Grew up Catholic, now attend non denominational. I"m not anti Catholic by any means, but non denominational speaks to me in a real life sort of way that the Catholic church missed for me.

What's a good version(?) of the bible for picking up and reading a random passage.

For years the pastor has said to just pick up the book and let the Lord speak to you. I'm finally listening.

NormanEH said:

---

Grew up Catholic, now attend non denominational. I"m not anti Catholic by any means, but non denominational speaks to me in a real life sort of way that the Catholic church missed for me.

What's a good version(?) of the bible for picking up and reading a random passage.

For years the pastor has said to just pick up the book and let the Lord speak to you. I'm finally listening.

---

Young's Literal Translation is probably the most accurate to the original Greek. David Bentley Hart's translation of the New Testament is also very true to the original Greek.
I would stay away from the King James translation. Heavily biased and you might want to read a little about King James also.
For example, the KJV translates the exact same word Sheol half the time as hell and half the time as grave or place of the dead in the Old Testament. It is weird because Jews at that time had no concept of hell and when Sheol was translated as hell it was always in the most damning way.

Thoughts on NLT Life Application study bible?

NormanEH said:

---

Thoughts on NLT Life Application study bible?

---

I prefer the most accurate version as pertains to the original Greek. But that is me.

NormanEH said:

---

Thoughts on NLT Life Application study bible?

---

I don't know about the study Bible, but I had a NLT Bible once and I didn't care for the translation. It was overly casual and often had some translations that were quite different from the more traditional translations (NASB, ESV, NIV).

The Common English Bible is easy to read and pretty faithful to the original text.

BonfireNerd04 said:

---

The Common English Bible is easy to read and pretty faithful to the original text.

---

What faith communities were represented in the
creation of The CEB Study Bible?
The translators, reviewers, and editors represent the following faith communities:
African Methodist Episcopal Church
Moravian
American Baptist
National Baptist
Anglican
Presbyterian (USA)
Baptist
Progressive National Baptist
Baptist General Conference
Quaker
Church of the Nazarene
Reformed Church in America
Disciples of Christ
Reform Judaism
Episcopal Church
Roman Catholic Church
Evangelical Free Church
Seventh-Day Adventist
Evangelical Lutheran Church
United Church of Christ
Free Methodist
United Methodist
Mennonite

Orthodox Study Bible

PacifistAg said:

---

Orthodox Study Bible

---

Have that one and like it.

NormanEH said:

---

Thoughts on NLT Life Application study bible?

---

NLT is a wonderful translation. I primarily use NIV, because it is most commonly used. However, the TNIV is better for modern inclusive language, and doesn't carry the stench of Paige Patterson. The ESV is also good, but came out of the hubris of Reformed evangelicals. The NASB is a little wooden and worn, but still okay. The KJV is a relic, and a great historical accomplishment, but it belongs in history. The NRSV is also okay

The very best Bible translation, without question, it the one you read

94chem said:

---

TNIV is better for modern inclusive language

---

A is A said:

---

94chem said:

---

TNIV is better for modern inclusive language

---

---

Language changes. If you've ever read the KJV or Shakespeare, studied a language, supported a Wycliffe missionary, or have teenagers, you'd know this well

Not knowing anything about it, I started reading the MacArthur Bible. Seems pretty good to me. I've read the Catholic Bible and the NKJV as well. I have a Living Bible from my mother. I do not care for the contemporary language.

Try the NLT. It's a faithful translation without the folksy paraphrasing. Very underrated and perhaps under-utilized because it didn't have a single denominational backing.

94chem said:

---

A is A said:

---

94chem said:

---

TNIV is better for modern inclusive language

---

---

Language changes. If you've ever read the KJV or Shakespeare, studied a language, supported a Wycliffe missionary, or have teenagers, you'd know this well

---

Read both, have studied Spanish and Latin, and have 3 kids, you got me on the missionary piece. My problem is not the "modernization", but rather the "inclusiveness". But hey, if you want to change meaning and context, go for it.

Yeah, I had hangup too about 20 years ago, then I started reading it for myself and realizing that it was about following the money and the power, and rejecting the fear-mongering. When I saw who Paige Patterson really was, I sadly realized how political that even Bible translation had become.

