Another "New, Improved" Bible Version!

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by Baptist4life, Jul 20, 2011.

  1. Baptist4life

    Baptist4life
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    Messages:
    1,460
    Likes Received:
    0
    New Bible Aims for 'Common' Language, Gender Neutrality
    By: TIM NEWCOMB



    We didn't know Jesus being called the “Son of Man” was so confusing. But the publishers of the Common English Bible translation want to clear up anything and everything that can confuse those inclined to dive into the Bible, so “Son of Man” now reads “the Human One.” Not exactly poetic, but arguably modern.

    In an effort not only to make the Bible more accessible to modern readers, but also to appease both conservative and liberal denominations, the multi-denomination publishers of the new Bible translation—the Common English Bible Committee, an alliance of five publishers—out digitally now and in print in the next few weeks didn't just toss together a few new catchy phrases, though. They took the task seriously.

    With more than 200 biblical scholars and church leaders representing more than 20 denominations, the committee translated straight from the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek texts, says associate publisher Paul Franklyn. When field-testing showed passages appeared confusing, project staff worked in modern phrasing. USA Today notes the committee was made up of "a coalition of Protestant denominational publishing houses owned by the United Methodist Church, one of the nation's largest denominations, and the Disciples of Christ, Presbyterian Church U.S.A., Episcopal Church and the United Church of Christ."

    Along with switching out Jesus' well-known descriptor, the new $3.5 million Bible translation that took four years to complete, also tossed out “alien” and “foreigner” in places (read Exodus 22:21) in lieu of “immigrant”; shifts toward a more gender-neutral approach (“brother or sister” versus just “brother” when Jesus teaches to “warn,” not “rebuke” in Luke 17:3-4); adds in plenty of contractions; uses words such as “insulted” instead of “defiled” (1 Samuel 17:45); and eases up the language of the Lord's Prayer (found in Matthew 6:9-13) by switching out “hallowed be thy name” for “uphold the holiness of your name,” among other shifts.
    To help catch a few eyes along the way, the CEB includes maps from National Geographic. There must be some proven science showing everyone loves a great map.

    All the academic work has the Christian community talking (and reading), as the Fuller Theological Seminary in May made the new translation required reading for its students. New copies of the paperback edition will come out in August.

    While the vocabulary may deviate slightly, the meaning coming from the Son of Man or the Human One remains the same. Ultimately, it's all still the Bible. :rolleyes:


    http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/07/20/new-bible-translation-aims-for-common-language/
     
    #1 Baptist4life, Jul 20, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 20, 2011
  2. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    IF mainline churches ;scholars: are translating this Bible...

    Could they even be able to give unto us a reliable Bible to teach/study/read from?
     
  3. Steadfast Fred

    Steadfast Fred
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2009
    Messages:
    1,983
    Likes Received:
    0
    It was always my understanding that we don't have the original texts? What gives?
     
  4. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    "Must" be the ones that would approve their readings into the texts!
     
  5. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,410
    Likes Received:
    328
    Not a problem. The KJV has the word "Stranger' which is not so appropriate.

    In the 2011 NIV there is a footnote :"The Greek word for brother or sister (adelphos) refers here to a fellow disciple,whether man or woman."

    As for not using the word rebuke and employing warn instead --not a biggie. I would prefer rebuke or reprove though.


    When is it too much? For instance the HCSB uses more contractions than the 2011 NIV. Should we fault the HCSB for that? It tries to reflect common speech.

    The word in the KJV and 2011 is "defied" not defiled. "Insulted" works quite well.

    It makes it much plainer for a 21st century person. Do you really object to the phrase uphold the holiness of your name"? It's honoring the Lord!
     
  6. Deacon

    Deacon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    6,973
    Likes Received:
    129
    I read through the New Testament that they sent late last year.

    It's easy to read out loud, quite free flowing.

    It's not one I would use regularly; too many unique readings that grate at me.

    Read Jim West's review about it.

    Zwinglius Redivivus Review LINK

    His charge: English versions soften too many vulgar readings - the Common English Bible delivers!

