Rick Mansfield noted a few weeks ago that the translation itself was completed, while Will at Anwoth confirmed an October 2009 publishing date.

From the sample text provided by WORDsearch, here are the differences from the opening chapter of Genesis between the 1st (2004) and 2nd Edition texts:

As you can see, with just one change in 31 verses (Gen 1:1-31), the revision appears limited in scope. In this case, the text in v.26 has been edited from “animals” to “livestock”, presumably to be in concordance with v.25.

Robert reports a change in 1 Timothy 1, but notes that overall the changes were less significant than he’d hoped.

Update:

For more info and commentary on the HCSB 2nd Edition, check out the following links:

• HCSB 2nd Edition Released by WORDsearch (with Strong’s coding!)
• The HCSB 2nd Edition and the Tetragrammaton
• HCSB Second Edition
• HCSB 2nd Edition - My personal gripes
• HCSB 2nd Edition Ephesians Review

1. The previously noted “Methodist Bible” now has a name:  the Common English Bible, presumbably CEB for short. (HT: Gary Zimmerli)
2. Subversive Influence has posted a review and recommendation for The Voice translation (HT: Eddie Arthur)

First, on This Lamp, Rick includes a brief look at the new NRSV Notetaker’s Bible. This new Bible has a single-column text setting and ruled 2″ outside margins for notes. [sample pages] According to the promo text on CBD’s website, this new edition from Oxford will be available in hardcover, deluxe cloth and bonded leather. The paperback size is 8″x6¼”, while the hardback is a little taller (9″x6¼”) to accommodate the cover. The NRSV Notetaker’s Bible is to be released in February 2009.

Second, a commenter on TC’s New Leaven blog noted the impending release of a new TNIV Bible in Zondervan’s NoteWorthy Collection. Zondervan is taking a slightly different approach by inserting a completely blank page after every page in the Bible. So you have a double-column text page on the left and a blank page for notes on the right. [sample pages] Other features include an inside pocket for notes and an elastic band to keep the cover closed. According to Zondervan, this will be available in black bonded leather, as with the standard version of the TNIV Reference Bible. The paper size is 6¼”x7¼”, almost square like the TNIV² or the NRSV XL editions. The TNIV NoteWorthy is to be released in May 2009.

Finally, the HCSB is also available in a notetaking format. The HCSB Notetaker’s Bible is currently available in separate editions for Men (brown hardback) and Women (mauve/olive green hardback), continuing B&H’s maddening trend of niche publishing. Compared to the NRSV and TNIV editions above, B&H also drops the ball in design aesthetics, simply reproducing the layout of their reference Bibles (double column text with center-column cross references) with ruled lines on the outside and above the text - see the Excerpt pages on CBD’s site. The HCSB Notetaker checks in at 9¼”x7¼”, the largest of all three editions considered here.

Of all three, I like Oxford’s approach with the NRSV the best, especially the single-column text, though I share Rick’s hesitation about the ruled lines. Better, I think, to have just left the space blank for more freeform notes. The TNIV provides more than adequate freeform space “to journal, take notes or sketch”, as their marketing states. This is really quite attractive too and I think this could be a more successful edition than the trim NT edition that Zondervan had previously released, which, at just over 3″ wide, felt tight and awkward just holding it in my hands, much less writing actual notes. Just from the interior page comps, the HCSB looks like a disappointment in aesthetic appeal - I can’t help but feel this was rushed to market to have something in the catalog against competition like the ESV Journaling Bible et al. Hopefully a more thoughtful design is in the works for the promised HCSB “Second Edition” text in 2009.

Finally, I can’t help but think that the plain wide-margin Bible has gone the way of the dodo, replaced by these journaling concept editions. That’s too bad, in my opinion, but with an appeal to publishers to invest in great layout aesthetics, perhaps we can have our cake and eat it too.

I’m familiar with bonded leather, genuine leather, calfskin, goatskin and various other binding styles, but had not seen pigskin before. I think that if you say “pigskin” to most Americans, the first response would be “football!”, even though most footballs are made with cow leather or synthetic materials nowadays.

On first blush, this feels very similar to the stiff “genuine leather” used on my NASB from Foundation Publications. It is not as immediately limp as my Oxford REB Study Bible, but then again it is new and has not been broken in at all. It has a bit more grain than my bonded leather NASB, but lest I’m branded as a leather heretic for comparing the two, I thought I’d dig a little deeper.

The first stop for most Bible leather and binding questions is Mark Bertrand’s “Bible Design and Binding” blog. A search for “pigskin” turned up a few hits, including this one discussing old and new editions of the REB†. In the comments, Mark notes that:

Jerry, the one I have is sewn and bound in Berkshire leather, which according to Cambridge is “a term for pigskin — the material most commonly used in bookbinding when ‘genuine leather’ is the description used.”

