Electronic Bibles: Do You use Them?

[~Brian~]

I have been a follower of the Bible for many years.  I was baptized Catholic, but didn't really attend the services when young.  When I was about 10-12. (82-84) My Dad married again, and I started using a New King James Version, as a Seventh-Day Adventist.  I then started working in a Methodist Church, in 2009, and I continue to direct our Thrift Store Ministry, and I sometimes attend services on Sunday.  So, I have studied as a Catholic (limited)  a Seventh-Day Adventist, and a Methodist.

I realize a couple things.  One is, that the Bible is an amazing story, book by book, and it does tell you how everything stated, From Genesis to Revelation.  My brothers, all raised Seventh-Day Adventists, and attending the Church School are VERY familiar with most of the stories in the Bible, and because they had a subject "Bible" in all grades, they are quite familiar with it, and can remember things about the stories they like, or what they read, while I was Baptized Catholic, and very RARELY  attended any services, Til I was 11-12, and then I was using my Bible, and trying to understand what it says, and trying to interpret what it means.  I've read my Bible some, and want to learn more, and as I work in a CHURCH, I sometimes run into situations, and wonder:  "How would God handle this" or "What would our Pastor Say/Do?"  I've learned so much in 11 years service to my community - I LOVE God/Jesus, and I want to be closer to HIM!

Second thing is:  As we are dealing with COVID-19, we have been isolated and shut in since March - Maybe this is a "challenge" that God is giving us?  Maybe the time I spend alone has made me realize that He is **ALWAYS THERE**  Not to mention the LONELINESS, Depression, and feeling like I have so much to GIVE, and sometimes I feel guilty because I am unable to do things to help others, because I am COMPROMISED :  My Brother Eric is a Devout Christian, believing in the Teachings of the SDA Church, and he has been ZOOM'ing every week with us:  Eric KNOWS his Bible, and can readily reference things IN it, because he studied it like I studied Reading, Math, or Science: So I realize that I **COULD** have the Bible read to ME!  That way, I can listen, and maybe remain calm when my  anxiety is cranked.  I should be able to know more, but at any rate, I won't know as much as my brothers, because I wasn't required to study Bible as a subject.

My Bibles:  I have a Catholic Bible, a New King James Version, and a Zondervan Study Bible, New International Version.  I used to use my NKJ Version when younger, but I can't really grasp the "old Language,"  as it takes away from the comprehension of what you are trying to learn.  I have the NIV Bible, and this one is a Study Bible, which explains what is being stated in the chapters and verses, and it is cool that I can understand what I am reading, because 90% of what you read is based on the ability to UNDERSTAND what you read, so you can INTERPRET what you are reading.

I like the Bible, and I would like to read it more, but Time is limited, and my Bible is HEAVY and CLUNKY, so I decided to Order an Electronic Bible.  This way, I can LISTEN to the Bible, and enjoy it more when I am on the go.  I have chosen to purchase the following Bibles listed below:

Wonder Bible Stars (RSV)

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07K6VQ4DV/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

Wonder Bible NIV

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07K6WCFJB/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o03_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

Daily Meditation 1 Numerical Audio Bible Player (NIV)

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07K6WCFJB/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o03_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

My Question is: Do you use your Bible to read it and as a Reference Book, or do you prefer an "electronic version"  of your favorite Bible?  If so, what Version do you use, and how often?  if NOT, what Bible do you use, and what Version?  I HATE the New King James Version, because of the use of "Old Language," and have a better understanding of what I am reading/listening to, if its a modern translation.

Would you use an Electronic Bible?

Brian

Edited June 17, 2020 by ~Brian~
added additional information

[PinkGecko]

Outside of the times I've tried occasional apps for daily Bible readings, I never thought to use an electronic one. Call me a traditionalist of sorts, but there's something a lot more intimate about using an actual book for, well, The Good Book. I also prefer to just keep myself away from all electronic distractions when I'm reading the Bible 'cuz I'm ADHD as heck.

