Bibles come and bibles go ....

[Xeno.of.athens]

I was thinking this morning, before breakfast, that some of the modern bibles that I like most are now rather hard to get, or if not hard to get they are clearly bibles of the past. This was a melancholy thought.

I like the Good News Bible
I like the Revised Standard Version
I like the Jerusalem Bible

But they are all bibles of the past. I imagine the same can be said of many other bibles, the 1977 NASB, the 1995 NASB, the Living Bible, The Message, ... and more.

Yet some old bibles remain popular, the KJV and the Douay Rheims Bible, remain popular.

What's the cause? Is it commercialism. All the ones I liked are copyright, but the old bibles are not. Perhaps it is prices, and maybe levels of trust.

How do you see it?

 

[bling]

Manuscripts are found to help new translators and the English language changes.

 

[Philip_B]

I grow old, I grow old, I shall wear the bottoms of my trousers rolled ...

I have lived with the NRSV for the past 40 years or thereabouts I guess, and that is the normative translation used in our Diocese. It has solid scholarship and is well suited to liturgical reading.

 

[sandman]

I was thinking this morning, before breakfast, that some of the modern bibles that I like most are now rather hard to get, or if not hard to get they are clearly bibles of the past. This was a melancholy thought.

I like the Good News Bible
I like the Revised Standard Version
I like the Jerusalem Bible

But they are all bibles of the past. I imagine the same can be said of many other bibles, the 1977 NASB, the 1995 NASB, the Living Bible, The Message, ... and more.

Yet some old bibles remain popular, the KJV and the Douay Rheims Bible, remain popular.

What's the cause? Is it commercialism. All the ones I liked are copyright, but the old bibles are not. Perhaps it is prices, and maybe levels of trust.

How do you see it?

I use the KJV only because it’s the one I started out with ….I am so use to it that it is difficult when someone quotes from a modern version, to understand. Actually …. I think the KJV is the only one that is not copyrighted.

I am not a KJ only person, and I do use several different versions in research…. but they all have flaws, although the more modern version can and do loose the efficacy of meanings by trying to make it fit with today’s vernacular…..and since words mean thing ….. and God communicated with words whose meanings related to the times when they were written…. and that meaning can get lost in translation when trying to modernize.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

I think the KJV is the only one that is not copyrighted.

Quite a few are not copyright any more, the American Standard Version, the Revised Version, the Douay Rheims Bible are out of copyright. One called the Catholic Public Domain Bible is also not copyright.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Manuscripts are found to help new translators and the English language changes.

True.

But still, why so many and all copyright ... still, I guess publishers need profits, and some bibles are still available at affordable prices.

 

[peaceful-forest]

True.

But still, why so many and all copyright ... still, I guess publishers need profits, and some bibles are still available at affordable prices.

I think the copyright thing has to do with copyright laws.

For example, the King James Version is considered "Public Domain" because of its age.

In my opinion, the Bible doesn't need to be copyrighted. The Bible is God's word, not man's.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

In my opinion, the Bible doesn't need to be copyrighted. The Bible is God's word, not man's.

I think you are right but some folk will distort a bible by changing words or adding their own, one need only look at the "New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures" that the Jehovah's Witnesses organisation publishes to see an example of adding and taking away words to fit a bible to one's religious perspective. Maybe publishers want to protect the integrity of the text? It's hard to be sure.

 

[YeshuaFollower]

I was thinking this morning, before breakfast, that some of the modern bibles that I like most are now rather hard to get, or if not hard to get they are clearly bibles of the past. This was a melancholy thought.

I like the Good News Bible
I like the Revised Standard Version
I like the Jerusalem Bible

But they are all bibles of the past. I imagine the same can be said of many other bibles, the 1977 NASB, the 1995 NASB, the Living Bible, The Message, ... and more.

Yet some old bibles remain popular, the KJV and the Douay Rheims Bible, remain popular.

What's the cause? Is it commercialism. All the ones I liked are copyright, but the old bibles are not. Perhaps it is prices, and maybe levels of trust.

How do you see it?

i think it might be because KJV is the closest to the original texts, when i started to study the bible, a long time ago I went to a library and verified what versions in english and french were the closest to the original texts in english it was the KJV or NKJV in french it was the louis second version. I have the crampon in french and it is very nice, the french of this version is sublime and transpires the true devotion of the translator. it is my favorite of all.

I also noted then that many texts in the OT and NT were written under divine inspiration, you can see it as a constant style in the texts the way it was written. It is more much more apparent in the OT however

Blessings,

Jff

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

i think it might be because KJV is the closest to the original texts, when i started to study the bible, a long time ago I went to a library and verified what versions in english and french were the closest to the original texts in english it was the KJV or NKJV in french it was the louis second version. I have the crampon in french and it is very nice, the french of this version is sublime and transpires the true devotion of the translator. it is my favorite of all.

I also noted then that many texts in the OT and NT were written under divine inspiration, you can see it as a constant style in the texts the way it was written. It is more much more apparent in the OT however

Blessings,

Jff

I am quite fond of the Latin Vulgate, and its English translations - the Douay Rheims and the Catholic Public Domain Bible. I have a good number of bibles based on the Masoretic text for the old testament and various critical texts for the new testament. I also have the KJV (with deuterocanonical books), and some without the Deuterocanon. Naturally, I prefer those with the Deuterocanon.

