Hi, I'm within the church of england. I wondered if there were views on which translations and versions of the bible I should be reading? I have KJV,NKJV, New Jerusalem but I've also noticed some of the readings set daily are contained in the apocrypha which many of these don't have so I've now got a Catholic NRSV which I like to use. I'm sure there's an element of just use whichever Bible I like but I wonderd what the guidance is here. Also Lectio Divina, is this a practice within anglicanism?
You just want to use the KJV with Apocrypha. Not all KJV editions have that, because many of them have been appropriated by the non-Anglican dissenters and they pick and choose what they include. The full KJV always includes the apocrypha. The other big translation, at least among North American traditionalists, is the ESV, which is a strong rendering of the original manuscripts into modern English. It didn’t have the KJV beauty, but then again nothing else does, at least it is approachable and accurate. I’d caution against that mindset, because by that approach you’re letting in all the modern translations, with their political agendas: Gender Neutral pronouns, universalist or Arian theology, effeminate reinterpretation of key passages. You’re more likely to lose your faith with modern Bibles than anything else. Roman Catholic bibles are a big culprit in that, I forget if it’s the NRSV which you have, or the other big one, but RCs have been leaving their church in droves because of the poor teaching in one of their central Bibles.
Great advice thankyou. Do you have a view on the NKJV? Why would the KJV have apocrypha removed then if in the original I wonder? Is it your advice to focus on the KJV over other Bibles?
I do tend to read the NKJV but most of my bibles don't have apocrypha and I also like them soft cover plain leather (fussy I know). Many of the bibles I can find with apocrypha are hard backs. I will look at ESV as it gets good reviews
Most printed KJV Bibles are purchased by Protestant members of denominations that don't use (and that more or less look down upon) the apocrypha. So there are less copies of KJV + apocrypha in print simply because there's less demand for them. The NKJV isn't too bad, but it does have a number of minor deletions versus the KJV text. For a modern translation I like the MEV (Modern English Version) which is even closer to the KJV. Not sure if there's any MEV with apocrypha, however; I've never looked for one.
I keep a pile of NKJVs on hand to use for give a ways when we baptize adults. We've also got them in the classroom where we do Bible classes. Many of the American Orthodox churches use NKJV as well. My bishop authorizes KJV, NKJV, ESV, and NASB. Of those options, only the KJV and ESV have the Apocrypha.
Interesting. The committee that made the NKJV didn't translate the Apocrypha. The publishers sometimes borrow those books from another translation. For example, the early ESVs with Apocrypha were printed with the text of the NRSV for those books.
Rambly answer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wum06Ms_Ac&list=PLxi4S47JyTw9FiOLjFUZ7i6GnSRGEDX4M Short answer for picking good translations: #1 Pick one and invest in it #2 Use two different types for study purposes #3 Make sure it has all the books you need #4 Match it to the Prayer Book you use
At least in the US, the RC bishops wanted to use the New American Bible liturgically but the translation was so horrendous that the Vatican wouldn't let them. The lectionary you'll hear at an RC mass uses a corrected NAB. Fun fact about the NRSV though: as far as I know, it's the only Bible translation that the synod of my Church has explicitly banned for liturgical use.
The Oxford World Classics KJV has the apocrypha and it's pretty inexpensive. It's a paperback and my copy's held up for about three years of daily use. The APA also sells nicer but pricier KJVs with apocrypha. And if you already have an apocrypha-less Bible, you can get a copy of just the apocrypha.
I heard it had something to do with gender neutral language obscuring some of the Christological prophecies in Isaiah. Don't quote me on that though; it's possible that the style just clashes too hard with the KJV-esque language of our liturgy.