My preferred translation is NIV. When I was first studying the Bible, I would double up on a literal translation (for me, NIV) and a paraphrased/modern translation (for me, The Message), typically reading the same book concurrently with both. Though I would never quote a paraphrased Bible (some passages in The Message are downright goofy), I feel they're very useful in helping newer readers better comprehend the more hard-to-follow books. That's why I look at the King James Version as only of historical interest, it's near-impenetrable to modern readers if you're actually looking to follow along and learn from it.

[AmberStarfield]

I guess it is just a personal preference, but I prefer to read from the 1611 KJV, complete with the apocrypha and archaic spellings. Most the time I use this version at kingjamesbibleonline.org to quickly look up passages. I also have a hard back printed version featuring the original 1611 cover page and gothic fonts. When I was a child, I attended a few different “Church of Christ”, mostly with my aunt and uncle. However I was never baptized because these churches thought you had be be an adult or reach a certain level of knowledge before you could decide to give your life to Christ. As an adult, I am a member of a non-denominational church in the virtual world of SecondLife and I love my pastors there very much. I don’t like being in even small crowds of people, so I have had no desire to find a physical church to attend. As for my personal faith or salvation, I don’t know. 

[PinkGecko]

21 hours ago, AmberStarfield said:

I guess it is just a personal preference, but I prefer to read from the 1611 KJV, complete with the apocrypha and archaic spellings. Most the time I use this version at kingjamesbibleonline.org to quickly look up passages. I also have a hard back printed version featuring the original 1611 cover page and gothic fonts.

May I ask what you get out of reading the KJV? I definitely think it's great to own one for its historical significance, but it must be very hard to follow along with without putting extra effort into translating it. The most important aspect of reading the Bible (to me) should be being able to understand it and therefore learn from it.

[AmberStarfield]

1 hour ago, PinkGecko said:

May I ask what you get out of reading the KJV? I definitely think it's great to own one for its historical significance, but it must be very hard to follow along with without putting extra effort into translating it. The most important aspect of reading the Bible (to me) should be being able to understand it and therefore learn from it.

I don’t really have much trouble reading it, and have read other books translated in old English, such as the Malleus Maleficarum. For me, it makes the Bible sound more poetic. As for the archaic spelling, there are only a few letters that are different, such as using the letter “u” swapped with “v”, “i” instead of “j”. The rest of the spelling difference are still easily read such as: Mark 1:6-7 And Iohn was clothed with camels haire, and with a girdle of a skin about his loines: and he did eat locusts and wilde honie, And preached, saying, There commeth one mightier then I after me, the latchet of whose shooes I am not worthy to stoupe downe, and vnloose.

 

[rosalie.bent]

On 6/25/2020 at 2:58 AM, AmberStarfield said:

I guess it is just a personal preference, but I prefer to read from the 1611 KJV, complete with the apocrypha and archaic spellings. Most the time I use this version at kingjamesbibleonline.org to quickly look up passages. I also have a hard back printed version featuring the original 1611 cover page and gothic fonts. When I was a child, I attended a few different “Church of Christ”, mostly with my aunt and uncle. However I was never baptized because these churches thought you had be be an adult or reach a certain level of knowledge before you could decide to give your life to Christ. As an adult, I am a member of a non-denominational church in the virtual world of SecondLife and I love my pastors there very much. I don’t like being in even small crowds of people, so I have had no desire to find a physical church to attend. As for my personal faith or salvation, I don’t know. 

actually, I am betting that you DONT use the 1611 version at all but one of the revisions of the KJV. The 1611 version is unreadable to current english speakers

[AmberStarfield]

11 hours ago, rosalie.bent said:

actually, I am betting that you DONT use the 1611 version at all but one of the revisions of the KJV. The 1611 version is unreadable to current english speakers

Welcome to believe what you wish. It is written in English and is readable.

