

|
Loading... The Holy Bible, with the Apocrypha: New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) (1989)by NRSV, Bible, Bruce M. Metzger (Editor)
None. Kindle Bibles are works-in-progress. Very basic edition with links to books only. Word search is slow but seems to be stable. The package lists a concordance and ribbon marker, neither of which are in this edition. Otherwise, a perfectly acceptable pocket-sized version. The zippered closure was also unexpected. The greatest book ever In my opinion this is the perfect student bible; to begin with, the NRSV is a very good modern but accurate translation pitched at about an upper high-school level, and this one has good discussions about all significant disputes. It is well-bound for a paperback, on excellent stock, with thorough cross references (I initially typed "crass references" -- no, there are none of those!). It has a useful glossary and an excellent apparatus for looking up passages on selected topics. It's not so expensive that you mind marking it up so when you wear it out every few years (if that's your thing) you can toss the old one and start on a new one. Disclosure: I actually don't toss them out; I have three copies around in various states of disrepair. no reviews | add a review
Amazon.com Product Description (ISBN 0195283805, Paperback)The New Revised Standard Version is the most accurate and accessible Bible translation available today, and has been accepted by almost all major US denominations. Prepared by a multidenominational committee of scholars who based their translation on the original Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic texts, the NRSV is also the most sensitive text on the topic of inclusive language. It includes the most complete collection of the Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical books. A 96-page, select NRSV Concordance enhances the Text Edition's usefulness.* Two column text. * Eight pages of full color New Oxford Bible Maps (except for 9820A) * Ninety-six page, select NRSV Concordance. * Available with and without the Apocrypha (retrieved from Amazon Fri, 04 Jan 2013 17:12:13 -0500) No library descriptions found. |
Google Books — Loading...Popular coversRatingAverage: (4.02)
Is this you?Become a LibraryThing Author. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
http://nwhyte.livejournal.com/2047769.html
First off, I don't think I actually would recommend reading the Old Testament (or indeed the Bible) through from start to finish as I did. It wasn't written or compiled to be read in that way, and it doesn't do the text any services to read as if it were a novel, a short story collection, or a book of essays and meditations. I chose this approach because I wanted to feel that I had control of what I was reading, and that I was not missing anything, but if you want to get a fair flavour of it, it's probably better to follow one of the many reading guides available online and elsewhere, which are designed both to showcase the good bits and to keep the reader interested.
Second, a lot of it is pretty dull, actually. 2 Chronicles in particular comes close to Mark Twain's description of the Book of Mormon, as "choroform in print". Large chunks of the Pentateuch are lists of laws and, even less exciting, census returns. The historical bits have an awful lot of tediously horrible ethnic cleansing and dynastic struggle, leavened by the occasional good bit (the Saul/David/Solomon succession in particular). The prophets are rather indistinguishable in tone of outrage. I recommend finding some way of skipping the dull bits.
Third, the good bits are indeed good. I've singled out the Book of Job in a previous post; I found the Psalms generally inspiring and uplifting, and I've always been a fan of Ecclesiastes. The narrative histories, which I thought I knew fairly well, still had some surprises for me - in Numbers 12, God smites Moses' sister with leprosy for racism towards Moses' black wife, for instance. There are some fun bits in the prophets - Jonah, and the deuterocanonical addenda to Daniel (Susanna, and Bel and the Dragon). I also rather liked Sirach, aka Ecclesiasticus, which again is deuterocanonical. And 2 Maccabees is a fairly lucid, if brutal, historical note to finish on.
Fourth, there were indeed a few themes running through the entire OT whose importance I hadn't perhaps fully grasped: the importance of God's endowing his people with the land, the importance of the cult of the Temple, and the trauma of the Babylonian exile (which of course shaped most of the text we have very directly). I'm not saying that these are the only or even the main main themes, but that these are the ones whose importance was enhanced for me by reading through the entire thing.
As for the New Testament: it falls rather naturally into three sections. The Gospels and Acts are among the most readable narratives in the Bible; the most striking things are that the three synoptic gospels are so very close to each other, leaving John as the outlier, and that Luke's better Greek prose style comes through in almost any translation of his gospel and Acts. I am also struck every time that the Feeding of the Five Thousand is the only miracle other than the Resurrection reported in all four gospels.
I was much less familiar with the various epistles. They are not as easy to read as the gospels, combining as they do advice on local disputed, personal salutations, declarations about correct practice and belief, and attempts to put words on the ineffable (Hebrews in particular is an attempt at a theological manifesto avant la lettre). I was struck by how hardline Paul is, particularly in the early letters, on the issues that hardliners still stick to today, and also on the question of justification by faith; but there is a significant counterbalance from some of the later letters, especially 1 Peter which seems to be a direct response in some ways. (And the Epistle of Jude seems strangely familiar after 2 Peter ch 2...)
Finally, Revelation is the most Old Testament-y of the New Testament books. (There is nothing like the letters in the Old Testament, and the gospels and Acts are quite different in style from the OT historical books.) Again, Revelation is an attempt to express in words that which cannot be expressed in words; it is clearly not meant to be taken literally, but as one person's attempt to concretise the underlying truths.