94chem said:

---

Yeah, I had hangup too about 20 years ago, then I started reading it for myself and realizing that it was about following the money and the power, and rejecting the fear-mongering. When I saw who Paige Patterson really was, I sadly realized how political that even Bible translation had become.

---

Heard.

I am looking for a new study bible as well and am in between getting an ESV study bible and the Reformation Study bible. I really appreciate a lot of what Sproul has to say which is a pro for the reformation study bible, but the ESV study bible casts the widest net in terms of different commentary perspectives.

Interested to get this boards thought on the two. I am also in the market for a large desk bible that is heirloom quality. Something that will last 60 years and will live to have my kids fighting over it when I am gone.

The ESV Study and Reformation are both the main copies I use.

We also have a 1984 NIV large Bible that stays on our coffee table for family time. Unfortunately the quality is poor and already falling apart.

Which do you prefer between the Reformation and ESV study if you could only have one?

I have enjoyed having a lot of the Creeds, Confessions, and other types of commentary (besides the text commentary) in the Reformation Study Bible. The Introductions to each Book are also great. I use this one most of the time. I am also bias and cherish Sproul very much as well.

The NASB is my go to English version.


Principle:
God gave us His words through the scriptures. Shoot for the most accurate translations in English to the originals in English.

Satan has twisted, watered down God's words from the beginning. Stay away from the translations that try to give you the interpretations vs the words themselves.

2 Camps for word for word translations
NKJV - majority of text
NASB - oldest manuscripts
NIV thought for thought translation vs word for word.


Most languages only have 1 option and that's due to a linguist missionaries learning a language and translating from the the sources. (not KJV) There's an embarrassment of riches within the English language and study tools.

HWP Version

John 1:1 Da time everyting had start, had one Guy. "Gods Talk," dass who him. Dat Guy an God, dey stay togedda, an da Guy stay God fo real kine

1:14 Dat "Gods Talk" Guy, he wen come one guy jalike us guys. He wen stay wit us. We wen see how awesome he stay. He awesome, cuz he da one an ony Boy dat come from da Fadda. He like do plenny good stuff fo us, cuz dass how he stay. Everyting he say bout God, stay fo real.

A is A said:

---

94chem said:

---

A is A said:

---

94chem said:

---

TNIV is better for modern inclusive language

---

---

Language changes. If you've ever read the KJV or Shakespeare, studied a language, supported a Wycliffe missionary, or have teenagers, you'd know this well

---

Read both, have studied Spanish and Latin, and have 3 kids, you got me on the missionary piece. My problem is not the "modernization", but rather the "inclusiveness". But hey, if you want to change meaning and context, go for it.

---

Not meaning to derail but a Gentile complaining about "inclusiveness" made me smile. Thanks.

As a big Wes Huff enjoyer, I checked out a few of his reviewed bibles. The Bibliotheca Bible is absolutely beautiful, the highest quality. It gives a different feel reading without chapters and verses. I just got the Connecting Scripture NT as well, but have yet to dive in. But this video provides some great info for the thread too.

For an heirloom quality bible look at Schuyler or Allan.

I use the Bible app and frequently go between NASB, CSB, ESV, Amplified and sometimes NIV.

When listening to a sermon I will use a different translation from what the pastor is using so I can pick up on variations.

dermdoc said:

---

A is A said:

---

94chem said:

---

A is A said:

---

94chem said:

---

TNIV is better for modern inclusive language

---

---

Language changes. If you've ever read the KJV or Shakespeare, studied a language, supported a Wycliffe missionary, or have teenagers, you'd know this well

---

Read both, have studied Spanish and Latin, and have 3 kids, you got me on the missionary piece. My problem is not the "modernization", but rather the "inclusiveness". But hey, if you want to change meaning and context, go for it.

---

Not meaning to derail but a Gentile complaining about "inclusiveness" made me smile. Thanks.

---

When I took Ralph Winter's Perspectives course 32 years ago, there was this story of a missionary who just couldn't reach a people group when he shared that Jesus would make their sins as white as snow. Then one day he learned that this particular culture viewed the color black as clean and the color white as dirty. Souls were saved when he explained that the blood of Jesus makes our sins as black as coal.

