Non denominational churches

MoreCoffee said:

I don't think it is right to say that any bible is not denominational. The KJV is Anglican in emphasis.

Click to expand...

How so?

MennoSota said:

The text of the scripture is not denominational.
Each denomination may choose a specific translation that fits their presuppositions. For example, the Roman church in the US has used the New Jerusalem Bible

Click to expand...

Catholics in the USA use the New American Bible (a Catholic translation whose copyright is owned by the US Council of Catholic Bishops). The Jerusalem bible is what Catholics in the UK and Australia and a lot of other countries use for the liturgy (but the liturgy removes "Yahweh" and uses "the Lord" in liturgical readings.

and added its own commentary in the text for congregants.

Click to expand...

The footnotes in the study edition of the Jerusalem bible are not present in the "reader's edition" and are not present in the liturgy. I think that the study edition of the Jerusalem Bible has been out of print for a long time. There is the "New Jerusalem Bible" with study notes but it is not used in the liturgy. It is "gender neutral" in some passages and that makes it unsuitable for liturgical use it seems.

Other denominations may choose a different translation and suggest a different commentary such as Ryrie or Scofield. My personal preference is to purchase a bible with no comments from any outside source. I just want the text. Usually I read two or three translations to see how translators interpreted a certain word. Then I check with my Young's concordance and Vine's expository dictionary to get a deeper meaning of a greek word. The text itself has no denominational connection.

Click to expand...

Have a careful read of the KJV and then compare it to the NASB and see how often they differ not only in passages with disputed Greek readings but also in passages that use "theological hot topic" words. "propitiation" is an evangelical favorite which is in the KJV but not in the RSV and NRSV because the people behind the RSV and NRSV preferred "expiation". Some bibles prefer "congregation" over "church" and some like "predestination" more than others. There's always some theological element in a translation. It can't be escaped. You'll never find an English translation that is neutral and those that claim to be free of denominational biases are usually the worst for inserting a particular theology into the text.

Albion said:

How so?

Click to expand...

The KJV translators were ordered to retain the "church words" by the king (James I of England), it was part of the translators "royal license". So the KJV has "bishop" and "church" and other church-words while the NASB has evangelical words like "overseer". For example:

[1 Timothy 3:1 NASB] It is a trustworthy statement: if any man aspires to the office of overseer, it is a fine work he desires to do.

[1 Timothy 3:2 NASB] An overseer, then, must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, prudent, respectable, hospitable, able to teach,

[Titus 1:7 NASB] For the overseer must be above reproach as God's steward, not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not addicted to wine, not pugnacious, not fond of sordid gain,

while the KJV says:

[1 Timothy 3:1 KJV] This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.

[1 Timothy 3:2 KJV] A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

[Titus 1:7 KJV] For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre;

[1 Peter 2:25 KJV] For ye were as sheep going astray; but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls.

MoreCoffee said:

Catholics in the USA use the New American Bible (a Catholic translation whose copyright is owned by the US Council of Catholic Bishops). The Jerusalem bible is what Catholics in the UK and Australia and a lot of other countries use for the liturgy (but the liturgy removes "Yahweh" and uses "the Lord" in liturgical readings.



The footnotes in the study edition of the Jerusalem bible are not present in the "reader's edition" and are not present in the liturgy. I think that the study edition of the Jerusalem Bible has been out of print for a long time. There is the "New Jerusalem Bible" with study notes but it is not used in the liturgy. It is "gender neutral" in some passages and that makes it unsuitable for liturgical use it seems.



Have a careful read of the KJV and then compare it to the NASB and see how often they differ not only in passages with disputed Greek readings but also in passages that use "theological hot topic" words. "propitiation" is an evangelical favorite which is in the KJV but not in the RSV and NRSV because the people behind the RSV and NRSV preferred "expiation". Some bibles prefer "congregation" over "church" and some like "predestination" more than others. There's always some theological element in a translation. It can't be escaped. You'll never find an English translation that is neutral and those that claim to be free of denominational biases are usually the worst for inserting a particular theology into the text.

Click to expand...

The difference often comes in the fact that there are more ancient manuscripts extant today than during the translation of the KJV. This makes the NASB and ESV more accurate to the greek.

nm

Imalive said:

nm

Click to expand...

no

tell us

:cheer:

MennoSota said:

The difference often comes in the fact that there are more ancient manuscripts extant today than during the translation of the KJV. This makes the NASB and ESV more accurate to the greek.

Click to expand...

The NASB & ESV are popular among evangelicals and so is the NKJV while NRSV and some others are popular in the older larger protestant denominations. Everybody has their preference each denominations has its preference. John MacArthur's "Grace to You" group likes the NKJV. Some of the megachurches like the 2011 NIV. The Catholic Church in the UK, NZ, Australia, and a bunch of other countries uses the 2007 New Catholic Bible.

MennoSota said:

Jonestown and the Branch Davidians are clearly intra-biblical cults. Only their followers would ever label as such.

Click to expand...

At the end of their history Jim Jones's group were definitely weird and dangerous but at the beginning they were fairly normal Christians with a social conscience. The Branch Davidians were Adventists in the beginning but by the end of their history they'd become very strange indeed.