Which versions of the Bible should a researcher read?

Soontir C'boath · Post by **Soontir C'boath** » 2005-09-13 09:40pm

I am thinking about reading a bible or bibles and see what's inside this "classical literature."

Finding that I am somewhat confronted by religion at my school or more specifically my roommate, and reinforced by reading Thomas Paine's book a couple years ago, it has risen to pique my interest. Maybe I'll write a book out of it if no one has done so yet!

So with that, which version/s are good to read?

Heck, how many versions are there?

Duckie · Post by **Duckie** » 2005-09-13 09:48pm

The King James Version and New International Version are the two main ones in America, I believe. KJV is more of a Catholic/Traditional translation in my experience. NIV I've seen at many Protestant Churches instead of the KJV, and it's used among the Fundies because I guess they hate Catholics or something.

KJV is very formal and religious in nature, with things like "Thee" and "Thou" and "Lo,", while NIV is translated into Modern English, IIRC. Wording differs slightly between them, so if you're looking at any specific verse for significant meaning, you might want to look up the other translation online to be sure they didn't misplace a comma or alter the sentence in another way.

The Skeptic's Annotated Bible is a good but obviously nontraditional version, using KJV with annotations on the absurdities and violence and immorality in the bible. Surely you've heard of it.

Soontir C'boath · Post by **Soontir C'boath** » 2005-09-13 09:57pm

Actually I haven't. This will be my first time truly diving into the subject.

Duckie · Post by **Duckie** » 2005-09-13 10:02pm

Soontir C'boath wrote:Actually I haven't. This will be my first time truly diving into the subject.

The best thing would be to use the Skeptic's Annotated Bible as an online resource. If you need a hard copy to read outside of the internet, I'd recommend the NIV- it's easier reading and better worded in modern English, but is less accurate in literal translation of the Greek it was made from.

DrkHelmet · Post by **DrkHelmet** » 2005-09-13 10:04pm

MRDOD wrote:
Soontir C'boath wrote:Actually I haven't. This will be my first time truly diving into the subject.
The best thing would be to use the Skeptic's Annotated Bible as an online resource. If you need a hard copy to read outside of the internet, I'd recommend the NIV- it's easier reading and better worded in modern English, but is less accurate in literal translation of the Greek it was made from.

NWT is good too, with all the footnote references and so forth. It's a good research tool.

Duckie · Post by **Duckie** » 2005-09-13 10:11pm

DrkHelmet wrote:
NWT is good too, with all the footnote references and so forth. It's a good research tool.

For clarification and easy reference, he's referring to the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, used primarily by the Jehovah's Witnesses.

As to your question on how many there are, in English I count nearly 60 according to Wikipedia, but I don't know how common some of the more obscure ones are, or even if they're still used today.

Darth Servo · Post by **Darth Servo** » 2005-09-13 11:08pm

MRDOD wrote:For clarification and easy reference, he's referring to the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, used primarily by the Jehovah's Witnesses.

Correction: used exclusively by the JWs. Its their personal version where they essentially re-wrote the thing to make it more consistant (in their eyes anyway) and change the verses that don't fit their beliefs. They can't use the name "Bible" in it because they changed so many things that supposedly copyright or some other such legal issue prevents them from calling it a "Bible"

Superman · Post by **Superman** » 2005-09-13 11:35pm

Actually, the King James Version was never officially sanctioned by the Catholic Church. THE KJV was a reaction by the Puritans to the sanctioning of what is known as the "Bishop's Bible." Basically, they didn't like it having "official" status. King James I agreed with the Puritan's and the completed KJV Bible appeared in 1611. It appeared outside of the realm of Catholic translators, although it did originally contain the Apocrypha.

Personally, I recommend the New American Bible. This is a great version that was directly translated from the Latin texts, and has lots of theological footnotes. It contains the apocrypha too.

Haruko · Post by **Haruko** » 2005-09-13 11:58pm

An interesting related article I read a few months ago is Paul Tobin's:

Not All Versions Are Created Equal.

He claims the New Revised Standard Version, or NRSV, is your best bet. In the above linked article, he explains why.

DrkHelmet · Post by **DrkHelmet** » 2005-09-14 12:06am

NWT is still good for researching. Very few translations have as many footnote and cross references as it does. Get the big reference edition. It adds all kinds of extra information.

Havok · Post by **Havok** » 2005-09-14 01:32am

I read the KJV when I was a dirty lil' punk rocker in highschool to start arguments. It proved to be a waste of time. You can't argue with a persons beliefs... they are thier beliefs.
I found it a fairly easy read and I think would be a good starting point.
I also started reading The New American like Supes' up there, but I was just too old and found that I started getting angry with how gulible I believe people to be that think the book is fact. So I didn't get through it and can't recommend it whole heartedly.

Side note: Reading the Good Book was fun the first time and I get a kick out of how mean God is.

EmperorSolo51 · Post by **EmperorSolo51** » 2005-09-14 01:44am

As A Catholic, I use the New American bible, which is the official sanctioned bible for the Catholic Church in North America. Though this bible is different from the NIV and the KJV as it is frontloaded with Church Doctorine and Canon.

