Ship of Fools: Kerygmania: Finding a bible, picky picky picky

Thread: Kerygmania: Finding a bible, picky picky picky Board: Limbo / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=11;t=001280

Posted by Autenrieth Road (# 10509) on :

We've had threads asking which translation to use. Here's a case where in essence I want a particular edition, which I don't even know if it exists.

In general -- when you want certain features in a Bible, where do you look? For example, suppose you have a preference in translation, maps, pictures, binding, size. Have you had a particular search, and what path did you take to success (or not)?

My particular search: Looking for RSV for daily office reading, not too fat, no in-line interpretive section headings. Running page heads are fine. I'd be happy to have the apocrypha but it's not essential. If the apocrypha is in, it can either be Protestantly separate or Catholic Orthodoxly in-line. I've found the Oxford University Press RSV With Apocrypha but it's big and fat and laden with stuff I don't need, especially as I already have the OUP NRSV w/ Ap.

Where to look?

[ 02. July 2015, 23:36: Message edited by: Trudy Scrumptious ]

Posted by Jengie Jon (# 273) on :

When I last did that sort of complex buy, I went to CLC and got them to let me look through their Bible catalogs. I was looking for a RV that was leather bound.

However look on Amazon for RSV, there is for instance this compact one. However if you want details I think I would still go to your local Christian Bookstore and look at the catalogs

Jengie

Posted by Saint Hedrin the Lesser-Known (# 11399) on :

Your local Bible Society might help you in that department.

I have an old RSV to spare that might be to your specifications. It's fairly slim, around 1.5" thick. It's a regular-sized volume, but no Apocrypha. We got it from clearance sales in the local Christian bookshops.

Posted by Thurible (# 3206) on :

The 2nd Edition Catholic RSV published by the Ignatius Press sounds as if it would be suitable.

Thurible

Posted by Brian M (# 11865) on :

here

Posted by Autenrieth Road (# 10509) on :

What's CLC?

What's my local Bible Society? (I mean, how do I find my "local" one as opposed to just online or something)?

I love the "looking through catalogs idea at local bookstore" idea. This particular RSV hunt seems to be a search process where looking online doesn't make me very happy because I can't get enough of a birdseye view online to feel I've scoped out the possibilities thoroughly and matched them up against each other.

Saint Hedrin, a very kind offer of your spare RSV. Hoping to find one from closer to spare postage from Phillipines to Starlight. May need to take you up on it all the same. I am fascinated by the variety of ideas of Where To Search already from two posts!

[ETA: four posts! (cross-posted with Thurible and Brian M.]

[ 19. May 2009, 15:17: Message edited by: Autenrieth Road ]

Posted by Loveheart (# 12249) on :

CLC is a chain of Christian bookshops. Hope you find what you want!

Posted by Saint Hedrin the Lesser-Known (# 11399) on :

I forgot to add that some of the RSV Bibles we have were rescued from second-hand booksellers; some of the Bibles still have their bookplates or have been stamped with their church of origin.

They're all pew-sized and Apocrypha-free, but I'm keeping on the lookout for one that does have the Apocrypha.

Posted by rosamundi (# 2495) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Loveheart:
CLC is a chain of Christian bookshops. Hope you find what you want!

Autenrieth Road is in the US. I don't think Christian Literature Crusade have made it over the pond.

Posted by Thurible (# 3206) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Brian M:
here

This is the edition I'm familiar with (of the second edition). Personally, I'm quite happy with my Common Edition RSV but I'd like to get a 2nd edition at some point.

Thurible

Posted by Brian M (# 11865) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Thurible:

quote:
Originally posted by Brian M:
here
This is the edition I'm familiar with (of the second edition). Personally, I'm quite happy with my Common Edition RSV but I'd like to get a 2nd edition at some point.

Thurible

The second edition takes out the thees and thous, if you care to avoid such things. The edition I link above is the original RSV-CE in a nice thumb-indexed edition.

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Brian M:
The second edition takes out the thees and thous, if you care to avoid such things.

That's good. Irrespective of your attitude to 16th-century English, the RSV was theologically suspect because it used 'thou - thee' for God and 'you' for individual human beings.

Posted by Brian M (# 11865) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:

quote:
Originally posted by Brian M:
The second edition takes out the thees and thous, if you care to avoid such things.
That's good. Irrespective of your attitude to 16th-century English, the RSV was theologically suspect because it used 'thou - thee' for God and 'you' for individual human beings.

Setting God apart from individual human beings is theologically suspect? Good to know.

Posted by Jengie Jon (# 273) on :

quote:
Originally posted by rosamundi:

quote:
Originally posted by Loveheart:
CLC is a chain of Christian bookshops. Hope you find what you want!
Autenrieth Road is in the US. I don't think Christian Literature Crusade have made it over the pond.

It sure has

But I wouldn't recommend it, it is my nearest.

Jengie

[ 19. May 2009, 19:38: Message edited by: Jengie Jon ]

Posted by lily pad (# 11456) on :

Looks like you could call them here to get some ideas.

An American Bible Society Ministry

Posted by lily pad (# 11456) on :

Then again, you could always take a little road trip to Saint John and pick one up here.

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Brian M:

quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:

quote:
Originally posted by Brian M:
The second edition takes out the thees and thous, if you care to avoid such things.
That's good. Irrespective of your attitude to 16th-century English, the RSV was theologically suspect because it used 'thou - thee' for God and 'you' for individual human beings.
Setting God apart from individual human beings is theologically suspect? Good to know.

In this matter, yes. It has the effect of suggesting that the 'familiar' form of address is really the 'formal, respectful one. It reverses the reasoning for addressing God as 'thou' in the first place: that we could address him as our loving Father rather than a distant tyrant.

Posted by frin (# 9) on :

I don't understand - surely it emphasized that the relationship with God has a greater intimacy than the relationship with other people can ever have?

'frin

Posted by cg (# 14332) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Thurible:
This is the edition I'm familiar with (of the second edition). Personally, I'm quite happy with my Common Edition RSV but I'd like to get a 2nd edition at some point.

I looked at that but discarded it when I found a misprint on the second pair of pages I opened: Eiphaz for Eliphaz in the heading of Job 15. I didn't trust it not to have more elsewhere. Also I didn't like the excess capitalization of the headings and thought the font used for them a poor match for the body text.

I ended up getting a secondhand copy of the Revised English Bible with Apocrypha, as used in the monastic community I visit.

Posted by Autenrieth Road (# 10509) on :

Thank you for all the great suggestions!

Exploring minutia of editions, it appears that what I want is the 2nd edition, with Deuterocanonical books if I can find them but OK if not. But not the Catholic Edition.

It turns out that I also own a 1st edition (I think) RSV, but it's even frailer than my 2nd edition confirmation bible. Ai yi yi.

A place that occurred to me, that no-one has suggested yet is e-bay.

[ETCorrect: confirmation & communion are not the same thing, even if they were closely linked way back when I was confirmed.]

[ 20. May 2009, 21:03: Message edited by: Autenrieth Road ]

Posted by Brian M (# 11865) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Autenrieth Road:
it appears that what I want is the 2nd edition, with Deuterocanonical books if I can find them but OK if not. But not the Catholic Edition.

I'm not sure such a thing exists. The only RSV 2nd ed. with which I am familiar is the 2nd ed. of the RSV-CE published by Ignatius. The RSV itself has gone through a number of revisions since it was first published, but as far as I know the only in-print edition that is not explicitly a Catholic Edition is the big Oxford UP annotated study bible. If you know differently, please do link us!

There is also the ESV with Apocrypha.

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :

Irrespective of your attitude to 16th-century English, the RSV was theologically suspect because it used 'thou - thee' for God and 'you' for individual human beings.

