The books of the Bible(s) would be extremely challenging ancient texts in the best of circumstances— without complications, or such high stakes they would be very hard to read, even for serious scholars— So, this idea that you can just “go read the Bible” and find wisdom is frankly buck wild and dangerous. I was brought up constantly being told that I should “study the Bible” but of course I didn’t. I don’t think the people who tell you “read the Bible” really expect you to do it. 1/
@futurebird I was raised in a "just read the clear meaning of the Bible" subculture -- in practice, the "clear meaning" gets disambiguated to whatever your pastor thinks it is, and what he thinks it is is based on social norms a generation prior to yours mixed with what his pastor thought it was. The process functions as a way to reframe decades-old biases as "the inerrant Word of God".
@futurebird The way I've heard it explained is this.
Consider in modern English the difference between "horse play" and "pony play". Consider the confusion that potentially brings to someone who speaks a related language (like, say, German or French) and the misinterpretation of some things that could happen.
Now tell me you can read a 5000 year old text in a long-extinct dialect with idioms that have long died out and be sure of the results.
@futurebird I went to Baptist churches as a kid. Bible study and Sunday School were a big part of that. I've read the Bible cover to cover a few times as a youth, but I didn't understand what I was reading.
Or, I didn't (and still don't) understand giving such blind reverence to petty and vengeful gods.
I remember, when I first accepted the challenge to sequentially read the "Bible," I was most fascinated by the part about naphtha. As a computer guy, the Shiboleth thing was interesting too. Over the years, I have found portions of the text to contain great beauty and other parts to be complete gibberish. But then, the same could be said of any book. Try reading Galen sometime. 🙂 "Wine is the nurse of old age?" I like having some Jesus in my life, even though I consider myself a scientist. I just wouldn't depend too much on ancient texts of dubious origin (religious or scientific) to guide my everyday decisions. The same could be said of the Internet. 🤣
@futurebird
1/2
being a very strange child, I took "study the scriptures every day " seriously as soon as I learned to read, reading from the bible regularly, as well as the other, LDS (mormon) specific scriptures, and also from the lesson books meant to explain it all to children. Most parts I read multiple times before moving on, for comprehension. Yet, by age 8 I could say I had read them all multiple times.
@futurebird 2/2
and yes, it was definitely not expected; although I didn't realize it until I was much older, my knowledge of scripture made adults very uncomfortable. When I got older, and was driven from belief in religion, I also found that my religious family members were vastly more upset with me, the knowledgeable one, who read scriptures and lessons thoroughly, left the church, than they were with my other siblings and cousins who left merely out of boredom.
@llewelly@futurebird yeah this was a bit of a puzzler for me growing up, too, I read it, and then kept getting confused when I was given totally contradictory "religious" instructions, or, for example, people got angry with me supposedly on religious grounds, but for something that was really quite inoffensive, like wearing blue lipstick. I asked a few times if we had read the same book and they got even more mad. 🫠
@futurebird What a great thread. I read it some almost every day. Started when someone I trusted suggested I just read it. I read several different modern translations. Most of it I don't find difficult, just some compelling storytelling and poetry. It helps me to have a reading plan and some insightful commentary. I like how old and new tie together. I'm not crazy about what some fundamentalists try to make it into. They're missing the love story..
@futurebird The Ethiopian Bible comes in two flavors: the “narrow canon” and the “broad canon.” Many of the books of the broad canon have never been published in English, though there is a long-term project to do so.
@futurebird There are certainly better and worse ways to read the Bible, and annotated versions most definitely provide a better understanding. An acquaintance had an app with which you could explore the differences between versions and read annotations, which seemed like the best way to approach it.
That said, this amount of effort seems to illustrate better than anything else how pointless the exercise is. We either need to approach all texts with this (probably more the older they are),...
@futurebird Note that in the Jewish tradition, going back as far as we have knowledge, it has always been understood that the Bible does not stand alone but rather is accompanied by an interpretive tradition that was originally oral but began being written down at least 1000 years ago.
Even the most fundamentalist Jews don't think the Bible stands alone; they just accept different commentaries on it.
@futurebird
My first interaction with the Bible was in 9th grade humanities class. We read it right after Greek and Roman mythology. It was so boring, it was really difficult to study for quizzes. I had a Mormon friend “help” me and I was just so ready to never look at it again.
Give me weird swan action over lists of nothing any day.
