A religion question

[TheMightyFavog]

Which type of denominations use the Revised Standard Version of the Bible? Is it a popular version amongst the fundies, or is it common amongst more mainstream or liberal denominations.

[Rabrrrrrr]

1. Actually, this isn't a religion question, this is a Christianity question.

And I can only :rofl: about fundies using the RSV! No, they don't use it. And they absolutely do not use the NRSV.

RSV and NRSV are very much mainline, even sometimes Catholic, translations. Because they're, you know, accurate. Fundies don't like accurate, they like spin. So they stick to the King James, some will allow the New King James, or a few others (NIV I think is one of theirs, but I could be mistaken - I sort of like the NIV, which makes me think that the fundies might have something else with N and V in the translation mame; NIV might be more at the evangelical level, not the hard core fundy level).

[TheMightyFavog]

2. OK, that's somewhat of a relief.

Thanks.

[thefool_wa]

3. I'm Catholic

We use the "New World Bible" as canonized by the Vatican (last canonized in 1960's with the Vatican II conference).

It is distinguishable by 2 traits:

1) It's usually far thicker than most as it includes both old and new testament books that were removed by most protestant (meaning post-protestant reformation) denominations.

2) It is filled with historical footnotes, entire chapters of biblical and social history to put the events and occurrences of the bible in perspective, tends not to hide the fact that not everything lines up 100% and even tries to facilitate understanding where the text is difficult to reconcile against itself.

Anything beyond that I have no idea. It seems like there are hundreds of versions and and that things change to the needs of the church that is using it every time the bible is "re-translated". What's worse is that some denominations use different versions depending on which specific church you attend.

I'm curious, are there certain elements, passages, or ideas that the RSV bible contains that you think may not be universal to all versions?

[yellowdogintexas]

4. The more conservative, the more likely the King James or

New King James is the translation used. Some cons groups use American Standard.

My church has New RSV in the pews. We used New English Bible for our Disciples Bible Studies, however.

[RevCheesehead]

5. Fundies prefer the Good King Jimmy version.

Because it uses antiquated language, they can stick to their antiquated notions of domination, manipulation, and mind control.

And Rabrrrrrr, you're right - they do like the NIV (New International Version).

Me? I'm an NRSV woman. I also read "The Message" - an excellent paraphrase by Eugene Peterson.

[elocs]

6. Yes, the good old King James Bible is the one handed down by God.

It is the preferred version for all good fundamentalists. I think the RSV is a rather obscure version of the Bible today with 3 or 4 version perferred above it by the majority of Christians.

[Bucky]

8. Shakespeare, actually

I think one of the psalms translations has been linked to him--circumstantial evidence only. I'll Google it right quick.

[Bucky]

9. Here it is. Jacobian Biblical tinfoil: Shakespeare wrote the 46th Psalm

The evidence is only circumstantial--and might just be a big coinky-dink. But 46 words in from the start of the 46th Psalm is the word "shake" and 46 words in from the end of it (or is it 47?) is the word "spear". The year before the KJV was published, Will turned (bum-bum ba Bummm!) 46 years old. If you're impressed by the coincidences like the fact that there are 50 stars on the US flag and that George Washington was a 50th degree Scottish Rite Mason, then this 46 words in the 46th Psalm is ample proof that Shakespeare wrote part of the Bible. And is therefor a direct agent of God.

[billyskank]

13. Okay, that's not very convincing

What I would consider evidence would be the same Psalm existing in some or other writing of Shakespeare, with no known incidence of the text appearing before he wrote it. Nothing else will do.

[tjwmason]

14. You sceptic you.

:P

If one looks at the Coverdale translation (which is used for singing psalms according to the B.C.P. in our cathedrals &c. to this very day) which was produced in the 1530s (i.e., 30 years before W.S. was born) then the pattern holds pretty close - with the 46th word of the 46th Psalm being shake, and spear being 48 words from the end. The two translations are very obviously linked:

Ps 46, iii.

Though the waters thereof rage and swell: and though the mountains shake at the tempest of the same. - Coverdale

Though the waters thereof roar and be troubled, though the mountains shake with the swelling thereof. Selah. - Authorised Version

Also in the A.V. the final word of the Psalm is "selah" the meaning of which is disputed with many holding that it is actually a musical mark rather than an integral part of the text - which would mitigate against counting this as one of the 47 words.

I don't have a copy of the original text Douay Rheims (the R.C. translation which predates the A.V.) but the Challoner reivision of 1749-1752 doesn't have either "shake" or "spear" in there (this being Ps. 45, of course).

Finally given that Shakespeare was probably a Catholic sympathiser, and at the least was not very enthused about the Church of England - it's hardly likely that he would have got involved. Now I'm going to search through the Bible to see if I can find a hidden reference to Marlow ;)

[Blue_In_AK]

7. Methodists use it

or at least they did back when I was going to church 40 years ago, but my favorite Bible is the Amplified version which goes back to the original Greek or whatever and includes subtle shades of meaning that are lost in most translations.

[Floogeldy]

10. Honestly, what could the bible possibly have to do with "religion?"

:shrug:

[Lydia Leftcoast]

11. It's in common use among mainstream Protestants

But they tend to encourage their people to read different translations of the Bible, so if you prefer the King James or the New English Bible or the Good News for Modern Man versions, nobody's going to get upset.

By the way, the Revised Standard Version is old hat. There's now a New Revised Standard Version.

[tjwmason]

12. It's used in one of the two parish churches near me

Which means Church of England (equivalent to Episcopalian).

It's sometimes used for personal reading by Roman Catholics, one will sometimes see an edition advertised as "Catholic Edition", which means that it has all of the books including those removed by protestants at the reformation (alias deutero-canonical books, alias apocrypha).

It's main use is for those who appreciate a good quasi-literary style for reading in church, but who find the Authorised Version to be too obscure.

[elocs]

15. The 5 most popular Bibles.

http://christianity.about.com/od/practicaltools/a/translations.htm

1) New International Version (NIV)
2) King James Version (KJV)
3) New King James Version (NKJV)
4) New American Standard Bible (NASB)
5) New Living Translation (NLT)

Twenty-some years ago when I was a good Pentecostal, the KJV was the version everybody in the church used. I did use the NKJV and the minister (Brother E) was ok with it because it was very recognizable as the KJV with pretty much just the thees and thous changed along with archaic language.

The Bible to Christianity is like the Constitution to the U.S. Our Constitution is the Bible for our denomination of democracy.

Although I have not gone to church for years, I have a good understanding of the Bible and know how to read a verse in the context of surrounding verses and know when to discard elaborate doctrinal themes that require the forcing together, torturing, and manipulation of scriptures (read: the "Rapture").
I particularly like the words of Jesus (almost exclusively like) with their message of social Christian justice, which sadly, much of the Evangelicals and Fundamentalists have forgotten are in their Bibles.