Re: Bible's in Church: RSV, NRSV or Good News Bible?

On Sun, 08 Jan 2006 19:53:03 +0100, Stuart <SW_NOSPAM@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> In article <slrnds2hm6.o36.Trevor.Jenkins@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> Trevor Jenkins <Trevor.Jenkins@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I prefer either the Contemporary English Version or God's Word
> > translation for my own reading/study. But being a renegade am following
> > an NIV-based reading scheme with the Jerusalem Bible at the moment. ;-)
>
> Well, for my own reading, principle is NIV but I usually have KJV by me.
> NEB is on the shelf and I pull down my "J.B.Philips" and "The Message"
> when reading NT.

Ah yes, J B Philips; if only he'd completed his Old Testament translations
--- bits of Isaiah and other fragments aren't enough. Love reading JBP.
His English seems to have survived well compared to his contemporary C S
Lewis. Philips' remeniscience of translating the Greek is worth a read if
you can find a copy of "Ring of Truth" and the anecdote regarding Lewis is
thought-provoking. When N T Wright has finished his "... for Everyone"
series of commentaries I do hope that SPCK can be persuaded to publish his
translation as a separate volume. Would be a worthy successor to JBP.

NEB has some really good features --- mostly typographic as the language
is too high-brow. Better than the REB which was supposed to improve it;
but they reverted to type with the typographic stuff thereby losing much
of the NEB's benefits.

Peterson's The Message is just strange even to my idiomatic translation
loving eyes. Stuff in there that just grates on the nerves. Psalm 1:1
being perhaps the pits. But the humour in 1 Peter 1:1 is brilliant. If one
can read past these bizarrisms then it makes a good reading Bible. Like
the NEB the best bits are the typography with no verse numbers and single
column presentation though the chapter numbers are highly intrusive, which
they were not in NEB. Seems however, they are now publishing The Message
with verse numbers, yuck.

No idea where my KJV is and even if I did I wouldn't use it. When I did
use the KJV my Living Bible was open beside it. My ancient copy of LB is
up on the shelf and occasionally gets pulled off but its successor (the
NLT) is better for being a translation not a paraphrase.

Regards, Trevor

<>< Re: deemed!
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: To Garamond: Genesis Commentary
    ... I do think it presents a few issues for a literal reading. ... "Tehom" is a cognate of the Babylonian Tiamat, ... Maybe it is, but if it is, then we'd need the nonliteral interpretation ... But my point is the translation you're reading is not faithful to the ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: To Garamond: Genesis Commentary
    ... Thanks for combining this into a single thread (which I'm promptly going ... do think it presents a few issues for a literal reading. ... Another way would be to suggest that there was an original true event ... translation to the historical study needed to determine the original word ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: To Garamond: Genesis Commentary
    ... do think it presents a few issues for a literal reading. ... Another way would be to suggest that there was an original true event ... one particular word be given a literal interpretation? ... translation to the historical study needed to determine the original word ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: To Garamond: Genesis Commentary
    ... Ocean of Nuance wrote: ... I do think it presents a few issues for a literal reading. ... one particular word be given a literal interpretation? ... translation to the historical study needed to determine the original ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: To Garamond: Genesis Commentary
    ... John Wilkins wrote: ... I do think it presents a few issues for a literal reading. ... one particular word be given a literal interpretation? ... translation to the historical study needed to determine the original ...
    (talk.origins)