    Yeah - I guess I like a softer reading in places :saint:

    Rob
     
  7. franklinmonroe

    franklinmonroe
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,872
    Likes Received:
    3
    We must sometimes get away from the Authorized Version, if for no other reason, simply because it is so beautiful and so solemn. Beauty exalts, but beauty also lulls. Early associations endear, but they also confuse. Through that beautiful solemnity, the transporting or horrifying realities of which the Book tells may come to us blunted and disarmed, and we may only sigh with tranquil veneration when we ought to be burning with shame, or struck dumb with terror, or carried out of ourselves by ravishing hopes and adorations. ... --C. S. Lewis
    I also just finished the CEB New Testament.
     
    #7 franklinmonroe, Jul 21, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 21, 2011
  8. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,410
    Likes Received:
    328
    Well don't leave us in suspense --what do you think of it? Give us a mini-review Franklin.
     
  9. preacher4truth

    preacher4truth
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,121
    Likes Received:
    0
    Devils advocate here. :laugh:

    Why are some a little upset over genderless Bible translations? (not saying any in this thread are)

    Won't we be, in heaven, neither male nor female?

    Perhaps these versions are helping to advance the Kingdom of God in this world, and some are fighting against it! Perhaps we shouldn't fight against a genderless society either, perhaps such would be a hyper-preteristic "spiritualized" fulfilment of this and we should just submit! :tongue3:

    - Peace!
     
  10. TCGreek

    TCGreek
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Messages:
    7,373
    Likes Received:
    0
    Translations such as the CEB have their readership - simply not for all.
     
  11. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    Baptist4life, does the title that you made for this thread imply that the KJV translators were wrong to have the mark or goal of making earlier English translations better? Are you suggesting that it is wrong to attempt to improve earlier English Bibles?

    The KJV translators wrote: "Truly (good Christian Reader) we never thought from the beginning, that we should need to make a new Translation, nor yet to make of a bad one a good one but to make a good one better, or out of many good ones, one principal good one."
     
  12. Baptist4life

    Baptist4life
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    Messages:
    1,460
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm saying that "NO" I don't think we need another new translation every few years. Sorry if that upsets you.
     
  13. Mexdeaf

    Mexdeaf
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    No one is upset except perhaps you. I asked you before how many times the KJV was revised in it's first few years and never got a reply.
     
  14. Baptist4life

    Baptist4life
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    Messages:
    1,460
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why would you possibly think I'm upset? BTW, I don't know how many times the KJV was revised IN IT'S FIRST FEW YEARS, do you? Anyway, it was still the KJV, not a totally new translation, so your point, whatever it is, doesn't apply.
     
  15. Mexdeaf

    Mexdeaf
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    Not too many translations are "Totally new", not even the KJV. ;)
     
  16. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,410
    Likes Received:
    328
    Yeah,it was a rehash.
     
  17. Amy.G

    Amy.G
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Messages:
    13,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    I wish instead of new translations they would put their money into the quality of the ones they already make. I'm tired of buying bibles that fall apart and have lousy print quality. They weren't cheap ones either.
     
  18. Baptist4life

    Baptist4life
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    Messages:
    1,460
    Likes Received:
    0
    Get a Scofield. Oxford University Press does it right.
     
    #18 Baptist4life, Jul 22, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 22, 2011
  19. Amy.G

    Amy.G
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Messages:
    13,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    The old or the new?
     
  20. preacher4truth

    preacher4truth
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,121
    Likes Received:
    0
    Amy, get an R.L. Allan Bible. They are the best bound Bibles in the world. Had an oxford Bible, noticeable difference between it and the Allan. 1) Oxfords tend to have broken letters, I have one, and it does. You won't probably notice until you see the print quality of an Allan, this I noticed immediately. 2) The binding is unsurpassable, and the Bible lays flat from Genesis to Revelation. You have to see one to believe it, but the quality is much better than even an Oxford. 3) Pages in the Oxford begin to come lose, they are in mine, my ordination Bible, and it cost about 160.00 a long time ago.

    Check out this site for purchasing, and no, they aren't cheap, but it would outlast probably all your bad bindings combined: www.evangelicalbible.com

    This is a review site: http://www.bibledesignblog.com/2009/03/r-l-allans-esv1-esv1t-and-esv1-br-in-highland-goatskin.html


    - Peace
     
    #20 preacher4truth, Jul 23, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 23, 2011

Share This Page

Loading...