For an additional viewpoint, Mechling Bookbindery has the following note in their online glossary of terms:

COWHIDE AND PIGSKIN is from older animals with larger and thicker skins. The skin is skivered (sliced) into thinner layers and embossed with grain pattern and usually finished with a pigment and gloss coating. These skins have a hard finish and are somewhat stiff. Cowhide is an economical alternative to goatskin or calf but not a good choice where soft feel and appearance is important.

Further, Leonard’s Book Restoration notes that:

One of the leathers we use most often at Leonard’s is pigskin, because it’s very strong, but still affordable.  Natural pigskin looks a lot like human skin.  Once it’s dyed purple or red, it really looks much better. [Pigskin is] also known as Berkshire, which is commonly used on Bibles in natural and pressed grains. In many cases, Bibles which say “genuine leather” are covered with pigskin.

So there seems to be general agreement that “pigskin” is “Berkshire leather” is “genuine leather” and that it is the most economical “real leather” option available for book binding. It’s interesting that Cambridge produced this same edition with the term “Berkshire leather” (not calfskin, as Amazon describes) while Oxford used “pigskin leather”. I guess it’s all marketing in the end.

* * * * *

†For the record, the edition I now have was jointly published by Oxford/Cambridge in 1989 (the ISBN in the first paragraph above is an Oxford number) and resembles the older example discussed on Mark’s blog, though mine is burgundy without any titling on the front and came in a cardboard slipcover. I would also echo the comment to that post that the ISBNs listed on the title page match those of the equivalent REB hardback edition - the ISBN on the slipcover (listed above) is the unique number for the pigskin binding.

* * * * *

Update: a few photos now included. I apologize for the poor lighting conditions.

Certainly with a “Buy It Now” price of $19,500 USD, one might expect it to be authentic? Though that hardly compares with the “BIN” of $119,000 USD that the seller is asking for a First Edition 1611 King James…

Be sure to check out the PDF link to read the introductory material from the ESV - as with all of these new study Bibles, there is a significant amount of background scholarship to be gleaned before you even get to the study notes - in this case, seven pages of material, including sections on author and title, date, theme and purpose, occasion and background, key themes, style, influence, history of salvation summary, literary features, and outline.

Not reproducing the introductions as part of a review makes excerpting the study notes a little like comparing fish out of water, but it’s still worth getting a feel for the different approaches. As can be seen below, the ESV Study Bible is much closer in tone, approach and length to the New Oxford Annotated (NRSV) and Oxford Study Bible (REB) that I previously compared the NLT to.

Ezekiel 1:1-3 - Comparison of NLT and ESV study Bibles

For God sent Jesus to take the punishment for our sins and to satisfy God’s anger against us.

– but still fights “against the idea of using a dynamic equivalent translation as [his] main Bible” and “always wonders if more interpreting is going on than with a more literal approach.”

Jeff’s post prompted me to revisit a thought that started to rumble around in my brain the past week or so - namely the idea that when functional translations become accepted as every bit authoritative as formal translations, the Bible translation market is going to break in two directions for the general reader: [1] modestly formal translations like the NRSV, ESV and HCSB for those who want (or are directed) to study the context of the original languages and receivers, and [2] idiomatic functional translations like the NLT for those who want to use the Bible as a living document in their maturing lives.

Traditionally, Bibles have been sold as either literal translations, paraphrases or median translations. The final selling point of median translations always seems to be around “the Bible in today’s language” - no different than what a true functional translation offers. It seems to me that median translation offers buyers a way out in trying to decide between more literal texts and freer language options. To date, the latter have done nothing to assuage the fears, such as those expressed by Jeff above, that somehow the accuracy of the Bible has been sacrificed and that it is necessary to learn Biblish (with words like “propitiation”) to really understand what God says to Christians.

However, as more accurate functional translations (like the NLT, which has been through two revisions) emerge on bookshelves, I’m beginning to think that the median fence may not be so attractive a marketplace to be.

The final stake in the heart of median translation would be a functional translation with a reading level geared toward native English-speaking adults. According to ChristianBook.com, the NLT has a 6th grade reading level. Median translations like the NIV and HCSB are written at a 7th or 8th grade level, while formal translations speak on a level understood by high school and older audiences. If a modern evangelical publisher were to produce a functional translation that doesn’t feel like it is speaking down to an adult Christian, median translation would become obsolete.

Finally, please note that I said “the general reader” at the start of this. I realize that there are academics, hands-on original language students and other niche market audiences that will always require specialized texts, but I’d find it hard to believe that these groups, even added all together, purchase more Bibles than the unwashed masses.

