REB and ISV 2 available for e-Sword

News to me and perhaps to others:

The Revised English Bible has become available for e-Sword (presumably 9.x series) for a fee. UPDATE: Also available for 8.x series, apparently. See here at e-Sword Users.

Also, the International Standard Version 2.0 has been available for a while, in e-Sword 8.x format. It includes all the Protestant bible but the almost complete Isaiah.

Studying the Apocrypha/Deuterocanonicals/Anagignoskomena

Whew! What a mouthful that title is. I got all the titles from the Wiki page on “Apocrypha”, which links helpfully to “Biblical Apocrypha” and “Deuterocanonical Books”. What you will get out of reading those three articles at its most basic is that one person’s apocrypha, etc. is another person’s holy writ. There is no totally agreed upon selection of Old Testament apocrypha, our subject in this post.

Some brief definitions:
Apocrypha:That hidden away. Originally things were hidden because they were too esoteric for the average joe.  Later the idea became that these things were hidden because they were false, or at least questionable.

Deuterocanonical: of the second canon. The first canon are the universally received books of the Hebrew Tanakh or Protestant Bible. The division was cooked up during the sixteenth century during the debates on Old Testament canon revolving around the Council of Trent.

Anagigoskomena: things read. This fits the classic idea that these books not found in the Hebrew Tanakh are to be read as instruction, devotion, and example, but not to establish doctrine. This is a distinction practiced by some Roman Catholic authorities before the Council of Trent, the Anglican Church, and at least part of the Orthodox church.

Oh, and while we’re on the subject, the Jewish reaction to these eighteen books is interesting. Most of them were never considered part of Jewish scripture, but over the centuries many rabbis have been very interested in some of them (Sirach/Ecclesiasticus in particular). Much of the material might have entered Jewish consciousness more through oral sources as the actual documents, for the details in the various Maccabees and Judith (who somehow along the way got associated with Hanukkah) stories in Jewish literature don’t necessarily match those in the actual books.

Those of you whose religious tradition accepts the importance of these books will have to bear with me now as I make a very short case for Protestant/Evangelical study of them, all of which most people have probably heard before. Nevertheless, in short, the reasons are three:

1. Tradition: Protestantism didn’t spring from nowhere. These books and the debate about them are part of the history and foundation of the various Protestant denominations. Studying them makes one more aware of his roots and his extra-denominational Christian fellows’ viewpoint.

2. History and historical background: 1 Maccabees in particular is a main source of the history of the intertestamental period, and even the mangled history in some of the books point to actual events. Likewise even those apocryphal books which are regarded as historical fiction still serve as background to the thought and culture of the bible, as a number of the books were plainly popular in the Second Temple period, based on discovered remains of copies.

3. Theology:  Religious cultural background, in short. What people were thinking and writing in the times that lead to our New Testament. These books are a distinct Jewish part of that thought process from roughly 300 BC to 100 AD. There’s plenty more books, including a mountain of Greco-Roman ones and what are termed apocrypha and pseudepigraphia to form that background of thought, but these apocrypha are the most familiar in style and content of the lot.

There, having laid out all that background, I can now get to the real point of this post: What’s an easy way to study the “Apocrypha” in the internet age?

1. Try the resources listed on one of my most popular blog posts, about electronic apocrypha and pseudepigraphia, unsurprisingly. Add to that a trip to e-Sword Users where you can get “A Catholic Commentary on Scripture” and “Haydock Catholic Bible Commentary, 1859″ for esword 8.x and 9.x.

2. Buy a bunch of books. Lock up your wallet and credit cards, this gets expensive fast:

a. Apocrypha/Deuterocanonical Editions of the Bible:

1. NRSV with Apocrypha: The standard bearer, with the most complete selection of apocrypha in its day.

2. ESV with Apocrypha: A reader’s edition of the popular conservative formal translation with the addition of the same apocrypha as the NRSV.

3. New English Translation of the Septuagint (NETS): Recent translation of the Greek OT, which includes the standard apocrypha, thus doubly useful for apocryphal study and examining the OT translation the apostles used.

4. The Apocrypha translated by Edgar Goodspeed: One of the first twentieth century modern english translations of most of the apocrypha, and one of the more easy to read.

5. New Living Translation Bible, Catholic Reference Bible: Out of print but still often available used or in bookstore backstock, this is probably the easiest to read translation of the various apocryphal books (together with Today’s English Version, aka the 6.  Good News Translation, Catholic Edition (GNT)), but not officially approved by the Roman catholic hierarchy. My leather-like edition has cross-references, a small concordance, and a useful verse finder for topics in the front.

