Do you see ether RSV/NRSV as being "acceptable" study versions?

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by JesusFan, Dec 13, 2011.

  1. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Is it that they tend to be in liberal study bibles that give both of them "bad names?"

    or are they bad translations in sense of conveying word of God to us today?
     
  2. preachinjesus

    preachinjesus
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,406
    Likes Received:
    99
    Several journals I read and submit things to use the NRSV as their default text. Its a fine translation, I don't use it much (I hate the conversations I have to have and frankly can alleviate my frustrations by using another translation.)

    If you're looking to do study utilizing several texts like NIV(84), NLT, ESV, NASB, KJV, and such I'd include it. The scholarship at the time fo the translation was rather good.
     
  3. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    heard that the NRSV is the standard version used in "Theology", amomg "Bible scholars"....

    Think main problem with it is that it got stuck as the text in critical/liberal" study bibles, also it was one the first to go the gender inclusive route big time!
     
  4. jaigner

    jaigner
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2009
    Messages:
    2,274
    Likes Received:
    0
    Fundamentalists reacted negatively to the RSV (a good translation for its time), and much of that has carried over to the NRSV. Anyone suggesting it's not reliable is, frankly, not educated on it and is listening to some fundamentalist wackos who don't like it.

    It's only gender inclusive when the original languages are, as well. There is no reason to say "man" when the text would indicate "humanity."
     
  5. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    So the NRSV would tilt towards Liberal, while the NIV 2011 tilt towards more consrative as regards to translations and gender renderings?
     
  6. preachinjesus

    preachinjesus
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,406
    Likes Received:
    99
    How did you get this conclusion from what jaigner said?

    Anybody saying the NRSV "tilts" liberal (not Liberal) would have the burden of proof on themselves. It's a decent translation, though the overwhelming sentiment of the translation committee would have been moderate to leftist in theology. The actual text, IMHO, shows little of this.
     
  7. jaigner

    jaigner
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2009
    Messages:
    2,274
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sweet mercy, no. Throw out the "liberal" and "conservative" words. They are not appropriate to use for Bible translations. The NRSV is no more "liberal" than the NIV.
     
  8. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    why is it then that conservative Christians have reacted against it as being a good version to use for Bible study?

    read reviews that ranged from gpong overboard on being gender inclusive, to not having a solid view on messianic texts within the OT?
     
  9. go2church

    go2church
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2002
    Messages:
    4,304
    Likes Received:
    6
    NRSV is a good translation and I would recommend it. The text isn't liberal or conservative, what you should be concerned with is the notes of the editors of whatever study bible you are looking at. Those most certainly can be tilted left or right.

    Good NRSV study bible - the Harper Study Bible
     
  10. jaigner

    jaigner
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2009
    Messages:
    2,274
    Likes Received:
    0
    You really should include subjects in you sentence. Do you mean "I read reviews" or "I have read" or "They read." You're barely intelligible sometimes.

    These "conservative" Christians you have read or spoken to are simply mistaken or have an agenda against any hint of gender inclusiveness. Any reputable evangelical scholar will tell you it's a find translation.
     
  11. Deacon

    Deacon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    6,970
    Likes Received:
    128
    The perception of "liberal" perhaps is due to the untraditional way the version translates texts such as Isaiah 7:14.

    Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Look, the young woman is with child and shall bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel.
    Isaiah 7:14 (NRSV)

    Rob
     
  12. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    Even the stalwart NASBU has Or: maiden in the footnote.
     
  13. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    isn't the problem here in this translation though that the hebrew word that we are translating has the conotation of the young woman was to be seen in that culture as also being assumed to be a virgin?

    that its still best and properto render it as a Virgin?

    Also, isn't this to be a direct prediction/prophecy of the messiah to come?

    So translating "young woman" really negates OT prophetic element/supernatural understandings
     
  14. jaigner

    jaigner
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2009
    Messages:
    2,274
    Likes Received:
    0

    Oh sweet mercy. I'm going to go bang my head on a brick wall now.
     
  15. Deacon

    Deacon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    6,970
    Likes Received:
    128
    Not going to argue for one or antoher - plenty of post threads to look at but the real question here is:

    Did Isaiah’s prophecy have a double fulfillment, one in his time and a second, later messianic fulfillment?

    Some think a correct translation of the word Isaiah used would allow both options, as it would have in Isaiah’s time.

    Rob
     
  16. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    You do realise they denied the prophetic element of the OT, as they did not see the Messiah here?
     
  17. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Think easiest way to answer this qiestion would be that there was an immediate fulfillment with birth of son in that time period of the prophet, so young woman would fit there, but future fulfillment with mary and Messiah jesus, so MUST use the virgin meaning there!
     

Share This Page

Loading...