Study bible time!

[DeerGlow]

So my bible is falling apart and I don't know how to fix it (the pages are separating from the spine and the front cover from the spine of the cover) so I thought it would be good to get a new bible. Specifically I saw this bible at a Christian store a while back that was, as far as I remember, an ESV study bible (not apologetics, I know a guy at school who has an apologetics study bible this one is just study bible. If you've seen some of my other posts you might know I use NIV, I don't like using ones that use too modern slang but KJV can be confusing just trying to understand the older english, never mind the theological concepts. So, ESV?

 

[faroukfarouk]

So my bible is falling apart and I don't know how to fix it (the pages are separating from the spine and the front cover from the spine of the cover) so I thought it would be good to get a new bible. Specifically I saw this bible at a Christian store a while back that was, as far as I remember, an ESV study bible (not apologetics, I know a guy at school who has an apologetics study bible this one is just study bible. If you've seen some of my other posts you might know I use NIV, I don't like using ones that use too modern slang but KJV can be confusing just trying to understand the older english, never mind the theological concepts. So, ESV?

It you are looking for a study Bible, the Thompson Chain Reference edition has a huge amount of reference information that is really helpful.

 

[OpenYourBibles]

It you are looking for a study Bible, the Thompson Chain Reference edition has a huge amount of reference information that is really helpful.

I agree Thompson Chain reference all the way!

But also I would encourage you to press your Pastor to do his job (not to say that he doesn't, but here is what I mean) In Acts 8:31 the Ethiopian Eunuch is already giving himself to the word of God, studying while he is on his travels but he tells Peter how can I understand what I read unless some man teach me. I always get nervous when folks begin to look for later translations that run the risk of additional erroneous translations, for the simple reason that KJV is too difficult to understand. 1 Cor 1.21 tells us it pleased God to use preaching to save those that believe. It is your Pastor's job to help you understand, to feed you with knowledge and understanding (Jer 3:15).

Ok, back from the tangent - Thompson Chain Reference Bible is an amazing study bible!

 

[faroukfarouk]

I agree Thompson Chain reference all the way!

But also I would encourage you to press your Pastor to do his job (not to say that he doesn't, but here is what I mean) In Acts 8:31 the Ethiopian Eunuch is already giving himself to the word of God, studying while he is on his travels but he tells Peter how can I understand what I read unless some man teach me. I always get nervous when folks begin to look for later translations that run the risk of additional erroneous translations, for the simple reason that KJV is too difficult to understand. 1 Cor 1.21 tells us it pleased God to use preaching to save those that believe. It is your Pastor's job to help you understand, to feed you with knowledge and understanding (Jer 3:15).

Ok, back from the tangent - Thompson Chain Reference Bible is an amazing study bible!

I actually think that the KJV is worth the effort of reading carefully; although there might be more initial effort involved in some verses, yet its basic accuracy makes it in my humble view preferable to some of the more modern paraphrastic versions, and far better to study from than from paraphrases.

 

[miamited]

Hi deerglow,

You might try some of the NKJV study bibles. There are quite a few of them. John MacArthur and the Billy Graham association both have ones that are quite good. If you like the ESV, then by all means, use that for your study bible. It's never been impressed upon me that any particular translation is better than another, although I do say that with the caveat that there are some I'm not fond of. Translations such as the Message or Good News for Modern Man and even the newer copyright NIV's aren't high on my list of accurate translations. There are, however, many very good and very accurate translations to choose from.

God bless you,
In Christ, ted

 

[OzSpen]

So my bible is falling apart and I don't know how to fix it (the pages are separating from the spine and the front cover from the spine of the cover) so I thought it would be good to get a new bible. Specifically I saw this bible at a Christian store a while back that was, as far as I remember, an ESV study bible (not apologetics, I know a guy at school who has an apologetics study bible this one is just study bible. If you've seen some of my other posts you might know I use NIV, I don't like using ones that use too modern slang but KJV can be confusing just trying to understand the older english, never mind the theological concepts. So, ESV?

DeerGlow,

It depends on which kind of translation you prefer. If it is dynamic equivalence (meaning for meaning), then I prefer the NIV and the NLT.

If it is formal equivalence (an attempt at word for word), the ESV and NASB are good translations. I find the ESV less wooden in translation than the NASB. That's a personal preference.

I use The NIV Study Bible (1985 Zondervan). There are possibly updates of this version. Crossway Bibles publishes an ESV Study Bible. See also the NLT Study Bible (Tyndale).

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

I actually think that the KJV is worth the effort of reading carefully; although there might be more initial effort involved in some verses, yet its basic accuracy makes it in my humble view preferable to some of the more modern paraphrastic versions, and far better to study from than from paraphrases.

Could you be confusing paraphrase with dynamic equivalence? The NIV and NLT are dynamic equivalence translations. Phillips, The Message, and the Good News Bibles are paraphrases.

