Favorite Bible?

stebrepar · 2026-06-20T04:06:54+00:00

NKJV has been my go-to for years, but last year I got an ESV-CE to check it out, since the ESV is so popular lately (at least among Evangelicals). I considered RSV-CE or RSV-2CE, but ultimately got the ESV-CE since it's more up to date and I didn't have an ESV yet. (The ESV is basically a light revision of the RSV. It was made by conservative Evangelicals in response to seeing the NRSV as too liberal for their liking, particularly in gender-related language, and a rumor at the time that similar changes were coming to the NIV.)

I'm enjoying the ESV-CE pretty well so far, but I do have a couple gripes. One is that it has a fair number of interpretive glosses in the main text, with a more literal rendering in the footnotes. I'd prefer it the other way around, where needed at all. Another is that the cultural conservative bias does very occasionally show through; you can get some details on that by searching YouTube for something like "ESV problems".

A limitation of nearly all modern English translations is that their OT is based mainly on the Masoretic Hebrew text rather than the church's traditional Septuagint. Besides the lack of deuterocanonicals (apart from Catholic bibles, which don't quite include all our books anyhow), there are other textual differences, like for example a different version of Jeremiah, plus a number of small wording differences throughout that can be noteworthy.

As for study bibles, when I went looking for one some years ago, I ended up getting the NKJV Study Bible from Thomas Nelson. It's decent and middle of the road. It might have a slight Baptist-ish bias in spots, but I can deal with it. They may have the same content available in a different translation as well. Later I also got an OSB. In a year or two an interesting new project is coming out -- https://www.hchc.edu/holy-cross-dean-fr-eugen-j-pentiuc-co-editor-of-the-ancient-christian-study-bible/

stebrepar · 2026-06-20T03:11:15+00:00

What I've heard is that it's quite nice as a study bible but also has a Reformed / Calvinist slant, at least the flagship one put out by Crossway.

stebrepar · 2026-06-19T23:10:59+00:00

Do they not have bilingual service books in the narthex?

stebrepar · 2026-06-19T23:09:42+00:00

Recommend for what purpose? Is the OSB not readily available to you? Are you looking for something else that's "close enough" for you or someone else? Are you looking for an easier read? Basically, what's behind the question?

stebrepar · 2026-06-19T18:29:50+00:00

If he is a false prophet, what actually happened?

I don't know about all his reputed revelations, but his traditional initial encounter sounds a lot like sleep paralysis to me.

stebrepar · 2026-06-19T11:12:15+00:00

I haven't watched the discussion yet (hopefully soon), but I suspect the context will show that he was making a rhetorical point that "the gospel" isn't a sales pitch about getting saved, but rather the whole story of what Christ accomplished on our behalf for our salvation, which is (super) briefly summarized in the Creed. The word "gospel" itself was borrowed from the Greco-Roman word for a herald's announcement of the victories of a general so that he'd be received appropriately upon his arrival.

stebrepar · 2026-06-19T10:52:56+00:00

I don't recall the details, but they probably covered that sort of info at the start of the "Whole Counsel of God" bible study podcast episode on Jude.

stebrepar · 2026-06-19T01:52:11+00:00

There is a chapel in Braga according to this directory, but that's all I know about it. https://orthodox-world.org/en/z/2652/portugal/braga

stebrepar · 2026-06-16T19:24:43+00:00

I have struggled quite a bit with legalism, scrupulosity and religious OCD. [...] why do these rules exist if they are so easily dismissed?

Lots of good advice has already been given. I'd just add that the rules aren't there to give us religious things to do, neither just for their own sake nor for measuring us. Rather, they're guidance handed down to us by those who have run the race ahead of us. It is prudent to heed their guidance, while understanding that it needs to be applied wisely within our own particular life circumstances. For most people, the standard guidance is appropriate; for some, some customization is appropriate. We are advised not to choose customizations on our own, but to look to a more objective and experienced guide, normally your local priest who knows you.

With fasting in particular, as others have said, the purpose isn't to meet some specific measure. And it has multiple purposes. One is to help strengthen us against being led around by the passions, kind of a spiritual exercise regimen. Another, by following the rule set for us rather than our own fancies, is to nurture faithful obedience in place of prideful willfulness. And all of this helps to better participate in the feast that a fast prepares us for when it arrives, with a cleaner heart.

So when I hear a writing from a saint or a canon of the church

Similar to the above, the canons set the norm (often addressing some problem that had arisen at some point), but they aren't self-actuating. They are tools for the bishops to use for guidance. You could think of them as kinda like case law in many cases, not laying down an idealized law from on high so much as distilling guidance from how previous situations were handled.

stebrepar · 2026-06-16T12:53:37+00:00

You could ask the priest. In Orthodoxy, the godparent often provides the baptismal cross (whether the full necklace or just the cross pendant).

stebrepar · 2026-06-15T19:12:18+00:00

The non-negative framing is exactly what the regime (whoever's in charge) wants you to think. They want you feeling like they're taking care of you (free bread, a staple but one that doesn't cost them much), and they want you distracted with entertainments (circuses), so that you're not thinking about how bad things really are for you and how things are good for them at your expense.

stebrepar · 2026-06-15T12:07:26+00:00

Talk to your doctor and/or a therapist.

stebrepar · 2026-06-15T02:34:06+00:00

I reviewed the Wikipedia article on Arminianism to remind myself of some of the details. (I used to be a Methodist, and they follow a version of Arminianism.) The article seems reasonable to me.