Elheru Aran · Post by **Elheru Aran** » 2005-09-14 09:46am

KJV is the 'traditional' version, as observed above; it's the one many fundies rely upon. NIV is more readable, but there are quite a few churches which don't accept it. The Catholics use a translation which's similar to the KJV, just a little bit more elaborate-- the Douay Bible, I think; they probably use a 'modernized' version, which I regret to say I don't know the name of.

Basically, you can't go wrong with having a whole stack of different Bibles-- NIV/New Standard Version/recent translations for research, KJV/Douay for argumentation (once you find a verse in NIV, you can generally find the same one in KJV with the chapter and verse numbers).

mjn6172 · Post by **mjn6172** » 2005-09-14 10:22am

I would also recommend the Oxford Study Bible if you need one for research/references. That was the version we used back when I was a theology minor in college. It's filled with tons of footnotes and crossreferences, contains the histories of each of the books of the bible (IE when it was written, why it's part of the cannon, etc.), and contains the Apocrypha. All in all a very useful reference source.

Mobiboros · Post by **Mobiboros** » 2005-09-14 10:31am

+http://www.usccb.org/nab/index.htm
The above is a link to the American Catholic Bishops website which has the full text of the New American Bible (the official bible of the American Catholic Church).

For more literal translations the Jerusalem Bible is very good as well but as it's more literal it lacks context so it reads a little odd.

Soontir C'boath · Post by **Soontir C'boath** » 2005-09-14 04:42pm

Elharu Aran wrote:Basically, you can't go wrong with having a whole stack of different Bibles-- NIV/New Standard Version/recent translations for research, KJV/Douay for argumentation (once you find a verse in NIV, you can generally find the same one in KJV with the chapter and verse numbers).

Yes, reading all the bibles mentioned at once would be the best way I think too. I probably would forget things if I read separately.

A visit to Barnes and Nobles or perhaps even to my university bookstore will have to be attended.

Elheru Aran · Post by **Elheru Aran** » 2005-09-14 04:56pm

Soontir C'boath wrote:
Elharu Aran wrote:Basically, you can't go wrong with having a whole stack of different Bibles-- NIV/New Standard Version/recent translations for research, KJV/Douay for argumentation (once you find a verse in NIV, you can generally find the same one in KJV with the chapter and verse numbers).
Yes, reading all the bibles mentioned at once would be the best way I think too. I probably would forget things if I read separately.

A visit to Barnes and Nobles or perhaps even to my university bookstore will have to be attended.

Nah. Christian bookstore.

Cheaper, for one thing... plus wayyyyyyy more options

Darth Servo · Post by **Darth Servo** » 2005-09-14 04:59pm

Elheru Aran wrote:Nah. Christian bookstore.

Cheaper, for one thing... plus wayyyyyyy more options

But they'll only have the versions of the Bible they like or rather, their personal flavor of Christianity favors. No chance in hell of finding the Catholic Douay version in there.

Plus you run the risk of being assaulted by witnessers.

Elheru Aran · Post by **Elheru Aran** » 2005-09-14 05:29pm

Good point... but I don't see why he should bother getting spankin' new Bibles at Barnes, when he could get just-as-good if slightly used ones at a used bookstore or something... not current, true, but you could say that of my dad's KJV that I've had for the past few years (it was printed circa 1950s), yet I've never met one Christian, let alone fundie, who'd not accept it

Darth Servo · Post by **Darth Servo** » 2005-09-14 05:35pm

Elheru Aran wrote:Good point... but I don't see why he should bother getting spankin' new Bibles at Barnes, when he could get just-as-good if slightly used ones at a used bookstore or something... not current, true, but you could say that of my dad's KJV that I've had for the past few years (it was printed circa 1950s), yet I've never met one Christian, let alone fundie, who'd not accept it

[yoda fundie]
Old matters not. Perfect the bible is. Change it cannot.
[/YF]

dworkin · Post by **dworkin** » 2005-09-14 07:04pm

Reading the Bible is like reading LOTR. There's the interesting start but then it gets incredibly boring for a long while before anything interesting happens. And if you ever thought Aragorn breaking into song every 12 pages was bad, wait till you hit Psalms.

All in all it takes aproximately 80 hours to read, cover to cover.

Myself, I prefer the versions with the following except on the first page

"All characters and events within this book are entirly fictional. Any similarity to persons, living or dead or events is entirly unintentional."

Most libraries should have a copy or two.

Elheru Aran · Post by **Elheru Aran** » 2005-09-14 07:46pm

dworkin wrote: Most libraries should have a copy or two.

Speaking of which. Mine had a copy of the Biblia Polyglotta-- an old Catholic edition-- four huge volumes comprising Old Testament (I and II) and New Testament (III) along with the Apocrypha (IV). Eight different languages at least-- Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, Arabic, Latin, German, French, and the Douay English translation. Could've very well been another language or two in there as well. All in all, a very remarkable edition, very fascinating.

I seriously doubt it's in print anymore, though...

Darth Servo · Post by **Darth Servo** » 2005-09-15 07:12pm

dworkin wrote:All in all it takes aproximately 80 hours to read, cover to cover.

Someone actually went and TIMED it?

Darth Servo · Post by **Darth Servo** » 2005-09-15 07:13pm

Elheru Aran wrote:Old Testament (I and II)

Um, whats OT 2?

Darth Servo · Post by **Darth Servo** » 2005-09-15 07:14pm

Oh, never mind. I misunderstood what you meant by "I and II" It takes two volumes for the entire OT.