iPhone Bible Study apps?

[colossians323]

Don't know what you settled on, but my first reaction to your post was about the pastor! I can't imagine what he would be teaching that had him bouncing around so much/so fast. First, he should be staying in the passage that he's teaching and explaining it in context. At most, after teaching the text in context, he'd use other passages simply to show that the principle(s) in the passage are commonly taught in other books. Second, to move that much/fast, he's got to be explaining from other passages (which violates what I just wrote in (1)). Third, he has to be proof-texting - taking other verses out-of-context or using verses that don't teach what's in his passage.

A common example of all of the above is when a passage has "love" in it. There are different types of love and different aspects of those types. The passage is trying to teaching a specific facet of love. But, pastors often see the word "love" and just go off on a general teaching of what THEY want to say about love. So, they bounce around and say a lot of nice things about love, but don't teach the word in context, and hence, people get nothing.

BTW, the best translations for Bible Study are the New American Standard (NASB) and the New King James (NKJV). Both are as close as you can get to word-for-word matching the Greek. Everything else is some level of a paraphrase (i.e. built in commentary) and so hard to follow someone teaching.

I use Logos. It's the best Bible Study software available. You can get all the commentaries you want in it and see them both on the desktop app and the phone/tablet app. But, it's expensive.

Blessings,

NASB is starting to go woke. Although it is a great translation, one should use the 1995 or before versions.

Here is one of many examples.

NASB 1995
Whatever you do, do your work heartily, as for the Lord rather than for men,

New American Standard Bible
Whatever you do, do your work heartily, as for the Lord and not for people,

Notice the difference?

[billvau]

Thanks for all the feedback friends. I downloaded "YouVersion" at the recommedation of a member of the study group and because it is NIV oriented (which I have read on my own, so I'm comfortable navigating through it). And, having the app is easier to thumb through (literally) than my hardcopy; old skin is dry and flipping pages is not as easy as it used to be. But I intend to check out your other suggestions as well; as you may be aware, the NIV is quite colloquilal in its wording.

The church is Grace Bible Church in Arroyo Grande, and they a sponsoring Iron Sharpens Iron Men's Ministryhttps://isimensministry.com/home

Thanks for the update! Sounds like you've got a good understanding of what you're using and have a comfortable tool! BTW, I'm leery of these "programs" for men/women. So, keep your eyes of discernment open!

Blessings,
Bill

[Barang]

NASB is starting to go woke. Although it is a great translation, one should use the 1995 or before versions.

Here is one of many examples.

NASB 1995
Whatever you do, do your work heartily, as for the Lord rather than for men,

New American Standard Bible
Whatever you do, do your work heartily, as for the Lord and not for people,

Notice the difference?

soon, there will be no "He and Father." not being facetious but the trajectory is obvious.

[colossians323]

soon, there will be no "He and Father." not being facetious but the trajectory is obvious.

Agreed!

[billvau]

The new NASB isn't out yet (from what I read). First, all of my sermon prep is from the Greek text and I have language tool that compares as many translations as I want. I always show NASB, NKJ, ESV, and Young's Literal (YLT), so it's easy to see bad translations on a verse. Second, I point out serious translation problems in a sermon, and that isn't often. But, believe me, even the best brutalize the original text.

We all love our worn-out, marked-up Bibles. Changing translations is a traumatic thing! When I remember verses, I can often visualize exactly where they are on the page in my Bible.

Blessings,
Bill

[skilletboy]

Just for the record there are other word for word translations of the Bible and most are gtg. Here is a cool image that shows a quick example of the differences between some of the main ones:

GW-Bible-translation-guide-AUG18_030650a7-fcaa-48c9-8ee6-d98b11bbd203_1024x1024.png
I generally don't have an issue with the more "liberal" translations, that are thought-for-thought or even full on paraphrasing, like the message bible, so long as actual study and bedrock understanding is done as close to what original language was. But translation issues are difficult.

[billvau]

Just for the record there are other word for word translations of the Bible and most are gtg. Here is a cool image that shows a quick example of the differences between some of the main ones:

GW-Bible-translation-guide-AUG18_030650a7-fcaa-48c9-8ee6-d98b11bbd203_1024x1024.png
I generally don't have an issue with the more "liberal" translations, that are thought-for-thought or even full on paraphrasing, like the message bible, so long as actual study and bedrock understanding is done as close to what original language was. But translation issues are difficult.