There is quite a difference between the two in translation philosophies.

For any new Christian, the KJV is a nightmare. We don't talk that kind of language and there is absolutely no need to use the 1611 or 1769 revision of the KJV.

If one wants to use the Textus Receptus as the basis for the NT, then use the NKJV. As a teacher of NT Greek, I do not regard the Textus Receptus as representing the best available NT manuscripts for Bible translation. The MSS are way too late and Erasmus couldn't find even one MSS of the Book of Revelation that contained the last 6 verses in Greek. What did he do? He translated from the Latin to the Greek. Not one MSS found since then has agreed word for word with Erasmus's Textus Receptus for those 6 verses.

We can do better than the Textus Receptus, using MSS now that are older and closer to the originals - but not without variants. That's the nature of copying.

Oz

 

[faroukfarouk]

Could you be confusing paraphrase with dynamic equivalence? The NIV and NLT are dynamic equivalence translations. Phillips, The Message, and the Good News Bibles are paraphrases.

There is quite a difference between the two in translation philosophies.

For any new Christian, the KJV is a nightmare. We don't talk that kind of language and there is absolutely no need to use the 1611 or 1769 revision of the KJV.

If one wants to use the Textus Receptus as the basis for the NT, then use the NKJV. As a teacher of NT Greek, I do not regard the Textus Receptus as representing the best available NT manuscripts for Bible translation. The MSS are way too late and Erasmus couldn't find even one MSS of the Book of Revelation that contained the last 6 verses in Greek. What did he do? He translated from the Latin to the Greek. Not one MSS found since then has agreed word for word with Erasmus's Textus Receptus for those 6 verses.

We can do better than the Textus Receptus, using MSS now that are older and closer to the originals - but not without variants. That's the nature of copying.

Oz

Look at the way both the NIV and the Good News chop up the sentences in Ephesians 1 and 2, for example; both versions chop them up into many short ones, while the King James generally retains the sentence flow of the original (Paraphastic versus dynamic equivalence? if you say so. Kenneth Taylor style telling stories to his children or Eugene Nida applying the notion of engineering redundancy into Holy Writ? Whatever you prefer. But I do strongly prefer the formal equivalence of the King James.)

As a teacher of NT Greek you will have also looked at the Claremont Profile and Pierpont-Robinson editions of the Greek NT text, and even at the Hodges-Farstad Majority text; and even at F. Wisse's variant collations; although not a TR advocate, he wishes that more attention were paid to the Byzantine text type.

I'll still stick to the King James, thank-you.

 

[OzSpen]

Look at the way both the NIV and the Good News chop up the sentences in Ephesians 1 and 2, for example; both versions chop them up into many short ones, while the King James generally retains the sentence flow of the original (Paraphastic versus dynamic equivalence?

farouk,

I've got bad news for you. There are no punctuation marks in NT Greek so sentence length and paragraph dimensions have been determined by translators, including the KJV translators.

There's absolutely no problem with short sentences when translating the Greek NT.

Which version of the KJV are you using? The original 1611 edition or the 1769 revision or some other revision?

Oz

 

[faroukfarouk]

farouk,

I've got bad news for you. There are no punctuation marks in NT Greek so sentence length and paragraph dimensions have been determined by translators, including the KJV translators.

There's absolutely no problem with short sentences when translating the Greek NT.

Which version of the KJV are you using? The original 1611 edition or the 1769 revision or some other revision?

Oz

If you look at Robert Martin's book 'Accuracy of Translation' by Banner of Truth, it contains various tables on exactly this subject: various passages in different versions such as KJV, NIV and TEV (Good News) where the numbers of sentences are compared against the underlying Greek.

The KJV most people use is the 1769, even though some ppl call it the 1611.

 

[OzSpen]

If you look at Robert Martin's book 'Accuracy of Translation' by Banner of Truth, it contains various tables on exactly this subject: various passages in different versions such as KJV, NIV and TEV (Good News) where the numbers of sentences are compared against the underlying Greek.

The KJV most people use is the 1769, even though some ppl call it the 1611.

That's a red herring fallacy. You did not address what I wrote: 'There are no punctuation marks in NT Greek so sentence length and paragraph dimensions have been determined by translators, including the KJV translators'.

Oz

 

[faroukfarouk]

That's a red herring fallacy. You did not address what I wrote: 'There are no punctuation marks in NT Greek so sentence length and paragraph dimensions have been determined by translators, including the KJV translators'.

Oz

Robert Martin wrote a book in which he clearly does not share some of your presuppositions.

 

[OzSpen]

Robert Martin wrote a book in which he clearly does not share some of your presuppositions.

It's not a presupposition of mine. It's a fact. Take a read of the Codex Sinaiticus: Matthew 6:4-32 (Courtesy Wikipedia).

