P3chrmd Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 [quote]Yahweh doesnt actually appear in the manuscripts as often as the JB renders. Its Adonai = Lord. Although its nice, its incorrect. I cant remember what they call that rendering, not paraphrasing, or literal.[/quote] Well, i don't care what you call it! I think that is one of the perks of the JB or the NJB....they aren't affraid to use the sacred name of God...YAWEAH! That is who he is in ALL his awsomeness....its offensive to Jews to say Yahweah...because they don't believe in speaking it, heck they don't even spell it out all the way! But Yahweah isn't the only reason I like the JB... for another reason it is single column (THANK GOD) I don't like double column bibles! And the rest of the translation is pretty acurate....except for the angels greeting to mary... "Rejoice, so highly favord" I actually like the "Rejoice" better than simply "Hail"...but I don't like the "so highly favord." So I just don't say it like that...whenever Im reading it...for group study or just by myself...I simply say "Rejoice, Full of Grace"! Thats what Mother Angelica does She uses the JB for teaching but just dosen't read it as "so highly favord" she says "full of grace"! But other than that, to me the JB is THE BEST bible translation out there...so poetic and awsome! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3chrmd Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 (edited) [i]Praise for The Jerusalem Bible...[/i] [quote]This is one of those really monumental works...There is just nothing like it in English, and I will not live long enough to see anything like it." ---Father J.L. McKenzie, President, Society of Biblical Literature[/quote] Edited June 29, 2004 by P3chrmd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorphRC Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 [quote name='StColette' date='Jun 29 2004, 04:06 PM'] yep there is a first time for everything [/quote] Lol.. -_- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorphRC Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 [quote]Well, i don't care what you call it! I think that is one of the perks of the JB or the NJB....they aren't affraid to use the sacred name of God...YAWEAH! That is who he is in ALL his awsomeness....its offensive to Jews to say Yahweah...because they don't believe in speaking it, heck they don't even spell it out all the way![/quote] Your right, they dont spell it out Yahweah, coz thats NOT THE NAME! Its YHWH = Modern Hebraic = Yahweh [url="http://www.bible-researcher.com/jerusalem-bible.html"]Bible Researcher - JB[/url] 'An example of this freedom from tradition may be seen in Luke 1:28, in which the Annunciation to Mary is, "Rejoice, so highly favored! The Lord is with you." This is a significant departure from the traditional "Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou among women." The final phrase (from the Vulgate) is omitted, and the traditional rendering, "full of grace," which is so familiar to Catholics through recitation of the Hail Mary, (3) and which has been the basis of Roman Catholic teaching concerning the sinless grace of Mary, is boldly departed from. The traditional rendering is not even mentioned in the footnote on this verse.' The literary quality of this version is admirable. Among the English stylists who worked with the translators was [b]J.R.R. Tolkien[/b], the famous English novelist and literary critic, and his influence is plain to see in many places. Unfortunately, the Hebrew tetragrammaton or divine name (represented as "Lord" in the New Testament) is everywhere rendered "Yahweh," which spoils the literary effect of many passages, especially in the Psalms. WOW Tolkein. Cool [color=blue][i]Unfortunately, the Hebrew tetragrammaton or divine name (represented as "Lord" in the New Testament) is everywhere rendered "Yahweh," which spoils the literary effect of many passages, especially in the Psalms[/i][/color] Told it was translated incorrectly, and also purposely, which is worst of all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3chrmd Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 [quote]Told it was translated incorrectly, and also purposely, which is worst of all. [/quote] Well it dosent bother me! I have always loved it. But I have read other peoples reviews and comments that they wish the JB would have used Adoni instead of Yahweah...but I like it...oh well! JMO I also like how in the book of Job...they use El Shaddi! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3chrmd Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 [quote]'An example of this freedom from tradition may be seen in Luke 1:28, in which the Annunciation to Mary is, "Rejoice, so highly favored! The Lord is with you." This is a significant departure from the traditional "Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou among women." The final phrase (from the Vulgate) is omitted, and the traditional rendering, "full of grace," which is so familiar to Catholics through recitation of the Hail Mary, (3) and which has been the basis of Roman Catholic teaching concerning the sinless grace of Mary, is boldly departed from. The traditional rendering is not even mentioned in the footnote on this verse.'[/quote] Yea...I explained that! I just DONT read it like that I read it "Rejoice, so full of grace" If Mother Angelica can overlook it...so can I! That is the ONLY problem I have with the JB! But other than that...for me anyway, it is the best translation out there...better than the RSV-CE or the DR! But again...thats just little of me's opinion! LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorphRC Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 [quote name='P3chrmd' date='Jun 29 2004, 04:29 PM'] Well it dosent bother me! I have always loved it. But I have read other peoples reviews and comments that they wish the JB would have used Adoni instead of Yahweah...but I like it...oh well! JMO I also like how in the book of Job...they use El Shaddi! [/quote] It looks cool, I must admit, but people need to be warned that isnt what the manuscripts say. Also: This justifies anyone whos says 'Christians have corrupted Scripture' Falls right into their hands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oik Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 DRV all thee way. However, why stop there, just learn latin and read the Vulgate instead. However, I still say, use the NAB. Also, Scott Hahn recommends using several Bible translations as a reference in study. So, I would say, a combo. Use, study, and pray the NAB, DRV, and RSV-CE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3chrmd Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 oh no...don't use the NAB.... I have found that one to be...well... no..but hey if thats the one you choose to use that is cool! The IMPORTANT thing is the look for the imprimitur....regardless of what our opinions are of all these translations...as long as it has that imprimitur...you really can't go wrong... BUT.....just remember *cough* The Jerusalem Bible *cough* sorry...just had to plug my fav. translation in there...you know I couldn't resist! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorphRC Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 The NAB has Impartiur Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3chrmd Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 [quote]The NAB has Impartiur [/quote] Oh yea I know! I was just saying that I don't really care for that translation But thats why I said that everyone should get the bible translation that THEY want...as long as it has approval by the Church then its ok! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorphRC Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Ok. dont know why the Church put 'Impartiur' with the NAB it contradicts mariam doctrine. Luke 1:28 rendering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomProddy Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 [quote name='MorphRC' date='Jun 29 2004, 04:16 PM'] Ok. dont know why the Church put 'Impartiur' with the NAB it contradicts mariam doctrine. Luke 1:28 rendering. [/quote] Maybe that's what the bible is actually meant to say.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorphRC Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 [quote name='RandomProddy' date='Jun 30 2004, 01:40 AM'] Maybe that's what the bible is actually meant to say.. [/quote] Yes thats it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jessinoelw Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Does anyone know if they make a nice, leather-bound RSV-CE with the deuterocanonical books incorporated into the Old Testament? I found a beautiful RSV-CE recently but it was put out by Oxford and the deuterocanonicals were separated. Also, don't get the NRSV-CE. It has inclusive language which really changes the reading in a lot of places. --Jessica Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now