BIBLES

[tutuof8]

I would like to hear from others as to which bible they use and why.

[John]

i use the HRV, RSV, NRSV, NASB, or ASV for theology, because they are literal. (i also use the old JPS). they are not as binding in how you can interpret a passage, so you can apply the passage to more things, and if you have an understanding of the culture you can understand it better through the hebraisms and such.

i use NLT, Message, and CJB for paraphrases. i use message for talking to others about the bible, NLT for personal applications of verses, and CJB for a messianic outlook in paraphrase form.

also good for focusing on how to LIVE the bible not just read it is the A;;lication Study Bible... it's really good.

shalom

[itiswritten]

I use the King James Version a lot. It is not a perfect translation, but I use it a lot because it is keyed to the Strong's Concordance. I occasionally use an interlinear Bible. I also like using "The Scriptures." The Scriptures restores the Name of The Most High and His Son. It also uses the Hebrew names for the names of the books and other things. To me, it gives you a more true, Hebrew flavor than most English versions.

I have some Bible software that I use a lot. The main thing that I use there is the Hebrew interlinear with transliteration. In other words, you can read the English translation, see the actual Hebrew letters, and also read the Hebrew the way that it would be pronounced. Also, each word has a number under it that you can click on. This will take you directly to the Strong's Concordance definition of the word. I really enjoy using that too.

Also with the same software I often use the Englishman's Hebrew and Englishman's Greek Concordance. It's basically a reverse Strong's Concordance. It will show you every where that a particular Hebrew or Greek word is used.

Although I do not have it yet, I am intending on getting a concordance to the Septuagint. That way I can take the NT Greek back to the Hebrew by seeing which Greek word was used for the Hebrew in the Greek translation of the Tanach (OT)

[John]

i want a septuagint.

i will look into "the scriptures"

i also use KJV, but more for the traditional poetic form, not really for theology. but like itiswritten noted, i use it for theology purely because it is keyed to Strong's.

the interlinear bible is AWESOME. tutu let me borrow hers actually (tell Jeremy to give it back, lol). now i use it online.

i also have a greek new testament and lexicon.

shalom- john

PS- but that is all for study- i hihly suggest using a paraphrase (CJB and Message, possibly NLT) if you are not interested in theology, but have a literal translation (NRSV, HRV) in handy when your doing study.

[anochria]

itiswritten, "the Scriptures" sounds interesting. Where can you find it?

My default for normal reading and basic study is the NIV just because it's so widely used and is easy to understand without dumbing things down.

However, I rely a lot on the New King James for comparisons in study.

Lexicons of course are helpful, and sometimes I use an Amplified Bible as well.

[Jonatan]

I personally use Bibles in my language, so you'll probably not know it. But in international communication, I always try to use KJV, whether old or new, if it's possible, and if the target people group can understand the King James archaisms that are used.

That's good point, Keith - Strong's references. That's why I wouldn't change to use it by any other translation (maybe except Webster?).
Next thing is that it is possibly the most literal and thus precise translation + it is translated from more original texts (Textus Receptus reconstructed by Scrivener) than the critical texts, manipluted by people (Westcott Hort, Nestle/Aland, Robinson/Piemont etc.).

As greek original, I recommend either Stephanus' Textus Receptus, but it's older - from 16.century, or newer Scrivener's TR.

And yeah, good thing about hebrew Tanakh is that there aren't differences like in any of the languages but has been strictly kept by masorets so that there might not occur any important change.

You want Septuagint? If you are interested in it, you can have it online together if you also install bible program DAVAR3 Scripture Study Tool. Here are links. I use that because it has many advantages in comparison to other programs, e.g. hebrew and greek fonts are nicer and more readable that in E-Sword. Plus, it's TOTAL FREEWARE WITH ALL BOOK, DICTIONARY AND LEXICON PLUGINS TO BE DOWNLOADED.

www.davar3.net

here's the link to download Septuagint

www.davar3.net/download.htm#GREEK_BOOKS

there you list down until you find LXX+ with description.

Just learn how to manage and install it correctly with everything and you have perfect program with many and many sources.

[John]

Next thing is that it is possibly the most literal and thus precise translation + it is translated from more original texts (Textus Receptus reconstructed by Scrivener) than the critical texts, manipluted by people (Westcott Hort, Nestle/Aland, Robinson/Piemont etc.).

As greek original, I recommend either Stephanus' Textus Receptus, but it's older - from 16.century, or newer Scrivener's TR.

the textus receptus is now acknoweledged as one of the MOST corrupted texts. the KJV is not the most literal. read ehrman- though he has beliefs that i dont agree on, his "misquoting jesus" is really good and shows how the KJV is probably one of the least reliable english tragumim.

shalom- john

[Jonatan]

I don't know that much about King James Version, and if I were correct that it's been translated from Textus Receptus, but at least I know that Textus Receptus is better in historical accuracy than OTHER CORRUPT CRITICAL TEXTS!