@futurebird
The whole reason the Talmud exists is that you can't just "read the Torah" to get an unambiguous answer to any moral question. So that deals with the Old Testament.
So does the New Testament fill in all the gaps? I don't see how. There isn't enough specific "Jesus said..." in it to do that, let alone any "Jesus also said if in 2000 years this thing we don't even have words for happens, you should..."
@futurebird I have taught a secular Bible-reading class quite often, and students seem to appreciate the New Oxford Annotated. The notes are scholarly and interesting rather than religious explication--more about language, context, references, specific events. But yeah, everyone--especially the religious students--is surprised by what you see when you read it without being told what it's "supposed" to mean.
Thing is I’ve been reading it lately. The first challenge is “which version and which books?” You are already in trouble, you see. American Christians will say King James… but … why? Why not go back to the oldest extant version? Why not some of the newer versions? It’s confusing. But let’s say you pick a few versions to read and get down to it. More trouble— I can tell I’m missing so much context as I read it feels absurd— there are bits that have the feel of inside jokes. 2/
@futurebird There are also lots and lots of culturally bound stories, the point of which get lost in the various translations and through the millennia since they were first told.
I am starting to think the intended effect of “just reading the Bible” is that you will feel overwhelmed, not educated to the task of understanding the words of these people who lived in a very different world from ours and so settle down and let someone else tell you what it means. Who you choose to trust in this task will determine what you get from it. I think the people who say “just read the Bible” assume you will come back to them for help. But— I’m good. You see, I have studied poetry. 3/
Taking the text alone as it is? There are a lot of meaningful nuggets, some of it is very evocative— I could easily make a very convincing case that Proverbs 30 is about how everyone ought to study natural history and be wary of facism. And that what I sincerely get from The Text because such ancient text can only hope to be mirror. Unless we drill down enough to know who “the Augur” was and why he says he’ll list three things but then names 4– or what that bit about a spider in hand means. 4/4
All the sacred books that we have - Old and New Testament, the Quran, the Buddhist doctrines -- were compiled and written down at least a century after they had been circulated in oral tradition and disparate manuscripts.
@ianhecht listen hear me out— like I always knew “read the Bible” was a bigger ask than the people saying it realized but I think I even underestimated the absurdity— It makes me wonder about those people who talk about their “journey to faith” and how the read the Bible and found their way. Is it just like— meditating on abstract poetry? Did they think they really understood it all? did they just find a little part that they could prop up to mean what they needed?
99% of “read the Bible” comes from a Christian context, so I always ask, “where should I start?” From a Christian ‘follower of Jesus’ perspective, it should be something like, here’s a little book (supposedly) written down by Matthew, it’s a pretty good way to ‘meet’ Jesus.
I’ve read it, and the guy I met was mostly (along with some esoteric ‘I am’s) a wild radical who didn’t seem to care too much how ordinary people lived, but saved especially scathing criticisms for the rich, powerful, and self-righteous, and mostly was someone who particularly loved to tell stories; interesting, obscure, and challenging stories to make you rethink your place in the world.
What I especially love about these stories Jesus told was that the people around him, the ones with the most context, are often just as mystified as I am. The most common response from his disciples seems to have been variations in the theme of “huh?”, or “what the heck did that mean?”, and “please tell us straight up what you meant?”
@futurebird@punishmenthurts@DavidM_yeg@ianhecht Yes, and ignoring social hierarchies, being concerned about true morality and equity, making connections other people didn't, drawing in the dirt instead of interacting with people...
@futurebird Fun fact: my maternal grandfather had a kind of deluxe Catholic Bible: a big tome, the size of an encyclopaedia tome, with gold-edged pages, a portrait of John XXIII (or Paul VI, can't remember), <and> notes and comments. I explored once the Revelation of Saint John of Patmos (the book of the Apocalypse) and wow, was it full of interpretation and references to Nero, the Roman Empire, and practically zero "this is literally what will happen in our future".
@futurebird The first thing that needs to be considered when reading "the bible" is whether or not it is even a worthwhile activity. As many others have pointed out, whether or not Theology is even a valid field of study in the first place is an open question, because it's debatable whether or not it contains anything resembling actual knowledge.
But, setting that question aside, the only sensible strategy when critically reading "the bible" as part of Religious Studies is to study the history of translation and to read multiple translations in full knowledge of the potential errors and biases of the translators, and being aware that original sources don't exist and any English translation is a translation from non-original source languages translated hundreds of years after the original sources.
