Hello friends!
I ordered a new Bible. It's the Chronological Life Application Bible. I'm super excited to get it. I was wondering what's your Bible of choice?
The Bible
Moderator: Moderators
-
puddleglum
- Sage
- Posts: 685
- Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2009 12:35 pm
- Been thanked: 1 time
- Contact:
Post #2
I use the MacArthur ESV Study Bible. I believe the English Standard Version is the best English translation available. My Bible contains notes by John MacArthur which are helpful in understanding the Bible. Anyone interested in knowing what MacArthur teaches or wanting to buy a Bible can do so at this site:
http://www.gty.org/
http://www.gty.org/
His invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made.
Romans 1:20 ESV
Romans 1:20 ESV
-
Peds nurse
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 2270
- Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2014 7:27 am
- Been thanked: 9 times
Post #3
[Replying to post 2 by puddleglum]
I will look into that puddlegum. I am not familiar with that Bible. I have many Bibles, but I don't have a chronological one. I have no idea how I can be so excited to read His word...again! It should be delivered today. I will try and contain my excitement!
Blessings for a beautiful day!
I will look into that puddlegum. I am not familiar with that Bible. I have many Bibles, but I don't have a chronological one. I have no idea how I can be so excited to read His word...again! It should be delivered today. I will try and contain my excitement!
Blessings for a beautiful day!
-
ttruscott
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 11064
- Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 5:09 pm
- Location: West Coast of Canada
- Been thanked: 3 times
Re: The Bible
Post #4I turn to Bible Hub Parallel bibles http://biblehub.com/ and their interlinear page also along with Strong's.Peds nurse wrote: Hello friends!
I ordered a new Bible. It's the Chronological Life Application Bible. I'm super excited to get it. I was wondering what's your Bible of choice?
PCE Theology as I see it...
We had an existence with a free will in Sheol before the creation of the physical universe. Here we chose to be able to become holy or to be eternally evil in YHWH's sight. Then the physical universe was created and all sinners were sent to earth.
This theology debunks the need to base Christianity upon the blasphemy of creating us in Adam's sin.
We had an existence with a free will in Sheol before the creation of the physical universe. Here we chose to be able to become holy or to be eternally evil in YHWH's sight. Then the physical universe was created and all sinners were sent to earth.
This theology debunks the need to base Christianity upon the blasphemy of creating us in Adam's sin.
-
Overcomer
- Guru
- Posts: 1330
- Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 8:44 am
- Location: Canada
- Has thanked: 32 times
- Been thanked: 66 times
Post #5
I usually read either the NIV or the NRSV. I use them because they are faithful to the original languages. They're in the dynamic equivalence category, meaning that they are translated according to the meaning of the text rather than word for word.
I have the NET Bible on my e-reader. I admire the work of Daniel Wallace (one of the world's foremost scholars in textual criticism) and he had a big hand in it. The footnotes are great. It's available online here:
https://bible.org/netbible/
And here's a good article that deals with the topic of versions of the Bible:
https://bible.org/article/why-so-many-versions
I have the NET Bible on my e-reader. I admire the work of Daniel Wallace (one of the world's foremost scholars in textual criticism) and he had a big hand in it. The footnotes are great. It's available online here:
https://bible.org/netbible/
And here's a good article that deals with the topic of versions of the Bible:
https://bible.org/article/why-so-many-versions
-
ttruscott
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 11064
- Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 5:09 pm
- Location: West Coast of Canada
- Been thanked: 3 times
Post #6
Yoiu do now that "meaning that they are translated according to the meaning of the text rather than word for word." just means according to the opinion and interpretation of the translator, right? But don't fret, that is the best we can get in any Bible we haven't translated ourselves.Overcomer wrote: I usually read either the NIV or the NRSV. I use them because they are faithful to the original languages. They're in the dynamic equivalence category, meaning that they are translated according to the meaning of the text rather than word for word.
I have the NET Bible on my e-reader. I admire the work of Daniel Wallace (one of the world's foremost scholars in textual criticism) and he had a big hand in it. The footnotes are great. It's available online here:
https://bible.org/netbible/
And here's a good article that deals with the topic of versions of the Bible:
https://bible.org/article/why-so-many-versions
This problem is why I always encourage folk to seek the Spirit in all things so we do not have to stand on someone's opinion and some church's interpretation.