 

[Ceallaigh]

My guess is Bible sales have gone down overall because you can get most versions on your phone. You can read most versions anywhere, all on something you always carry with you.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

My guess is Bible sales have gone down overall because you can get most versions on your phone. You can read most versions anywhere, all on something you always carry with you.

very true, I hadn't given that much thought even though I have such on my phone. I am truly elderly now, I need to grumble about the youth of today and their phones!

 

[bling]

True.

But still, why so many and all copyright ... still, I guess publishers need profits, and some bibles are still available at affordable prices.

Money drives a lot of actions.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

I was thinking this morning, before breakfast, that some of the modern bibles that I like most are now rather hard to get, or if not hard to get they are clearly bibles of the past. This was a melancholy thought.

I like the Good News Bible
I like the Revised Standard Version
I like the Jerusalem Bible

But they are all bibles of the past. I imagine the same can be said of many other bibles, the 1977 NASB, the 1995 NASB, the Living Bible, The Message, ... and more.

Yet some old bibles remain popular, the KJV and the Douay Rheims Bible, remain popular.

What's the cause? Is it commercialism. All the ones I liked are copyright, but the old bibles are not. Perhaps it is prices, and maybe levels of trust.

How do you see it?

All three are readily available on Amazon!
Blessings

 

[Yekcidmij]

I was thinking this morning, before breakfast, that some of the modern bibles that I like most are now rather hard to get, or if not hard to get they are clearly bibles of the past. This was a melancholy thought.

I like the Good News Bible
I like the Revised Standard Version
I like the Jerusalem Bible

But they are all bibles of the past. I imagine the same can be said of many other bibles, the 1977 NASB, the 1995 NASB, the Living Bible, The Message, ... and more.

Yet some old bibles remain popular, the KJV and the Douay Rheims Bible, remain popular.

What's the cause? Is it commercialism. All the ones I liked are copyright, but the old bibles are not. Perhaps it is prices, and maybe levels of trust.

How do you see it?

To me it depends first and foremost what the base text is. Today it should be something like BHS 5/BHQ + NA28 along with input/considerations of the SP, LXX, and Vulgate. Of course, there are versions of the SP, Vulgate and LXX available in English, so could just get those seperate.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

To me it depends first and foremost what the base text is. Today it should be something like BHS 5/BHQ + NA28 along with input/considerations of the SP, LXX, and Vulgate. Of course, there are versions of the SP, Vulgate and LXX available in English, so could just get those seperate.

sounds okay, LXX and vulgate will help with the Deuterocanon.

 

[hedrick]

Good News is still easily available. It was revised in 1990. I still like it for middle school and younger. A possible replacement is the Common English Bible.

RSV turned into NRSVue. Unless you object to gender neutral language, I see no reason to stick with RSV.

Jerusalem has had several revisions, the latest in 2018. I don’t have the 2018, so I don’t know whether it’s a reasonable continuation. Wikipedia says that in 2008 it was decided in Rome not to use Yahweh in worship. That causes problems for Jerusalem.

The one whose disappearance bothers me is the New English. It was revised into the Revised English Bible, but that seems to have mostly disappeared. NAB is a perfectly reasonable Catholic translation, but it’s sort of uninteresting compared with Jerusalem.

 

[Yekcidmij]

sounds okay, LXX and vulgate will help with the Deuterocanon.

I know NRSV and ESV (I have both) have the deuterocanon; or in the case of the ESV, they print a version with the deuterocanon....not sure what their text base is for those. I assume it's the LXX, but I'm not sure.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Good News is still easily available. It was revised in 1990. I still like it for middle school and younger. A possible replacement is the Common English Bible.

RSV turned into NRSVue. Unless you object to gender neutral language, I see no reason to stick with RSV.

Jerusalem has had several revisions, the latest in 2018. I don’t have the 2018, so I don’t know whether it’s a reasonable continuation. Wikipedia says that in 2008 it was decided in Rome not to use Yahweh in worship. That causes problems for Jerusalem.

The one whose disappearance bothers me is the New English. It was revised into the Revised English Bible, but that seems to have mostly disappeared. NAB is a perfectly reasonable Catholic translation, but it’s sort of uninteresting compared with Jerusalem.

I have the Revised New Jerusalem Bible, the 2018 revision of the Jerusalem Bible. It is okay. And I know that the Good News Translation is available, being the revision of the Good News Bible. It too is okay, but I preferred the GNB. One can get the RSV Catholic Edition still, and it is a fine translation but it is hard to get in a typical bookstore. Some old printings of the New English Bible are still around, and the Revised English Bible, its revision, is around but quite hard to find. The Contemporary English Version is also still around but a bit rare.

I am a little bit Gender Neutral Language averse, not much, not the NRSV and NRSVue are a little too clumsy with their gender neutral choices.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

I know NRSV and ESV (I have both) have the deuterocanon; or in the case of the ESV, they print a version with the deuterocanon....not sure what their text base is for those. I assume it's the LXX, but I'm not sure.

Yes, both do. I have the ESV with Deuterocanon. It is fairly good, and but for the strong "evangelical" bias in word choices and some choices in translation too it is a fine translation.