"Hello, I just joined this. Just saying Hi!"
 |
Which Bible Version Is Best?
Which is a pretty contentious question, and an odd one to ask as an atheist. My question is: what are the strengths and weaknesses of the different English translations of the Bible?
Readability, enjoyability of that read (poeticness would be a factor if it was a word) and a certain amount of consistency to the source material are all factors. I'm mostly interested in the Old Testament: It's got some pretty cool stories, I celebrate Jewish holidays with my Jewish friends and I want to know what's going on, and it's a little bit about making fun of Christians.
I haven't found any satisfactory answer on the interwebs or on the nexus. There's too much information that I can't adequately filter and, besides, I want you know you lovely peoples opinions.
(Something I've heard: Richard Dawkins likes The King James Version because of the poetic Elizabethan Prose)
Tags: Bible
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Steph S. on -
All of them are bad. They have the bible online -- if you really want to read it. It will make you a stronger atheist.
-
Permalink Reply by booklover on -
I've never understood how someone could read the bible and then call it "the good book". It's horrible. Horrible stories, bad writing, etc. Why would anyone even WANT it to be true. Sick.
-
Permalink Reply by Jason Fleming on -
I agree, KJV is the best version for consistency. Its funny how such a derivative piece of fiction got so many remakes.
-
Permalink Reply by Matt VDB on -
When it comes to consistency to the source material, that's really not true though. The KJV is several centuries old; modern Bible translations have the advantage of centuries of scholarship into Ancient Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic.
The KJV is probably the most poetic version, but for the same reason it's also one of the least close to the source material by modern standards.
-
Permalink Reply by Bruce Griffin on -
I really like the full, unedited version of the KJB. I live in a remote area and sometimes run out of TP.
-
Permalink Reply by Regina Goodwin on -
TP. ROFLMAO
-
Permalink Reply by heretic zero on -
One problem, with any bible, is that many people have the reading comprehension of an 8th grader. Upper level readers, in college, read at a 10th grade education level. This is an obstacle for those who read their bibles, they have no comprehension of what they read. Many gloss over many scriptures that would prove Christianity a false religion, such as the Book of Jeremiah. Others do not read beyond their religious books to understand that the Book of John, introduction, is a plagiarized version of the writings of the pagan Greek philosopher Heraclitus who wrote of The Logos 500 years before the common era. He was writing about creation through the power of Zeus. Christians stole this philosophy and wrote it into the intro to the book of John. Many people read texts at face value without really investigating the origin of their reading materials. So, it really doesn't matter what Bible one uses because most Christians only read the parts that satisfy their own church doctrine and ignore the rest of the bible.
-
Permalink Reply by Tom Sarbeck on
-
I've read maybe 10% of KJV; only sentences in other versions.
After 12 years of next-worldly Catholicism, Song of Solomon is pleasantly this-worldly.
I found more value in collections of quotations, and works on pragmatism and existentialism.
-
Permalink Reply by Tiffany on
-
When I was taking biblical scholarship classes in undergraduate, we used the New Revised Standard version of the bible. Most scholars consider this version to be the most accurate. As others have said, while the KJV is more poetic, it is by no means the most accurate translation. A good rule is that the older the manuscripts used in translation, the better. (However, this is assuming that the older translations don't have deliberate 'corrections' or changes.)
I haven't read my copy of the bible in awhile, but I found the translation to be pretty readable and accessible. HTH!
-
Permalink Reply by Richard ∑wald on -
The Lego Bible...
-
Permalink Reply by Pat on -
R. Crumb's The Book of Genesis Illustrated. Shows, in graphic detail, the absolute assinine ancient fables that lead to the evil which is present day Abrahamic religions - Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
-
Permalink Reply by Richard ∑wald on
-
Excellent!
I'd forgotten about this...
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
CONNECT WITH ATHEIST NEXUS
Latest Activity
- Top News
- Everything
The Flying Atheist commented on Ruth Anthony-Gardner's group Hang With Friends"Chris, thanks for checking in. I hope you're having a wonderful holiday. Enjoy Vesuvius. "
The Flying Atheist commented on Ruth Anthony-Gardner's group Hang With Friends"Joan, you mentioned awhile back about liking to eat a nice steak with some red wine. The Argentinians have a wonderfully simple accompaniment to their steaks: Chimichurri Sauce
It has lots of chopped parsley and garlic!!"
GM joined Yvette's group
Young Atheists
A group for young atheists, any ages from 0-20 welcome! People love to underestimate young people, especially minors who can't vote, but we are a powerful group...we are not alone.
The Flying Atheist commented on Claire Donnelly's group LGBTQI atheists, nontheists, and friends"I'm with you Chrissie, Dallas, and Daniel. If an anti-gay supporter wants to be a selfless martyr and end their life over two people loving each other, then let them kindly proceed, as long as they don't take any innocent victims…"
"A real scary video, Joan, but my nerves are made of straw. Glad the surgery went well! Yes, parsley fights inflammations, very good for you!
What a good picture of Ian, you look well!
And this is to wave goodbye as I'm off to the Vesuvius…"
Joan Denoo commented on Ruth Anthony-Gardner's group Hang With Friends"Thanks for your support friends on Atheist Nexus. I am feeling just fine and in good spirits. I feel well supported and encouraged. I have a cloud of supporters."
Photos
© 2013 Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.