PCE Theology as I see it...
We had an existence with a free will in Sheol before the creation of the physical universe. Here we chose to be able to become holy or to be eternally evil in YHWH's sight. Then the physical universe was created and all sinners were sent to earth.
This theology debunks the need to base Christianity upon the blasphemy of creating us in Adam's sin.
We had an existence with a free will in Sheol before the creation of the physical universe. Here we chose to be able to become holy or to be eternally evil in YHWH's sight. Then the physical universe was created and all sinners were sent to earth.
This theology debunks the need to base Christianity upon the blasphemy of creating us in Adam's sin.
-
JehovahsWitness
- Savant
- Posts: 21140
- Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
- Has thanked: 794 times
- Been thanked: 1129 times
- Contact:
Re: The Bible
Post #7[Replying to post 1 by Peds nurse]
I use the New World Translation (pub. Watchtower Bible Tract Society) reference bible for study and ministry as I find it's the most trustworthy and one of the easier translations to understand. For only discussions I tend to translations that are easy to understand (like the ESV) or that people have the most respect for such as the KJV.
JW
I use the New World Translation (pub. Watchtower Bible Tract Society) reference bible for study and ministry as I find it's the most trustworthy and one of the easier translations to understand. For only discussions I tend to translations that are easy to understand (like the ESV) or that people have the most respect for such as the KJV.
JW
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681
"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" - Romans 14:8
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681
"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" - Romans 14:8
-
Overcomer
- Guru
- Posts: 1330
- Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 8:44 am
- Location: Canada
- Has thanked: 32 times
- Been thanked: 66 times
Post #8
ttruscott wrote:
“For God did so love the world, that His Son – the only begotten – He gave, that every one who is believing in him may not perish, but have life age enduring.�
We can understand it, but it's awkward.
A dynamic equivalence -- such as the NIV or NRSV -- translates thought by thought instead of word by word. This eliminates the awkwardness of the word by word versions and, more importantly, it clarifies difficult passages. But it remains true to the original text. Here is John 3:16 in the NIV:
"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."
It is, obviously, much easier to read -- and it retains ALL of the information from the original Greek.
I have a degree in French language and literature. I had to do a serious amount of translation -- from French into English (Albert Camus' essay on capital punishment, for example) and from English to French (passages from Wuthering Heights, for example). The best translations were NOT word by word ones. Such translations would actually lose the nuance in many cases and the complete meaning in others, especially when it came to things such as idioms. Sometimes there are NO exact equivalents to be had. Therefore, we did thought by thought translations to accurately convey the information and tone.
I assume that you have studied Hebrew and Greek extensively since you say you believe that we should all do personal translations under the influence of the Holy Spirit. That's fine. But most people are not going to study those languages. They have to rely on translations by scholars who are experts in that field. There is nothing wrong with that. I do agree that it is the Holy Spirit who gives us revelation knowledge of Scripture -- and he can do that using any good translation.
And I see you have posted a link to the Biblehub which provides all kinds of translations, both dynamic (NIV and NRSV among them) and formal as well as Strong's Concordance. If you recommend those, I don't quite see your problem with my choice of translations. Neither the NIV or the NRSV are "someone's opinion" or a church's personal translation as you suggest. The latter is, however, true of the New World Translation which I will address in a separate post.
Again, I urge you to read the Bible.org article that I recommended in my original post. It discusses the issue well.
Let's consider the difference between dynamic and formal equivalency. The latter is a word by word translation of the original language. Unfortunately, if one translates something word by word it can be stilted, awkward, and, most importantly, unclear. For example, look at one of the Bible's most famous passages translated word by word:Yoiu do now that "meaning that they are translated according to the meaning of the text rather than word for word." just means according to the opinion and interpretation of the translator, right? But don't fret, that is the best we can get in any Bible we haven't translated ourselves.
This problem is why I always encourage folk to seek the Spirit in all things so we do not have to stand on someone's opinion and some church's interpretation.
“For God did so love the world, that His Son – the only begotten – He gave, that every one who is believing in him may not perish, but have life age enduring.�
We can understand it, but it's awkward.
A dynamic equivalence -- such as the NIV or NRSV -- translates thought by thought instead of word by word. This eliminates the awkwardness of the word by word versions and, more importantly, it clarifies difficult passages. But it remains true to the original text. Here is John 3:16 in the NIV:
"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."