I don't think this is a theological issue. When the AV was translated, English had complicated rules and conventions about when and how one used the 2nd person singular, as do most other languages in Western Europe to this day. The RSV replicated them because that's what people in the 1950s still expected the Bible to sound like. However, because people didn't still use 'thou' in any forms of standard English, and the dialects that did (or do) still use it often have different rules and conventions on its use, those responsible for producing the RSV may have got the usage wrong in some places.

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Irrespective of your attitude to 16th-century English, the RSV was theologically suspect because it used 'thou - thee' for God and 'you' for individual human beings.

I don't think this is a theological issue. When the AV was translated, English had complicated rules and conventions about when and how one used the 2nd person singular, as do most other languages in Western Europe to this day. The RSV replicated them because that's what people in the 1950s still expected the Bible to sound like. However, because people didn't still use 'thou' in any forms of standard English, and the dialects that did (or do) still use it often have different rules and conventions on its use, those responsible for producing the RSV may have got the usage wrong in some places.

Were those different from the current conventions in those other languages, that use either the 2nd person plural or 3rd person singular to address superiors, or strangers, while keeping the 2nd person singular for intimate friends and family members?

Posted by Pancho (# 13533) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
Were those different from the current conventions in those other languages, that use either the 2nd person plural or 3rd person singular to address superiors, or strangers, while keeping the 2nd person singular for intimate friends and family members?

I'd like share something from my background. Generally, in Mexican Spanish one uses 'usted' for superiors or strangers, and 'tu' for intimate friends and family members. But that's not always a hard & fast rule in the sense that you sometimes use 'usted' for family members if they are elders. I always used 'usted' for my parents and grandparents because that's what was expected and I know mine wasn't the only family. Nowadays I hear kids use 'tu' with their parents ( I blame T.V.) but even now I (and others) use 'usted' with older relatives and if I use 'tu' with my dad I get in trouble. So it's completely possible that at different times and places people used formal language with close family members.

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Pancho:

quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
Were those different from the current conventions in those other languages, that use either the 2nd person plural or 3rd person singular to address superiors, or strangers, while keeping the 2nd person singular for intimate friends and family members?
I'd like share something from my background. Generally, in Mexican Spanish one uses 'usted' for superiors or strangers, and 'tu' for intimate friends and family members. But that's not always a hard & fast rule in the sense that you sometimes use 'usted' for family members if they are elders. I always used 'usted' for my parents and grandparents because that's what was expected and I know mine wasn't the only family. Nowadays I hear kids use 'tu' with their parents ( I blame T.V.) but even now I (and others) use 'usted' with older relatives and if I use 'tu' with my dad I get in trouble. So it's completely possible that at different times and places people used formal language with close family members.

That's really what I'm getting at. If 16th-century English worked in the same way, it would have been a really radical step to address God as 'thou'. AFAIK Yorkshire dialect works like that: a father will address his children as 'thou' (or 'tha') but expect to be addressed as 'you'. I think. Though brought up in Yorkshire we didn't speak dialect.

Posted by Pancho (# 13533) on :

That's an interesting point. I really don't know how radical 'thou' would have necessarily been. I don't think that because I use 'usted' with my dad it implies necessarily that I see him as a distant tyrant, rather a certain level of respect. Not that 'thou' doesn't imply a shift in relationship either, but maybe not as radical as one would think necessarily. Or not quite in the same direction. *shrugs*

Posted by Brian M (# 11865) on :

Actually, AR, you may wish to consider the ESV, if what you want is a Bible based on the RSV with the thees and thous taken out. It comes in many formats and sizes. That said, I read a few critiques of the ESV that suggest that its fairly conservative evangelical editors might have been heavy-handed in translating language to emphasize a male-only clergy, so if that is a concern you may wish to research this matter.

Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :

Obviously, Bibles get used in worship, but this seems to be more general. I think it would play better in Keryg.

Hart, Eccles host

Posted by Anselm (# 4499) on :

quote:
Originally posted by frin:
I don't understand - surely it emphasized that the relationship with God has a greater intimacy than the relationship with other people can ever have?

Actually, I think that it suggests that one needs a more formal relationship with God.

The main problem with the use of thee's and thou's only in regard to addressing God is that it is imposing a distinction that it not present in the original Hebrew or Greek, nor is it one that we use in modern English.

Posted by Autenrieth Road (# 10509) on :

Is the RSV 2nd edition without Apocrypha still published, I wonder?

Recently, not having Wisdom when it showed up in the lectionary, I happily read the second half of Daniel instead. (A profound work, with at least one incredibly beautiful prayer that is not read elsewhere officially in the lectionary, more's the pity.) So staying in a nil-Deuterocanonical state wouldn't be bad, and I have at least one Bible with Deuterocanon if I decide I really want the occasional reading.

The search for a particular Bible edition is a curious beast. For study, sure, I have a whole heap. For devotional reading, I want to have just one for a while and sink into that, not worrying about the language or translation biases (erm, choices). And then look what happens when your beloved translation-of-choice becomes no more, and of course, given the life of Bibles, this will generally only happen loooooooooong after it has gone out of print.

(Oh no, I've been on the Ship so long I've picked up you-allses "erm" instead of a good USian "umm".)

Posted by Autenrieth Road (# 10509) on :

Oh wait, look, there's RSV Common Bible, and Expanded Edition, both from a couple of years after I was confirmed. Those would be good too. Wikipedia has a page with some info on the plethora of RSV editions. Cool.

Brian M, I think the ESV isn't quite what I want; I've gotten quite fond of my RSV and the trust I feel in it (rightly or wrongly).

Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Anselm:

quote:
Originally posted by frin:
I don't understand - surely it emphasized that the relationship with God has a greater intimacy than the relationship with other people can ever have?
Actually, I think that it suggests that one needs a more formal relationship with God.

The main problem with the use of thee's and thou's only in regard to addressing God is that it is imposing a distinction that it not present in the original Hebrew or Greek, nor is it one that we use in modern English.

Originally addressing God by thee or thou did suggest a special intimacy, but English, as it has developed, left that sense behind when we stopped using thee and thou in everyday speech. So yes, originally it did confer a sense of special intimacy as well as paradox (you'd address God as you would address a servant! [Eek!]

). Now since we would only use the words in relationship to God, it sounds formal and stilted, not intimate at all without making a concious effort to think like an Elizabethan.

Posted by Autenrieth Road (# 10509) on :

I've realized there's a list of the Protestant/Catholic differences in RSV versions so with that I'm happy to get a Catholic Edition. I realize that's back from mid-60s, but it pleases me enough. I'll also be frequenting the Bible section of 2nd hand bookstores, just to see what I find. Thank you all for all your help.

Posted by Brian M (# 11865) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Autenrieth Road:
Is the RSV 2nd edition without Apocrypha still published, I wonder?

Again, the Second Edition you refer to IS the Second Edition of the RSV-Catholic Edition. So, yes, it will include the Apoc/Deut books found in any Catholic Bible.

Posted by Autenrieth Road (# 10509) on :

OK, now I'm completely confused.

My understanding is that there was a 2nd edition in the Protestant strand, and a different 2nd edition in the Catholic strand.

My confirmation RSV bible was published in early-mid seventies, and says Second Edition. That would correspond I think to the "New Testament, Second Edition (1971)" listed at Wikipedia's page on the Revised Standard Version. That's the edition I was wondering if it is still published.

Then on looking at the Wikipedia page I discovered there's a later edition called the Common Bible, which I assumed would have the Protestant translation choices in OT and NT. The Deuterocanonical books would have the Catholic choices, that being the only option, which is fine with me. That edition looked exactly perfect, having as many books as possible.