(Can you tell I was raised Lutheran? LOL)
The versions of "the bible" currently in my collection are the New English Bible and the Revised English Bible, which were produced by a joint translation team of Oxford and Cambridge Universities in the 20th Century.
In my family, I grew up with the Revised Standard Version (later the New Revised Standard Version) at home and in church (LCA and later ELCA) churches, the King James Version at the evangelical/fundamentalist elementary school I attended, and I forget which Roman Catholic version at the RC high school I attended.
I forget which version my grandmother's Missouri Synod church used, but there's a reason my mother went LCA once she got out of my grandparents' house.
@linglingo That’s fine but my ancestors are deeply weird cult American Baptists and I wanted to understand what they were doing exactly… and I’m a little troubled by what I’m discovering. My inclination is to go for scholarship— history— context. But that isn’t what I think many people are doing and some might even call that … evil. Christianity is a vast religion — from handling snakes to sadly reading St. Thomas Aquinas
@futurebird That reminds me the first time I read the Bible. I started with Genesis, decided to go once through it. I didn't understand much.
I can say the same thing the first time I read about Quantum Physics. And yet I continued, and now I have some intuitions. Or perhaps not. I'm in a quantum state now...
There were two things which helped me a lot understanding the Bible:
joining a Bible reading group - finding the right one is not easy. My favorite was the one from my Technical University. Christians with scientific minds, ready to tear apart Bible verses. I loved it. Making links between the Bible and my daily life started being fun. I did Science and Bible jokes all the time. Not all people liked it.
receiving and accepting the Holy Spirit. Is this the point where you start seeing connections between the parts of the Bible? Like you do when you do Maths with your students? From a Christian point of view it is a gift which God offers to everybody. You just need to accept it.
@futurebird I'm sure you like verse 25 about ants the most :)
Personally I also think that using our brain is what God asks us to do. And when Jesus is asked about the most important law, he answers: "... Love your neighbour like yourself". Which excludes facism.
Also, Jesus considers that even your enemy should be regarded as your neighbour, see the famous "The good Samaritan".
Natural Science and against Facism. All in the name of God :)
@futurebird What a great thread. I read it pretty much every day. Ever since someone I trusted suggested I just read it. I read several different modern translations. I find most of it to be compelling storytelling and poetic. I do use a reading plan and liberal open-minded commentary.
@futurebird
I had a chance back in college to take a Bible study class, a specifically non-religious class. The point was to read the Bible like any other book and try to dissect it. I can't remember exactly why I didn't take the class. I think it was a scheduling conflict or I didn't need the credits for it or something, but I do regret not taking the class.
I think it would be interesting to dive into the Bible to try to understand the stories for their historical and literary value.
It's one of the many hundreds of things I plan on getting to when I have the chance.
@futurebird my dad was a well-educated, well-read, intelligent minister and even he did not “just read the Bible”. He sure parroted that line without interrogating it though.
I read the Bible pretty much every day. I read it in the interlinear. Versions are no challenge at all.
A lot of Americans, especially Protestants, get this idea that the Bible is some guide for life. It's 66 texts which come to us out of the late Bronze age and continue until the middle Roman empire. They're a record of God's interaction with man, if you believe that sort of thing, but the same is true of the Odyssey and the Iliad.
I am truly sick and tired of all this pseudo-confusion about the sacred texts of Judaism and Christianity. Nobody else's sacred texts come in for the same degree of scorn - how about attacking the Qu'ran or the Vedas for a while? Give us Christians a break. We're not demanding you believe this stuff - this one, anyway.
You say you feel overwhelmed by the challenge of understanding what's being said. I've pointed you to an interlinear text, so you now have every word, its definition, its transliteration and all its usages. The whole thing. We have these definitive texts - our Jewish brethren give us the Old Testament and every student of the Bible now uses NA28.
@futurebird@tuban_muzuru
I’ve come to a similar conclusion in my experience with reading the Bible in an attempt to understand others’ belief systems. This includes a few iterations of “ambush reading” (trying to pick apart the inconsistencies to prove someone else “wrong”) to “allegorical reading” (how moral lessons might be symbolically represented through narrative). Outside of the social implications, I genuinely enjoy most of the text…
@futurebird@tuban_muzuru
…but that has not brought me any closer to a rapprochement between my science/philosophy-based belief structure and the religious belief structure of others.
I’ve since formed the opinion that “read the Bible” is another form of “Google it.” Meaning, whoever giving me that directive isn’t interested in a nuanced discussion of ethics and human nature, and instead assume that I will magically understand their point of view just by being exposed to the information.