In Revelation, I suppose the wedding guests will get black robes...but I digress. Nothing is more inclusive than the Gospel, and it is a shame that some people are triggered by the word. Exclusive claims, yes. Inclusive message, a thousand times yes!!!

94chem said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

A is A said:

---

94chem said:

---

A is A said:

---

94chem said:

---

TNIV is better for modern inclusive language

---

---

Language changes. If you've ever read the KJV or Shakespeare, studied a language, supported a Wycliffe missionary, or have teenagers, you'd know this well

---

Read both, have studied Spanish and Latin, and have 3 kids, you got me on the missionary piece. My problem is not the "modernization", but rather the "inclusiveness". But hey, if you want to change meaning and context, go for it.

---

Not meaning to derail but a Gentile complaining about "inclusiveness" made me smile. Thanks.

---

When I took Ralph Winter's Perspectives course 32 years ago, there was this story of a missionary who just couldn't reach a people group when he shared that Jesus would make their sins as white as snow. Then one day he learned that this particular culture viewed the color black as clean and the color white as dirty. Souls were saved when he explained that the blood of Jesus makes our sins as black as coal.

In Revelation, I suppose the wedding guests will get black robes...but I digress. Nothing is more inclusive than the Gospel, and it is a shame that some people are triggered by the word. Exclusive claims, yes. Inclusive message, a thousand times yes!!!

---

Well, as Gentiles we were excluded until Christ. And the Jerusalem Council was huge. Paul went to bat for us. Look at who Christ had the harshest words for, religious leaders who tried to exclude people.
And to keep it on the subject, what Bible translation is exclusive?

dermdoc said:

---

94chem said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

A is A said:

---

94chem said:

---

A is A said:

---

94chem said:

---

TNIV is better for modern inclusive language

---

---

Language changes. If you've ever read the KJV or Shakespeare, studied a language, supported a Wycliffe missionary, or have teenagers, you'd know this well

---

Read both, have studied Spanish and Latin, and have 3 kids, you got me on the missionary piece. My problem is not the "modernization", but rather the "inclusiveness". But hey, if you want to change meaning and context, go for it.

---

Not meaning to derail but a Gentile complaining about "inclusiveness" made me smile. Thanks.

---

When I took Ralph Winter's Perspectives course 32 years ago, there was this story of a missionary who just couldn't reach a people group when he shared that Jesus would make their sins as white as snow. Then one day he learned that this particular culture viewed the color black as clean and the color white as dirty. Souls were saved when he explained that the blood of Jesus makes our sins as black as coal.

In Revelation, I suppose the wedding guests will get black robes...but I digress. Nothing is more inclusive than the Gospel, and it is a shame that some people are triggered by the word. Exclusive claims, yes. Inclusive message, a thousand times yes!!!

---

Well, as Gentiles we were excluded until Christ.

---

Rahab and Ruth say hi

10andBOUNCE said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

94chem said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

A is A said:

---

94chem said:

---

A is A said:

---

94chem said:

---

TNIV is better for modern inclusive language

---

---

Language changes. If you've ever read the KJV or Shakespeare, studied a language, supported a Wycliffe missionary, or have teenagers, you'd know this well

---

Read both, have studied Spanish and Latin, and have 3 kids, you got me on the missionary piece. My problem is not the "modernization", but rather the "inclusiveness". But hey, if you want to change meaning and context, go for it.

---

Not meaning to derail but a Gentile complaining about "inclusiveness" made me smile. Thanks.

---

When I took Ralph Winter's Perspectives course 32 years ago, there was this story of a missionary who just couldn't reach a people group when he shared that Jesus would make their sins as white as snow. Then one day he learned that this particular culture viewed the color black as clean and the color white as dirty. Souls were saved when he explained that the blood of Jesus makes our sins as black as coal.

In Revelation, I suppose the wedding guests will get black robes...but I digress. Nothing is more inclusive than the Gospel, and it is a shame that some people are triggered by the word. Exclusive claims, yes. Inclusive message, a thousand times yes!!!

---

Well, as Gentiles we were excluded until Christ.

---

Rahab and Ruth say hi

---

That was because of Christ. And He saves all.