[rosalie.bent]

6 hours ago, AmberStarfield said:

Welcome to believe what you wish. It is written in English and is readable.

Well, you would be the FIRST person who claims to read the 1611 version who actually does. everyone else actually reads the revised version of 150 years later. But, I still dont see the point in struggling to read a Bible that is NOT written in English that is even remotely easy to read. And it is NOT easily readable and unless you know what the words really mean you can actually get the wrong meaning eg 1 Cor 13... is that a chapter on 'generosity'?

On 6/26/2020 at 12:19 AM, PinkGecko said:

May I ask what you get out of reading the KJV? I definitely think it's great to own one for its historical significance, but it must be very hard to follow along with without putting extra effort into translating it. The most important aspect of reading the Bible (to me) should be being able to understand it and therefore learn from it.

exactly. The point of the Word of God is to be 'taken internally' and if you cannot easily read it or read it at all, the value is lost. The entire purpose of Bible translations is to make it accessible to the common man. Ironically, that was the purpose of the KJV so that people could read it in their own language instead of Latin. But 'common tongue' is a moving target.

[PinkGecko]

15 hours ago, rosalie.bent said:

exactly. The point of the Word of God is to be 'taken internally' and if you cannot easily read it or read it at all, the value is lost. The entire purpose of Bible translations is to make it accessible to the common man. Ironically, that was the purpose of the KJV so that people could read it in their own language instead of Latin. But 'common tongue' is a moving target.

Well, there's certain limitations and problems on both extremes. Something like The Message and The Living Bible certainly assist in helping readers better comprehend the original text through modern language, but they're too loosely paraphrased to be considered a proper Bible in and of themselves, let alone the word of God. Being TOO modern/paraphrased can present just as much of error in translation and understanding as being "too old" and written in a near-indecipherable old English. However, I don't know anyone who proclaims a superiority of paraphrased Bibles, compared to the many super-fundamentalist "King James Only" movements.

The middle ground is best, a literal translation that's still readable, modern English but not paraphrased. That's why NIV is my preferred translation. I would recommend that people have a KJV for its historical significance and I'd recommend that people have a paraphrased Bible as a study aid, but I would never recommend either as a primary Bible.

[rosalie.bent]

6 hours ago, PinkGecko said:

Well, there's certain limitations and problems on both extremes. Something like The Message and The Living Bible certainly assist in helping readers better comprehend the original text through modern language, but they're too loosely paraphrased to be considered a proper Bible in and of themselves, let alone the word of God. Being TOO modern/paraphrased can present just as much of error in translation and understanding as being "too old" and written in a near-indecipherable old English. However, I don't know anyone who proclaims a superiority of paraphrased Bibles, compared to the many super-fundamentalist "King James Only" movements.

The middle ground is best, a literal translation that's still readable, modern English but not paraphrased. That's why NIV is my preferred translation. I would recommend that people have a KJV for its historical significance and I'd recommend that people have a paraphrased Bible as a study aid, but I would never recommend either as a primary Bible.

I mostly agree with you. I use a NKJV and ESB as my main bibles, but also have an NIV. These are mainly stylistic considerations as I enjoy the majestic tone of the NKJV. I wouldnt say that paraphases are not 'real bibles' but I do think that sometimes they can leave the meaning a little strained or diluted.

I've never understood the KJV-only movement. That sounds like just another conspiracy theory by people susceptible to them. I engaged with a number of them online at one stage and discovered one interesting fact - MOST of them dont actually go to church. So their claims become even less credible by virtue of their (non) actions.

[PinkGecko]

15 hours ago, rosalie.bent said:

I mostly agree with you. I use a NKJV and ESB as my main bibles, but also have an NIV. These are mainly stylistic considerations as I enjoy the majestic tone of the NKJV. I wouldnt say that paraphases are not 'real bibles' but I do think that sometimes they can leave the meaning a little strained or diluted.

