Bible version used by Reformed/Presbyterian

  • Thread starter Thread starter KnightIHSV
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
K

KnightIHSV

Guest
Does anyone know what Bible version is used by the orthodox Reformed/Presbyterian denominations? I have tried to find online but there is no definitive translation that is preferred. I would normally presume the KJV or RSV. However it may be that there is no defined version.

Also, was the Geneva Bible popular for English speaking Protestants after the KJV or did the KJV replace it in most Protestants’ minds.

Thanks for any assistance.

Yours in Christ,

Graham
 
From my Protestant friends, I understand that the ESV is also widely used in conservative Reformed churches – leading to the bitter joke that the ESV is the “Elect Standard Version.”

I’ve read in books on Bible translation history that it took about 50 years for the KJV to become completely dominant and displace the Geneva Bible.
 
The "New Geneva Study Bible’ with articles by J.I. Packer and R.C. Sproul uses the NKJV and notes where the Greek texts differ for those concerned.

Or else an Interlinear Greek Version with parallel NASB and NIV such as published by Zondervan.
 
Is that so? thanks for your up-to- dateness:D

Most Calvinists I’ve met still need everything supported by Greek as the original.
 
As a former Presbyterian, the popular versions provided in the pews were the ESV and NRSV. Most people I know in those churches actually used NIV at home. To my knowledge there is no officially endorsed version. 🤷
 
I recall reading that one of the Presbytarion churches in my area used the New Living Translation.

🤷
 
Thank you – this is very helpful indeed.

Would appreciate hearing from any former Reformed
 
Newsy said:
As a former Presbyterian, the popular versions provided in the pews were the ESV and NRSV. Most people I know in those churches actually used NIV at home. To my knowledge there is no officially endorsed version. 🤷
Click to expand...
I studied in a Presbyterian Theological Centre for 2.5 years. All ministers are required to study the originals because in the WestminsterConfession of Faith (WCF) Section 1 which is on Holy Scripture states that "in all controversies of religion, the Church is finally to appeal unto them [the Hebrew and Greek originals].

It goes on to say that “because these original tongues are not known to all the people of God… therefore they are to be translated into the vulgar language of every nation unto which they come…”

There has never been an official translation for the people of God, ministers are required in controversy to go back to the original languages.:cool:
 
Thank you very much, again. This is very helpful. Given the importance of Greek, then that would point me towards the KJV or RSV.
 
I am trying to understand the Reformed worldview so am trying to get a handle on what Bible is read.

I meant to add that I saw a Christian writer described as a “Reformed Baptist”, which I would have thought was a contradiction in terms. Or does that mean the writer is an Arminian of some sort or another?
 
KnightIHSV said:
Does anyone know what Bible version is used by the orthodox Reformed/Presbyterian denominations? I have tried to find online but there is no definitive translation that is preferred. I would normally presume the KJV or RSV. However it may be that there is no defined version.

Also, was the Geneva Bible popular for English speaking Protestants after the KJV or did the KJV replace it in most Protestants’ minds.

Thanks for any assistance.

Yours in Christ,

Graham
Click to expand...
I grew up Presbyterian (calvinist) and we always used NIV in Christian school… But my dad really likes the ESV and the MacArthur Study Bible.
 
KnightIHSV said:
I am trying to understand the Reformed worldview so am trying to get a handle on what Bible is read.

I meant to add that I saw a Christian writer described as a “Reformed Baptist”, which I would have thought was a contradiction in terms. Or does that mean the writer is an Arminian of some sort or another?
Click to expand...
It means he isn’t an Arminian but a Calvinist Baptist, similar to Spurgeon. Its not Reformed as in Dutch Reformed, merely the theological interpretation of the doctrines of Grace.
 
I’ve seen in a PC USA building the KJV, the NJV, and maybe others.
 
Thank you to all contributors.

I have just received and tabbed my new RSV-Catholic Edition. It is really good. I have been in a debate with a Presbyterian friend over church governance in terms of what is the Church and whether “the church” should have Bishops or Elders (he is an elder in his church). My friend is a really good guy, good Christian but a persistent critic of what he calls “the Roman Church”. I have found the RSV very useful for dealing with a Presbyterian as it is a translation that he finds acceptable.

There is an obvious “sola scriptura” issue as to which version of the Bible is to be our “Bible alone” guide. We are yet to confront that in our argument!
 
Yes, my friend has today said he also prefers an ESV.

I would be sincerely interested in understanding Sola Scriptura in the context of which translation. How can there be ‘Bible alone’ but different Bible translations? Even within Protestantism there is a dispute over what certain key words in Scripture mean. Seems strange to me for a denomination to be “Bible alone” but to not say which Bible version is the supreme rule of faith.

Can anyone explain this one to me?
 
Newsy said:
As a former Presbyterian, the popular versions provided in the pews were the ESV and NRSV. Most people I know in those churches actually used NIV at home. To my knowledge there is no officially endorsed version. 🤷
Click to expand...
Like you I’m a former Presbyterian, although my main pastor was actually an ex-Methodist, and not even a real Calvinist (fortunately for me as there was at least one hard line boy who would either have destroyed my faith, or made me a bigger Pharisee than he was, but that’s another story). My old pastor was an erudite man as well.

I can’t remember ever having a discussion about an officially endorsed version, or having a preferred version.

I do however remember three comments the pastor made -
  1. He had a high opinion of JB Phillip’s translation of the New Testament (I’ve never read it myself, and having no knowledge of Greek, I would have no standard by which to pass judgement).
  2. He had more concerns with the accuracy of the NIV than with the “Good News Bible” (which was actually written for people for whom English was a second language).
  3. He stated the “Living Bible” was a commentary and not a translation in the strict sense.
Other than that I can’t remember anything on officially endorsed versions. But then I was not much into official doctrine.
 
KnightIHSV said:
Yes, my friend has today said he also prefers an ESV.

I would be sincerely interested in understanding Sola Scriptura in the context of which translation. How can there be ‘Bible alone’ but different Bible translations? Even within Protestantism there is a dispute over what certain key words in Scripture mean. Seems strange to me for a denomination to be “Bible alone” but to not say which Bible version is the supreme rule of faith.

Can anyone explain this one to me?
Click to expand...
No.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top