In our assembly, we're doing new translation - when we started, we needed to discuss whether it would be better to translate from manuscripts and textus receptus or from criticals (Nestle/Aland). So we decided to choose TR. There are many arguments why to translate rather from TR than from the critical texts, if you'd like to hear, write me and I'll translate and paste here some.

What's been found out is that the criticals have been tampered by human critique of Word of God as though people wanted to prove or disprove the original text - same as though unbelieving people would want to find contradictions in Tanakh and say that it has been tampered with.

No, no. Not tamperings - there's one factor - TRADITION that shows what's original and preserved.
As hebrew masorets preserved OT in form of Tanakh, we can suppose that Greek Orthodox have done the same - and they just use TEXTUS RECEPTUS. From my side, it's all - PERIOD.

[tutuof8]

I have been looking online and came up with these findings:

ESV: 100 scholars, literally follows KJV, ASV and Revised SV. Very accurate, word for word, very readable.

NASB: 54 conservative Protestants scholars worked on it.

NIV: 115 Evangelical scholars.

New Jerusalem Bible: 2 Catholic scholars.

NLT: 90 bible scholars from around the world and from various theological backgrounds and denominations.

Textus Receptus Greek N/T is not copywrited, which according to the author is the one to read.

According to several different reports as of 2001 there are 30,000 +/- different christian denominations. WHY?

I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHO IS MESSIANIC JEW AND WHO IS ORTHODOX JEWS OR GENTILE

[tutuof8]

FORGOT TO SAY THANKS TO THOSE WHO RESPONDED. I LEARNED AND EVEN FOUND WORDS I KNEW. THANK-YOU

[itiswritten]

Sept 9, 2009 21:10:18 GMT -5 anochria said:

itiswritten, "the Scriptures" sounds interesting. Where can you find it?

If you go to the link below there is an online version. You just go to the very top of the page and select the book that you want to read, for example Genesis or Exodus. Then you select the chapter. I have it in book form and use it pretty often. If you like the online version, you may want to order a hard copy.

www.eliyah.com/thescriptures/

[John]

everyone here except jonatan and anochria is a messianic jew. jonoatan is an evangelical from ukraine, and josh is a [youth?] pastor who runs his own forum as well.

NLB is a christian. an earlier member, tonga, is an orthadox jew.

why do you want to know?

shalom

[itiswritten]

Sept 13, 2009 10:48:31 GMT -5 tutuof8 said:

I have been looking online and came up with these findings:

ESV: 100 scholars, literally follows KJV, ASV and Revised SV. Very accurate, word for word, very readable.

NASB: 54 conservative Protestants scholars worked on it.

NIV: 115 Evangelical scholars.

New Jerusalem Bible: 2 Catholic scholars.

NLT: 90 bible scholars from around the world and from various theological backgrounds and denominations.

Textus Receptus Greek N/T is not copywrited, which according to the author is the one to read.

According to several different reports as of 2001 there are 30,000 +/- different christian denominations. WHY?

I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHO IS MESSIANIC JEW AND WHO IS ORTHODOX JEWS OR GENTILE

Thanks for all of the great info Ms Tutu. As for myself, I'm not much on titles and labels. Probably many would call me "messianic" "hebrew roots" or something like that. I am unaware of any Jewish heritage in my family, but who knows?

Although in theology I would be in line with a lot of Messianics believe, there are many differences among people even in that group. Sometimes great differences. For now, I just call myself a "truth seeker." That's what I'm ultimately interested in: Ruach (Spirit) and Emet (Truth)

[John]

okay i didnt know itiswritten was a Messianic Gentile.

that means he follows only the laws of Torah applicable to Gentiles but still follows Judaism (messianic judaism).

if you would like to talk to an orthodox jew, visit this (www.theloveofgod.proboards.com) website and speak to "tonga."

shalom

[itiswritten]

Here is a link where you can read an interlinear, transliteration with the Hebrew. It is set up from left to right though.

www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/Hebrew_Index.htm

[anochria]

way cool itiswritten. thanks for the link.

John:

I'm not a youth pastor, but I can understand the confusion.

I am a high school teacher (day job) and senior pastor of a church community called Aletheia Christian Fellowship in Oregon.

[edited by John]

[Jonatan]

And I'm not from Ukraine, but from Slovakia (slightly to the west from Ukraine) and I don't know whether I am an evangelical, pentecostal or a messianic. Trying to be it all in one. May Lord help me - we must follow the Word and Spirit in any denomination.
But thank you John.
Shalom to all!

[John]

ok--- whooops.

you used to be evangelical right?

shalom

[Jonatan]

Well, all pentecostals are practically evangelicals, because they're not catholic charismatics, simple definition.

[thevicarsson]

Well, i tend to use the NIV or my now ruined kids bible i got for my first communion when i was eight(first communion is not confirmation of faith, however just a confirmation that you understand what the bread an wine symbolises and are ready to take the body and blood of christ. Very few churches do it.