In the interim, Bryan Lilly and Rick Mansfield published some detailed “first looks” overviews, while Nick Norelli took us on an in-depth look at the NLTSB’s various study features. There have been a host of other comments and reviews, which Jeff has summarized here.

So rather than rehash ground that has been well-traveled already, I thought I’d enter the comparison arena. One of the big marketing points of the NLTSB has been its claim to be focused on historical context rather than specific doctrinal systems, topical subject matter, personal life keys, literary forms analysis or study methodologies. Historical-critical study Bibles are nothing new, certainly this is ground well traveled by the Oxford Annotated Bible, HarperCollins and even the Oxford Study Bible (REB) I tend to refer to.

In a comment to the above linked post, NLTSB editor Sean Harrison wrote:

[...] you are right that there are some similarities in tone between the NLT Study Bible and the Oxford and HarperCollins Study Bibles. I included those Bibles in my initial review and wanted to achieve a similar tonal level, but within an explicitly evangelical framework (Scripture as divinely inspired, Scripture as historically accurate, etc.).

Since I don’t have an Oxford Annotated or a HarperCollins for fingertip reference, I’m going to reach back to my review of the Oxford Study Bible and use the NOAB notes quoted there from a review published on This Lamp last year. This will limit to some extent the text used in comparison (Ezekiel 1:1-3), but I believe that even this small excerpt will be enough to illustrate the essential approach of the NLTSB.

Ezekiel 1:1-3 - Comparison of three study Bibles

In their marketing, Tyndale claims that reading the NLTSB is “like being led through Scripture by a caring Bible teacher.” From the notes reproduced above, I would further suggest that reading the NLTSB is like listening firsthand to that lecture or discussion, while reading the NOAB or OSB is like reviewing the notes that you took from that lecture. All cover similar ground, but the NLTSB has a more conversational narrative than the latter editions’ more abbreviated annotations.

In rereading the NOAB review on This Lamp, I was struck by the similar description that the reviewer, “Larry”, used for the New Interpreter’s Study Bible (NISB):

This passage illustrates well the strengths and weaknesses of the NISB. On the one hand, the annotations are written in a much more conversational style than those of the NOAB or the HSB. On the positive side, one can simply read this study Bible as if it were the transcript of a lecture of a friendly instructor. But on the other hand [...] this is clearly a Christian reading of the Bible – seeking to answer the question “what is the relevance of this passage to us today?”

The NLTSB clearly does not give us a Christian reading in the study notes, nor does it address any modern application of the text to life today. These are good things. That said, I should note that the NLTSB is still a Christian study Bible; the final paragraph or two of the Meaning and Message section of each book’s introduction addresses fulfillment by/in Jesus Christ. I would have preferred that the Christian extrapolations be put it in their own section of the introductory materials, apart from the original “meaning and message”, but their presence is consistent with Sean Harrison’s rejoinder that the NLTSB was created with “an explicitly evangelical framework.”

Much of the discussion of dates in the OSB is covered in the NLTSB’s introductory material. By shifting alternate or disputed elements such as timelines and authorship out of the study notes, the editors have tightened up the study notes narrative and provided a much more continuous thread. Several times in looking at the NLTSB, not just at this passage, I caught myself reading the notes for page after page - this caused me to reflect on an essential difference between the NLTSB and the Oxford editions.

Whereas the latter really are annotated notes to the text, the NLTSB feels more like a commentary, more in line with my Daily Study Bible editions from William Barclay. Yes, the notes are inline with the text, but they really form their own narrative to some degree and can be read separately if so desired. The key is that the NLTSB appears to be a balanced “commentary”, not tipped in a doctrinal bias, but evenhandedly providing the contextual story of the scripture.

As someone who typically does not *use* study Bibles on a regular basis, I enjoyed this approach and found it more engaging than the jottings of the Oxfords, which often leave you wanting more or trying to flesh out a comment. In my next NLTSB review, I will compare it to another commentary-style study Bible, namely the Jewish Study Bible featuring the NJPS Tanakh translation.

Finally, I would be remiss if I did not point out a minor error in the NLTSB’s notes. In the first section, the notes describe the “call narrative” that gives legitimacy to the prophet’s words. The analogy is used of an musical overture. However, I must point out that symphonies do not have overtures; I must assume that the notes author meant that “just as the overture to a symphony an opera introduces the musical motifs that form the basis for the composition that follows.” Certainly there are examples of works where the first movement of a symphony contains the motivic seeds for the remaining movements, but these are never called “overture”. Or perhaps the author was thinking of a self-contained symphonic poem, but that is neither overture nor symphony. Change a word or two and this note will be acceptable to music majors everywhere!