7. The Parallel Apocrypha: Out of print, pricey but still available used and lurking in bookstore corners. This is your one stop multiple translation source, including Greek, KJV, Douay, Knox, TEV, NRSV, NAB and NJB. It also has very interesting and useful essays about the apocrypha and various churches’ views on them preceding the actual apocrypha that I used to craft the introductory part of this blog.

“Okay”, you say, “but what if I want to do more than read these books? What if I want to actually study them a bit?”

That’s where study bibles come in, along with a couple of one volume bible commentaries:

8.  New Interpreter’s Study Bible (NRSVA): fast becoming the new scholarly standard. Available in several bindings.

9. Harper Collins Study Bible(NRSVA): The gold standard of the Nineties, revised in 2006. Several bindings available.

10. New Oxford Annotated Bible: Multiple editions, including a forthcoming fourth edition any second now. Not only in NRSVA but also an older 11. RSVA version.

12. New Jerusalem Bible: A Roman Catholic translation, noted for its literary style and in this edition, loads of short but very pointed and useful study notes.

13.  Harper Collins Bible Commentary: Another standard updated. Based on the NRSVA’s fuller canon.

14. Oxford Bible Commentary: Large in size as well as scope, this is Oxford’s answer to the Harper Collins and the next competitor:

15. Eerdmans Commentary on the Bible: One of the latest of these scholarly one volume heavyweights, Eerdmans’ claim to uniqueness is that it also adds commentary on 1 Enoch to the apocrypha.

16. New Jerome Commentary: An increasingly dated Roman Catholic standard work that includes much material about specific Roman catholic thought about the bible, along with the more standard scholarly commentary.

“Yes”, you add,”but what if I want to actually study these apocrypha in depth? What then?”

Well, first you cry. See the price for one paperback commentary set here for why. The Anchor Bible commentary series is no better alternate, financially.

However, there is a less than optional alternate. Yes, e-books from the internet for free! They’re outdated,  and they use the KJV or the Revised Version for base text (some original translations are in there, but they’re still bible English, if you know what I mean). But they do really dig into the text and they are free (can’t say that too often).

So without further ado, here are the e-books I found on the Apocrypha for your amusement and edification. (At last! The real reason for this already over-long post!!)

17. The Story of the Apocrypha: Edgar Goodspeed, American translator of the Apocrypha, gives a brief overview of the Apocrypha including previous translations and summaries of each book’s contents. Almost new by archive standards.(1939)

18. Readings from the Apocrypha: A “greatest hits” selection from the various apocryphal books in the KJV translation.(1922)

19. An Introduction to the Books of the Apocrypha: Now we start the serious scholarly tomes. Relatively new for archive books (1935)

20 and 21. The Apocrypha and Pseudepigraphia of the Old Testament edited by R.H. Charles: vol 1: Apocrypha; vol 2: Pseudepigraphia. The same volumes as on my other blog post, but added here individually. A standard work still, I believe.(1913)

22. Lange’s Commentary on Holy Scriptures vol. 15: The Apocrypha: 1873, but it’s huge, with small print, and free.

23.  Holy Bible(KJV) with Revision and Commentary-Apocrypha: vol. 1 and vol. 2: Addition to the Speaker’s Commentary (1888)

24. 1 Maccabees: Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (1897)

25. The Apocrypha: Greek and English in Parallel Columns: For the hardcore researchers and Greek students wanting something less familiar than the New Testament to work with.(1871)

26. The Apocryphal Books of the Old and New Testament: A bonus; this is a brief layman-friendly summary of the apocrypha of both testaments.(1908)

And finally, if you want to read the bible through in a year with the apocrypha included, you can find several useful reading plans for this here, courtesy of Kevin Edgecomb and Esteban Vazquez. You can use the NRSVA or the ESVA for the whole bible, or the NETS for the OT alone.

NET Bible and Kindle: Now Better Together

Originally only available in noteless text form, the Kindle Net Bible is now available with notes and a working hyperlinked table of contents for books and chapters, according to Todd Lingren at bible dot org.

The direct Amazon download page for the Kindle NET Bible with Notes and working links is here.

Now I must go repent of coveting my neighbors’ Kindle.

Pocket Bible of Choice

The winner is this one, which is jacket pocket sized, attractive, and has a font that is quite readable for its size.

Why the NRSV with Apocrypha Compact? If I were being snarky I would say because it has something to offend everyone. Reams of Protestants and Jews don’t like the inclusion of the Apocrypha; Almost no denomination entirely likes the inclusive language and translation choices; Orthodox like the reliance on the Septuagint in the OT, Jews dislike the same. And so on.

But if you want to talk to Roman Catholics and Orthodox, you’ve got to have those pesky Apocrypha in some form. And if you’re doing serious bible study, you need them for the cultural background to the NT and the cross-references.

In short, I see this as the most useful Bible translation in a small size I could find. And did I mention it’s dark blue with silver edges and pretty?