It is, obviously, much easier to read -- and it retains ALL of the information from the original Greek.
I have a degree in French language and literature. I had to do a serious amount of translation -- from French into English (Albert Camus' essay on capital punishment, for example) and from English to French (passages from Wuthering Heights, for example). The best translations were NOT word by word ones. Such translations would actually lose the nuance in many cases and the complete meaning in others, especially when it came to things such as idioms. Sometimes there are NO exact equivalents to be had. Therefore, we did thought by thought translations to accurately convey the information and tone.
I assume that you have studied Hebrew and Greek extensively since you say you believe that we should all do personal translations under the influence of the Holy Spirit. That's fine. But most people are not going to study those languages. They have to rely on translations by scholars who are experts in that field. There is nothing wrong with that. I do agree that it is the Holy Spirit who gives us revelation knowledge of Scripture -- and he can do that using any good translation.
And I see you have posted a link to the Biblehub which provides all kinds of translations, both dynamic (NIV and NRSV among them) and formal as well as Strong's Concordance. If you recommend those, I don't quite see your problem with my choice of translations. Neither the NIV or the NRSV are "someone's opinion" or a church's personal translation as you suggest. The latter is, however, true of the New World Translation which I will address in a separate post.
Again, I urge you to read the Bible.org article that I recommended in my original post. It discusses the issue well.
Last edited by Overcomer on Wed Mar 02, 2016 7:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
Overcomer
- Guru
- Posts: 1330
- Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 8:44 am
- Location: Canada
- Has thanked: 32 times
- Been thanked: 66 times
Re: The Bible
Post #9I have serious problems with the New World Translation -- as does pretty much everybody outside of the Jehovah Witnesses' church. Here's the problem: the JW church came up with its doctrines and then took the Bible and translated it to fit those doctrines, changing some of what the Bible says and means.JehovahsWitness wrote: [Replying to post 1 by Peds nurse]
I use the New World Translation (pub. Watchtower Bible Tract Society) reference bible for study and ministry as I find it's the most trustworthy and one of the easier translations to understand. For only discussions I tend to translations that are easy to understand (like the ESV) or that people have the most respect for such as the KJV.
JW
For example, JWs deny the Trinity and the deity of Jesus. That means they had to re-write a lot of passages in the Bible that refer to Christ as God. Take Heb. 1:6. The NWT translates it this way:
But when he again brings his Firstborn into the inhabited earth, he says: “And let all of God’s angels do obeisance to him.�
But here's what the Greek, translated into English, really says:
And again, when God brings his firstborn into the world, he says, “Let all God’s angels worship him.�
JWs HAVE to change the word 'worship' to 'obeisance' because only God can be worshipped. Yet, it isn't true to the original language. The NWT mistranslates other examples were Jesus is worshipped because they can't acknowledge that he is God Incarnate. See Matt. 2:2, 11, 14:33, 28:9.
The NWT is full of changes made to fit their doctrines. But they are not true to the original languages and, therefore, don't represent God's truth.
-
Overcomer
- Guru
- Posts: 1330
- Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 8:44 am
- Location: Canada
- Has thanked: 32 times
- Been thanked: 66 times
Post #10
A quick P.S.:
I neglected to mention that, while Dan Wallace is one of the scholars who worked on the NET Bible, it is NOT his personal interpretation of it. It occurred to me that you (ttruscott) might have been referring to it as one man's opinion. It isn't. It took a committee to discuss how things should be rightly translated just as it took many experts to do other modern translations, whether formal or dynamic. I mentioned him specifically by name because of the high regard other scholars have of his work.
I should also add that authors who paraphrase the Bible (such as Eugene Peterson with his The Message) offer interesting takes, but they should never be used as study Bibles as they are just too loose and free with their interpretations.
I neglected to mention that, while Dan Wallace is one of the scholars who worked on the NET Bible, it is NOT his personal interpretation of it. It occurred to me that you (ttruscott) might have been referring to it as one man's opinion. It isn't. It took a committee to discuss how things should be rightly translated just as it took many experts to do other modern translations, whether formal or dynamic. I mentioned him specifically by name because of the high regard other scholars have of his work.
I should also add that authors who paraphrase the Bible (such as Eugene Peterson with his The Message) offer interesting takes, but they should never be used as study Bibles as they are just too loose and free with their interpretations.