Unfortunately, this forum won't allow me to do a copy and post of this image from Sinaiticus.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

Robert Martin wrote a book in which he clearly does not share some of your presuppositions.

They are not my presuppositions. They are the facts. The Greek NT and Septuagint did not come with punctuation marks nor breaks between words or sentences.

Take a read of an open full page of Codex Sinaiticus. Unfortunately, CF.com will not allow me to copy and paste this image.

There are no punctuation marks in this uncial copy of Codex Sinaiticus. It is in the British Museum.

Oz

 

[Romansthruphilemon]

I would strongly recommend that you use only a king James Bible. The english is not that hard to understand and after a while you don't even notice it.

The translations change things to the point where the original meaning of the text is completely different. It's pretty shocking if you study it and think about it a little. I'll give one example but there are plenty more where God's word is totally changed.

2 Timothy 2:15 KJV Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

2 Timothy 2:15 NIV Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth.

2 Timothy 2:15 ESV Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.

Do your best to present yourself to God is completely different than study. Do your best to present yourself to God kind of gives the impression of works for salvation when Ephesians 2:8,9, Romans 4:5 and Titus 3:5 clearly show we are not saved by works.

It gets even worse in the second part of 2 Timothy 2:15. If you don't use the KJV you won't know that you have to rightly divide the word of truth. That's huge! Everyone knows that we have to divide truth from error but does every bible student know we need to divide truth from truth? Only if they are using a KJV. Rightly dividing the word of truth is so important that many people are lost because they have never heard a clear gospel message, that was rightly divided, and believed it so they could be saved.

I think God is not happy at all how the meaning of his word has been changed with the translations. I threw mine in the trash where I think they belong. Not trying to hijack your thread but I would like to add one video that demonstrates how important it is to rightly divide that you won't get without the KJV.
Thanks and God Bless.

 

[Romansthruphilemon]

 

[OzSpen]

I would strongly recommend that you use only a king James Bible. The english is not that hard to understand and after a while you don't even notice it.

The translations change things to the point where the original meaning of the text is completely different. It's pretty shocking if you study it and think about it a little. I'll give one example but there are plenty more where God's word is totally changed.

2 Timothy 2:15 KJV Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

2 Timothy 2:15 NIV Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth.

2 Timothy 2:15 ESV Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.

Do your best to present yourself to God is completely different than study. Do your best to present yourself to God kind of gives the impression of works for salvation when Ephesians 2:8,9, Romans 4:5 and Titus 3:5 clearly show we are not saved by works.

It gets even worse in the second part of 2 Timothy 2:15. If you don't use the KJV you won't know that you have to rightly divide the word of truth. That's huge! Everyone knows that we have to divide truth from error but does every bible student know we need to divide truth from truth? Only if they are using a KJV. Rightly dividing the word of truth is so important that many people are lost because they have never heard a clear gospel message, that was rightly divided, and believed it so they could be saved.

I think God is not happy at all how the meaning of his word has been changed with the translations. I threw mine in the trash where I think they belong. Not trying to hijack your thread but I would like to add one video that demonstrates how important it is to rightly divide that you won't get without the KJV.
Thanks and God Bless.

It's the opposite of what you are suggesting. 'rightly dividing the word of truth' (KJV) means 'correctly handles the word of truth' (NIV).

Seems to me that you are stuck in the KJV groove and no other version that clarifies the meaning is acceptable.

The New Living Translation clarifies the meaning even further of 2 Tim 2:15: 'Work hard so you can present yourself to God and receive his approval. Be a good worker, one who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly explains the word of truth.'

So, 'rightly dividing the word of truth' really means 'correctly explaining the word of truth'.

I'm blessed by the fact that there are many modern translations that help to bring out in modern day English the meaning of the text.

The text of the 1611 version of the KJV is not the language of today whether in the USA or here in Australia. It is foreign lingo. Do you use the 1611 KJV that is complete with the Apocrypha?

This is how the 1611 KJV of 2 Tim 2:15 reads: 'Studie to shewe thy selfe approued vnto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly diuiding the word of trueth'.

Are you serious when you try to tell us that 'The english is not that hard to understand and after a while you don't even notice it'? You must be joking.

Oz

 

[Striver]

Deer, have you chosen a Bible yet?

The ESV Study Bible is really an excellent Bible. I have the copy from the first release of the ESV and not only has the Bible held up well with use, but I've seen no reason to update it. It's the synthetic leather version. For a long time, I carried this Bible to church, which doubled up as a good lift workout. The notes are solid and reliable and as good as any in depth.

The other Bible you may want to look at is the HCSB/CSB. They're actually in the midst of rebranding the Holman Christian Standard Bible to just the Christian Standard Bible, but it's notes are as good as the ESV, if not better. I really appreciate the word studies for key terms and I find the notes maybe a bit more cross-discipline in nature.