I've never understood the KJV-only movement. That sounds like just another conspiracy theory by people susceptible to them. I engaged with a number of them online at one stage and discovered one interesting fact - MOST of them dont actually go to church. So their claims become even less credible by virtue of their (non) actions.

ESV was the first Bible I read and I liked it fine, though I primarily use NIV because that's been the standard at nearly all churches I've been to. I have a NKJV in my collection but I honestly haven't read through it to a significant extent. I have a really bad attention span, so it's important for me to find a Bible translation that keeps me attentive and engaged.

Why I personally wouldn't consider paraphrases 'real Bibles' is that so much of it is indeed paraphrased, most significantly the words of Christ, which I find to be their biggest detriment. Stuff like 'The Message' are pretty much meant to be an easy-to-follow outline: it's not even numbered like a typical Bible, each paragraph in each chapter is preceded by "1-3", "15-20", etc., so "verses" technically don't exist. Plus, it just lacks the poeticism of more literal translations; I'm really not a big fan of how many of the Psalms are translated. I look at paraphrases the same way I look at CliffsNotes, they get the main points and messages across, but it's only a fraction of the bigger picture and intricate details of the original work.

[rosalie.bent]

10 hours ago, PinkGecko said:

ESV was the first Bible I read and I liked it fine, though I primarily use NIV because that's been the standard at nearly all churches I've been to. I have a NKJV in my collection but I honestly haven't read through it to a significant extent. I have a really bad attention span, so it's important for me to find a Bible translation that keeps me attentive and engaged.

Why I personally wouldn't consider paraphrases 'real Bibles' is that so much of it is indeed paraphrased, most significantly the words of Christ, which I find to be their biggest detriment. Stuff like 'The Message' are pretty much meant to be an easy-to-follow outline: it's not even numbered like a typical Bible, each paragraph in each chapter is preceded by "1-3", "15-20", etc., so "verses" technically don't exist. Plus, it just lacks the poeticism of more literal translations; I'm really not a big fan of how many of the Psalms are translated. I look at paraphrases the same way I look at CliffsNotes, they get the main points and messages across, but it's only a fraction of the bigger picture and intricate details of the original work.

I'm not that critical of paraphases. But it is important to note that Jesus' words are translated from the original into another language so they technically aren't His words either and most good paraphases dont alter what He says to any degree.

But good to discuss things like the Word of God.

[le Hollandais]

On 6/17/2020 at 4:10 PM, ~Brian~ said:

Would you use an Electronic Bible?

Brian

No. I like real books I can hold in my hand. And if I own the volume, I highlight passages that are important to me.

[rosalie.bent]

On 7/5/2020 at 6:20 AM, le Hollandais said:

No. I like real books I can hold in my hand. And if I own the volume, I highlight passages that are important to me.

I'm a fan of real books myself, but the bible on my phone has the advantage that it is always with me. When I need to look something up or check a passage or pursue a thought, my phone bible is always there. I use a real bible for personal devotions and used to in church but now with low light levels and (ugh) poorer eyesight, I find the back lit phone preferable and easier to use.

 

[Kaliborio]

I'm an ex-Catholic Quaker. I do use electronic Bibles; I used to use the New International Version, but I'm not a big fan these days. I usually switch between the New American Standard Bible if I want to know what it actually says, and the original King James Version if I want to read something that sounds cool.

[Mark84]

YouVersion is a great Bible App that has tons of different translations to pick from - I prefer the HCSB and the ESV. They also have hundreds of devotionals and Bible reading plans. I’m currently going through The Bible Project’s reading plan for reading through the whole Bible in a year. It’s great. If you’re not familiar with The Bible Project, I would highly recommend them. They make videos explaining various themes and also books of the Bible. 