@tuban_muzuru@pwflint I don’t think there is anything I’d ascribe to all Christians universally. I can assure when I was told to “read it” this was meant literally. And again I’m talking about US evangelical baptists. Not everyone.
@tuban_muzuru@pwflint Yes I think reading an ancient text looking for salvation with no context is pretty buck wild and dangerous. That is exactly what many charismatics do!
I am far more inclined to leave the Charismatic denominations to worship as they feel guided. I'm very strict about this Division of Church and State thing, too.
I go to a Lutheran church. Around the block is an AME church. We have joint services four times a year. It's a blessed event.
@tuban_muzuru@futurebird
As a Christian, I'm demanding that other Christians deeply understand and take to heart "whatever you do not do for the least of these you do not do for me" as an overriding moral test of whatever else they are proposing comes from biblical instruction.
Whatever non-Christians think about Jesus doesn't hurt me in any way, by comparison with getting that wrong.
This is about Christians telling people to read the Bible. I've outlined how to dispel all the smoke and blether surrounding the topic: we have these texts, they have been set forth, every word translated and compiled into usages.
So read them.
Biblical instruction is a rum old thing. The Bible doesn't work like that, anyway. The Bible teaches us about sin and redemption, from Genesis right through.
We can be forgiven, but we have to forgive others.
@tuban_muzuru@petealexharris But seriously is that part about the spider in the castles of Kings — is it saying a spider is small enough to be caught in a hand, or is it saying the spider has hands, something about weaving a web. And what is Augar’s deal? is the bit about not knowing the ways of men with women a joke or is it that he was chaste? Why does he say he’ll name three things … but then gives you four? Is there some meaning to that?
So I did some looking - KJV is wrong, as it often was - שְׂמָמִית - a lizard, not a spider. Quite a few animal names were gotten wrong, subsequent scholarship fixed them - but it took a while.
That group of proverbs basically says it doesn't matter if you're small - being clever gets you a long way. Similar to the English proverb "A cat may look at a king"
@tuban_muzuru@petealexharris That’s plain enough. So it’s not a spider? What is with the “three things are x and four things are x and y” I think I’m missing something in the pattern of the rhetoric.
This is a semitic ascending-repetition. It also appears in Proverbs 6:16 "There are six things the LORD hates, seven that are detestable to him"
It's also in the book of Job 5:19 "He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee."
These "proverbs" contain mnemonic devices - scholars of the Iliad and Odyssey know about these, too, signposts into a longer passage. The Qu'ran has lots of ascending-ending repetition.
@tuban_muzuru@petealexharris Is the last one significant? The one only experts know? Or the one everyone knows. It comes off as someone adding to a list— but I can’t tell if the item set aside is incidental or so central it might not even need to be listed. eg.
There are three big cities (Chicago, LA and Atlanta) but four that are huge (add NYC)
Or
There are three huge cities (NYC, Chicago and LA) but four that are pretty big (add Atlanta)
@tuban_muzuru@petealexharris It’s sort of … jolting in the context— the other things are wonders of nature— the way that birds fly, the way the snake moves over rocks— I feel like there is some point being made by the shift in subject and also tone (the way of man with a woman) and I don’t know exactly what point is being made— is it not to be understood? is it beyond the speaker? is it too terrible to contemplate? is it simply another beautiful miracle of nature?
@futurebird@tuban_muzuru@petealexharris on top of this we've got the translation issues... i was so baffled about the spider references until this reply because i was looking at biblehub's default berean https://biblehub.com/proverbs/30.htm which has a lizard (some translations even have a juvenile newt - i'm guessing it's from the LXX? the only greek word for lizard i know is σαῦρος for obvious reasons) and the various translations seem to be a fairly even mix of whether this sprawling climbing bug-eating wallcritter is the one doing the grasping or the one being grasped which would presumably alter the reading a bit
@tuban_muzuru@futurebird Talking about the secular history of holy books in mixed company is always going to be a difficult subject, because those details might not match the traditions of people who follow the book, or the contents of the book itself. I once profoundly offended a Hasidic rabbi by sincerely asking about the variants of the Torah that preceded its standardization around 500 BCE...but by tradition the Torah is about 3,500 years old, not 2,500, and the text has never changed.
It was once illegal to own a copy of the Bible in the English language.
