Add Your support for the typesetting of ecumenical Bible version to a Bible software

[Unix]

I, and some others, think that the 1966, 1967, 1968 Jerusalem Bible Reader's Edition or the 1975 Bible In Order (which has basically the same text but just slightly updated footnotes) should be typeset in the Logos 5 Bible Study Software.

More people who think this, are needed! Go to: Jerusalem Bible or 1975 Bible In Order - Logos Bible Software Forums
... You can register without having to make an initial purchase. Post in that thread about that You also want to see it in Logos.

(Logos is freeware.
Logos may sometimes be more expensive than competing Bible study software, but some software companies pirate Logos books and therefore sell them cheaper. Also, Logos has by far the largest amount of books to offer, and has currently a bit more functionality than any competing sofware.
Logos books have functioning links, so when You click on a reference in a book, that book pops up to the right page and row if You have the book, and if You hover the mouse over a Bible reference the verse is displayed from Your preferred Bible version - this applies also to some other literature beyond the books contained in the Bible.
You can highlight, make notes, and if You have Microsoft Word You can create an own book or a Bible to add to Your local installation of the Logos - so called Personal Books - abbreviated PBB.
You keep all Your books all Your life without needing to pay a subscription fee. And it can be installed on either Windows or Mac.
In case that You want to give Your collection to someone, for example before You die, You can do so through customer service for a fee of $20 a transfer, no matter how many books there are in the transfer. The notes and highlightings are transferred too.)

Also a same kind of request is for the UK English 3rd Edition of the Good News Translation: 1992 GNT-CE 2nd ed. preferably with Anglicized text and 1971 GNB 3rd ed. NT - Logos Bible Software Forums
... the procedure is the same, You post in the thread.

You don't need to make an inital purchase to register and post.

For further discussion, see:
http://www.christianforums.com/f511/
... show last 45 days, latest posts November 7th and 18th.
http://www.christianforums.com/t7653202/
... latest post November 27th.
... feel free to bump these threads!

 

[ebia]

I, and some others, think that the 1966, 1967, 1968 Jerusalem Bible Reader's Edition or the 1975 Bible In Order (which has basically the same text but just slightly updated footnotes) should be typeset in the Logos 5 Bible Study Software.

Given the international copyright issues that already mean you can't buy the Logos NJB in many countries it seems pointless to do the JB without dealing with that issue first.

 

[Unix]

I was/am(? still) offered the NJB for $5 (the Customize if/when I order a new version (5) base-package in Logos) and I didn't/don't want it, I have a print copy which my dad accidentally bought me (he didn't know it was Catholic because I didn't tell him and he resents all things Catholic and he tought it was the JB Standard Edition) and that is enough for the few verses I read from it. I didn't verify whether I can get it since I live outside the U.S., I don't have a clue. You can ask the customer service, ebia!

The NJB is Roman Catholic (it is even though it is not the approved version in the U.S.), but the JB is not.

I don't think You should compare these versions. NJB is a standalone version. So is JB. The only revision of the JB is the recent CTS New Catholic Bible (revises it a bit in the Catholic direction and is used as the official Bible in the U.K. The notes in it are simplified from the NJB).

you can't buy the Logos NJB in many countries

 

[ebia]

I don't agree with your summary, but that's entirely beside the point because my comment was about copyright issues. They come out of the same stable and are both plagued by similar international copyright issues.

The JB is a thoroughly Catholic bible, is the official Mass bible in most of the English speaking world. The NJB is also priduced to be a Catholic bible, based on the JB, but has never been officially adopted anywhere because of its (very limited) inclusive language and use of YHWH.

 

[Mikhael The Archangel]

I don't know how anyone can claim the JB isn't a Catholic Bible. It openly claims to be and is used as such.

 

[Unix]

The first rule of examining English Bible versions, is: Never believe the advertising and the foreword and such.

ebia and Mikhael The Archangel, JB is not especially Catholic, for example it doesn't support the Transubstantation - so that's just one big defect to mention one.

he JB is a thoroughly Catholic bible, is the official Mass bible in most of the English speaking world.

 

[ebia]

The first rule of examining English Bible versions, is: Never believe the advertising and the foreword and such.

ebia and Mikhael The Archangel, JB is not especially Catholic, for example it doesn't support the Transubstantation - so that's just one big defect to mention one.

Being a catholic bible does not mean artificially manipulating the text to support a doctrine.

 

[Unix]

The doctrine is true. There are Bibles that are much more Catholic than JB.

Being a catholic bible does not mean artificially manipulating the text to support a doctrine.

 

[Radagast]

From Wikipedia: The Jerusalem Bible (JB or TJB) is a Roman Catholic translation of the Bible which first was introduced to the English-speaking public in 1966 and published by Darton, Longman & Todd. As a Roman Catholic Bible, it includes the deuterocanonical books along with the sixty-six others included in Protestant Bibles, as well as copious footnotes and introductions.

Excerpts from the Jerusalem Bible are used in the Lectionary for Mass that was approved by the Catholic Bishops' Conference of England and Wales and that is used in most of the English-speaking world. Other translations have also been approved for use in the Liturgy by the English and Welsh bishops.

There are Bibles that are much more Catholic than JB.

Hardly. You can't get more Catholic than "endorsed by Bishops and used in the Mass."

