Museum of the Bible mentions the Recovery Bible

[boughtbyJesus]

Hello. I wasn't really sure which thread to put this on. Have any of you seen the recent "artifact" mention of the Recovery Bible by The Museum of the Bible's facebook post on September 20? See here:

<iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fmus eumoftheBible%2Fposts%2F2399716116809999&width=500" width="500" height="173" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowTransparency="true" allow="encrypted-media"></iframe>

My two kids and I had the opportunity to visit this museum over the summer, having spend the day there, and really enjoyed our time there. My husband, who attends the LC, was aware of our visit there but showed no interest in our time there until a few days ago when all of a sudden he wanted to know how I like the museum, if what they presented was good and asked if they presented something, did I think it was legitimate. Well, of course I knew something was up but I didn't want to ask and he didn't say. A couple of days later he sent me the picture that was posted of their 9/20 thread as the "artifact of the day" item. I told him that it was the Museum of the Bible and as such they had hundreds of bibles on display, but that did not affirm legitimacy. I also found this page making the claim that the museum in now recommending this bible, which they're not because I reached out to them to let them know what they were misconstruing their post:

Recovery Version Bible is Recommended by The Museum of the Bible 圣经博物馆推荐—圣经恢复本
Published September 27, 2019
Recovery Version Bible is recommended by The Museum of the Bible.

Artifact of the Day: The Holy Bible (Recovery Version)
This Bible was completed by Living Stream Ministry between 1974 and 1995. Named the “Recovery Version,” its translators sought to recover teachings that had become neglected by modern Christians by producing a new translation based on the original languages.

https://churchnews.info/2019/09/27/artifact-of-the-day-the-holy-bible-recovery-version-%e4%bb%8a%e6%97%a5%e6%89%8b%e5%b7%a5%e8%89%ba%e5%9 3%81%ef%bc%9a%e5%9c%a3%e7%bb%8f%ef%bc%88%e6%81%a2% e5%a4%8d%e6%9c%ac%ef%bc%89/?fbclid=IwAR3UE2NakOKpM_udqHyWKTwWAhFdksXh8tyaG8RC AQ2AfbdOwSLHk1BGfsI

[Freedom]

I told him that it was the Museum of the Bible and as such they had hundreds of bibles on display, but that did not affirm legitimacy. I also found this page making the claim that the museum in now recommending this bible, which they're not because I reached out to them to let them know what they were misconstruing their post:

Recovery Version Bible is Recommended by The Museum of the Bible

It seems that those in the LC consider any kind of outside recognition to be a legitimization of the LC. I'm not familiar with this museum, but I don't see why most people would draw any particular meaning from what is on display in a museum.

[awareness]

It seems that those in the LC consider any kind of outside recognition to be a legitimization of the LC. I'm not familiar with this museum, but I don't see why most people would draw any particular meaning from what is on display in a museum.
I've never been there either. But I remember announcements of its coming opening, and have bumped into it on the web enough to look into it.

[Sons to Glory!]

Your husband bringing that up the way he did was sorta "cute" doncha think? :D

Since we here in Scottsdale were once affiliated with the LC (30+ years ago) there are still a few here who read the RV without footnotes. But it is less and less over time. I too used the Recovery Version for years. Up until a few years ago, I used a RV of the New Testament without footnotes, because I liked how easy it was to carry and read with the clear print. But more recently I decided to go with a complete NAS Bible, so as to have the whole enchilada with me. (and the NT RV w/o notes traditionally had weak binding which failed after a couple years usage, or sooner)

To me, the RV footnotes became a BIG distraction as I was reading. And they definitely colored my thinking on particular passages and verses. I much rather have the Holy Spirit speaking fresh to me than Witness Lee (or any man). It's not that WL's footnotes were so much in error or anything, I just don't think I need man's speaking right alongside with scripture. If I want to consult a commentary, then I want that separate. To me, WL's notes are just another commentary to look at. I don't feel threatened or "tossed about" by what he presents (good, bad or ugly theology). I certainly don't agree with some of his things, but then again I don't know that I agree 100% with anybody's!

So overall, the RV is not a bad translation and does a decent job at the least (but I'd dump the notes). (FYI - I find that even very literal translations like the NAS don't always do a perfect job. None of them is 100% in my humble estimation, that's why checking different translations is always a good practice.)

[boughtbyJesus]

I just thought it was funny and sad that my husband would first try to set a trap for me to agree. Then when a sneaked a peek at his text messages on his phone, low and behold found this gem: "PTL the Lord is moving, even in Washinton DC!":rolleyes:

[Sons to Glory!]

I just thought it was funny and sad that my husband would first try to set a trap for me to agree. Then when a sneaked a peek at his text messages on his phone, low and behold found this gem: "PTL the Lord is moving, even in Washinton DC!":rolleyes:Eh? :confused5: Not sure I got this (but I'm sometimes a little dense by nature . . .)

[Bubbles!]

Hello. I wasn't really sure which thread to put this on. Have any of you seen the recent "artifact" mention of the Recovery Bible by The Museum of the Bible's facebook post on September 20? See here:

<iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fmus eumoftheBible%2Fposts%2F2399716116809999&width=500" width="500" height="173" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowTransparency="true" allow="encrypted-media"></iframe>

My two kids and I had the opportunity to visit this museum over the summer, having spend the day there, and really enjoyed our time there. My husband, who attends the LC, was aware of our visit there but showed no interest in our time there until a few days ago when all of a sudden he wanted to know how I like the museum, if what they presented was good and asked if they presented something, did I think it was legitimate. Well, of course I knew something was up but I didn't want to ask and he didn't say. A couple of days later he sent me the picture that was posted of their 9/20 thread as the "artifact of the day" item. I told him that it was the Museum of the Bible and as such they had hundreds of bibles on display, but that did not affirm legitimacy. I also found this page making the claim that the museum in now recommending this bible, which they're not because I reached out to them to let them know what they were misconstruing their post:

Recovery Version Bible is Recommended by The Museum of the Bible 圣经博物馆推荐—圣经恢复本
Published September 27, 2019
Recovery Version Bible is recommended by The Museum of the Bible.

Artifact of the Day: The Holy Bible (Recovery Version)
This Bible was completed by Living Stream Ministry between 1974 and 1995. Named the “Recovery Version,” its translators sought to recover teachings that had become neglected by modern Christians by producing a new translation based on the original languages.

https://churchnews.info/2019/09/27/artifact-of-the-day-the-holy-bible-recovery-version-%e4%bb%8a%e6%97%a5%e6%89%8b%e5%b7%a5%e8%89%ba%e5%9 3%81%ef%bc%9a%e5%9c%a3%e7%bb%8f%ef%bc%88%e6%81%a2% e5%a4%8d%e6%9c%ac%ef%bc%89/?fbclid=IwAR3UE2NakOKpM_udqHyWKTwWAhFdksXh8tyaG8RC AQ2AfbdOwSLHk1BGfsI
Hey, my thinking is really corrupt! I noticed your name on here; BoughtByJesus. Well, in reality, all Christians are! But, the first thing my mind pictured was a mental image of a bearded man in a robe, stepping into that Bible museum, and BUYING a copy of the Recovery Version! He would, wouldn't He?