Tyndale replied, “I defy the Pope and all his laws, if God spare my life, I will make a boy that driveth the plough know more of the Scripture than thou dost.”
Tyndale was burned on September 6th, 1536.
American Christians will not say King James Version except a few traditionalists. Everyone reads NIV in English now.
But if you want to step behind the curtain of translation - Interlinear.
I’ve been to a lot of churches and never heard any other version mentioned. And was kicked out of one for bringing in the wrong one once. These were all evangelical baptist churches and “charismatic” hooo boy.
I have a copy of the KJV my Dad gave me on my 17th birthday. I've had my ass on a church pew all my life and I haven't heard a sermon preached out of KJV for 30 years.
Oh but I have read them. I would never say of Hindus or Buddhists, nor indeed the sacred texts of other religions - what these folks are saying of the Bible.
Nor would I ever sneer at an atheist.
Now that we have that straight, I am not often glad to be an American, but in this I am. In this country, we are free to believe as our conscience guides each of us.
@futurebird
I also recommend reading the Gelasian Decree, the earliest document that confirms which books comprise the bible.
You see who decided what was "god inspired" scripture and what was apocryphal and fraudulent - and how they decided it is at best questionable.
Why don't we read the Gospel of Peter or the Apocalypse of Stephen? well only because of some self appointed editorial panel from 1600 or 1700 years ago
@futurebird a lot of protestantism emerged as a protest against the Catholic Church's insistence that a relationship with and knowledge of the divine was only possible through the mediation of a priest. And to be fair, there was and remains a LOT to criticize about that.
However, there is something to be said for the value of expertise achieved through intensive study, like you might find in a seminary that produces priests and ministers among the Catholic and Mainline Protestant traditions. My personal sense is that Evangelical churches often suffer from a lack of expertise, and that many of their historical and modern challenges emerge from that.
I don't mean to serve as an apologist for Catholicism or organized religion in general. I think there are plenty of valid criticisms of them. But, as you say, these are difficult subjects, and I think we'd all benefit if their adherents engaged in a more structured and rigorous study of them instead of amateur hour.
@DaveMWilburn Alternately one could recognize if you take only the text and read it and find the meaning that emerges— you are dealing with a mirror not a magnifying glass. It’s possible to find meaning in almost any text— the more obscure the authorship from your own experience the more you will only discover what you already know. And sometimes that’s what people need. Sometimes it becomes a tool for dark impulses and harm.
@DaveMWilburn@futurebird I'm atheist but I've been thinking about this a lot. More specifically, I've been thinking about how as areligiosity seems to continue growing, & society keeps moving in... whatever direction it is, people have no real way of giving & receiving "spiritual" guidance & support in their lives. We're just out here witnessing man-made horrors beyond our comprehension everyday & no one is helping us have context for what we're seeing, the things we're feeling, etc.
@DaveMWilburn@futurebird i think priests & religious leaders in a community have served to formally recieve wisdom from bygone generations, historically this would be orally transmitted stories and history, & they were meant to use this to help their community process things when their favorite horse dies, their neighbor steals milk from their cows, their wife leaves & marries their brother, whatever.
Some modern religious leaders seem aware of this role, but I'm not sure it's most.
@itsmeholland@DaveMWilburn But most charismatic Baptists believe in the priesthood of every believer. There isn’t any formal requirement to lead such churches or to teach at them beyond conviction (and fitting in with the particular community)
@futurebird@DaveMWilburn right, and as relates to what you were saying, that puts every believer in kind of a difficult position of figuring it out for themselves right? How does anyone know they're getting what they should out of it? And when two members come to incompatible conclusions, boom, you've got a new sect. Know what i mean?
@futurebird I'm remembering how the Catholic Church intentionally kept the texts solely in Latin (claiming it was the holy language or something, lol.) This ensured that 99.999% of the people listening wouldn't understand a single word of it. Thus they relied on the Church to tell them what was correct. Sometimes I feel like that's still going on despite the change to English. "Let us tell you what is right because you can't understand it." Maybe that's even why the use of an older English.
@futurebird One thing I have definitely noticed though is that a lack of a more comprehensive reading results in quite a lot of cases where people highlight an individual passage or even just one sentence and that's all they take to heart -- without even the context in which it appears -- and ignoring everything else around it (like the things that would make them quite uncomfortable if they actually read them...)
@futurebird Right? Religious parents think it's the ultimate holy text and can do no wrong (because they haven't read it) and want it taught to their children, yet so much misogyny, rape, violence, hate, and a million other things you'd never want a child to actually read...
