Christian Mystics

Posted in bible | 39 Comments

39 Responses to “Which Bible Do You Use?”

1. on 03 Jul 2007 at 6:56 am1Angie

   First, I love the new design with the blog up front! Also, the Library, makes everything very clear, congrats!

   I’ve always loved the King James Version because of the sound of the words. Lately, I’ve been reading “The Devotional Bible” by Max Lucado as editor. It’s an improvement on the New Century Version of some years back — very readable and his comments are excellent (although I do filter some of it!)

2. on 04 Jul 2007 at 11:41 pm2Jim L.

   I did get lost in your wonderful site for a few hours tonight! Thank you for this amazing resource.

   As for a Bible, I suppose for reading I like the Phillip’s version of the New Testament. For study, though, I use the Harper Collins Study Bible. It is the New Revised Standard Version, and has more footnotes and notes than anything I’ve ever seen that I can feel comfortable with.

   Please keep up the good work! May God bless you.

   Jim

3. on 05 Jul 2007 at 9:46 am3Paulos

   I personally love the Pashida (but mainly because im Eastern Orthodox) But its really not that all different in wording than the KJV (other than the obvious mistranslations).

4. on 05 Jul 2007 at 10:54 am4Brian Robertson

   I’m not familiar with the Pashida - and can find no reference to it anywhere that refers to a Bible. Can you help me out?

5. on 05 Jul 2007 at 5:50 pm5Jeff

   I love the new sight. I visited the old site many times over the past couple of years. As a non-denominational, mystical leaning Christian (and this is what I considered myself before I even knew that there were Christian mystics per say) I’m glad to have found such a site.

   As for which Bible I use……I keep an old King James Bible that my grandmother gave me when I was 9 years old. I agree that the language used can sound beautiful, but I found it too cumbersome for practical everyday use. For my day-to-day reading and study I use the New International Version (the one I have in particular has extensive notes and study aids).

6. on 05 Jul 2007 at 7:51 pm6Brian Robertson

   Thanks, Jeff I appreciate people’s comments, believe me, lets me know there are people coming by! I do get some pretty heated letters, though, about how the Bible versions have gone straight downhill since the KJV in accuracy — while the opposite it true in many of the publications.

   Er, KJV translates in Philemon 1:20 “Yea, brother, let me have joy of thee in the Lord: refresh my bowels in the Lord.” The Greek word meant “feelings” or “emotions” and, in 1611, the argument could be made the true meaning of the word was somewhat evident. But I believe the popular meaning has changed, or modern churches would have to put in a few more stalls. I know, I know, tacky. Small point, but this kind of thing is peppered through the KJV.

7. on 06 Jul 2007 at 12:51 pm7Paulos

   Its called the Peshitta. Excuse my spelling error.(had a long day at the workplace) Type Peshitta in your search engine and you should find an abundance of information on it.
   M’Shlama,
   Paulos

8. on 07 Jul 2007 at 11:17 am8Marla

   Love the new look on the website!!

   I like the Richard Lattimore translation of the New Testament from the Greek. It reads like a narrative with no verse and chapter numbers.

   As for a study bible I usually use the RSV with apocrypha. To be honest I’m less in to theology than I once was. It seems to me Christianity in many ways has made an idol of the Bible, and lost the message/intent of Christ along the way.

9. on 07 Jul 2007 at 3:11 pm9Brian Robertson

   Maria:

   Thanks for the good words about the site — I’m putting a lot more effort into it, and I think it’s paying off; at least I hope so. As I am knee deep in a book on Christian Mystics, I decided it would be nice if the site was a little more active, a bit more friendly!

   I wondered if someone would bring up the Lattimore translation. I love it. He translates it as an expert on Greek translations, having done the Illiad and such before. Rather than approaching it with a theological axe to grind, he’s more concerned with what the words themselves say. I find that very, very refreshing.

   And, yes, I think for many the Bible has become a stopping, rather than the account of a spiritual journey which we all are still a part of and still learning from.

