Is the New JPS Tanakh any good?

[Zacharias]

I was getting tired of carrying my Artscroll Tanach to Church because it's like carrying a slab of cement. I found a beautiful NJPS Tanakh on amazon.com. It's sells for $40 Amazon had it for $26. I figured Artscroll may be better but that NJPS one is compact. Why purchase the same copy that I already have just because it's smaller. I ordered the NJPS Tanakh. Hey it's a new Jewish translation that I can compare with my other Bibles.

The next day I went to the library and borrowed the NJPS Study Bible and found some differences between it and my Artscroll.

Deuteronomy 6:4
Hear, O Israel! The L~RD is our G~d, the L~RD alone. (NJPS)
Hear, O Israel: HASHEM is our G~d, HASHEM is the One and Only. (Artscroll)

Okay so saying L~RD instead of HASHEM is a disappointment. It's a beautiful compact Tanakh of $40 value. I can live with that.

Numbers 15:39
That shall be your fringe... (NJPS)
It shall constitute a tzitzis for you... (Artscroll)

Now I'm annoyed. This is a "Jewish" Bible. If I want to read "fringes" instead of "tzitzis" I can use one of my "Christian" Bibles.

Leviticus 21:10
The priest who is exalted above his fellows... (NJPS)
The Kohen who is exalted above his brethren... (Artscroll)

Leviticus 23:34
...On the fifteenth day of the seventh month there shall be the Feast of Booths... (NJPS)
...On the fifteenth day of this seventh month is the Festaval of Succos... (Artscroll)


I thank HaShem that I was able to cancel my order. I now plan to get the student size Artscroll Tanach.

 

[MyLittleWonders]

I have a Tanach put out by JPS ... I like it for various reasons, but also line it up next to the others as another translation to read for information and cross-referencing. I haven't ventured into buying an Artscroll ... how much does the student version cost? I love having a bunch of translations. I use the NASB for most of my "study" but also love reading things from the NIV and NLT for paraphrasing, NKJV for a different spin, the CJB for a Hebraic look at things and the JPS Tanach for feeling like I'm actually reading Jewish Scriptures.

 

[Zacharias]

I have a Tanach put out by JPS ... I like it for various reasons, but also line it up next to the others as another translation to read for information and cross-referencing. I haven't ventured into buying an Artscroll ... how much does the student version cost? I love having a bunch of translations. I use the NASB for most of my "study" but also love reading things from the NIV and NLT for paraphrasing, NKJV for a different spin, the CJB for a Hebraic look at things and the JPS Tanach for feeling like I'm actually reading Jewish Scriptures.

$30 Artscroll Student Edition: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...72857?_encoding=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&v=glance The Artscroll one is an excellent Orthodox Jewish Tanach.

 

[shmuel]

The JPS is a "scholarly" translation while the Artscroll is more influenced by religious views. Of course, both will obscure Messianic passages, but JPS with more scholarship, e.g. Is 9:5.

The JPS rendering of the Shema is correct. The word for "one and only" is "yachid" not "'ehad". 'Echad may be properly translated "alone" in certain contexts, for example Zech 14:9. Both HaShem and LORD are substitutions for the tetragrammaton. Both are conventions.

These works are translations. Translations render one language into another language. "Cohen" is equivalent to the English word "priest". "Cohen" can refer to priests of other religions as well as priests of Israel. A succah is a booth or temporary structure. I don't see the problem.

S

 

[Mikhail]

The JPS is a "scholarly" translation while the Artscroll is more influenced by religious views. Of course, both will obscure Messianic passages, but JPS with more scholarship, e.g. Is 9:5.

The JPS rendering of the Shema is correct. The word for "one and only" is "yachid" not "'ehad". 'Echad may be properly translated "alone" in certain contexts, for example Zech 14:9. Both HaShem and LORD are substitutions for the tetragrammaton. Both are conventions.

These works are translations. Translations render one language into another language. "Cohen" is equivalent to the English word "priest". "Cohen" can refer to priests of other religions as well as priests of Israel. A succah is a booth or temporary structure. I don't see the problem.

S

Personally I use the HRV by James Trimm though it is quite large as it has room for you to wright personal insights and notes around it it is full letter sized pages.
The wording of YHWH and Adonai YHWH the footnotes that give the differences between the Septugaint and Moasoretic Text, verses that do not appear in all greek texts in the Brit ChaHadasha and the use of the Aramaic is moore than worth the weight of carying it. US $75.00 plus freight though.
Shalom,
Mikhail

 

[Zacharias]

The JPS is a "scholarly" translation while the Artscroll is more influenced by religious views. Of course, both will obscure Messianic passages, but JPS with more scholarship, e.g. Is 9:5.

The JPS rendering of the Shema is correct. The word for "one and only" is "yachid" not "'ehad". 'Echad may be properly translated "alone" in certain contexts, for example Zech 14:9. Both HaShem and LORD are substitutions for the tetragrammaton. Both are conventions.

These works are translations. Translations render one language into another language. "Cohen" is equivalent to the English word "priest". "Cohen" can refer to priests of other religions as well as priests of Israel. A succah is a booth or temporary structure. I don't see the problem.

S

The NJPS is gender-neutral which causes some inaccuracies. Though I mainly hold against it the fact that it's Jewish but uses the "Christian" wording instead of the "Jewish" wording.

 

[shmuel]

Though I mainly hold against it the fact that it's Jewish but uses the "Christian" wording instead of the "Jewish" wording.

My concern would be whether the grammar was correct, and whether the translation conveys the meaning found in the original text. But then that's why I learned Hebrew. So I could see which was the better translation. My experience has taught me to favor the NASB.

In ritual reading of the Hebrew Scriptures as well as prayer "Adonai" is substituted for the Tetragrammaton. "Adonai" morphologically signifies "My Lords", thus an English convention of using "LORD" (all caps) does not seem unreasonable or necessarily "Christian" but rather follows an established Jewish practice. There have been diverse Jewish practices at various times and various places. To pick out practices from one time and place and call that Jewish and any other practice "Christian" doesn't seem quite accurate to me. An effect to vocalize the Tetragrammaton would IMHO seem "Christian" in practice.

S

 

[shmuel]

Here is a note from the JPS that addresses some issues regarding translation.

http://www.jhom.com/torah_portion/portion_jps/jps2.html

 

[Zacharias]

My concern would be whether the grammar was correct, and whether the translation conveys the meaning found in the original text. But then that's why I learned Hebrew. So I could see which was the better translation. My experience has taught me to favor the NASB.

In ritual reading of the Hebrew Scriptures as well as prayer "Adonai" is substituted for the Tetragrammaton. "Adonai" morphologically signifies "My Lords", thus an English convention of using "LORD" (all caps) does not seem unreasonable or necessarily "Christian" but rather follows an established Jewish practice. There have been diverse Jewish practices at various times and various places. To pick out practices from one time and place and call that Jewish and any other practice "Christian" doesn't seem quite accurate to me. An effect to vocalize the Tetragrammaton would IMHO seem "Christian" in practice.

S

Except being gender-neutral, I'm not saying that the NJPS is a bad translation.