Bible Versions Compared To Star Wars Characters. (Humor)

5/16/2019

[Gamecock]

I am an ESV guy and they nailed it!

[woweeitsme]

Me too...and agree totally.

[avenir]

Guess I’m an ESV guy since finding it on audio (David Cochran Heath). It has idiosyncrasies. I listen to several preachers who swear by the KJV. Still think the older NIV reads best when looking for a quote.

[rjsimmon]

NIV guy here.

I’M HAN SOLO, Y’ALL!!!!!!!

[dangus]

Douay Rheims: Obi Wan Kenobi
Really old, somewhat mysterious. Most people expect it’s dead, but it’s miraculously still alive.

New American Bible: Lando Calrissian
Started out slick, untrustworthy, and aligned with the wrong people, but ended up reformed.

[Tell It Right]

AMP (Amplified) = R2-D2...connected to the source (Greek/Hebrew/Aramaic) and able to answering most detailed questions you ask of it without having to connect yourself, as long as you’re patient with reading it. :)

[know.your.why]

AMP (Amplified) carrier here also. I have to be...after being raised in a household headed by a fundamentalist Christian scholar who to this day believes that the KJV is the one true bible and ALL others are basically evil. Admittedly I get lost with all of the ‘thee’s, thou’s, thine’s, whenst’s, ye’s, etc. of the KJV. I got tired of re-reading the same passage 5 times and still not getting it.

[BillyBoy]

Every single one of these are protestant translations of the bible. What are Catholic translations of the bible? Star Trek characters?

[Boogieman]

“What are Catholic translations of the bible?”

Emperor Palpatine

*ducks for cover*

[left that other site]

Funny...I am acquainted with all the Translations but not all of the Star Wars Characters. Since my enjoyment of the franchise ended with the “Return of the Jedi”, I guess that puts me in the Chewbacca category (Love the Originals, not too happy with some of the revisions...LOL)

[BillyBoy]

That doesn’t even make sense. The Douay-Rheims Bible, the
Confraternity Bible, the Knox Bible, the Jerusalem Bible, the
New American Bible, the Christian Community Bible, and The CTS New Catholic Bible are all Catholic translations of the Bible into English, and all are quite different.

[Tell It Right]

I like the KJV from a historical perspective. It wasn't the first English translation, but was the first to be allowed. And don't dismiss how the combination of 3 things at the same time made a major change in the world: while 1) England was the dominant nation in the world, 2) they're masses embraced the Protestant Movement, which included a belief in Sola Scriptura, 3) and the KJV (a translation in their native language) was the access to run with that belief and learn about God at a personal level.

So much of the vast improvements in the western world and, by extension, much of the rest of the world due to the west's dominance of the world, can be attributed in part to the KJV. When the average Joe Anglo in England embraced God in a personal level it caused the abolitionist movement, it caused a lack of dependency on government, etc. The fact that it happened in England when England was the dominant power and their offspring nations were growing in power (especially later the U.S.) shouldn't be forgotten.

But even with all that I love the AMP more than anything. :) I, too, was a young man in a KJV-only church and read the KJV twice through in my teen years, struggling with the "thee"'s and "thou's" and the sentence syntax speaking verse before noun like Yoda. :) Then I read the NIV twice (in my opinion a fairly accurate translation if you cut it some slack for trying to be easy to read). Then I read the NIV in a chronological-order Bible (about as eye-opening as later reading the AMP).

Then I got a 4-version parallel Bible with KJV, NIV, NASB, and AMP. I spent a few years reading through it from beginning to end, all 4 versions at the same time. And any time I saw a discrepancy among them I stopped and looked up the Strong's Concordance to verify each one's accuracy. Almost every time the AMP was the winner in my opinion, even in times the other 3 were in agreement with each other.

I'll give the KJV a nod at being most accurate in a few cases in the Old Testament, though I can't remember which parts.

[Tell It Right]

Fun fact: The KJV used to have the apocrypha books (i.e. the Catholic books). Everybody reading the KJV knew which books/chapters were accepted as canon only by Catholics and which were not accepted by Protestants, mainly because they were in between the Old Testament and New Testament. So at the time the only difference between a "Catholic" Bible and a "Protestant" Bible in the English speaking world was the order the books appeared in the Bible. (The Protestants grouped/sorted the Old Testament books into 3 categories: first historical books, then poetic books, then prophetic books.)

But the Puritans demanded the Protestant copies not have any apocrypha books, so the Puritan printing presses omitted them. They said if you want to read the deuterocanonical books, fine, nothing's stopping you. Just don't confuse everybody else by putting it in the Bible and making people think they are Bible scripture. Later other Protestants started doing the same thing.