Considering sources

[Xeno.of.athens]

In discussions on CF one sees many claims, assertions, statements about this or that belief. It's can be interesting even when it is sometimes exasperating. However, when claims are presented knowing the roots from which they came is useful. Sources are helpful. Citing sources is useful. So, here is something that is useful in video form. Those who watch it are invited to comment on what is said. Others may offer their insights on sources.

 

[BobRyan]

I like NASB/NKJV/YLT/NIV/KJV all of them make key contributions depending on the text one is looking at.

I like his
rejection of -- "the author is not who the book claims or who other Bible writers claim wrote this book " -
rejection of -- "miracles did not happen" "acts of God did not actually happen"

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

I like NASB/NKJV/YLT/NIV/KJV all of them make key contributions depending on the text one is looking at.

I like his
rejection of -- "the author is not who the book claims or who other Bible writers claim wrote this book " -
rejection of -- "miracles did not happen" "acts of God did not actually happen"

I would like the NASB better if it had the deuterocanon available, the same applies to NKJV, NIV. The KJV does have the deuterocanon and I believe that there is work currently underway to produce a KJV Catholic Edition, it is sponsored by former Anglicans who are in the Catholic Church in what is called a personal ordinariate which was created by Benedict XVI and in which a version of the Book of Common Prayer is used for the liturgy and many Anglican practices ans tradition are maintained with the approval of the Roman Curia.