Comments on: Which Bible to Read?

By: Ric

Ric — Tue, 09 Oct 2007 03:44:39 +0000

Myself, I think it really does not matter. As some said before “…depends on what you seek…”. Read any of them, read them with an open mind, read them with a “hunger” or a “thirst” for truth (for want of a better word). What it comes down to is, does the whole gist of what you are reading tell you in your heart that what you are doing is right or wrong. In your heart, your mind (unless you are insane!) you know whether a thing would be good or bad. Summed up, would you want it done to you? As far as history, is anyone’s history more right than another’s? Just read it, read it often. Practice Love for your fellow “man”, and practice it always. Love, Ric.

By: Dawn

Dawn — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 23:08:12 +0000

Understanding the Bible: An Introduction for Skeptics, Seekers, and Religious Liberals by John Buehrens

Thanks for that Steve, I think I’ll check that out myself.

By: Mriana

Mriana — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 12:05:45 +0000

I only have a copy of the NRSV because in an effort to get me to read the Bible when a was teen my grandparents gave it to me. Thinking it was easier to read than the KJV, therefore I’d read it. Well, I did and was bored by it. My mother got me the NKJV thinking I’d like it better. I didn’t, but I used it the first time around in college when I took an Old Testement class, which was an easy A for me and went towards required credits. Yeah, it was and is a State uni, but you have required Humanities classes or whatever catagory it fell into for credit in that area.

It was there my sneaky suspecions about Christianity and Judaism evolving from other myths was confirmed, just not quite explained enough for me and I had more questions. Which I researched on my own. Now I thought it would be an easy minor for this degree, but Hinduism is proving to be a challenge, but it too is confirming my suspecions and answering some of my questions.

Those Bibles now have their backs off them and falling a part. So it looks like I read them a lot.

By: Jen

Jen — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 05:14:16 +0000

I think I own the NIV, because that was popular when I was 13 at the church I went to. These days, though, its pretty easy to find verses or chapters online, so I usually head over to Bible Gateway for all my Bible needs. This is because I am a person of the internet generation.

If you want to read about the Bible from a fairly even-handed source, I suggest Don’t Know Much About the Bible. It divides the Bible into sections and provides summaries and then answers questions about each book. Like the entire series, it doesn’t cite sources or provide references beyond a bibliography and some book recommendations throughout the text, but its a pretty easy and quick read, and is a nice starting point, even if I wouldn’t use it to write a paper.

By: Mriana

Mriana — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 04:12:56 +0000

I agree with Mike C, the DaVinci Code is worthless if you are looking for history.

By: Mike C

Mike C — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 03:56:39 +0000

Michael Baigent? Didn’t he co-author that pseudo-history, conspiracy theory book “Holy Blood, Holy Grail” that Dan Brown based a lot of the DaVinci Code off of? That’s nice fiction but it has very little relation to actual history.

By: Steve Caldwell

Steve Caldwell — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 02:13:28 +0000

I would recommend buying the following book as a study guide to go along with whatever translation or translations this person chooses:

Understanding the Bible: An Introduction for Skeptics, Seekers, and Religious Liberals by John Buehrens

You can find information on this book online here.

Buehrens recommends looking at multiple translations because each translations often have theological assumptions — for example, are you using a Protestant, Catholic, or Jewish translation of the text?

Buehrens recommends the following translations:

The New Oxford Annotated Bible, New Revised Standard Version with the Apocrypha

The Oxford Study Bible: Revised English Bible with Apocrypha

The Catholic Study Bible: New American Bible

My local Unitarian Universalist church did a class using Buehrens’ book and when our class would look at a passage, everyone who was reading along in class would have a different translation — the word choice and the emphaasis between the different translations provoked lots of discussion.

One suggestion in the book is to “read against the grain” when reading the Bible. This means keeping in mind which voices are present and which voices are absent. For example, a feminist reading against the grain would suggest interpreting the Bible through a lens of suspicion. Women were present when the stories were written but were marginalized in these stories.

By: Mriana

Mriana — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 01:22:40 +0000

That’s funny, Matt. Robert Price recommends the KJV, but if one can’t stand that then he recommends the NKJV and to stay away from the NAS and NIV because they are too far from the original translation, even worse with the NLT. I also recommend the NKJV IF you are going to read the Bible.

By: Matt Howden

Matt Howden — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 21:17:32 +0000

I would say New International Version. New American Standard. New Living Translation.

Stay away from New King James Version and King James Version.

The Message is good but it is a translation. So you will have to remeber that as you are reading it.

By: Calvin Moore

Calvin Moore — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 18:41:31 +0000

I’m a Biblical Studies student at Rochester College in Rochester Hills, MI. The general answer to this question is, “It depends on what you’re trying to accomplish.” For your purposes, I would suggest the New Revised Standard Version. It’s not as readable as the New Living Translation (NLT) or the New International Version. But, it is considered (among the translations) to be the closest to the original Greek manuscripts. I cannot attest to this last fact (as I am a only a first year Greek student), but this is what several professors have explained and, at this juncture, I have no reason to question their scholarship. Happy studying.