Comments on: A scholar’s top ten Bibles

By: ElShaddai Edwards

ElShaddai Edwards — Fri, 29 Feb 2008 10:51:20 +0000

If we go around hoping not to offend, then we shall never get anything done. I appreciate your posts and enjoy learning about Hebrew Bible traditions – thank you!

I will be sure to read your thoughts on the Jerusalem Bible.

By: Iyov

Iyov — Fri, 29 Feb 2008 01:50:58 +0000

E-S — my apologies for not replying sooner. I’m a bit jealous though — you get almost as many comments on this post as I had on my original post! Indeed, I’m amazed that some people posted here and not on my original post. Oh well, I hope I have not offended anyone.

Well, my answer to your question about the New New Jerusalem Bible, I posted here.

By: ElShaddai Edwards

ElShaddai Edwards — Mon, 25 Feb 2008 10:45:28 +0000

I’ll give Iyov the benefit of the doubt and simply assume that he meant that he selected translations that are widely used in ivory towers, whether for textual or spiritual reasons. Certainly there is a benefit to using the same texts as your peers, if Iyov is that and not a sycophant.

By: Jim Swindle

Jim Swindle — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 13:48:57 +0000

I don’t think influence upon secular and mainstream academics” is a particularly useful measuring stick, since the great majority of secular and mainstream academics are spiritually blind and dead. Would we down-rate the works of Bach because they don’t have much influence on deaf scholars?

Jesus himself said, “Anyone who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him” (John 5:23). We can love and respect and pray for the scholars who reject Jesus, but it’s foolish to value their opinions on spiritual things. Is my position narrow? Yes, but is it narrower than Jesus?

By: wordalone

wordalone — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 05:13:59 +0000

I commented on Iyov’s post but maybe I was a bit harsh in my comment. Due to donominational and theological bias, I said that: “I would not use the “influence upon secular and mainstream academics” as a measuring stick to evaluate whether the quality of a translation.” Maybe I’m narrow minded.

By: ElShaddai Edwards

ElShaddai Edwards — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 01:18:09 +0000

Touché!

By: Peter Kirk

Peter Kirk — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 17:35:30 +0000

If Iyov wants to be consistent in rejecting translations which omit books which large numbers of believers consider canonical and are “necessary for scholarly study”, he should drop from his list NJPS and NETS which omit the New Testament.