>Ordered 5 different bible translations and 3 books of apocryphal

moms gonna freak

I could think of a million things worse than that, OP. Hope the RSV was among them.

>>9373191
>tfw up to 6 different bible translations now

thanks

File: rps20170412_223057.jpg (105KB, 768x1024px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 768x1024px

>>9373172
You don't know the half of it. I'm on about 3 layers of ironic mormonism too.

>>9373191
>buying a 65 year old translation

I've got
NRSV
NABRE
NASB
ESV
NJPS

Plus 1 Enoch, the Nag Hammadi scriptures, and a book of new testament pseudepigrapha.

>>9373215
No TJ?

>>9373215
Are you gay?

>>9373231
TJ?

>>9373241
No but I'd fail just about every other one of their baptism questions, lol

File: 1рерайт.jpg (36KB, 685x514px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 685x514px

>>9373271
Oh, I remember that.
- Do you believe in the 10 commandments?
- No.
- Okay ...

>>9373286
Mormons are such funny people. So nice on the surface but it gets weird and cultish very quickly.

>>9373309
But they are much more sincere than pentecostals like Hillsong.

>>9373271
The Jerusalem bible

>>9373331
Nah, it's a dynamic translation, useless for studying. I've got the NABRE if I want a Catholic perspective.

>>9373337
Whats the difference? Dynamic is more layman compared to a more literal translation?

>>9373372
Dynamic is more of a paraphrase than a translation.

File: 1470509360318.gif (427KB, 857x994px) Image search: [Google]

427KB, 857x994px

Why did you order 5?

>>9373165
I bet you read Genesis, part of Exodus, Job and one of the gospels from one translation each. Except maybe (part of) Genesis in a couple.

>>9373386
Got kind of obsessed with differences in translation and just got all the ones that seemed the best. It's not like I ordered five of the same.

So I've got a good range of takes on it I guess. Two are by protestant scholars, one by catholics, one by jews, and one by a mixed team.

File: IMG_3735.jpg (17KB, 184x184px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 184x184px

>>9373215
>I'm on about 3 layers of ironic mormonism too

File: 1471010809001.jpg (72KB, 818x548px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 818x548px

>>9373429
Well, now that you have them, treasure them

>>9373405
Nope, already read Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 Samuel, 2 Samuel, 1 Kings, 2 Kings, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, Daniel, the 12 minor prophets, the four gospels, Acts, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, 2 Thessalonians, Philemon, and Revelation.

>Here about OP buying Bibles
>Cool another autist that's been doing that
>Mormonism

Lad, why did you have to ruin it?

>>9373215
This looks like you are actually mormon. Why?

>>9374050
I'm not, I just find them fascinating.

>>9373215
> No KJV
Have fun in hell

>>9373909
Mormonism is like protestant Gnosticism, kiddo, it's cool.

File: crusader_desktop_2244x2859_hd-wallpaper-1063534.jpg (580KB, 2244x2859px) Image search: [Google]

580KB, 2244x2859px

>>9375078
>Protestant
>Gnostic

>>9373215
>no kjv
Huh

>>9375086
Learn to read.

>>9375125
Right. It's ok to not get the KJV if you're buying one Bible, especially if it's your first. It's not ok to not get the KJV if you choose more than one.

>>9373215
>> buying a 65 year translation
I fear any wisdom is lost on op.

>>9373165
Thank God He is not an engineer.

>>9375125
>>9375148
You can tell someone knows nothing about translation when they get all uppity about the KJV. It's beautiful to read, and had a profound impact on English lit, but it's not for Bible study.

>>9375148
>I fear any wisdom is lost on op.
Yes, please tell me the wisdom of using outdated scholarship. I'm guessing your response will be:

>muh gender neutral conspiracy
>muh evil historical critical method
>muh RSVCE a kiddy-fiddling seminary teacher recommended

>>9375196
>it's not for Bible study
Yeah, God forbid 'Bible study' should include any study of how the Bible has been translated and understood in English. That couldn't possibly be relevant to an English-speaking person, amirite?

>>9375213
???

KJV uses poorer manuscripts than are available to modern translators, and the archaic language makes the meaning less clear. It's inferior if you actually want to study what the bible says.

>>9375282
I feel like you missed the point entirely there

>>9375299
So you were annoyed because you think Bible Study should be about the history of English translations?

>Not reading in the original Hebrew.

You got cucked by the goy Jew.