Nrsv

[Biblicist]

It's notorious for being the liberal's Bible and went further than the RSV and introduced gender neutral language that goes further than others e.g NIV11. It's one of the reasons the ESV came about, those who liked the RSV wanted a conservative revision that didn't have gender neutral language and fixed areas such as in Isaiah with virgin replacing young woman. I wouldn't recommend it for anything other than a reference.

It has often been said that the earlier RSV did the future English translations a great favour in that it absorbed some of the flack that could have come their way. I agree that for either right or wrong that the RSV was certainly deemed to be the 'liberals' Bible; the NRSV has certainly become a bit more mainstream but its egalitarian language will probably keep it as a niche version.

 

[hedrick]

Is there a version of the NSRV that doesn't have the apocrypha?

Yes. The major Bible publishers have copies with and without.

 

[Biblicist]

Yes. The major Bible publishers have copies with and without.

Many faithful KJV users would undoubtedly be horrified when they eventually discover that the original KJV (1611) included the Apocrypha for about its first 50 years.

 

[James Is Back]

Many faithful KJV users would undoubtedly be horrified when they eventually discover that the original KJV (1611) included the Apocrypha for about its first 50 years.

Yep but that's a different discussion and we don't want the KJVO people coming here and ruining the thread.

 

[Biblicist]

Yep but that's a different discussion and we don't want the KJVO people coming here and ruining the thread.

Good point!

 

[ByTheSpirit]

Yep but that's a different discussion and we don't want the KJVO people coming here and ruining the thread.

Already tried once... the funny thing about this is some of them would undoubtedly take one of three courses in such a discussion:

a) deny such a thing happened vehemently
b) only claim a later version of the KJV as divinely inspired
c) claim the Apochrypha must be inspired too as it was included in the KJV

 

[caspianrex]

OK, I know this is an old thread, but I couldn't help chuckling when I read the comment from geetrue, saying,"Okay, I thought you meant the authorized KJV version not the amazon ones, so sorry, but still a waste of time to read unless your bored with the parts written in red that is." So much misunderstanding of Bible translation history and practice, and of the KJV's history. As if there were some special "unauthorized" KJV...you know, the one with the extra books that was the ORIGINAL printing of the KJV.