Indeed, the NRSV can be very good at times. But it also makes changes without footnotes. For instance, it will follow an ancient version (for the OT: LXX, Targum, etc.) but not provide any footnote, and for someone who does not read Hebrew, that can be misleading. Very inconsistent.
Also, the NRSV crosses the boundaries of the gender issue at times; but the reader is "warned" in the preface. "The mandates from the Division specified that, in references to men and women, masculine-oriented language should be eliminated as far as this could be done without altering passages that reflect the historical situation of ancient patriarchal culture." Ironically there is even a sexist bent to this kind of guidance, but it is in the other direction so that must mean it is okay.
Upvote
0