The Zondervan NRSVue with Apocrypha

Подписаться 11 тыс.

Просмотров 8 тыс.

50% 1

A review of Zondervan's Comfort Print New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition (NRSVue) with Apocrypha. The ISBN on this brown Leathersoft copy is 9780310461494.
The paper is advertised at 36 grams per square meter (gsm). Text is arranged in two columns, organized into paragraphs. The text block is sewn.
The dark, evenly printed font is 10 points in height. The words of Christ are in black ink.
This is not a reference edition, and there is no concordance; but informative text and translation notes appear in the lower right hand corner of most pages.
There are two ribbon markers (gold and brown), brown head and tail bands, and eight color maps, but no concordance. Nine lined pages are provided for notes.
An unboxing video for this Bible may be viewed here: • Unboxing the Zondervan... .
The ISBN of the goatskin edition is 9780310461500.
Thanks go to HarperCollins for providing this review copy.
00:00 Introduction
02:40 Page layout
07:50 The font
08:35 The paper
09:51 Notes pages and maps
10:50 Ribbons
11:23 The sewn binding
12:25 The cover
12:43 Title and copyright pages
14:08 Pagination
15:06 The preface
19:05 Font comparisons
19:50 Translation charts
23:32 Conclusion

Опубликовано:

26 июл 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 43

@timwilkins2008 Год назад

I have used the NRSV since 1989. I purchased this update as a pre-order and purchased the e-book as soon as it came out. I am even more pleased with the update than I anticipated. It is a very smooth translation and solid as well.

@Agben35 4 месяца назад

I was wanting a softcover bible with apocrypha and got this exact one. I love it. It won’t be my main, but will be my choice when looking into the apocrypha.

@paulcollins6732 Год назад

I was eagerly waiting for this review, as the NRSV is my preferred translation. An excellent review as usual! Many thanks!

@RGrantJones Год назад

Thank you for the encouraging comment, Paul!

@Airik1111bibles Год назад

I like their new imitation leather on these bibles . The old stuff that many companies are still using turns to dust and peels away . I have some study bibles I've never even used that much which are completely falling apart . My old NLT Study Bible leaves behind particals after I use it I even get it under my fingernails nails😂 . It reminds me of the cheap non stick tephlon pans they quit making cause it ends up in your food .

@henrythornton7931 Год назад

I always enjoy your reviews and videos. Thank you. Have you done an analysis video yet comparing the NRSVUE changes from the NRSV? That would be a great and helpful video. Thank you. God bless. ☦️

@RGrantJones Год назад

I haven't posted such a video yet, but I hope to. Thank you for the kind comment!

@rachelkarslake7787 Год назад

Thank you for reviewing this Bible. It looks like a very nice edition. I do like the NRSV translation, and I read it often. However, I am still a bit hesitant about the update, and I value your opinion. I am looking forward to the translation comparison video.

@MAMoreno Год назад

It's interesting to see that the NRSVue has moved even closer to its sister (or should I say brother?) translation, the ESV, on the New Testament text charts. I would like to get a print edition of this translation soon, as I do think it's an improvement in some places. For instance, it has fixed one of my greatest nitpicks with the ASV family of translations by placing "reasonable" back into Romans 12.1 instead of "spiritual." (If I see "spiritual" in a New Testament translation, I expect the Greek word πνευματικόν or some other word with the same root to be behind it.) And it made some other improvements I appreciated, such as rendering the measurements in Revelation 21.16 as "twelve thousand stadia" instead of "fifteen hundred miles." (Why they ever felt compelled to treat the measurements so literally in 1989 is anyone's guess.)

@RGrantJones Год назад

Interesting observations. Thanks for commenting, M.A. Moreno!

@jackwagon4313 6 месяцев назад

My copy will be here today... i can't lie im excited!

@gtgodbear6320 Год назад

I inherited a 1930's-40's vintage King James Bible in perfect condition. It came in a engraved wooden box. It has some very interesting language in it. The matrimony paper halfway through said 1936. But there's no copyright date on it. World Publishing Company Cleveland Ohio. It looks like it's never been opened.

@RGrantJones Год назад

That sounds like a great find, GT Godbear!

@booklover3959 10 месяцев назад

I wish I could find out which 100 passages you used with variants to the MT for your chart. What was the basis for your choices? It is fascinating and a brilliant idea you had. I wish you would do a journal article or a website doing full investigations of this nature on a larger scale with a much larger sampling of passages. And if you could separate DSS from LXX that would be helpful too. All this could be very illuminating!😊

@danivuk2036 Год назад

The NRSV is one of my favorite English translations. It gets Deut. 32:8 right. Great job, as always , BrotherJones.

@RGrantJones Год назад

Thanks for the kind comment, Dani!

@gilbertculloden87 Год назад

Well sort of, the NRSV is interpreting rather than giving a literal translation. The NRSV has that God set the boundaries "according to the number of the gods." But "gods" alone is not in any text of Deuteronomy that we have. A dead sea scroll fragment has "sons of God," the septuagint has "angels of God," and the Masoretic has "sons of Israel." But no text has "gods" alone. The ESV's rendering of "sons of God" is more faithful to the Dead Sea scrolls while the NET'S "according to the number of the heavenly assembly" is a fair interpretive translation.