[feralfreak]

On 6/24/2020 at 1:28 PM, AmberStarfield said:

I guess it is just a personal preference, but I prefer to read from the 1611 KJV, complete with the apocrypha and archaic spellings. Most the time I use this version at kingjamesbibleonline.org to quickly look up passages. I also have a hard back printed version featuring the original 1611 cover page and gothic fonts. When I was a child, I attended a few different “Church of Christ”, mostly with my aunt and uncle. However I was never baptized because these churches thought you had be be an adult or reach a certain level of knowledge before you could decide to give your life to Christ. As an adult, I am a member of a non-denominational church in the virtual world of SecondLife and I love my pastors there very much. I don’t like being in even small crowds of people, so I have had no desire to find a physical church to attend. As for my personal faith or salvation, I don’t know. 

there is a church in secondlife? isnt that a kind of game place?

On 6/25/2020 at 10:49 AM, PinkGecko said:

May I ask what you get out of reading the KJV? I definitely think it's great to own one for its historical significance, but it must be very hard to follow along with without putting extra effort into translating it. The most important aspect of reading the Bible (to me) should be being able to understand it and therefore learn from it.

a pastor i listen to reads a passage and explains it, chapter by chapter and verse by verse, you might want to try listening to him if you have the bible study on your tv lineup, its the shepherds chapel, he reads from the king james version, and helps to understand it, he gives you the translating and everything.

On 6/25/2020 at 12:32 PM, AmberStarfield said:

I don’t really have much trouble reading it, and have read other books translated in old English, such as the Malleus Maleficarum. For me, it makes the Bible sound more poetic. As for the archaic spelling, there are only a few letters that are different, such as using the letter “u” swapped with “v”, “i” instead of “j”. The rest of the spelling difference are still easily read such as: Mark 1:6-7 And Iohn was clothed with camels haire, and with a girdle of a skin about his loines: and he did eat locusts and wilde honie, And preached, saying, There commeth one mightier then I after me, the latchet of whose shooes I am not worthy to stoupe downe, and vnloose.

 

i dont mean to be nosy but why were you reading the hammer of sorceressses?

[AmberStarfield]

6 hours ago, feralfreak said:

there is a church in secondlife? isnt that a kind of game place?

i dont mean to be nosy but why were you reading the hammer of sorceressses?

SecondLife is not a game although there are a few games within it. SecondLife is a virtual world built by those who inhabit it. Many religions and denominations of Christianity have locations where people who would not otherwise attend a church in real life can gather. Sermons can be preached over normal voice chat, txt and images, video, and .mp3 audio streaming services. 
As for reading the Malleus Maleficarum, I have an interest in history and what drove people to preform heinous acts in the name of God. 

[feralfreak]

On 9/28/2020 at 12:12 PM, AmberStarfield said:

SecondLife is not a game although there are a few games within it. SecondLife is a virtual world built by those who inhabit it. Many religions and denominations of Christianity have locations where people who would not otherwise attend a church in real life can gather. Sermons can be preached over normal voice chat, txt and images, video, and .mp3 audio streaming services. 
As for reading the Malleus Maleficarum, I have an interest in history and what drove people to preform heinous acts in the name of God. 

what i think drove it was fanaticism, look at torqemada(Torquemada... do not implore him for compassion.Torquemada... do not beg him for forgiveness.Torquemada... do not ask him for mercy.Let's face it,you can't Torquemada anything!) for example, what he did was terrible, but in his acts of being a zealot, he must have thought it was more important to save souls than anything else, and committed atrocities, if i understand events right, same as when catholism was brought to the central American indians, doesnt mean that good didnt eventually come from it, but people took things out of what God had in mind, and ignored one important fact: you cant force faith onto anyone, i cant and wouldnt want to hold a gun to someones head and say "recite the Lords prayer! repent to Him now! accept Christ into your life!" id love to get a friend of mine back to the Lord, and id love to lead another from being a pagan witch to Christ, but seed dont grow in unacceptable ground, and they (the zealots) likely were influenced by demons who used their faiths as weapons, just my suspicion