Wikipedia says there's a "Second Catholic Edition (2006)". If I do get a Catholic Edition, then it makes sense that I would look for the Second Edition of it, but that's different AIUI from the Second Edition that was published in 1971.

It's not that I mind thees and thous so much, it's just that I find myself comfortable with my confirmation bible, and with a translation more on the formal equivalence side rather than dynamic equivalence side. Having become comfortable with it, my picky side really wants it, or something in the same RSV stream.

I've started following up the references in the Wikipedia, to learn more. I also seem to have accidently clicked on the Wikipedia Greek New Testament page, which has a fascinating table of Influences which suggests to me that I ought to be considering the NAS, for closeness to the Nestle-Aland Greek. Then I ought also to find out what the heck "The Comprehensive New Testament" is that Wikipedia cites as its source for this table.

And in further resources, oh look, the two libraries near me have lots and lots of books and I can probably find various editions to look at them first-hand before buying, plus the Wikipedia-suggested "See Also" books tracing translation history.

[ 29. May 2009, 18:13: Message edited by: Autenrieth Road ]

Posted by Jengie Jon (# 273) on :

I have a copy of the Common Bible circa 1973. It has protestant order but with Apocrypha/Deutrocanonical books including other apocrypha which are not in the Roman cannon but are in the Greek cannon although it does not seem to have Psalm 151, 3 Maccabees and 4 Maccabees. No I don't know why.

Does that help. You should be able to find versions of the Common Bible around in second hand book shops. There seems five available on Abebooks at present.

Sorry mine is not for sale (it has huge sentimental value being my first bible) and is falling to pieces anyway.

Jengie

Posted by ken (# 2460) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Brian M:
... I read a few critiques of the ESV that suggest that its fairly conservative evangelical editors might have been heavy-handed in translating language to emphasize a male-only clergy...

Its better than NIV for that. There are places where the original is clearly neutral but NIV uses masculine language. ESV tends to be more literal ad gender-neutral.

Posted by Autenrieth Road (# 10509) on :

So to broaden this from my own picky Bible search, have others had a Bible search where you're looking for just that right Bible, and not the first of 1000's of NIV variants that leaps off the shelf (which is the easy buy at all the bookstores I've been in recently that have Bibles)? What was it, and how did it turn out? What did you have to do to find it?

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by ken:

quote:
Originally posted by Brian M:
... I read a few critiques of the ESV that suggest that its fairly conservative evangelical editors might have been heavy-handed in translating language to emphasize a male-only clergy...
Its better than NIV for that. There are places where the original is clearly neutral but NIV uses masculine language. ESV tends to be more literal ad gender-neutral.

There is also one place (I forget where -- one of the Pauline epistles) where the word translated "tradition" when it's negative is used -- same word -- but since the context is positive it's translated "teachings". No evo spin there, eh. Tradition=bad. Teachings=good.

Posted by Moo (# 107) on :

There is a Limbo thread on bias in the NIV translation.

It's well worth reading.

Moo

Posted by tclune (# 7959) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Autenrieth Road:
So to broaden this from my own picky Bible search, have others had a Bible search where you're looking for just that right Bible, and not the first of 1000's of NIV variants that leaps off the shelf (which is the easy buy at all the bookstores I've been in recently that have Bibles)? What was it, and how did it turn out? What did you have to do to find it?

I'm always looking for Bibles, and how I go about it is pretty arbitrary. I respond to different things in different Bibles, and am basically just looking for a strong connection to the Bible. A few of my responses have been:

1. The JPS Study Bible, which is a new translation of the Tanakh with extensive scholarly notes from a Jewish perspective. Both translation and notes are wonderful. I appreciate getting out of the box of Christian preconceptions when approaching the Hebrew Testament, and this is my go-to text for that.

2. The Artscroll Tanakh. I am less enamored with this treanslation, but like this book for a couple of points. First, it includes the Hebrew text, which keeps my desire to learn to read Hebrew alive. And second, the notes are rooted in the Talmud. The JPS Bible is much more secular-scholarly, while this book glories in the rabbinical tradition.

I have a few study Bibles:

3. The Harper Collins Study Bible is my go-to study Bible that includes the New Testament and Apocrypha. I find the articles and notes wonderful examples of rigoruous scholarship. The translation is NRSV, which I find perfectly acceptable for close reading, although I would prefer that they abandoned their insistence on gender-neutral language. This sort of thing belongs in the footnotes rather than the text to my mind.

4. The Oxford Annotated NRSV. I got this because it used to be what the Disciple course recommended people use. I had used the old Oxford Annotated RSV, which was wonderful. I honestly find this version inferior to the Harper Collins Study Bible I mentioned above, though.

5. The New Interpreter's Study Bible. This is the version that Disciple now recommends. In all honesty, I find it the weakest of the three NRSV study Bibles listed. It is targeted for pastoral stuff. If I were preparing sermons, I'm sure I would like their notes better than I do. As a study Bible, it just seems rather lame.

6. The Reformation Study Bible (ESV). I got this for the ESV translation, which is quite attractive for close reading. I figured I might as well get some Sproul while I was at it, but I honestly don't have a lot of patience for these preachy notes and commentary. The translation is well worth having, though. If you can stand Evangelical preachiness more tha Reformed preachiness, there is a similar (and more colorful) ESV called the ESV Study Bible fom that perspective. What I have not found is an ESV with scholarly notes instead of apologetics.

7. The Learning Bible (CEV). I got this because I was looking for a Bible to give our Sunday School kids. The CEV is the American Bible Society's replacement for the TIV, which was a replacement for the Good News Bible. Each new translation has been a step forward, and the CEV is not awful. It is readable by late grade school children with decent reading skills, and the notes and articles are excellent for all ages. It is colorful and engaging. The kids seem to genuinely like it. There is a woodenness to the translation language that disappoints, but it is not riddled with errors.

8. Holman Illustrated Study Bible. I got this when looking for the Sunday School presentation Bible. I like the translation better than the CEV. But the notes are unremittingly apologist in a 19th century Baptist kind of way. I just couldn't bring myself to foist that off on the kids. And it is a bit harder to read than the CEV, so I was somewhat concerned that the greater grace of the language (and the less dynamic equivalence of the translation) would be lost, at the expense of subjecting them to notes and commentary that I find dishonest.

9. The NLT Study Bible. I got this for the New Living Translation. This translation is very readable, and makes a good choice if you are reading aloud. It is very easy to follow the text that way and the translation strikes me as reasonably faithful for a dynamic equivalence text. The notes are pretty much what you'd expect from Tyndale.

10. NIV Study Bible. Like all right-thinking Christians, I hate the NIV. But the people who did the translation are very good scholars (perhaps therefore more accountable for their invasive translation). Anyway, the notes are somewhere between serious scholarship and apologetics. By and large, they are worth having available, though. When I am reading aloud, I will sometimes use the NIV. It is easy to understand aloud, and if carefully vetted beforehand for willful bias, it can be a reasonable choice.

11. The New Jerusalem Bible. I really like this translation with one small kvetch -- they insist on using the tetragrammaton while telling you to read it as "The Lord." I much prefer the standard of printing "the Lord" in small caps wherever the original had the tetragrammaton. It's just plain easier to read and loses none of the information. Other than that small thing, I think this is very close to a perfect translation -- quite literal, but with a grace of expression that rivals the best of the dynamic equivalence translations. What I don't like about it is that it doesn't come in a decent study Bible. This one is about as good as they come now (I don't have this version -- the version I have seems to be out of print, but was not much better on the study notes.) The footnotes are fine as far as they go, but there aren't good articles of introduction.