• No surprise, the biggest layout was taken by the NIV, with 4 display units along the back wall, which is actually what your eye sees first when entering that section of the store. They’ve added very colorful and eye-catching graphic signage above each wall display unit with the translation abbreviation so you can easily find a specific translation area.
• Surprise, surprise, the second largest layout was for the NLT, with 3 display units. They’d moved the NLT from the back wall (where the NIV is now) to the left side wall (high visibility too), kicking out the ESV. That doesn’t include the current “write to the military” promotional area out on the main floor.
• The ESV section had been moved to one of the center islands (where the NIV used to be), meaning you have to go looking at the shelves themselves to find it. But more surprising is that it had only one display unit, sandwiched in between the NASB and HCSB, each also with one unit. I’ll be calling this display area “Literal Lane” from now on…
• I’m shocked that the HCSB was given so much display space. They’ve had them tucked into a corner previously and inventory was hit or miss. That said, it was mostly full of Apologetics Study Bibles and Illustrated Study Bibles, with a few of the themed pocket Bibles as well. None of the “standard” editions…
• The TNIV had one full display unit next to the NIV, giving it higher visibility than the ESV, though the inventory wasn’t much to take note of.
• The Message had a full display unit as well (next to the NLT) and I’m increasingly impressed with the editions that NavPress is producing… I may have to get one just to have it for reference!

There’s really not a point to this post other than these observations, but I found it interesting to see how the top two translations on the lastest CBA rankings had been moved to the highest visibility areas of the store. If nothing else, it’s good merchandising by the bookstore and shows that they’re in tune with what people are evidently looking for.

“Jesus said to her, I am [Myself] the Resurrection and the Life. Whoever believes in (adheres to, trusts in, and relies on) Me, although he may die, yet he shall live.”

The items in [brackets] and (parenthesis) have been added to the text as a way of using different nuanaces in language to suggest different facets of the text’s meaning. A more complete explanation of this system and the underlying textual sources can be read on the Lockman Foundation’s webpage.

I should disclose at this point that I have used the Amplified Bible in the past and while I don’t currently have a copy, I found it a valuable resource - like having a mini-Strong’s built into the text. My dad has used it as his primary translation for quite a while as well, though I think he’s been shifting toward the TNIV lately.

From the comments in Rick’s post, it appears that the base of usage for the Amplified Bible is focused these days in Charismatic/Pentecostal circles, as evidenced by Meyer’s Everyday Life Bible which uses the Amplified as a base text. Evidently charismatic leaders like Meyer have been using the Amplified for years. The suggestion was made that critics of charismatics might claim that their targets are attracted to the Amplified because they can take one of the bracketed meanings and say, “to me, it means this,” or even read into the Amplified whatever meaning they want to. However, Peter Kirk noted that “in the relatively little of Joyce Meyer’s preaching I have listened to, I have not seen poor exegesis based on misuse of the Amplified.”

The final topic on this tangent was more anecdotal, but it was noted that usage of the Amplified seemed skewed toward women. Suzanne commented that “I think that those who do not have training in the Biblical [languages] feel that this gives them authority. That would tend to be charismatics and women who enter the ministry without formal seminary training.” Her point on assumed authority perhaps runs into the criticism noted above.

Toward the end of all this, I commented that “with all the discussion of the Amplified and its seeming favor with women, I’m surprised that nobody mentioned that the translation was originally undertaken by a woman, Frances Siewert.” This is no small point. The Amplified Bible was created in the middle of the 20th century alongside the great committee translations like the NEB, RSV and Jerusalem Bible, which were predominantly if not exclusively produced by men.

Born in 1881, Mrs. Siewert (Litt. B., B.D., M.A., Litt. D.) dedicated her life to the intensive study of the Scriptures as well as to the cultural and archaeological background of biblical times. Her M.A. thesis was on “The Effect of the Bible on English Language” (1910). In 1954, she wrote that “I have averaged 4 hours a day of serious Bible study since 1914 [ed. 40 years!], when I was already a theological seminary graduate, and yet I am finding daily evidence of the fact that there are countless Scripture passages which have been obscure to me until now.”

Siewert’s vision and life’s work was to create a translation which would bring out each word’s original, often hidden, meaning in all its fullness. She began work in 1952, already in her early ’70s, and lived to see her work financially supported by the Lockman Foundation and Zondervan Publishing. The Amplified NT was published in 1958 and the full Bible in 1965; Siewert died in 1967.

Certainly the Amplified Bible is a legacy worth celebrating?!

HT: The Lockman Foundation