Does anyone use the NET Bible?

I do consult it from time to time, esp. for those textual notes.

 

I've enjoyed the NRSV recently but have had to put up with some negative comments among some of the older folk in the church.

I've never been an NIV user of any flavor but I'm awaiting the new NIV (due sometime in 2011)

When it comes out I'll give it a taste.

Rob

 

I have the Beta version. It is one of three Bibles I commonly carry to church. I have not read it straight through. The notes are great.

I noticed the HCSB was not in your list.

 

What is it about the HCSB that commends it?

 

I purchased the first edition with all of the notes with the idea it would replace the NIV. I do not find that I use it often and when I do it is only for the notes.

Instead I switched to the NKJV and have found a home there. I don't know greek so I cannot comment with respect to the actual translation. It does (the NET) remind me of the NIV.

 

I have the NET on esword. I like it, but not as much as my NLTse and my HCSB. If I had to pick one, it would be the HCSB.

 

I like the NET.. both my printed version and the computer version...
I love the translators notes..

 

I use it, but as a supplementary text.

The HCSB is my primary teaching and studying text.

I do like the NET very much and will refer to its renderings often. When I am just attending services and studies I will usually take my tablet pc with me. I always keep the NET Beta software open with my other texts. The footnotes, translators notes, etc are just terrific and really open up the text in many ways. (It helps that I know Hebrew and Greek pretty well.)

The overall translation varies from book to book. Because they chose to engage experts in the book as opposed to a translation committee there are some grammatical and stylistic anacharianisms that vary. The translation is pretty middle of the road but has some rather interesting renderings. I do like that they use a higher grade level of reading in translating.

 

I just bought a NET full edition and I love it. If I could get a parallel Bible with the NET and NASB with the NET notes. I would never open another Bible again.

The NET adds to the text what is fully implied sometimes, but the notes clear it all up. I use an NASB and NET because the NET notes tend to match the NASB text :tongue3:

To any serious student I recommend more than one translation. But the NET is great. Buy one with the full notes, you won't regret it.

 

With those 60,000 plus notes you'd think I'd be satisfied. I am indeed very pleased and aided tremendously by those blessed notes. However, there are sometimes questions I have for a given phrase which has no notes whatsoever. But then to quench my curiosity I'd require the NET Bible to have 600,000 plus notes! That's not the kind of translation I could lug around except by wheelbarrow.

 

I have read the NT and about half of the OT and found it easy to read. I have the Apologetics Study version which has good notes on things I'm mostly interested in. I'm not recommending it here; it seemed conspicuously missing from among those recent versions.

 

In a lot of places in the NT, it resembles the NIV. But I'm no fan of the HCSB.

 

How come? I think it is quite accurate and easy to read.

 

Yes, I grant that it is an accurate overall. But there're too many places that I strongly disagree with it.

First, it's rendering of Romans 3:25; 1 Cor. 16:2; just for starters.

Second, I'm all for reading "brothers and sisters" and so on. I cannot see myself using a translation as my main text that is not gender accurate when context demands such.

Plus, it's has too much theological baggage here and there.

 

For a translation that abounds with footnotes, I surprised that we don't have one for Ruach Elohim, whether "Spirit of God" or "wind of God" and so on.

Also, HCSB seems to be anti-charismatic: see 1 Cor. 12:1 and 13:8.

Samples.