12. One of my very favorite Bibles is The Net Bible. Although it is available as a (quite expensive) book, I use it on my computer. As software, it is available free on-line or in a version lacking notes or very inexpensively in a version with full notes that is supported by e-sword. The translation is from the Dallas Theological Seminary, but don't panic. It is actually a sheer delight and objective enough to have drawn a lot of criticism from folks who expected a more biased translation from them. The translator's notes are really informative and the rendition is elegant.

All this is, as you can see, very subjective. But perhaps it will be of some use.

--Tom Clune

Posted by Thurible (# 3206) on :

quote:
Originally posted by tclune:

quote:
Originally posted by Autenrieth Road:
So to broaden this from my own picky Bible search, have others had a Bible search where you're looking for just that right Bible, and not the first of 1000's of NIV variants that leaps off the shelf (which is the easy buy at all the bookstores I've been in recently that have Bibles)? What was it, and how did it turn out? What did you have to do to find it?
I'm always looking for Bibles, and how I go about it is pretty arbitrary. I respond to different things in different Bibles, and am basically just looking for a strong connection to the Bible. A few of my responses have been:

1. The JPS Study Bible, which is a new translation of the Tanakh with extensive scholarly notes from a Jewish perspective. Both translation and notes are wonderful. I appreciate getting out of the box of Christian preconceptions when approaching the Hebrew Testament, and this is my go-to text for that.

2. The Artscroll Tanakh. I am less enamored with this treanslation, but like this book for a couple of points. First, it includes the Hebrew text, which keeps my desire to learn to read Hebrew alive. And second, the notes are rooted in the Talmud. The JPS Bible is much more secular-scholarly, while this book glories in the rabbinical tradition.

I have a few study Bibles:

3. The Harper Collins Study Bible is my go-to study Bible that includes the New Testament and Apocrypha. I find the articles and notes wonderful examples of rigoruous scholarship. The translation is NRSV, which I find perfectly acceptable for close reading, although I would prefer that they abandoned their insistence on gender-neutral language. This sort of thing belongs in the footnotes rather than the text to my mind.

4. The Oxford Annotated NRSV. I got this because it used to be what the Disciple course recommended people use. I had used the old Oxford Annotated RSV, which was wonderful. I honestly find this version inferior to the Harper Collins Study Bible I mentioned above, though.

5. The New Interpreter's Study Bible. This is the version that Disciple now recommends. In all honesty, I find it the weakest of the three NRSV study Bibles listed. It is targeted for pastoral stuff. If I were preparing sermons, I'm sure I would like their notes better than I do. As a study Bible, it just seems rather lame.

6. The Reformation Study Bible (ESV). I got this for the ESV translation, which is quite attractive for close reading. I figured I might as well get some Sproul while I was at it, but I honestly don't have a lot of patience for these preachy notes and commentary. The translation is well worth having, though. If you can stand Evangelical preachiness more tha Reformed preachiness, there is a similar (and more colorful) ESV called the ESV Study Bible fom that perspective. What I have not found is an ESV with scholarly notes instead of apologetics.

7. The Learning Bible (CEV). I got this because I was looking for a Bible to give our Sunday School kids. The CEV is the American Bible Society's replacement for the TIV, which was a replacement for the Good News Bible. Each new translation has been a step forward, and the CEV is not awful. It is readable by late grade school children with decent reading skills, and the notes and articles are excellent for all ages. It is colorful and engaging. The kids seem to genuinely like it. There is a woodenness to the translation language that disappoints, but it is not riddled with errors.

8. Holman Illustrated Study Bible. I got this when looking for the Sunday School presentation Bible. I like the translation better than the CEV. But the notes are unremittingly apologist in a 19th century Baptist kind of way. I just couldn't bring myself to foist that off on the kids. And it is a bit harder to read than the CEV, so I was somewhat concerned that the greater grace of the language (and the less dynamic equivalence of the translation) would be lost, at the expense of subjecting them to notes and commentary that I find dishonest.

9. The NLT Study Bible. I got this for the New Living Translation. This translation is very readable, and makes a good choice if you are reading aloud. It is very easy to follow the text that way and the translation strikes me as reasonably faithful for a dynamic equivalence text. The notes are pretty much what you'd expect from Tyndale.

10. NIV Study Bible. Like all right-thinking Christians, I hate the NIV. But the people who did the translation are very good scholars (perhaps therefore more accountable for their invasive translation). Anyway, the notes are somewhere between serious scholarship and apologetics. By and large, they are worth having available, though. When I am reading aloud, I will sometimes use the NIV. It is easy to understand aloud, and if carefully vetted beforehand for willful bias, it can be a reasonable choice.

11. The New Jerusalem Bible. ... What I don't like about it is that it doesn't come in a decent study Bible. This one is about as good as they come now (I don't have this version -- the version I have seems to be out of print, but was not much better on the study notes.) The footnotes are fine as far as they go, but there aren't good articles of introduction.

The New Jerusalem Bible: Study Edition

Any use?

Thurible

Posted by Thurible (# 3206) on :

Sorry, as you probably guessed, I didn't mean to quote the whole post!

Thurible

Posted by tclune (# 7959) on :

I'm not familiar with that edition. It doesn't seem to be available in the US, although it looks like something I'd like to take a look at. So I just don't know if it would be a good study Bible. Sorry.

--Tom Clune

Posted by Thurible (# 3206) on :

Don't worry, I have no cart in the race. I have the NJB Study Edition and used it happily as such, though I tend to prefer the RSV. I thought it wasn't available in the States either but it does seem to be, though you can't browse that particular edition.

Apparently, it's a compact version of the Standard Edition.

The customer reviews seem to be quite in depth.

Thurible

Posted by tclune (# 7959) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Thurible:
Don't worry, I have no cart in the race. I have the NJB Study Edition and used it happily as such, though I tend to prefer the RSV. I thought it wasn't available in the States either but it does seem to be, though you can't browse that particular edition.

Apparently, it's a compact version of the Standard Edition.

The customer reviews seem to be quite in depth.

Thurible

Just one word of warning: the text linked to in your post as the "standard edition" has no notes whatsoever. I had that version before I got my current one (it has no designation on it at all as to what edition it is -- it's just called "The Jerusalem Bible" and was published by Doubleday.) The student's version may be an abbreviated form of mine -- I seem to recall such a thing from a few years back, but I'm not sure. Some of the reviewers on the standard edition clearly had a different version than the standard editon, and thought that they were reviewing the same edition that they owned but were not. You really need to see the specific version of the NJB to avoid this kind of mistake. They do a lousy job labelling their versions. FWIW.

--Tom Clune

Posted by tclune (# 7959) on :

Hah! The NJB that I have is still in print after all.
Here it is.

--Tom Clune

[ 03. June 2009, 20:23: Message edited by: tclune ]

Posted by tclune (# 7959) on :

Sorry to keep flogging this horse, but I found out that the version of the NJB that is an abridged version of mine is the Pocket Edition, not the Study Edition. FWIW

--Tom Clune

Posted by Jengie Jon (# 273) on :

Before we go any further the NJB and the JB are different translations though related in the way the NRSV is to RSV or the REB to NEB.

I have a copy of the Jerusalem Bible Standard edition and a copy of the New Jerusalme Bible pocket edition.

Jerusalem Bible standard edition was first published in 1966
New Jerusalem Bible was first published in 1989

Looking at 1 Corinthians 13:1 in both versions

Jerusalem Bible

quote:
If I have all the eloquence of men or of angels, but speak without love I am simply a gong booming or a cymbal crashing

New Jerusalem Bible

quote:
Though I command languages both human and angelic - if I speak without love, I am no more than a gong booming or a cymbal clashing

Just to note that verse was chosen as something well known not as an example but I doubt I could get a clearer verse if I spent days on it.