   Best, and thanks again,

   Brian

10. on 07 Jul 2007 at 3:28 pm10MARLA

    OOPS It’s Richmond Lattimore, not Richard (as I previously stated) in case someone is looking for this translation.

    The work you are putting in the website is noticed and appreciated. I usually check in several times a week. Thank you so much for a place to come to and share in this journey.

    Blessings, MARLA

11. on 08 Jul 2007 at 12:40 pm11Todd Rokholm

    I never realised there were so many versions. I’ve always used the New International Version, dunno if that’s good or bad?

    Todd.

12. on 08 Jul 2007 at 5:21 pm12Brian Robertson

    If you want to be surprised, Todd, check out this Wickipedia entry which lists some of the main English translations!

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_English_Bible_translations

    Blessing,

    Brian

13. on 09 Jul 2007 at 1:39 pm13Suzanne

    For a long time I was devoted to the NJB. The poetry and wisdom books are really lovely in that translation.

    Now I am using the ESV, though I am not in love with it. I have a copy of the NT in the Message. Good to read in bed, a total loss for study. But if the Word seems a little stale or you know it too well to really hear it in a fresh way the Message can take you to a green place fast.

    For OT only nothing beats the JPS for reading or study.

    That said, if the NJB came in an easy to carry version that still had at least 10 point type, I would probably use it 90% of the time.

14. on 09 Jul 2007 at 4:41 pm14Brian Robertson

    Oh my, Suzanne. You made me vividly remember a beautiful Bible I once had, a very oversized version of the New Jerusalem Bible, in very dark red leather with illustrations by, yes, Salvador Dali. ::sigh:: I’m afraid it’s vanished in the years of moves and changes.

    Brian

15. on 11 Jul 2007 at 12:56 pm15Catra T. L. Heaveno

    Dear Fellow Believers and Follower of the way,

    I started my faith walk ten years ago and the only bible that I have
    used is the KJV. I have looked at others, but I want to stay as close as I can to the hebrew text. I think that the bible that you use should help you understand what God is telling you to do in life. A bible should not be just for looks or story telling. It is the word of God, and I think that you use bibles that take away from the original context then you are missing out on alot. When you look for a bible; I think that you should find one that fits your relationship with Christ Jesus.

    With Love and Hope,
    Catra

16. on 29 Jul 2007 at 6:41 pm16Jen

    I will always love the music of the King James version, the bible of my High Anglican childhood.

17. on 18 Oct 2007 at 10:12 am17mark kacos

    I use the Aramaic translation done by George Lamsa as Aramaic was the language Jesus spoke. It clears up some things that were hard for me to understand i.e “hate your mother and father….” In aramaic “hate” meant put aside and/or snuff out. So, to say put the candle out in aramaic, you would say hate the candle.

18. on 20 Oct 2007 at 5:05 am18Rachel

    I’m new to this site and still wondering about it, but glad that it is there.

    Youngs Literal Translation, is where I am standing now. There are too many translation errors in the modern versions, insofar, as the reading of the text has been given priority over the metaphysical content. Youngs Literal, is not smooth sailing, or even good literature, but as far as I can tell - so far - it is loyal to the original languages and leaves me more understanding of the actual meaning of the words, than other versions do.

    Don’t knock it. The Hebrew language is a multidimensional structure. There is a tremendous shift in perspective and ‘feeling’ when you read - ‘In that day…’ as opposed to the correct English version ‘On that day…’, and shame on the Christian world - some OT errors seem to be deliberate, in order to - perhaps - justify the Churches version of Christ as the Messiah. Try isaiah 53:10 for a sample of this.

    To me Christ was the Messiah, but not in the Orthodox or Fundamentalist way and if I am to understand his life, words, his person, I must have the original. Thats how I work.

    The Unboundbible.com site, is superb for tasting different versions and comparing them, next to each other. Check it out.