Interesting that they put the ESV second. It's actually closer to the NIV. And, KJV above NKJV? You can't give KJV that much "word-for-word" accuracy when the words it's translating too (old English) aren't even close to the words we use today. NET is great, but unknown. JMHO - NASB, NKJV for best word-for-word equivalence. ESV for best paraphrasing. Again, JMHO, based on my sermon prep from the Greek, with comparisons against those during the process.

Blessings,
Bill

[socal m1 shooter]

LSB comparison

I purchased a digital version of the LSB for use in Logos but there is a stand-alone version available for mobile phones.

If you attend a church pastored by TMS graduates you may find the LSB competing with the ESV.

[skilletboy]

Interesting that they put the ESV second. It's actually closer to the NIV. And, KJV above NKJV? You can't give KJV that much "word-for-word" accuracy when the words it's translating too (old English) aren't even close to the words we use today. NET is great, but unknown. JMHO - NASB, NKJV for best word-for-word equivalence. ESV for best paraphrasing. Again, JMHO, based on my sermon prep from the Greek, with comparisons against those during the process.

Blessings,
Bill

I don't know if that is meant to be "ranked" per se as you're taking it within the sub set...?? I don't know.

I do know ESV is not a paraphrasing translation. It is a word-for-word translation. You might be getting it confused with another translation. When I was in Seminary and bible college all my profs disagreed about which one they preferred. The head of our bible department in seminary preferred NASB and taught from it. But I've had other profs use all the other word-for-words.

https://www.esv.org/about/translation-philosophy/

[billvau]

I don't know if that is meant to be "ranked" per se as you're taking it within the sub set...?? I don't know.

I do know ESV is not a paraphrasing translation. It is a word-for-word translation. You might be getting it confused with another translation. When I was in Seminary and bible college all my profs disagreed about which one they preferred. The head of our bible department in seminary preferred NASB and taught from it. But I've had other profs use all the other word-for-words.

https://www.esv.org/about/translation-philosophy/

Note that I didn't say that it was paraphrasing, just that it is closer to the NIV than I thought. ESV is a word-for-word, BUT did more for readability than the NASB. So, very slightly less accuracy. BTW, the NASB 1977 is better than the NASB 1995 for word-for-word.

There is no perfect translation because people want different things, especially levels of readability.

But, with all that said, you can get saved from all of the main translations! That's a great starting point.

Blessings,
Bill

[skilletboy]

Note that I didn't say that it was paraphrasing, just that it is closer to the NIV than I thought. ESV is a word-for-word, BUT did more for readability than the NASB. So, very slightly less accuracy. BTW, the NASB 1977 is better than the NASB 1995 for word-for-word.

There is no perfect translation because people want different things, especially levels of readability.

But, with all that said, you can get saved from all of the main translations! That's a great starting point.

Blessings,
Bill

You didn't?

Interesting that they put the ESV second. It's actually closer to the NIV. And, KJV above NKJV? You can't give KJV that much "word-for-word" accuracy when the words it's translating too (old English) aren't even close to the words we use today. NET is great, but unknown. JMHO - NASB, NKJV for best word-for-word equivalence. ESV for best paraphrasing. Again, JMHO, based on my sermon prep from the Greek, with comparisons against those during the process.

Blessings,
Bill

[billvau]

You didn't?

You're right, I did! I was looking at the first part of the post, not the end. When rereading it, I don't remember what I was trying to point out, but I would now change it to more accurately say that of the word-for-word translations, ESV is most readable. It's not a paraphrasing translation.

Thanks for point that out!

Blessings,
Bill

[Reno-Kid]

Note that I didn't say that it was paraphrasing, just that it is closer to the NIV than I thought. ESV is a word-for-word, BUT did more for readability than the NASB. So, very slightly less accuracy. BTW, the NASB 1977 is better than the NASB 1995 for word-for-word.

There is no perfect translation because people want different things, especially levels of readability.

But, with all that said, you can get saved from all of the main translations! That's a great starting point.

Blessings,
Bill

NIV from 1984 is pretty good to go. Prior versions can be found on EBAY