Jengie

Posted by tclune (# 7959) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Jengie Jon:
Before we go any further the NJB and the JB are different translations though related in the way the NRSV is to RSV or the REB to NEB.

Yes, when I wrote the title as "The Jerusalem Bible" it was a typo -- the version, as shown in the link, is the New Jerusalem Bible. Most folks feel that the Jerusalem Bible is less successful a translation than the New Jerusalem Bible -- all this was originally translated into French, and the Jerusalem Bible was the first re-translation into English. Both in terms of scholarship (it was done in the mid-60s if memory serves, and there was a lot of Biblical scholarship done after that) and in terms of careful crafting of the Engish, the New Jerusalem Bible is generally deemed to be the preferable translation. As they say, quality is job 1.1.

Of course, most scholars choose the NRSV over the RSV, and AR at least seems to prefer the RSV. So, as in all such things, YMMV.

--Tom Clune

Posted by Jengie Jon (# 273) on :

Don't worry my father prefers the Revised Version to the RSV .

The standard edition of the Jerusalem Bible however comes with extensive notes with a decided Roman Catholic flavour.

Jengie

Posted by Autenrieth Road (# 10509) on :

What a fascinating list of and reasons for various bible translations, tclune! I'll seek out a Harper Collins study bible (NRSV is fine there, for study). I have the Oxford Annotated NRSV, but don't thrill to it. I find much more interesting the Oxford Annotated JPS, which I read for the same reasons you do. The notes in the Ox.Ann.JPS are much more interesting than in the Ox.Ann.NRSV.

I'll keep an eye out for an Artscroll Tanakh. Goodness only knows when I'll ever learn more than a few Hebrew letters (I haven't even been able to master the whole alphabet yet), but it would be fun to have the Hebrew text and enjoy tracing out a word or two here or there.

It's a curious thing about more recent translations. I suppose I ought to want a more recent translation, that incorporates all the latest textual discoveries. But at some point my innovative interest dies and my desire for stability takes over. For study, sure, that's a different matter, have lots of translations. When I'm preparing for reading in church, I usually read the RSV, the REB, and sometimes the Nicholas King NT translation. Then in church I read from the NRSV. For a long time I liked the REB best, but then in preparing for reading I would start finding myself preferring the NRSV or RSV.

Another Bible I'd like is the Darby? Tyndale? something of that ilk, pre-KJV. Some of the Seventh Day Adventists I occasionally worship with, like it a lot, so I'd like to have one and see what it's like.

It's odd, in a way, that I'm now reading the Bible a lot more, because of reading Morning Prayer and Evening Prayer. But I'm reading a lot less of different translations or study materials, because I'm wanting to read stably through one bible without distractions.

I've gotten these bibles some at bookstores and some online. Buying online can be a pest because it's hard to sort out the precise editions and bindings. But bookstores don't always carry the variety I'm looking for.

Posted by Laurie17 (# 14889) on :

The Catholic Truth Society do a very nice travelling bible. Copact size and with a thing that snips to shut it. Nice thin silver edged bible paper. Maps and Notes and Intros to each book added by the CTS people.

I got it at the Pantasaph friary, near erm Pantasaph, recently.Seemed ideal-- Jerusalem translation too.

Ideal for in hand bag or rucksack etc when on the move.

Then I was invited to be a Godparent and this brandnew Bible seemed an ideal Christening present ! I felt a twinge parting , but also pleasure at seeing her parents delight (No-one else had given a Bible, or even a Missal so far !).

I added a nice Quaker book mark too, for enhanced Catholicity ! [Angel]

Posted by LutheranChik (# 9826) on :

Just a note that the Darby Bible has a premilennial Dispensationalist "spin" that will raise eyebrows of persons not of that particular eschatological persuasion.

Back in my student days one of my campus pastor friends and pastoral intern both preferred the New Jerusalem Bible for pulpit use. I've never owned a copy, but I agree that it seemed to "read" well during the lessons.

Posted by Jengie Jon (# 273) on :

Autenrieth Road

A piece of advice, don't treat the bibles on the bookshelf in a store as the limit that store will supply. If I was looking for a specific version I have nearly always asked to see the Bible catalogues the store holds. This meant some fifteen years ago I could get my father a Revised Version which he wanted and later a leather bount Revised Standard Version. Most stores will order anything from the catalogues for you.

Jengie

Posted by tclune (# 7959) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Autenrieth Road:
I'll keep an eye out for an Artscroll Tanakh. Goodness only knows when I'll ever learn more than a few Hebrew letters (I haven't even been able to master the whole alphabet yet), but it would be fun to have the Hebrew text and enjoy tracing out a word or two here or there.

I just wanted to say that I have begun a Hebrew self-teaching program. It is a four-workbook set. The first is called Aleph Isn't Tough, and introduces the entire alphabet in ten lessons. (I have the student book, not the teacher's guide shown. But I couldn't find an Amazon page that had the student version.)

The series is from the Reformed Jewish tradition, and was created to teach those lackadaisacal reformed jews how to read Hebrew. As is appropriate for the target audience, it includes lots of goodies about the Jewish tradition in the lessons.

I imagine that a typical interested and reasonably well-read Christian would be more-or-less at the kind of level of ignorance that is expected of the target audience. So far, the text is accessible and fun. FWIW

--Tom Clune

Posted by Autenrieth Road (# 10509) on :

Ooooh, I've got Aleph Isn't Tough. Also book 2: Aleph Isn't Enough. Books 3 and 4 are Bet is for B'Reishit and Tav is for Torah.

I've finally got the alphabet in the last two weeks. I re-discovered that it's in the front of my NJPS Study Bible, and somehow something finally clicked and I've been able to remember all the letters.

I think that means I can go back to Aleph Isn't Tough and absorb it finally. Thank you for the reminder!

Blessings for your studies.

Posted by cg (# 14332) on :

I'm bumping this thread in the hope that people here might be able to suggest a one-volume Old Testament commentary that draws on patristic interpretations of the OT. Perhaps something like the Catena Aurea for the Gospels. But even more useful if has some of the standard stuff as well, but minimal detail on textual variants. I've become intrigued by some of the patristic commentary in Nocturn II of the Matins readings, when Nocturn I is taken from the OT.

Is the Jerome Bible Commentary any use in this regard? I've not been able to get to see a copy. But I do have plenty on the NT so one for only the OT would be preferable.

Posted by Moo (# 107) on :

cg, I have copied your post to the thread on commentaries.

Moo, Kerygmania host

Posted by cg (# 14332) on :

Thanks, Moo. My first visit to Kerygmania and I didn't know my way round it.

Posted by Lothlorien (# 4927) on :

For many years I preferred the RSV but when studying, the NAS was used. It may be reasonable as a translation for study but it's wooden to read. It was an edition which used a single column, i.e. like a normal book, as opposed to a two column setting. My son bought it for me on his first visit to USA in the early 90s.

I was then given an NRSV. Unlike tclune who posted above, I really don't like the notes in the Harper Study Bible and have crossed out some I consider wrong and put question marks next to others.

This one does not have the Apocrypha which I would like to have included. However, it again is a single column setting.

Does anyone know of an NRSV like that? Leather bound if possible. Single column, Apocrypha, NRSV. Preferably not Harper Study Bible. Oxford is a double column edition as far as I can find.

I paid almost $100 Australian to have mine repaired five years ago. I could put that toward a new edition. I've looked in many catalogues, found one in Open Book catalogue which is the Lutheran supplier down here. However, they did not know when they would get another in.