Luckily they too just have a few bookmarks and individual highlighted sentences to read rather than the whole thing.
@futurebird@nazokiyoubinbou It doesn't even work as literal because it contradicts itself. There are two descriptions of creation in Genesis and things are created in a different order in the two versions. In the New Testament, there are contradictions between the various gospels. Trolls have put together "how well do you know the Bible" quizzes based on this designed to give everyone a zero score (whatever you answer, you'll get a reference to a proof that you're wrong).
@not2b@nazokiyoubinbou I know some people get hung up on the “contradictions” but some are from different authors or recounting the ideas of different people- it doesn’t bother me much or impress me as a failing of the text. It does however make the whole “literal word of God” line ring hollow. It’s written by people, revised by people, translated by people although to say as much was called the worst heresy in the tradition I encountered.
@futurebird@not2b Yep. Once you realize and accept that it's not divinely dictated and merely transcribed exactly word for word but just merely human texts like any other human texts all that begins to make a whole lot more sense.
And as you say, it has also been translated, revised, etc etc. Actually, one thing always bugged me about that. Why did they never just sort of subtly correct the contradictions? Bit by bit in ways that would be excused away as ok of course.
@nazokiyoubinbou@futurebird "highlight an individual passage" always reminds me of the most egregious example i'd ever seen - bob jones claiming that the bible is in favour of racial segregation, then his
one
passage he can quote to justify it
is a single passing barely-arguable-to-be-even-relevant, violently stripped of any cultural context of ancient Rome, mention by Paul quoting pagan philosophy as a setup for what he actually wanted to talk about
@apophis@futurebird I would argue that this is done over and over on virtually all topics when people use the Bible as a weapon and a tool to declare things they want to be true are divinely ordained. You see it a lot today in quite a lot of topics especially with religious hate groups. As you say, often the full context doesn't even agree with them. That example was likely intentional, but many just didn't even read the rest...
"Look to the ant, thou sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise."
At least when I use this one I'm not straying too far from the meaning. Although, I think the text was suggesting that "even though" ants are very small "even they" know how to be industrious.
But I like to use it to mean that ants are very wise and everyone should learn from them. Then there is the ant queen that schooled King Solomon on hubris.
@futurebird I mean, even the number of books varies. The standard Protestant Bible has 66 books, but catholics have a bunch of extras written in the "400 years of silence" before the birth of Christ.
@futurebird I seem to recall Jack Chick tracts having an awful lot to say about "why KJV" but the specific arguments aren't coming to me right now and I can't bring myself to dig into the website.
@futurebird
I tries to do that too and the one I settled on is The New Oxford Annotated Bible with the apocrypha. Each book starts with some great historical context.
@futurebird
One of the best books I read on understanding the context and use of tropes in the Hebrew Bible is The Art of Biblical Narrative by Robert Alter.
He points out things like how subtle changes in repeated stories/events convey meaning (e.g., the differences in the several "man meets women at well and gets betrothed" stories highlight character traits, so passive Isaac isn't even present, and active Rebekah is the one who gets the water).
"And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them."
They want to rape the male angels?!
"Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing*; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof."
@futurebird I'm going to quibble here, very few American Christians will recommend the KJV. The overwhelming majority of American Christians read more recent versions. The NIV, NRSV, and ESV are all pretty popular in different groups.
@futurebird I recommend Robert Alter’s translation of the Jewish Bible. Extensive footnotes. After reading a strange sentence I read the footnotes which stated that translators don’t know how to translate this sentence. In Psalms the problems of translation due to the damage to ancient texts. And he is concerned over the beauty of the translation.
Contrary to what christians will tell you, the King James is not a translation. As is clearly described in the original introduction, James told the leading clergymen of various sects of his day to sit down and come up with a text they could all agree on. It's not a "translation" at all. It's stated purpose was in to obfuscate the doctrinal differences between protestant sects. In order to do so, they had to purposefully misinterpret lots of things, mistranslate things, or just make up stuff that would sound good to everyone there. And that's what they did. It's essentially nice sounding garbage.
Bit to be fair, every denomination does the same. I have small collection, from college.
Fun story - some Jehovah's Witnesses used to come regularly to talk (they didn't who I am 😇 or my studies). They have their own bible, too, of course. One day they quoted something I knew was wrong. I pulled out every version I had, incl Hebrew & Greek, to show them. They never came back, lol.