 

[Unix]

Rule #2: Don't trust everything Wikipedia says. I've seen people saying on the internet (no, I don't have any theologically intrested friends nor any mainly English-speaking friends so it's no surprise there's no-one I know personally) that the JB is not Catholic. I would have attached one link here which I found ½ a year ago but unfortunately I immediately lost the link and was unable shortly thereafter to google it.

From Wikipedia: The Jerusalem Bible (JB or TJB) is a Roman Catholic translation of the Bible which first was introduced to the English-speaking public in.

One source, says: http://www.whs.humanists.ca/lib/bible.jerusalem.html
... the version does not serve to promote traditional Roman Catholic doctrine.

 

[Radagast]

Rule #2: Don't trust everything Wikipedia says.

I don't.

I say the JB is a Catholic Bible because that's what all my Catholic friends tell me, and because I trust sources cited by Wikipedia, such as the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. I have checked Catholic lectionaries against the JB and found them identical. I have personally seen the Catholic Nihil obstat and Imprimatur in copies of the JB. All the reference books I've seen say that the JB is a Catholic translation which follows the Catholic La Bible de Jérusalem. Need I go on?

I've seen people saying on the internet

Rule #3: Trust random people on the Internet even less than Wikipedia.

 

[Unix]

That only prooves that they use it. A Roman Catholic may use an ecumenical Bible.

I say the JB is a Catholic Bible because that's what all my Catholic friends tell me, and [...]

 

[Radagast]

That only prooves that they use it. A Roman Catholic may use an ecumenical Bible.

This is in the running for most insane thesis I've seen on CF.

The JB was translated by Catholics for Catholics. It was, for a time, the official Catholic English Bible.

The editor of the JB, Monsignor Alexander Jones, acknowledged the debt to its French Catholic predecessor: This twofold need has long been appreciated, and strong action was taken in France when, under the influence of the late Père Chifflot, Editions du Cerf appealed to the Dominican Biblical School in Jerusalem to meet it. This led to the production of separate fascicules with a full textual critical apparatus for the individual books of the Bible, and with extensive notes. Subsequently, in 1956, a one-volume edition appeared which came to be known popularly as La Bible de Jérusalem: a careful system of cross-reference enabled this edition to include all the information from the fascicules which could be useful to the thoughtful reader or to the student. This present volume is its English equivalent. The introductions and notes are a direct translation from the French, though revised and brought up to date in some places—account being taken of the decisions and general implications of the Second Vatican Council.

I see no point in continuing this discussion.

 

[Unix]

The post on the Logos -forum is NOT about the Jerusalem Bible Standard Edition but about the Reader's Edition which has very brief notes, so I don't understand why You bring up the notes of the Standard Edition as an argument?

I have never wanted the full notes.

I see no point in continuing this discussion.

 

[Unix]

The GNT is officially approved by a lot of denominations, more than any other version that I know of, at least not as broadly. I just wrote a new post about it, have a look: 1992 GNT-CE 2nd ed. preferably with Anglicized text and 1971 GNB 3rd ed. NT - Logos Bible Software Forums
And add Your support for the 2004 3rd Edition UK English Edition.

Also a same kind of request is for the UK English 3rd Edition of the Good News Translation: ...

 

[ebia]

The GNT is officially approved by a lot of denominations, more than any other version that I know of, at least not as broadly. I just wrote a new post about it, have a look: 1992 GNT-CE 2nd ed. preferably with Anglicized text and 1971 GNB 3rd ed. NT - Logos Bible Software Forums
And add Your support for the 2004 3rd Edition UK English Edition.

I can't stand the GNT.

I think you are wasting your time trying to get Logos to implement versions they will neither get a high take up on nor be able to charge a high price for.

 

[ErminlindaRika]

bump

 

[Unix]

Clearly You are not following what happens at Logos, they sell extremely many copies of the 1992 GNT 2nd Edition. I can't imagine how it would be a stretch to offer the 2004 UK English 3rd Edition?

EDIT: In case You wondered can I argue for the JB: NO Bible study software offers the JB. So if Logos starts offering it they get ALL customers who want a searchable, highlightable release of it that You can make notes in and that can show up when You just hover the mouse over Bible references.

trying to get Logos to implement versions they will neither get a high take up on nor be able to charge a high price for.

Previously edited by Unix; 15th December 2012 at 4:44 PM local time. Reason: add about the JB

 

[ebia]

Clearly You are not following what happens at Logos, they sell extremely many copies of the 1992 GNT 2nd Edition. I can't imagine how it would be a stretch to offer the 2004 UK English 3rd Edition?

They "sell" lots of 1992 GNT because they give it away in package deals. The number of people who would want to pay extra for a different edition is small. The market for Anglisised editions is very small anyway, being limited to England and Australia (which is why few translations offer one). Combine those two effects and the market is vanishingly small.

EDIT: In case You wondered can I argue for the JB: NO Bible study software offers the JB. So if Logos starts offering it they get ALL customers who want a searchable, highlightable release of it that You can make notes in and that can show up when You just hover the mouse over it.

The JB has little following in N America. It's limited to England and Australia, etc, and rarely used outside the mass anymore, even by Catholics. However copyright issues already prevent logos selling the NJB in England and Australia and would likewise likely prevent them doing the same for the JB. If you can't sell it in its primary market it's unlikely to he viable.

 

[Unix]

There ARE people who want to see the Jerusalem Bible in Logos, see this new thread in the same forum as the thread I linked to in my OP: SUGGESTION: Why we need the Jerusalem Bible in Logos

I think you are wasting your time trying to get Logos to implement versions