    God bless

19. on 20 Oct 2007 at 6:37 am19jb

    For good or for bad, I use the god-ole’ Catholic NAB study Bible. I like it mostly for the “cleanliness” of the translations. Others may disagree, but it’s hard to knock 1600 years (+ or -) of scholorship from the Roman Church. Also, I like having the footnotes and cross-references at the bottom of each page.

    I do, however, also use Nelson’s eBible. It’s a great program that allows one to search by theme, word, or chapter/ verse. Also, one can have several translations on a side-by-side comparison, as well as ready access to a concordance. They have cheap & simple versions, and they also have the scholarly versions for $$$$. The one good thing is that you can always buy and download add-ons.

    For Hebrew and Greek versions/ translations, check out:

    http://www.htmlbible.com/

    And, another good site for various New Testament versions and Early Church Fathers (as well as some Apocryphal and Gnostic works):

    http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/

    Peace and Blessings

    JB

20. on 23 Oct 2007 at 9:05 am20Q Bee

    The NAB is excellent because it translates from the original languages directly into modern American English. It is also loaded with footnotes that help to clarify a great many points.
    The inclusion of the Wisdom books is really worth while too. After all, the fact that diaspora Jews penned them in Greek instead of Hebrew does not render them into garbage. And, by the way, the deutero-canonical books were included in the original KJV; they were removed later.
    Although the KJV is well liked, it was not a direct translation, and the manuscript used for the translation is not a very good one, so it contains thousands of minor errors. Although the translation is revered, it is not the best choice for scholars and it’s also not the “King Jesus Version”.

21. on 27 Oct 2007 at 11:16 pm21Wiliam

    I do lean towards the Jerusalem Bible. I like the elegance of it’s translation, the fact that the OT uses ‘Yahweh’ for God’s proper name and not just THE LORD and . . . well, JRR Tolkien was one of the translators.
    I don’t read the Bible like a law book (something that is an easy error to make since they put all those darn verse and chapter numbers in!), I want to find the overarching meaning and message, which I don’t think is accomplished by vivisecting the text line-by-line. It also makes it easier to deal with contradictions and errors when the focus is the overall text. Frederick Buechner once spoke of the Bible as a window: we shouldn’t be looking AT it, but THROUGH it where we can see a gathering of people all excited and pointing up at something we can’t see directly.

22. on 28 Oct 2007 at 4:39 am22Brian Robertson

    Wiliam:

    Thanks so much for mentioning the Jerusalem Bible — but, wow, the Buechner quote is absolutely fantastic. I’ll keep that one in my head this morning as I head to church.

    For those who don’t know Buechner, http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/week936/profile.html will get your started on a fascinating journey.

    Other thoughts of his that will, well, get you thinking:

    “Religion points to that area of human experience where in one way or another man comes upon mystery as a summons to pilgrimage.”

    “It is as impossible for man to demonstrate the existence of God as it would be for even Sherlock Holmes to demonstrate the existence of Arthur Conan Doyle.”

    “In his holy flirtation with the world, God occasionally drops a handkerchief. These handkerchiefs are called saints.”

    “Listen to your life. See it for the fathomless mystery that it is. In the boredom and pain of it no less than in the excitement and gladness: touch, taste, smell your way to the holy and hidden heart of it because in the last analysis all moments are key moments, and life itself is grace.”

    Blessings,

    Brian

23. on 03 Nov 2007 at 3:04 am23Jon Eric

    I grew up with the old reddish orange New American Bible (NAB) but fell under the spell of “Good News for Modern Man” (or Today’s English Version - TEV) in the late 70s. Its still my favorite.

    I’ve also read and like the New International Version (NIV) which I hold dear (especially for translating the section on men’s hair length a little more correctly in its alternative translation notes).

    One weird note though. I was in the bookstore the other day and looked thru the Remix version. Truthfully, I can’t fathom where the translator is coming from.

