Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

579

I heard there is also a "modernized layman / english version of the bible". Do you if this is true and it's good to also have? You might say, it's not the original translation therefor it's 'fake / untrue'. Ya but if I can't understand the Robin Hoodish, Robin Hoodish, Robin Hoodish version of english in the bible then I ain't getting the 'right translation' there either.

Thanks!

I heard there is also a "modernized layman / english version of the bible". Do you if this is true and it's good to also have? You might say, it's not the original translation therefor it's 'fake / untrue'. Ya but if I can't understand the Robin Hoodish, Robin Hoodish, Robin Hoodish version of english in the bible then I ain't getting the 'right translation' there either. Thanks!

(post is archived)

[–] • 4 pts

The oldest available. KJV, anything else is simplified and watered down and will turn you into a retard.

[–] • 1 pt

Geneva Bible, used by US Pilgrims, was older, but both used same manuscripts, which is the key issue. "Older" is not always the best criteria either since verifiably fake manuscripts were created before the first Bible existed...

[–] • 3 pts

The Amplified Bible.

Look, it's written in dead languages. Simple as.

You can trust other people to make sense of it for you. Arguably the ones who have been dead the longest are the most reliable.

Or, you can get as close as you can to the primary source yourself. That's what the Amplified Bible helps you do.

https://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Amplified-Bible-AMP/

[–] • 0 pt

Same. It gives the most insight into the closest we have to original text and meanings. 100%.

[–] • 2 pts (edited )

The New American Standard Bible (NASB), particularly the 1977 edition.

If you can find one, I recommend the 1993 Hebrew-Greek Key Word Study Bible edited By Spiros Zodhiates.

The purpose of having an English language Bible is for ease of reading on a daily basis. However, to truly grasp the intentions of the writers, especially of those founders in the Early Church, a study of Greek manuscripts from within the first few generations is imperative. There are things the English language on its own simply cannot convey.

The NASB scholastically and prayerfully sought to provide the most accurate English translation of the source text, using the most comprehensive collection of manuscripts it could secure. By 1977, they had reached the peak of available materials, while still avoiding (((politically correct))) pitfalls of the subsequent editions.

The Zodhiates “key word” study Bible, much like the NASB itself, was the product of years of prayerfully poring over the original language texts in order to provide the lay person easy and accurate access to the most vital terms from the manuscripts, offering cross reference, definitions, and other study tools.

All of that said, for a deeper reading, I strongly recommend using the digital tools available to study the parallel Greek manuscripts we now have, particularly the Tischendorf and Stephanus, along with a mix of secular Ancient Greek language tools, as well as the usual Strongs Concordance and the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament by Kittel and Bromley.

[–] • 2 pts

One where j0os/the church haven't replaced God's name with 'LORD'

[–] • 1 pt

I was reading one and noticed this. Thought it was “weird” / blasphemous. It referred to “other gods” then god as “lord”.

I was like, wait a minute, the Bible recognizes other gods?

[–] • 3 pts (edited )

God himself sure seemed to.

Exodus 20:1-3: “And God spoke all these words: 'I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. You shall have no other gods before me.’”

Now think on what that says, and also on what it does not say, most carefully.

It says: "I am your God." (Those other folks over there? They've got their own god/s that aren't me.)

It says: "You shall have no other gods before me.

He could have said: "I am the one, true, god." But he didn't.

He could have said: "I am the only god." But again, he didn't.

It doesn't even forbid the worship of other gods, only stating that you must worship God, first and foremost, before them.

[–] • 2 pts (edited )

It doesn't even forbid the worship of other gods

...ahem... "for you shall worship no other god, for the Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God"

I mean.. that's pretty effing clear, my guy.

[–] • 0 pt

The fallen Angels became the pantheon of gods worshipped by ancient cultures, the bible just acknowledges that perspective that other supernatural, though lesser beings exist. Today, that's inverted, and some just call them "aliens". Aliens = Demons as some researchers have basically admitted in so many words...

[–] • 1 pt

Psalm 82

God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.

2 How long will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? Selah.

3 Defend the poor and fatherless: do justice to the afflicted and needy.

4 Deliver the poor and needy: rid them out of the hand of the wicked.

5 They know not, neither will they understand; they walk on in darkness: all the foundations of the earth are out of course.

6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.

7 But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes.

8 Arise, O God, judge the earth: for thou shalt inherit all nations.

[–] • 2 pts

Older versions are less corrupted and modified. If it says anything other then [ sons of god/ ba na elohim] then it's a molded version corrupted by a jew

[–] • 1 pt

Tisdale? Believe it was done by Swiss hiding in England, before King James

[–] • 0 pt
[–] • 0 pt

Was gonna check spelling. Was thinking tynsdale

[–] • 0 pt

Tyndale ??

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt

the one with pictures!

[–] • 0 pt

Isn't against one of the commandments?

[–] [deleted] • 2 pts

What? Tho shalt not color outside of the lines?

[–] • 0 pt

Yes, second one, graven and false images, if they depict Christ.

[–] • 1 pt

I don't think that is what it means. The utilitarian reason is that icons supercede the message. You ever see perverts and bastards wearing crosses? That is the reason. The cross has become a symbol but the symbol can be coopted and used wherever someone wants to use it and more importantly abuse it. The message though cannot be twisted, you say what you mean and mean what you say. You should be able to know a Christian by their behaviour and actions not the jewellery that adorns them.

I think the 10 commandments have very practical meanings too them that actually matter. Luke not taking the lord's name in vain, I always hear that as people shouldn't say 'chriat' when they stub their toe but I believe it ties into what I just said in that people shouldn't claim to follow Christ for purposes of vanity, ie "I'm a good guy, I'm a Christian". Again you shouldn't have to tell people you are one and if you have to tell them you probably aren't telling them for the right reason.

[–] • 1 pt

KJV or at least the 'new' KJV.

Half the men on the committee that translated it were godly men, and that matters in translations.

[–] • 1 pt

Still God older versions as even kjv has been heavily molded in our times

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt

as even kjv has been heavily molded in our times

Not the 1611 KJV. You must be thinking of the New KJV.

[–] • 0 pt

Yes, that's right.

[–] • 2 pts

Sorry auto correct incoherent lol. Still go for older versions as even the kjv has been modded heavily for our times

[–] • 1 pt

The Orthodox Study Bible. It includes the entire greek septuagenarian text, every gospel of the new testament, except Judas, the epistles, and detailed footnotes explaining the meaning of every symbol, metaphor, and moral in the scriptures. It will take at least six months to get through however, but it's the most complete scripture there is.

[–] • 1 pt

Trite answer, but whatever you'll actually read and absorb. My three go-tos are ESV, CSB, and NLT, with NLT being my daily driver and the other two for cross reference

[–] • 0 pt (edited )

All the modern bibles downplay the divinity of Christ:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqBEuxGY7DI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pe8h-yVidyU

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt

A friggin two-hour video? Come on man.

There is still plenty of proof for the deity of Christ Jesus in modern translations.

Load more (15 replies)