@properpropaganda9831 Год назад

@@gilbertculloden87 The NRSVue has a footnote for Deut. 32:8 stating: Q ms Compare Gk Tg: MT the Israelites

@gilbertculloden87 Год назад

@@properpropaganda9831 yes, but that's my point. The abbreviation "Q mss" is referring to the dead sea scroll manuscripts. There are two dead sea scroll fragments relevant here 4QDtq and 4QDtj. Both fragments read "sons of God" (bene elohim) not "gods". I think the NRSV made the choice it did because in Canaanite mythology the "sons of El" were all "gods" in their own right. But if we are going by the manuscripts themselves we only have three readings "sons of God" (dead sea scrolls), "angels of God" (septuagint), or "sons of Israel" (masoretic). No manuscript of Deuteronomy that we have reads "gods" by itself

@properpropaganda9831 Год назад

@@gilbertculloden87 Thank you.

@Mike-pz6hz Год назад

Do you have an idea when you will release the translation comparison video? Looking forward to it.

@seanchaney3086 Год назад

The textual content begins around 14mins

@booklover3959 6 месяцев назад

On the chart on agreement with Nestle-Aland 28 does "NAB" stand for the revised edition of the New American Bible new testament? If that is the case it should be abbreviated "NABRE."

@RGrantJones 6 месяцев назад

The New Testament of the NABRE *is* the NAB New Testament.

@peterpapoutsis496 10 месяцев назад

Hi Grant. Do you happen to know why the NRSVue remove the footnote "virgin" in Isiah 7:14?

@RGrantJones 10 месяцев назад

No, Peter, I don't. The updated edition removed a good number of helpful translation notes, but I don't know why.

@peterpapoutsis496 10 месяцев назад

@RGrantJones to be fair, the ESV removed the footnote "young woman" as well. However, the ESV removed a lot of footnotes I liked from both the Old RSV and the previous NRSV. Oh, well. I'm still waiting for the OSB to get revised, but I'm not holding my breath on that one.

@RGrantJones 10 месяцев назад

@@peterpapoutsis496 - Speaking of the OSB, you may already be aware of this, but I wasn't until a viewer brought it to my attention. The OSB omits Gen 25.34.

@peterpapoutsis496 10 месяцев назад

@@RGrantJones I was not. Good Lord! I knew it was a good idea just to stick with my traditional Greek Bible and just learn Greek until the English Speaking Orthodox get their act together. Smh. 😪😪😪

@FernandoSerna1654 Год назад

Any conclusions on the translation?

@RGrantJones Год назад

Thanks for the question, Fernando. I'm still formulating my conclusions. I hope to post a video on that topic in a few weeks.

@FernandoSerna1654 Год назад

@@RGrantJones many thanks

@misanthromike 4 месяца назад

Does this include Orthodox apocrypha or only Catholic?

@RGrantJones 4 месяца назад

Thanks for the question. You can see the table of contents at about the 13:17 point. It contains more books than are in the Catholic canon. It's my understanding that the Eastern Orthodox Church doesn't have an official canon of Scripture. But this volume has books that you'll not find in the Orthodox Study Bible -- 2 Esdras and 4 Maccabees.

@misanthromike 4 месяца назад

@RGrantJones thank you. i'm looking for the most comprehensive inclusion of books and this appears to have everything im looking for, including psalm 151 and 3 maccabees plus the books you mention

@preppysquirrel9712 6 месяцев назад

Wears watch like a Navy Pilot.

@P-el4zd Год назад

Overall, I enjoy the NRSV but the NRSVus is a hard pass. Negatives: The NRSVue soften the texts to promote a theological liberal agenda in key text. This can clearly be seen in 1 Cor 6:9 … “men who engage in illicit sex”, 1Ti 1:10 … “men who engage in illicit sex” Isa 7:14 “young woman” (removed foot notes for “virgin”) and the follows “gender neutral” language, etc. Positives: The NRSVue includes all Apocrypha/ Deuterocanonical books and despite its glaring weaknesses it reads well. If you have the NSRV I would pass on the NRSVue.

@IsaiahPatrick0115 9 месяцев назад

I prefer the AV (I have no major reason to side with the NRSVue) and I would say the NRSVue was a strong improvement on the NRSV, although 1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Tim. 1:10 are regressions (the RSV 1971 did the same thing in those texts). Also the NET has young woman in Isa. 7:14 and the NASB puts the reading in the margin. Most “liberal” readings in the NRSVue can also be found in one of the “conservative” translations from the critical text which conservatives endorse. I’d give the NRSVue another look!

@hassanmirza2392 Год назад

This is a very nice quality print, dark and thick. Is this translation too liberal, like pro LGBTQ? Or is it comparable to the 1990 NRSV version? I think it does not look like a major revision, so no need to buy this translation.

@RGrantJones Год назад

I plan to post a video in a few weeks comparing the NRSV and the NRSVue. In general, the changes strike me as minor. I've heard that some say that the NRSVue is pro-LGBTQ because of the way it translates 1 Cor 6.9, but I don't intend to discuss that topic in the upcoming video. I'd prefer to keep this channel's content appropriate for viewing by young people. Thanks for commenting, Hassan!

@hassanmirza2392 Год назад

@@RGrantJones I read this by Jared Michelson Is Europe Christian? Considering an intellectual genealogy of European secularization. Nice summary of the self-secularization of European Christianity. Maybe, you read the news that Northern Ireland is Catholic majority for the first time in its history, which might lead to Irish reunification. That goes to show that secular branches of Christianity (and other religions) have little demographic future.