Posted by tclune (# 7959) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Lothlorien:
Does anyone know of an NRSV like that? Leather bound if possible. Single column, Apocrypha, NRSV. Preferably not Harper Study Bible. Oxford is a double column edition as far as I can find.

Can you give some indication of the ways in which you find the Harper Collins notes inadequate? That may help focus suggestions.

--Tom Clune

Posted by Wilfried (# 12277) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Lothlorien:

Does anyone know of an NRSV like that? Leather bound if possible. Single column, Apocrypha, NRSV. Preferably not Harper Study Bible. Oxford is a double column edition as far as I can find.

The NRSV Standard Bible published by HarperOne (is that Harper Collins by a new name? So hard to keep track of publishers these days) is the only single column NRSV currently available that I know of. It's not a study Bible, and only includes the standard NRSV translation notes.

It's bound in a faux leather hardcover, available in a couple of different colors, with or without Apocrypha. There's also an Anglicized Catholic edition (with Deuterocanonicals interfiled in Catholic fashion) for all you Catholic Brits (oddly, the Standard Edition is only available non-Anglicized, and the Catholic Edition only Anglicized).

The text setting is beautiful, and the volume overall attractive (and rather hefty). But, and it's a big but, the paper so thin that the bleedthrough and ghosting is atrocious. You can see through three or four layers of text. I'm usually not too picky about this sort of thing, but when I looked at it, I thought I was going cross-eyed, and I kept trying to clean my glasses. Except for that, it would be a perfect reading edition, but as it is, I keep picking it up at the bookstore, and keep putting it back.

Nevertheless, it's worth checking out if it's available where you are. Sample pages are available here.

[ 15. September 2009, 17:57: Message edited by: Wilfried ]

Posted by Lothlorien (# 4927) on :

Thanks for the information, Wilfried. I think I may have seen that one a good while ago and it may be the one that Open Book used to sell.

I'm so used to my single column now after many years of two separate versions like that, that I'm reluctant to return to what appears to be the official versions with double columns.

Posted by Nigel M (# 11256) on :

quote:
Originally posted by cg:
...people here might be able to suggest a one-volume Old Testament commentary that draws on patristic interpretations of the OT. ... Is the Jerome Bible Commentary any use in this regard?

I'm probably not going to be much help here, cg, as I not familiar with the type of commentary you are looking for, so apologies in advance.

It's difficult to find any commentaries that reflect OT patristic interpretations to the extent that you are seeking. That may possibly be because the early generations of biblical interpreters focussed so much more on the NT. I no longer have access to a copy of the Jerome Bible Commentary (or the more recent New Jerome Bible Commentary), but I remember I found it useful as a pulling together of various critical approaches to interpretation, so it is heavy on scholarly findings since the 18th century (AD, that is!). Actually that Commentary is also just heavy (both in weight and scholarly depth)! I don't think it would meet your need, given its more modern slant.

There are quite a few books out now that cover the methods used by early church commentators, reflecting a more recent revival of interest in how the early church went about reading the bible – but that's not the same thing as covering their actual interpretations.

Alas, the only thing I know of that comes close to your requirements – though not close enough, I fear - is a multi-volume series-in-the-making entitled Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, of which 17 volumes cover the OT. That's approximately 16 volumes too long for your needs! I gather, however, that it is being produced in digital format so could be stored on a computer or mobile device.

Apart from that, there are several web sites that cover works by patristic interpreters, e.g. Christian Classics, or the Internet Christian Library.

Looking forward to seeing if anyone else can suggest something close to your needs...

Nigel

Posted by Yerevan (# 10383) on :

quote:
Originally posted by cg:
I'm bumping this thread in the hope that people here might be able to suggest a one-volume Old Testament commentary that draws on patristic interpretations of the OT. Perhaps something like the Catena Aurea for the Gospels. But even more useful if has some of the standard stuff as well, but minimal detail on textual variants. I've become intrigued by some of the patristic commentary in Nocturn II of the Matins readings, when Nocturn I is taken from the OT.

Is the Jerome Bible Commentary any use in this regard? I've not been able to get to see a copy. But I do have plenty on the NT so one for only the OT would be preferable.

There is a one volume Orthodox Study Bible. I've never used it, but being Orthodox I'm sure its interpretation of the OT will be patristics heavy. The website is www.orthodoxstudybible.com.

If any Orthodox shippies have experience of using Orthodox Study Bibles I'd be very interested, as I try to get a wide range of interpretations on difficult passages and want to pick up a handy one volume Orthodox commentary. At the moment I've got the following to dip into:

Academic: The Oxford Bible Commentary
Con Evo: The NIV Study Bible (which is awful in a "OMG are these guys for real?" way, but happens to be hanging round the house).
Open Evo: Some N. T. Wright commentaries
Liberalish ecumenical: Bible Readng Fellowship commentaries.
Catholic: A Catholic day-by-day study thingy.

[ 16. September 2009, 10:34: Message edited by: Yerevan ]

Posted by cg (# 14332) on :

Thanks for your suggestions, Nigel M. and Yerevan. I've ordered a couple of volumes of the Ancient Christian Commentaries on Scripture series for the books I'll be reading in the next few months, to try them out. That was before someone posted on the commentaries thread that s/he found them disappointing.

The Orthodox Study Bible certainly looks interesting, though the balance between text and notes on the page is the wrong way round for me. But it's surprisingly affordable, and might supplement what ever else I settle on.

Posted by tclune (# 7959) on :

quote:
Originally posted by cg:
The Orthodox Study Bible certainly looks interesting, though the balance between text and notes on the page is the wrong way round for me. But it's surprisingly affordable, and might supplement what ever else I settle on.

I picked it up because I was interested in getting a "user friendly" dose of the Philokalia in my studies. It really didn't do that for me at all. The notes are mostly uninteresting, despite being backed by some real heavy hitters of Orthodoxy. There is surprisingly little quoting from the Philokalia in the notes, and the commentary offered is considerably less interesting (to me) than the posts from the Orthodoxen on this board. For example, the Orthodox treatment of the Fall seems much more like dull-normal western Christianity than the nuanced understandings that the Orthodox among us tend to advance.

Any more, I pretty much ignore the notes. I still like having a translation of the Septuagint that is more readable than Bretton and the NT is the NKJ, which is the only book form that I have of that translation. The full-color icon plates are wonderful. So it's worth having if you've got a pretty decent collection of Bibles otherwise. But I had high hopes for really liking this, and was disappointed by how bland and rigid the notes were, as opposed to the open and invigorating sense that I get from other Orthodox works.

--Tom Clune

Posted by tclune (# 7959) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Nigel M:
Apart from that, there are several web sites that cover works by patristic interpreters, e.g. Christian Classics, or the Internet Christian Library.

Looking forward to seeing if anyone else can suggest something close to your needs...

Nigel

The big problem is that the Church Fathers didn't tend to write commentaries -- they interspersed commentary in their theological or pastoral writings. The most appropriate thing I can think of for retrieving commentary from their writings is a particular page of the Christian Classics Ethereal Library that you have already mentioned. One of their pages is an index of hyperlnks that is listed by Bible Book/Chapter/Verse. You click on the hyperlink and find yourself in the middle of some writing by one or another of the Apostolic Fathers that cites the verse.

It's a little tricky to use. To see where on earth you are, you need to scroll to the top of the document you jumped to. The far left side of the page will have a navigation bar that will show the author, book, and chapter that you're in. For example, the first entry on Genesis 1:1 will jump you to Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book II, Chapter II. If you manage to find that info, you have understood how to locate where you are in the library after the hyperlink jump. Here is the page for the index by scripture passage into the Apostolic Fathers' writings. FWIW

--Tom Clune

Posted by Nigel M (# 11256) on :

quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
It's a little tricky to use...