It’s true I have entirely too many copies of NRSV bibles, but outside of finding a good cross referenced edition, this should about do me in that translation. If the NET folk want to get busy and produce a NET with the fuller NRSV apocrypha, I’d gladly adopt that, but that doesn’t seem likely to happen soon. Thus, this is the one I go with.

So while the summer months are questionable, in the fall and winter at least, whenever I have a jacket or overcoat on, this book is going with me from now on. I wonder if  it qualifies as “something sensational to read”?

The Apocalypse One Sign Closer: Rick Mansfield Posts His NET Bible Review

This post title is a bit of a tease, obviously. Rick Mansfield, NT theology doctoral candidate, sunday school teacher, and bible collector and reviewer extraordinaire, promised one of his excellent, comprehensive bible translation and edition reviews (check under “Review” for starters) on the NET Bible going on two years ago. Alas, life intervened and he has only finally posted the review this week.  Go forth and read it here.  It is well up to his usual standard.

I note in one of the comments Rick confesses he would now include both the NET and the NRSV in his own Top Ten translations, if forced –at gunpoint, perhaps?– to compile such a list again. I think my subtle psychic influence has been working on Rick, as those are my two favorite translations. The NET 1st edition for it’s excellent notes and the unrivaled NET/NA27 diglot edition, the NRSV for its uniquely broad idea of “apocrypha” and wide acceptance among Christian denominations.

I note also that Rick neglected to mention one NET edition: the NET Bible Synopsis of the Four Gospels, available from Bible dot org and Amazon. I have a copy soon to arrive and am curious to see what it looks like, especially with the Gospel of Mark coming up next quarter in our Sunday School literature.

Some Bible Study Books for the Original Language Impaired

Basically here are resources for compare and contrast.:

Parallel Bibles:

1. Essential Evangelical Parallel Bible: Two formal translations (NKJV, ESV), a middle translation (NLT 2) and a paraphrase (Message) in one big volume.

2. Today’s Parallel Bible: Two formal translations (KJV, NASB), two dynamic (NIV, NLT)

3. Evangelical Parallel New Testament: Out of print,  but the motherlode of recent translations: NKJV, ESV, HCSB, NIV, TNIV, NLT, NCV, Message

New Testament Textual Criticism:

1. NET Bible: The footnotes cover differences in translation in detail. Problem is the notes range from layman friendly to rather scholarly.

2. New Testament Text and Translation Commentary: Philip Comfort’s one stop eight hundred page discussion of why English translations of the NT often differ.

Apocrypha/Deuterocanonical Editions:

1. NRSV with Apocrypha: The standard bearer, with the most complete selection of apocrypha in its day.

2. ESV with Apocrypha: A reader’s edition of the popular conservative formal translation with the same apocrypha as the NRSV.

3. New English Translation of the Septuagint (NETS): Recent translation of the Greek OT, which includes most of the standard apocrypha, thus doubly useful for apocryphal study and examining the OT translation the apostles used.

Craig Blomberg Stokes the Never-ending Fires…

… of the Bible Wars, that is.

In a post on the Denver Seminary website, Blomberg makes a number of good points many people will agree with. My translation:

1.  Most translators are sincere, their work trustworthy.

2. Bible Wars are a needless drain on believers’ time and emotion. Though, I add, a never ending source of discussion and blog posts, since, as Blomberg points out in his #1, no translation is perfect.

3. Is where Blomberg starts to get into trouble, because there are some people who will insist forever this side of the New Heaven and Earth that literal IS better. Period. Just as some will insist dynamic IS better. Period. Craig’s stated preference (literal as possible, dynamic as necessary) is a good middle ground if you must stick to only one translation. As Blomberg notes, these days it is very easy to buy software (or download free like e-Sword) or parallel bibles  to compare different translations done according to the different schools. One thing will strike you: bible translations are very often very similar, and seem to feed off each other.

4. The last lines here, “…the tradition of translating represented by the NIV-TNIV continues to achieve this balance most consistently. The next best options aren’t even close.” are inevitably what will keep Blomberg in hot water. Blomberg excludes the inclusive language debate in #4, but he’ll never get TNIV opponents to, and the “literal is always better” camp won’t go for it either.

“You may fire when ready, Gridley.”

Completely Non Profound Comments on Bible Translations

Bible blogging would be considerable diminished if there was only one English translation of the Bible available.

The ESV is what I call a “churchy” translation. That is, it retains much of the style of earlier translations people who have been in the church for some years are familiar– and comfortable– with. It’s therefore a good tool that way. Unfortunately, in an increasingly unchurched society, such language likely turns away many people. For that reason, more “idiomatic/dynamic/functional/unchurchy” translations are often better tools for new believers and witnessing(NLT 1, TNIV, yes, even The Message).

