What version of the Holy Bible has the most books & is the closest to the "first" original...

What version of the Holy Bible has the most books & is the closest to the "first" original? & which Christian denomination accepts that version of the Bible (Orthodox, Roman Catholic, etc) ?

Attached: file.png (1050x839, 752K)

Other urls found in this thread:

archive.org/details/pdfy-Uy_BZ_QGsaLiJ4Zs
youtube.com/watch?v=P9Tn8bvV5s8
youtube.com/watch?v=UUYtl8EjsCU
kids.christiansunite.com/biblestories_old_testament.shtml
kids.christiansunite.com/biblestories_jesus.shtml
kids.christiansunite.com/biblestories_apostles.shtml
streamable.com/m2s3b
youtube.com/watch?v=tRrq3s3P3Pw
pidginbible.org/Concindex.html
youtube.com/watch?v=tNv-zzpIwBs
youtube.com/watch?v=RqBEuxGY7DI
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Roman Catholic Douay Rheims

NRSV Orthodox edition.

The Dead Sea Scrolls:
>The Dead Sea Scrolls [complete eng translation] - John Marco Allegro
archive.org/details/pdfy-Uy_BZ_QGsaLiJ4Zs

Only thing you need to know about the Bible is that Jesus tried to tell his Jew community to peacefully assimilate or else they'll be shoahed for the next millennia. They killed him and now they're back to lying to Christians how these kikes are the Chosen ones.

KJV

>The Truth about the Dead Sea Scrolls

youtube.com/watch?v=P9Tn8bvV5s8

I’m not sure about the specific name of the Bible but anything Catholic really. Protestant versions are literally missing like 6-7 books because Martin Luther was a spaz and didn’t like them so he just heretically threw them away.

doesn't KJV () have Apocrypha omitted?

Apocryphal literally means extra-biblical. KJV is the correct English Bible and most popular with Baptists.

If you want the original bible as compiled without Luthers fingers all over it then Rheims is the way to go.

Well if you want a version with the most books it obviously has to be one with the Apocrypha attached so either Douay Rheims or NRSV are really the only choice, I'm Catholic so I would say DR but really they are all pretty much the same except that Protestant bibles exclude the Apocrypha

streamable.com/m2s3b

Attached: IMG_3151.jpg (1200x1600, 412K)

Yea i got like a minute in before closing it. Dudes a moron.

didn't Luther hate jews?

You're going to have to learn an old version of Greek, my dude.

Eventually. Initially, prots freed them from slavery. But later Luther learned they were bad people and he fucked up.

Unfortunately many Greek Orthodox parishes here in the states have been glow niggered.

King James is best

Protip:
get some free bible software like esword or bibletime, you can download most bible versions and compare yourself
and also strongs, vines and webster

Attached: Screenshot-04-08-2018_02-19-51-Uhr.png (1366x768, 221K)

>"Is there any part of the bible you would say is low quality ?"
KEK

Attached: 1526006578254.jpg (1024x512, 111K)

Cool, I'll check both of these programs out. Thanks Hans

NRSV.
but just dont go KJV. it was written for its rhythm and to linguistically attractive not to be accurate. The KJV is good if you are reading the bible for pleasure. idk people here are saying its closest to the original its not at all

I picked up an (Armaic English New Testament).

If you can get over the jew hate on the board and want to actually look into the linguistic history of "hebrew" (which has been painstakingly research based on things like the Nag Hammadi and Dead Sea Scrolls) this translation is rather interesting.

I do like the AKJV as well, as it's the "best" consolidation of the existing latin vulgate/greek translations.

Aramaic sry

He actually makes a great argument

Attached: Screenshot_11.png (1135x629, 1.5M)

according to the roman catholic perversions of the bible, the roman catholic church does not have an unperverted bible version

because the bible says that the people who take out or add to the word of God do not go ot heaven

and God says in the bible that he will preserve the bible (the words won't change)

therefore if the words change, it's a perversion

18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.

6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

Attached: screenshot.catholic bibles.jpg (947x1202, 433K)

The Codex Sinaiticus is a good start. Jesus never existed though. The Jews literally invented YHWH. You worship a mythicalmagical flying zombie Jew. KEK.

Attached: Mythical Man.jpg (236x275, 17K)

You owe it to yourself to watch Bart Ehrman talk about the Bible - he talks mostly about the NT.

Look for 'Bart Ehrman forged' on YouTube, there are several versions, long and short. Here's a long one.

youtube.com/watch?v=tRrq3s3P3Pw

Note, he started out as a fundy Christian, was even a pastor (you can hear that style it in his lectures), but left to become a Bible scholar. He's respectful but no longer a believer.

In these videos he points out that the first written version was something like /30 years/ after Jesus' death. A lot of inaccuracy can seep in in that time.

"Jesus Before the Gospels" is another video series of his, touching on the same thing.

>but just dont go KJV. it was written for its rhythm and to linguistically attractive not to be accurate.
they had 50+ scholars that spoke several languages each split up into teams and translate a portion of the bible then they all rotated to check each other's work

also it was translated from the majority text of the "received text" (original greek, original hebrew) when it was translated, around 1500 original documents were used. since it was translated, tens of thousands more had been discovered and they all agree with each other (the words do not change at all)

KJV is junk - great language, but the manuscripts are far from the oldest. I don't know the best version though.

Here is the real version.
pidginbible.org/Concindex.html

That's cuz it sounds so good - you can imagine God talking like that.

"Have I not commanded thee? Be strong and of good courage. Be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed, for the Lord thy God is with the withersoever thou goest." Joshua 1:9

If there was a God he'd talk like that :)

But as for accuracy, not so much.

Brainlet spotted

Battle of the Bibles - Walter Veith
youtube.com/watch?v=tNv-zzpIwBs
youtube.com/watch?v=RqBEuxGY7DI

I got NKJV because im trying to get into Eastern Orthodoxy and that's what multiple sources said they use. am i wrong?

Yes but the manuscripts were newer than those found later. Ie, the manuscripts have gotten better (older) over time, the KJV, not. Sounds good, though.

The Orthodox Study Bible, for example, is NKJV, but the Bible is not a replacement for going to church.

oh well yeah of course, but I'd like to read in my spare time. I have a NKJV but I dunno if I should go with a RSV instead or something.

Start here, OP.

Attached: types-of-bible-translations.jpg (781x444, 64K)

>Not politics
>Only politics on the days when there is news that another of your clergy is found with his dick in a child.
>So probably tomorrow again eh.
But tonight, this shit belongs on /x/ with all the other fairy tale fantasy. And when it gets there it will still be the least believable shite in the catalogue.

Attached: untitled.png (600x461, 677K)