I think I might find my way around the Middle East Road Map for peace more easily! Thanks for the link, though - I will try it out.

Cheers
Nigel

Posted by tclune (# 7959) on :

I think that it may be worthwhile to slightly expand my comment that the Apostolic Fathers didn't tend to write commentaries. To my mind, they seemed to find scripture to be the explanation, rather than being the thing that needed to be explicated. In their writings, they would address a problem or question, and quote scripture to make it clear what the "right" answer was. We, OTOH, tend to be more like the Ethiopian eunich, asking how we can understand scriptures without a guide.

So, if cg is hoping for a commentary from the Fathers that acts to explain scriptures, I suspect he will be disappointed. One can gather what they thought a particular passage meant by "reverse engineering" that from how they chose to apply the text, but it's kind of an inversion of what we normally expect to get from reading a commentary. Just to set expectations a bit.

--Tom Clune

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
I think that it may be worthwhile to slightly expand my comment that the Apostolic Fathers didn't tend to write commentaries.

The Apostolic Fathers wrote precious little that we still have -- it can fill a single paperback book. Do you mean the church fathers in general?

Posted by tclune (# 7959) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
I think that it may be worthwhile to slightly expand my comment that the Apostolic Fathers didn't tend to write commentaries.
The Apostolic Fathers wrote precious little that we still have -- it can fill a single paperback book. Do you mean the church fathers in general?

The link that I provided was for the Apostolic Fathers plus Irenaeus and Justin Martyr. That is the thing that I am discussing.

--Tom Clune

Posted by Thurible (# 3206) on :

Might this thread be an appropriate one on which to ask if anyone has any advice as to buying an audio-bible. Unabridged, preferably; in a modern translation and read in an English/"soft" non-English accent (I'm not sure I want to listen to John Wayne for that length of time, I'm afraid...).

Just had a look on Amazon and there appear to be more than I'd envisaged. Anyone got one that they'd be prepared to recommend?

Thurible

Posted by cg (# 14332) on :

Have a listen here. I really liked Max Mclean's reading of some of the historical books. I'm less sure how he'd be with Paul's Epistles. And I don't know if these readings can be obtained offline.

Posted by cg (# 14332) on :

Apologies for double posting, but I wanted to thank tclune for his contributions on the patristic commentary theme. I did want material that I could use offline, though. The conversation is now continuing on the commentaries thread.

Posted by Yerevan (# 10383) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Thurible:
Might this thread be an appropriate one on which to ask if anyone has any advice as to buying an audio-bible. Unabridged, preferably; in a modern translation and read in an English/"soft" non-English accent (I'm not sure I want to listen to John Wayne for that length of time, I'm afraid...).

Just had a look on Amazon and there appear to be more than I'd envisaged. Anyone got one that they'd be prepared to recommend?

Thurible

I had a look a while back but didn't find anything (Maclean sounds too much like a character in a 1950s swords'n'sandals epic). My favourite audiobible reader is Johnny Cash, but its the KJV.

Posted by Jengie Jon (# 273) on :

Checked there wasn't a thread specifically for Bible software.

I would like to get my father some Bible software, I think it might be easier than teaching him where to find the various translations on the web.

He wants this basically for sermon preparation (i.e. the ability to check that the translation in the pew says the same translation as the one he uses) and preparing to read set passages in worship again in the congregations own version.

Ideally therefore the translations should be
REV (the one he uses)
NRSV (home church uses)
GNB/TEV (quite a few other congregations use).

However I would settle for the second two.

My problem with Logos is not the cost but that I would only want a fraction of their smallest set, it just seems like overkill and likely to confuse Dad rather than become a tool he can use.

I am wondering about e-sword as it appears you can choose what you down load. In otherwords

How easy is it to use (not to install, as I will do that) but to use on an every day basis?

Jengie

Posted by tclune (# 7959) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Jengie Jon:
I am wondering about e-sword as it appears you can choose what you down load. In otherwords

How easy is it to use (not to install, as I will do that) but to use on an every day basis?

I love e-sword and use it a lot. I still use Bibles in book form most of the time, but there are some things that e-sword is just plain better at, and its interface is genuinely easy to use.

It excells at being able to compare multiple translations. There is no additional hassle in comparing the different texts.

It is a good replacement for a concordance. The problem I have with concordances is that I'm never sure what translation I'm remembering a verse in. With e-sword, you simultaneously search all the translations you have installed (if you use "extended search"), so you find the passage no mater what the wording of a particular translation.

Chain links are a joy with e-sword. I never found them useful at all in book form. By the time you find a link, you forgot why you were looking for it. With e-sword, just roll the mouse over the link and the verse pops up (using the current translation you are reading). If you want to explore the context of the verse, click on it and you're there. To return to the passage you were reading, just press the back browsing button. BTW, download the "Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge" to get an extensive chain reference for e-sword. But various of the commentaries will also use chain reference hyperlinks as appropriate.

You should know that the NRSV will cost you $15, but it includes the apochrypha, which is fully supported in the current version of e-sword for things like searches (not true of the last version).

You can get a nice library of the Church fathers' writings, Josephus' histories, and creeds of Christendom. Unfortunately, these are not linked in with the text of scripture at all -- they can just be read using e-sword. Once they're installed, go to "Topic Notes" and select the book from a drop-down window.

There is wonderful support for language studies of Hebrew and Greek, but it is tied to the KJV. The lexicons are the best of last century's scholarship -- Strong's, Thayer's, and Brown-Driver-Briggs are well-integrated into the interface. You can search on each Greek or Hebrew word as easily as you can search in English. It's a really nice interface for this sort of thing.

It s a little clunky to just read scripture -- the Bible is displayed a chapter at a time. To move forward a chapter, you hit F8 and back F5. It will take a while to remember those keys unless you print out a template for your computer. When you want to go to a different book of the Bible, you need to pull up a drop-down dialog to select book, chapter and verse that is not as elegant as one would like.

But it is a real pleasure to have maps, commentary, multiple translations, multiple versions of Hebrew and Greek text, lexicons and dictionaries all handy. There isn't a good modern scholarly commentary or dictionary, but there are wonderful classics available for free -- Wesley's notes, the Geneva Bible translators' notes, etc.

I would also recommend considering the NET Bible. You need to get it from Bible.org -- it isn't on the e-sword site for some reason. But it has modern notes on the text that are terrific, and the translation is a wonderfully fresh readable version. It will cost you some money ($20 ?), but is a complete delight. They also have a translation-but-no-notes version available there for free.

FWIW

--Tom Clune

[ 26. September 2009, 22:21: Message edited by: tclune ]

Posted by Jengie Jon (# 273) on :

Thanks I did realise that the NRSV cost about £15 but compared to even the most basic of Logos packages that is peanuts.

The problem is that my father already has an extensive theological library and will use it in preference to the computer for most tasks. He is also a slow learner when it comes to computing. I agree such resources are probably useful but I want to to start him with something relatively simple. If he likes the interface and is happy with it, then adding things he wants later should be straightforward.

The reviews sound promising.

Jengie

Posted by Jengie Jon (# 273) on :

Thanks I did realise that the NRSV cost about £15 but compared to even the most basic of Logos packages that is peanuts.

I don't think this is the way to extend my fathers theological reading. My father already has an extensive theological library and will use it in preference to the computer for most tasks especially as he is also a slow learner when it comes to computing. So while I agree such resources are probably useful, knowing my father he probably already has a selection of them, what I want to to start him with something relatively simple so I am aiming for just the bible translations.

Maybe if he likes the interface and is happy with it, then adding things he wants later on should be straightforward.