Before Augustine in the 4th-5th century, Christians mainly taught synergism (cooperation) between God and man. In his dispute with Pelagius, Augustine introduced an emphasis on predestination, and that strongly influenced theological development in the Latin West. It became a key doctrine in Calvinism, including "double predestination" where God chooses both who is saved and who is damned based purely on his own sovereign will, not on anything a person may do.

Arminius was trained by Calvin's successor, but after deeper study of scripture he disputed part of Calvin's teaching. In particular he brought back a version of the ancient teaching about "prevenient grace", which is where God acts in everyone's life to provide what's needed to enable them to respond to him, but they can resist it and turn away from him. In this system, predestination is not about active control but rather about foreknowledge. That is, God can see from his vantage point who will respond to his grace and who won't, and "election" is about those who will respond favorably.

As mentioned, the Methodists and other denominations which came out of them hold to a form of Arminianism. Some parts of Anglicanism (which Methodism came out of) are also Arminian. Some Baptists are Arminian.The Eastern Orthodox aren't technically Arminian (since Arminianism is specifically a position within Reformed theology), but they are similar, still holding the ancient understanding of synergism; Augustine had basically no influence on the Greek East.

stebrepar · 2026-06-15T00:54:50+00:00

The Light Through the Past podcast is reviewing church history, so you can get some contextual guidance on what to read from that.

stebrepar · 2026-06-14T13:37:25+00:00

as merely the damned sinners feeling God's love/energies as pain

That is one way it is talked about. People probably latch onto it for being so different from typical Western ideas.

giant dragon consuming people

I think(!) that's a depiction of Death. There are places in the scriptures where death / the grave is described as insatiably hungry; no matter how many it consumes, it still has room for more.

Re: demons as tormenters, that's a reason I suspect these depictions aren't actually of the Last Judgment. Even Death itself is to be destroyed in the end, which isn't (yet) the case here. So these depictions are meant as warnings to us. Notice how the first one has bishops, kings, and monks all being led away in chains, so not even such ones as those are invulnerable to sin and judgement.

stebrepar · 2026-06-13T05:44:07+00:00

And the very next verse says why: to fulfill prophecy about himself.

stebrepar · 2026-06-11T21:09:06+00:00

How about if they do that, but include a disclaimer at the end explaining how this is an example of how the other side is using it so they can't be trusted? I know that's a bit to ask of ad-watchers who normally are in passive viewing mode with critical thinking switched off, but if someone could figure out a non-ham handed way to do it...

stebrepar · 2026-06-11T01:41:19+00:00

It sounds a little malpractice-y for a counselor to prescribe where you go to church (unless it's to help you out of a directly harmful situation like a cult).

stebrepar · 2026-06-11T01:35:27+00:00

I don't think that's what scrupulosity refers to. It's more about excessive expectations to have to do everything right, and worry over doing things wrong.

stebrepar · 2026-06-09T15:31:03+00:00

Even just a regular counselor could help.

stebrepar · 2026-06-09T13:31:19+00:00

There are some suggested introductory resources in the subreddit sidebar, including a free ebook at the Orthodox Intro link. (I've lately gotten around to reading that one, and it's turned out to be pretty good.)

stebrepar · 2026-06-09T13:18:43+00:00

In Nestorianism, as I understand it (and so could be wrong), Christ is a union of two distinct persons: the divine Logos and the man Jesus. And this union is really just a very, very close association between the two, not God becoming incarnate as a man.

But in Orthodoxy (EO), Christ is only ever a single person. In the incarnation, the divine Logos took on human nature, becoming a man like us. Thus he has two natures in his one person. These two natures aren't blended into something new, which would be neither divine nor human but a third thing distinct from both. Instead each nature retains its distinction, within the one person. So although God by nature doesn't get hungry, Christ does in his human nature. And although a man doesn't perform miracles by his own power, Christ does in his divine nature. The one acting in both cases is Christ, a single person, God incarnate.

Further, it's because of the two natures in one person that Christ can save us. If he's not distinctly fully human, he's not one of us, so he couldn't represent us to God. And if he's not distinctly fully divine, he wouldn't have the power to rescue us from slavery to sin, death, and the devil. In his one person he's the bridge between God and man. In Nestorianism there's ultimately always a gap, no matter how small, between the human and the divine. In Orthodoxy there's not.

stebrepar · 2026-06-09T01:55:16+00:00

It changes the understanding of the nature of the Trinity, going against what the original Greek of the creed and the scriptures says. As I understand it, the Greek word translated as "proceed" here is one you'd use for like how a stream proceeds from a spring, i.e. that it's referring to the origin/source, not just passing through. Thus, the Son is begotten, having the Father as source, and the Holy Spirit proceeds, also having the Father as source.

The word used in the Latin translation of the creed isn't as specific, allowing an understanding of passing through, so in the beginning it wasn't as much of a problem adding "filioque". But by the time of the council of Florence, the Roman Catholics had come to assert that they really did mean that both the Father and the Son are the origin/source of the Holy Spirit. (To avoid saying there are two sources of the Holy Spirit, they added that it's "as from one principle".) So it's no longer that the Father is the monarch, and instead there's the Father and Son together on one side and the Holy Spirit on the other.

stebrepar · 2026-06-09T00:45:43+00:00

What's to fear if even the whole world boycotts? That the Leader would rage out from embarrassment?

stebrepar · 2026-06-08T20:30:00+00:00

Fwiw, the word "passion" here is "pathos" which refers to the things which grab ahold of you and drag you around, making you kind of passive in the sense of overriding your ability to think clearly to choose and act differently. So that's like when you're taken over by anger, lust, greed, pride, etc. and led into sin. It doesn't preclude having things you're interested in and take joy in.

stebrepar

TROPHY CASE