Hi, /lit/ Which version of the bible is, in your opinion, best?

File: 007A45CA-66B0-4463-8A2C-1B2545ADFD43-21830-000017A949529BC5_tmp.jpg (27KB, 361x499px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 361x499px

>>8918266
Got pic related for Christmas and I'm loving it so far. The language isn't as poetic as the King James but the introductions and extensive notes more than make up for it.

>>8918337
Thanks for the quick reply! I'll see how the thread pans out, but this looks like the one.

File: NAB_cover.png (27KB, 400x600px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 400x600px

My aunt is a nun, and she gave me pic related to read

>>8918394
The Oxford one is definitely the scholar's bible.

But for which books he has, I recommend Robert Alter's versions for reading. He's done much of the old testament.

>>8918266
It depends on what you want to get out of it. For someone who wants to get "the truth" out of your reading, the English Standard Version I've heard is a good translation in modern English that retains the core meaning well. If you're reading it for the literary and cultural value then an annotated scholastic bible like the Oxford posted ITT or any other version with some commentary will give you informed background to the biblical allusions that exist in literature, as well as the various controversies that exist over certain passages and which parts of the Bible reference which others.

>>8918397
>Trusting nuns

Never desu

Jewish Study Bible. And never look back, nor have any need for the christian fan fiction part.

>>8919931
I'm feeling sad because I removed all my reaction pictures.
That was a great comment, deserves a proper reaction face

>>8918266
King james version before the jews got ahold of the christian bible and brainwashed christians to like them

>>8918397
I got this at confirmation, >>8918337 is superior