useful invention." You would say "a useful" because "useful" starts with a y sound, and y is a consonant (in that instance).

Similarly, it would be "I produced an homage to the Three Stooges." Even though h is a consonant, since it's a silent h that means you're starting off with the "o" sound, making it "an."
A side note on the KJV - while many people know that it dates back to 1611, fewer know that it went through multiple revisions, and the version we actually use today is from a 1724 printing.

Also a fun fact is the original 1611 KJV contained the Deuterocanonical books such as Tobit, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Judith, etc. Even MORE interesting, the 1611 KJV contained three books that were not considered canon by the Council of Trent, 1 and 2 Esdras and Prayer of Manasses (call me immature but that name makes me laugh). It wasn't until the 1666 KJV Bible that all of the Apocryphal books were removed.
Image

Ezekiel 23:20
User avatar
Nate
 
Posts: 10725
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: Oh right, like anyone actually cares.

Postby mechana2015 » Fri Jan 07, 2011 1:25 pm

Mr. SmartyPants (post: 1449434) wrote:I don't know why you guys are all discussing on which kind of Bible to choose. Only the KJV is the true version of the Bible. The rest contain lies and heresies. A website told me.


This satirical comment would be hilarious if I didin't have 45 pages worth of e-mails from people at a church I used to attend espousing this exact commentary in detail.
Image

My Deviantart
"MOES. I can has Sane Sig now?"
User avatar
mechana2015
 
Posts: 5025
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2003 12:33 am
Location: Orange County

Previous

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 145 guests