The reviews sound promising and I have also spotted it has the RV, which will suit him quite nicely instead of the REB. Actually he probably does his sermon prep on that and only uses the REB when he gives a sermon.

Jengie

Posted by Myrrh (# 11483) on :

Have no idea yet what this is like as I'm still in the process of downloading it, a new Eastern Orthodox NT.

Would appreciate thoughts from the Greek speakers here.

EOB

Re the Orthodox Study Bible, it's not what it pretends to be - as can be seen in some of the comments link below many think it is a translation of the Septuagint, but it isn't..

OSB

Myrrh

Posted by tclune (# 7959) on :

I have extolled the virtues of the NET Bible before. Let me just mention that the second beta printing (from 2003, and basically the same text as the first version from 2005, bu lacking some of the maps in that version) is on sale from bible.org right now for $10 +s/h. This is a leather bound Bible with gold edges and has full notes. Since the printed version is usually very expensive, this is a good opportunity to get a hard-copy version of this wonderful text at an affordable price. I plan on using this version until the second edition comes out in 2010 or so -- which will finally include the apocrypha. FWIW

--Tom Clune

Posted by Myrrh (# 11483) on :

Further to your link:

From NETS
New
English
Translation of the
Septuagint

About NETS

Ken, I do have a vague recollection of the NEB arriving on the scene and being asked, in class setting, what we thought of the new translation. However, if the date below for its introduction is correct, then my memory of the event is junk..

And if the NKJV date is correct, then that was way after my time at school. We called it RK - I think we've had a previous exchange about that?

quote:
BibleStudyTipsBibles

American Standard Version. Nelson, 1901.
The Amplified Bible. Zondervan, 1965.
Companion Bible, KJV, Kregal Publications, reprinted 1990
Concordant Literal New Testament Concordant Publishing Concern, 1985
The Holy Bible: A New Translation (James Moffatt), Richard R. Smith, Inc., 1926
Holy Bible From Ancient Eastern Manuscripts A.J. Holman Company, 1957
*King James Version (or Authorized Version). Various publishers.
The Living Bible, Paraphrased. Tyndale, 1971.
The Message (New Testament & Psalms, Eugene H. Peterson), Navpress, 1993
*New American Standard Bible. Lockman, 1977.
New Century Version, Word Pub., 1996
New English Bible. Oxford/Cambridge, 1970.
*New International Version. Zondervan, 1978.
New King James Version. Nelson, 1982.
The New Testament (William Barclay), Collins, 1969.
The New Testament in Modern English. Macmillian, 1973.
The New Testament (Charles B. Williams), Moody Press, 1950.
The NIV Study Bible. Zondervan, 1985.
*Ryrie Study Bible. Moody, 1978.
Rotherham Emphasized Bible: A Literal Translation, Kregal Publications.
Young's Literal Translation of the Holy Bible, Baker Books, 1898, reprinted 1995

Myrrh

Posted by ken (# 2460) on :

NEB New Testament was early 1960s, OT was 1970. I used it - I still have a copy - but I hardly ever remember it being used in church or school.

"RK" was what we called it though it became "RE" before I left school in 1975! And it would probably have been "RI" not long before I started school.

Its long ago now, but IIRC, the Bibles we used at school, primary and secondary, were, an illustrated edition of the RSV. It had a dark red cover. Line drawings in the text and some colour plates on inserts and maps at the back.You used to see it everywhere in churches and Sunday schools as well. I suspect that when people in their 40s or 50s (& maybe even 60s) remember the AV being used they are often really remembering this translation.

Posted by Myrrh (# 11483) on :

Nope, no red cover, black.

Oh goody, for the dates re NEB, my memory isn't quite as decrepit as I thought it might be!

Myrrh

Posted by HCH (# 14313) on :

Someone mentioned the topic of Bible software. I suggest looking into QuickVerse. I doubt if this will meet everyone's requirements, but it offers a number of different translations and assorted supplementary materials.

At one time, the only translation of the Bible I could find available for free download was the King James; I don't know if that has changed.

Posted by hatless (# 3365) on :

I'm after a compact NRSV, leather binding, with zip. It doesn't seem to exist, so is there anyone who will rebind a bible in this way? It's for a present, so a bit of expense wouldn't rule it out.

Posted by Myrrh (# 11483) on :

Hatless - NRSV

Product Description
This portable New Revised Standard Version Bible is available in eye-catching binding styles at extremely attractive prices. Its compact size makes it easy to fit into a purse or attache case. That makes it the perfect companion for people on the go, such as travelers, students and hospital visitors. The Pocket Edition's clear typeface makes it eminently readable, too.
* The perfect companion for people on the go.
* Available with and without the Apocrypha.
* Features a presentation page and crisp 6 pt. black letter type.
* 96-page, select NRSV Concordance.
* Unique and attractive binding styles, including one with a high quality zipper closure.

Myrrh

Posted by Myrrh (# 11483) on :

Barnes and Noble $39 no shipping charge (members $31)

BandN

ChristianBook $29 shipping charge but not specified

CB

Posted by hatless (# 3365) on :

Perfect! Thank you.

Posted by Wilfried (# 12277) on :

Going back up the thread a bit to Lothorien's question, I recently got myself an NRSV Notetaker's Bible, another single column NRSV with Apocrypha, which I quite like. The single column text is very nice to read. The print is a bit small, but it's very clear on nice opaque white paper. It's a hard cover with about the look and feel, and charm, of a college textbook, but it has nice sewn binding. It's sellling point is it's two inch margins ruled for notetaking. I have taken some notes, though the lines are really narrow, so you have to scrawl in tiny letters with a fine point pencil or pen. It also comes in a deluxe version with a somewhat nicer cloth cover which I haven't seen in person.

You can see a sample of the page layout here.

Anyway, I'm pleased with it, and it fit the bill of a single column NRSV with Apocrypha, a rather rare breed, so I thought I'd share.

Posted by Moo (# 107) on :

bump

Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on :

This may be anathema to scholarly Kerygmaniacs, but does anybody know of a good edition & translation of the Bible that doesn't have footnotes? The thing is, I just want one I can pick up and read. I don't want to be constantly diverted to the bottom of the page for something that's of (literally) marginal interest - and I'm afraid I have the kind of mind that, no matter how hard I try, can't resist following a *.

Extra points if anyone can recommend an e-Bible of this sort.

Extra extra points if it's cheap!

Posted by HCH (# 14313) on :

The Bible I normally use is the New English version, including the Apocrypha.

I often wish I had a reference work with supporting materials: maps, timelines, etc.

Posted by Nigel M (# 11256) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
...does anybody know of a good edition & translation of the Bible that doesn't have footnotes?

It's anathema Adeodatus!!!

The most notable attempt (that failed!) was the aim behind the version eventually published as the Good News Translation. Drawing on the 'dynamic equivalence'[1] linguistic theory associated with Eugene Nida,[2] this version began life with the belief that it should be possible to produce a work that communicated without the need for footnotes.[3] As work progressed, however, it was appreciated that this was just not going to be possible without risking wrong interpretations by readers.

The issue is that very few words in one language map exactly over onto an equivalent in another language. Even such an apparently simple word as 'love' in English does not overlap neatly onto the Hebrew/Aramaic/Greek words that it is often chosen to represent.

It is possible to not use footnotes, of course; the Amplified Bible managed to get away with it by including semantic 'footnotes' in the actual text.

You can find the Good News Translation online here and if you select any of the chapters, then click the "Page Options" button above the biblical text, deselect the "Footnotes" option - voila! Footnotes disappear!!

And it's free.[4]

[1] Also known as 'functional Equivalence'
[2] Executive Secretary for Translations, American Bible Society
[3] Explanatory notes contained at the foot of the page
[4] Sits up and begs for points

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0