Bible translations are, in the end, tools.  You want to read the actual Bible, learn Greek and Hebrew. And a touch of Aramaic (only pronounce it differently from the folk in “The Passion”, please!).

For the rest of us, we can study our bible in translation and feel perfectly okay. Christianity is a religion of translation. It started off in Aramaic and Greek, and very quickly spread around the ancient world in all sorts of languages.

There are very few bible translations available where the translators haven’t worked diligently to get the meaning across accurately. Typically the ones to avoid are from an unorthodox church or two, and individual translators (though there are many good OT and NT translated by individuals– check their qualifications and reviews first).

My only advice is the same you’ve heard from everyone else. If you are studying your Bible, rather than merely reading it, it is very helpful to study several translations, and those from different branches of translation. Thus you would read a “churchy” translation along with an “unchurchy” one, and maybe a third one from a more secular Greek or Hebrew scholar, just to get a very alternate viewpoint.

So have no fear, little flock. St. Peter isn’t waiting at the pearly gates with a Hebrew or Greek  paragraph for people to translate in order to gain admission ( It’s actually Latin!). Nor is the road to Hell paved with any particular Bible translation.

A few relevant links around the web.

On Biblical Lexicons

Because I know Jim West read this comment on his blog and thought, “Holy Deleted! Doesn’t Chuck have a blog of his own?!” And because I haven’t posted anything in a few days. Though, of course, I have commented elsewhere.

So, for the two of you who don’t read Jim West’s blog, (Hi, there Nick Norelli! for one) or the much larger number who see multiple paragraphs and skip on by, here’s my reply. (Brevity not always being the soul of wit. Sometimes it is a lack of something meaningful to say. But when has that ever stopped me?)

“There’s nothing that wrong with Strong’s Numbers, though I prefer Goodrick-Kohlenbarger myself. It’s the lexicon you use them with that’s the problem.

But worst of all is the notion of some sort of direct one to one correspondence between original language words and translation words. Words have connotations and ranges of meaning, some of which even alter over time. (This is one of the problems with the KJV– some of those words didn’t mean what they now mean, so you aren’t necessarily getting what the translators of 1611 or 1769 meant). So a proper lexicon has to discuss not only meaning, not only connotations of meaning, but meaning over time. Yet pretty much any NT Greek resource, for example, before about 1900 is based on classical usage, because it wasn’t until after roughly 1900 that scholars gained access to Koine documents, closer in time and thus usage to the NT than classical Greek works. Strongs just isn’t up to that.

Truth is, there’s simply no short cut, no magic bullet. Use BDAG and HALOT long enough and you’ll grow a list of questions about their accuracy as well. Study Hebrew and Greek and you’ll learn a whole new set of questions about what the Bible means in various places you never considered from translations, even as you settle some problems with translations.

I don’t want to say that studying the Bible in translation is useless, because most people in history have learned the Bible in translation– especially the OT–, but I also don’t want to say learning Greek and Hebrew are useless, simply because most people will never become proficient in those languages. What is required is a healthy dose of modesty about what you know, and a realistic view of the perfection of your sources. I mean, even N.T. Wright admits 1/3 of what he teaches is probably wrong.

A believer obviously wants to know God better, and the two means for doing that are prayer and scripture. These are the tools, weapons, and exercise equipment of believers rolled into one. We must use them, study them, practice with them.

Apologetics-wise, there has never been a time when being acquainted with both the original languages and the transmission of the bible text- textual criticism, boring as so many find it– is more important. The internet has spawned a huge mass of biblical “information” readily available for anyone to misunderstand, misuse, or just plain lie about. If every American classically thinks himself a king in his own home, now every man worldwide thinks himself an expert thanks to a laptop and a wi-fi connection. Dr. Johnson I believe said something to the effect that a writer will use up a whole library to write a single book. Likewise, a Christian will have to know a mass of information from and about the Bible in order to overturn the prejudices and misapprehensions of non-believers.”

NET Bible for e-Sword 9.x

Over at e-Sword Users Todd Lingren of Bible dot org has announced the availability of NET Bible software for e-Sword 9.x. Users of the premium edition with the 60,000+ notes can get the 9.x upgrade by emailing http://store.bible.org/company.asp.  If you don’t own the NET Bible for e-Sword yet, you can purchase it in 8.x and 9.x format, or download the various free and premium versions from this page.

I personally recommend the NET Bible with notes, as it is an excellent first choice stop for any bible study questions I have during my studies. Other works may go more in-depth, but the NET notes routinely get the gist of any problems I encounter. The NET text reads quite well, too.

In other e-Sword 9.x news, Rick Meyers is regularly upgrading the 9.x module conversion utility, which you can find at the bottom of the e-Sword Extras page.