Which Bible?

[Angrboda]

As noted, probably the most important determination is what your intended use of the bible is. You will have a different needs if you are simply reading to acquaint yourself with the stories than you will if you intend to argue the meaning of the text with an apologist, or are doing historical research. In all cases, I would say it is sound to equip yourself with at least two different versions which differ significantly in their approach (as explained below).

I find three main difficulties here (actually four). The first being that there really is no substitute for reading the texts in their original languages. It is said that there is no substitute for reading the New Testament in the original Greek. Having modest to minimal proficiency in four languages beyond English, I have no doubt this is correct. Unfortunately, this is not a realistic path for the average reader, so you must depend on translations. One of the most disturbing flaws I find in most translations is that conservative apologetics has in many places been "written into" the translation, obscuring the actual original text. I have not found a single translation that evades this flaw, as most translations are done by people motivated to make such "corrections". Beyond that, there are two general strategies, or poles between which translations fall. The first is using a literal word for word translation, even if doing so makes the text difficult or even distorts its likely meaning. The other is to attempt to capture "the spirit of the text" even if that means losing a lot of the detail of the original text, and likely distorting the meaning as well. Unfortunately, there is no "solution" to this problem - any translation will suffer one or more of these problems. Which is why I suggest two bibles, one from each end of the spectrum (there are articles on the web detailing where each translation lies on this spectrum). How much further than that you go, again, depends on your goals. An inter-linear bible which presents parallel passages from different translations alongside the text in its original language, along with concordances may be required if you really want to go at it.

The fourth problem, which I omit from above, is that simply having documents written long ago does not really equip you for making sensible conclusions about what you are reading. Just as someone in the year 6025 shouldn't jump to the conclusion that 21st century Americans believed in wizards and vampires, if one doesn't want to be led astray by their good intentions, yet ignorant assumptions, one should also invest some time in understanding the philosophy and science of interpreting ancient texts (hermeneutics, and in this case, high and low criticism), and also some knowledge of the history and culture of the Ancient Near East. Even for a skeptic with limited aims, it's obvious that the task of understanding the bible can quickly snowball into an all-consuming task. Pick your endpoint, and choose accordingly.