24. on 03 Nov 2007 at 5:21 am24Brian Robertson

    Jon:

    Haven’t seen it, really, other than opening the book in a store, shaking my head, and putting it back on the shelf. I think I’ll take a look next time one’s in front of me.

    I love to go through reviews on Amazon of a book mostly because I enjoy different opinions. This one’s strongly positive or strongly negative, no real in between, and the url is:

    http://www.amazon.com/review/product/1576834344/ref=cm_cr_pr_link_next_2/104-9925026-6037539?%5Fencoding=UTF8&pageNumber=2&sortBy=bySubmissionDateDescending

    Thanks so much for commenting and for reading the site!

    Blessings,

    Brian

25. on 21 Apr 2008 at 6:29 am25Alan

    I use the NKJV for a study Bible. You can’t beat the King James for accuracy and beauty of language and the New for modern spelling. Of course, there are still some minor errors in it, but not enough to worry about. Study can correct those. I have recently bought a copy of The Message - a bit racy but good for reading rather than studying.
    May God’s grace be with you all.

    Alan

26. on 08 Jun 2008 at 6:47 pm26poverty

    The Renovare’ Spiritual Formation Bible (NRSV) was gifted to me a few years ago, best gift ever and the first Bible I’ve possessed that included the Deuterocanonical Books. Still working on finding their place, worth and value within the Book. Any thoughts?

27. on 25 Jun 2008 at 7:48 am27Layne

    I grew up on the NIV, then a few years ago I switched to the NKJV. Now I read the NLT because I needed a Bible that hadn’t been underlined because I was going on a missions trip to a country that views any kind of marking of your holy scriptures as sacriligious…and this particular Bible was small and metal-covered and good for stuffing into a backpack without worrying about bending the pages. Since then I’ve found that I really enjoy this translation…and the lack of study notes! I find it helps to change the style every once in a while when I catch myself mindlessly reading because it all is so familiar. It’s also nice to have a variety of translations around to cross-reference. I also use BibleGateway.com a lot to check out other versions.

28. on 18 Jul 2008 at 8:11 am28Chris

    I use the RV. I was given it by my priest when I was reading a lot of Westcott and Hort. The idea that they helped a translation made it the obvious choice.

29. on 30 Jul 2008 at 2:51 pm29Flower

    I used to use King James and then New King James during my fundamentalist years, then when I discovered liberal Christianity, I started to read the New Revised Standard Bible, which is more respectful concerning the use of gender.

    I am curious to know is there a copy of the original bible prior to the Roman occupation? Is there a copy of its translation in English? I wonder how much of it is authentic and how much have been tampered with by the church of Rome. My bestfriend, who converted to Judaism told me that the Jews purposely mislead the Romans on the translation in about 6 places.

    I do believe from my own mystical experience that God still speaks to us through any translation, I think.

30. on 25 Aug 2008 at 5:23 pm30Quix

    Generally, I use the NRSV although I’ve just purchased a parallel with the NRSV, the Revised English Bible, the New Jerusalem Bible and the New American Bible. GREAT for study.

    Wonderful sight, keep up the good work!

31. on 20 Oct 2008 at 3:05 pm31Catra T. L. Heaveno

    I use many bibles, because I want to understand God word on every level. I also want to get as close to his whole truth as I can, but hard some of the older copies of the bible are hard to come bye. Right now I have three copies I use together when I study KJV, NLT, and the Manga bible.

32. on 07 Jan 2009 at 8:52 am32td

    I, too, have accumulated what may be considered too many Bibles. Of all of them I still like the Authorized Version w/ “Apocrypha”. However, the Orthodox Study Bible (Septuagint OT + NKJV NT), the Revised Standard Version - 2nd Catholic Edition, and the (Old) Jerusalem Bible. The latter for the fluidity. The JB is perfect for private reading and meditation. I’m not big on the Hebrew God-names, though. It’s a bit distracting.

    Great site. I look forward to reading future posts.

33. on 14 May 2009 at 11:56 am33Brian Mullins

    I use various Bibles when I am studying and for a very long time I stuck with the authorized 1611 KJV, because I had been raised to believe that was the “only” version of the English Bible that was correct. Over the years I have obtained copies of the NIV, RSV etc. However, the version I most enjoy is the NET bible.

    I got my copy of it in the early beta release, before they did many changes to it, but from what I can see of the website it hasn’t changed much just grown in project size.
    http://net.bible.org/bible.php

    I love the fact that it has greek and hebrew notes at the bottom, including why and how they translated certain verses. Very handy for intense study and translations. Often if I read something that I had read in the KJV in the NIV and it seems different, I’ll go get my NET bible and read the translators notes. I also use a Mathew Henry’s commentary, though often commentary’s I find are skewed towards a religious point of view. As a Christian Mystic I find it is often more important to find your own point of view, and understanding as lead by the Spirit, or so has been my experience.

    Brian

34. on 09 Jun 2009 at 12:36 pm34Bernard

    Hi,

    Peace and Blessings to you in the Name of Yeshua (Jesus).

    ESV Study Bible. Am thrilled with it.
    Its based on the King James and RSV. Really easy to read
    and very accurate in its translation. The best Bible I have.

    Yours in His Grace and Mercy,

    Bernard.

35. on 28 Jun 2009 at 3:24 pm35Brad

    When studying I use the NRSV…specifically the Oxford Annotated edition…very helpful. New Jerusalem is great too. For prayer I use the Revised English Bible, readers edition — to keep from getting distracted by study! In both study and prayer, I often like to consult The Message Bible by Eugene Peterson for a fresh take.

36. on 28 Jun 2009 at 4:37 pm36Brian Robertson

    Thanks, Brad, and I also enjoy the Message Bible more than I expected to!

    Brian

37. on 04 Aug 2009 at 11:06 am37Andre

    A person has the option of a dynamic equivalent (paraphrase) or a literal translation. It is a matter that occurs when translating anything from one language to another– to translate the thought or to translate word-for-word? If translating literally sometimes it can be choppy.

    But for serious bible study it is probably recomended to avoid a paraphrased version as they can be subjective and based more on the author’s interpretation. Try to go for one of the more literal translations.

    When it comes to the more literal ones such as the King James and the New American Standard versions there is the option of having a translation based upon the early and the few manuscripts (KJV) or the latter and the many (NASB).

    However what I find interesting is how that 2 manuscript based option exists for the New Testament but the Old Testament manuscript for our Bibles has been the Hebrew Masoretic text ONLY (which was standardized not until the 9th century!). How interesting to note that Jews today while reading it cannot see Jesus or the virgin birth in it!!! Also interesting to note that the Scriptures used by the early 1st century church was the OT greek Septuagint. And some things in it are more crisp and clear than in the masoretc text (e.g. Daniel 9)!!!

    The Orthodox Study Bible (with Old and New Testaments) is now available with an english translation of the Septuagint for its Old Testament and New King James for it’s New Testament. It even comes in leather binding as an option! I only wish it had extra wide margins to add some of my own study notes and cross references. But otherwise great job!

38. on 20 Jan 2010 at 6:27 am38Steve

    Hello Everyone,

    I use the Revised English Bible. I can’t comment on the accuracy of the translation because I don’t know ancient Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek. But it doesn’t read like a translation which is a plus, I think.

    Steve

39. on 15 Feb 2010 at 11:13 am39Ed Teune

    Just discovered your site, will explore more, thanks for making it!

    I think that as with any ancient writing from another language one should use more than one modern translation.
    I use NIV for everyday use, but have several other versions as well.
    I use the other ones to check on particularly interesting passages that speak to me. I do the same with the Dhammapada and the DaoDeJing.
    It’s not the particular words from a particular translation that should matter, but the intent of the original message to be conveyed. I feel that can only be accomplished (easily) by the modern reader via at least 2 or 3 translations of modern English.

Leave a Reply