New International Version

NET Bible First Edition review

/ Christopher Terry / Leave a comment

I received a review copy the NET Bible First Edition in black a few weeks ago. The cover itself is a very nice bonded leather with hubs on the binding (a classic look). The one thing that I do wish is that they had gone with a genuine leather cover or something that would be a bit sturdier. The contents of the Bible are so large that I doubt the cover can withstand continued use without cracking or tearing (though the true test will be time of use). The pages are smyth-sewn which is a huge positive. This ensures greater durability of the binding and also for the bible to lay flat when open. The pages themselves are thin, probably a little thinner than normal Bible paper (not nearly as nice as the Lockman NASB’s – large print ultrathin reference Bible and wide margin single column reference Bible). The overall the Bible itself is well-made.

The translation itself is very good. It is toward the formal equivalence end of the spectrum. There are places where the NET has clarified ambiguities that are found in the original text. This has made a more idiomatic translation than the NASB and the ESV. Yet, there are places where this causes the NET to be more accurate such as, John 1:18 and John 3:16. One of the features of the NET that is unique are the chapter and verse markings. The NET includes the chapter number along with each verse marking, ex: John 1:1, 1:2, 1:3, 1:4 and so on. This is not a problem for me, though it did take some time to become acquainted with it. The satellite maps that are found in the back of the Bible are full color and topographical. These are by far some of the nicest looking maps that I have ever seen in any study resource. They truly open your eyes to the features of the areas in question. The maps are a bonus.

Now, time to discuss the study notes. These by far are worth their weight in gold. There are three different types of notes: study notes, technical commentary, and technical notes. The study notes are what you would find in other scholarly study Bibles. The technical notes are alternative translation options or a more literal translation option. The technical commentary notes are filled with a vast treasury of notes on the original languages. The notes are much like technical notes you would find in a Greek or Hebrew grammar. Yet, the blessing is that the notes are found beneath the text in question. In a grammar you have to search the index to find if there might possibly be help in regard to a text you are studying. The Bible came with a Bible.org Bible Library resource C.D. I have not even had a chance to examine this added resource. It seems like the NET Bible is like the gift that keeps on giving!

I truly like the translation itself. I believe that it is very accurate and yet readable. The scholars are from Dallas Theological Seminary. Therefore they are conservative evangelicals. It has been stated that the NET will be revised every five years beginning in 2010. This helps you to realize that the translators are striving for the best translation of the Word of God possible. The only drawback for me as a pastor is that people will have to buy a new copy every five years (though I don’t want to sound cranky, I am not, and I personally don’t mind doing so).

I read somewhere that someone was hoping that the NET would replace the NIV as an idiomatic translation. I don’t know if that will happen but I do believe that it is that good. I would highly recommend the NET Bible as a preaching and teaching resource. I would say that it is non-negotiable to own it as a study resource. At the very least, download the electronic version on Bible.org.

The Bible also comes with a resource c.d. with study materials.  I have not yet had an opportunity to check out this bonus resource.

The Bible is significant in size. But that is to be expected when you have over 60,000 study notes contained in it.

This Bible is smyth sewn and therefore opens fairly flat.  The pages are what you would normally find in other Bibles.  They are not the thickness of the ESV wide margin or the NASB large print ultrathin.

This is what you will find in some texts where there is a lot to be explained textually.  It is a black letter text which is a positive.

Here is an example of what the satellite maps look like.  They are a bonus.

Like the Bible itself, the ribbon marker is larger than most other Bibles feature.

The sewn binding and the weight of the Bible cause it to open fairly flat.  I do wonder how well the premium bonded leather will hold up under frequent use.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

NET Bible First Edition review

/ Christopher Terry / 2 Comments

I received a review copy the NET Bible First Edition in black a few weeks ago. The cover itself is a very nice bonded leather with hubs on the binding (a classic look). The one thing that I do wish is that they had gone with a genuine leather cover or something that would be a bit sturdier. The contents of the Bible are so large that I doubt the cover can withstand continued use without cracking or tearing (though the true test will be time of use). The pages are smyth-sewn which is a huge positive. This ensures greater durability of the binding and also for the bible to lay flat when open. The pages themselves are thin, probably a little thinner than normal Bible paper (not nearly as nice as the Lockman NASB’s – large print ultrathin reference Bible and wide margin single column reference Bible). The overall the Bible itself is well-made.

The translation itself is very good. It is toward the formal equivalence end of the spectrum. There are places where the NET has clarified ambiguities that are found in the original text. This has made a more idiomatic translation than the NASB and the ESV. Yet, there are places where this causes the NET to be more accurate such as, John 1:18 and John 3:16. One of the features of the NET that is unique are the chapter and verse markings. The NET includes the chapter number along with each verse marking, ex: John 1:1, 1:2, 1:3, 1:4 and so on. This is not a problem for me, though it did take some time to become acquainted with it. The satellite maps that are found in the back of the Bible are full color and topographical. These are by far some of the nicest looking maps that I have ever seen in any study resource. They truly open your eyes to the features of the areas in question. The maps are a bonus.

Now, time to discuss the study notes. These by far are worth their weight in gold. There are three different types of notes: study notes, technical commentary, and technical notes. The study notes are what you would find in other scholarly study Bibles. The technical notes are alternative translation options or a more literal translation option. The technical commentary notes are filled with a vast treasury of notes on the original languages. The notes are much like technical notes you would find in a Greek or Hebrew grammar. Yet, the blessing is that the notes are found beneath the text in question. In a grammar you have to search the index to find if there might possibly be help in regard to a text you are studying. The Bible came with a Bible.org Bible Library resource C.D. I have not even had a chance to examine this added resource. It seems like the NET Bible is like the gift that keeps on giving!

I truly like the translation itself. I believe that it is very accurate and yet readable. The scholars are from Dallas Theological Seminary. Therefore they are conservative evangelicals. It has been stated that the NET will be revised every five years beginning in 2010. This helps you to realize that the translators are striving for the best translation of the Word of God possible. The only drawback for me as a pastor is that people will have to buy a new copy every five years (though I don’t want to sound cranky, I am not, and I personally don’t mind doing so).

I read somewhere that someone was hoping that the NET would replace the NIV as an idiomatic translation. I don’t know if that will happen but I do believe that it is that good. I would highly recommend the NET Bible as a preaching and teaching resource. I would say that it is non-negotiable to own it as a study resource. At the very least, download the electronic version on Bible.org.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

The Value of the NASB

/ Christopher Terry / Leave a comment

I have at least one copy of each of the modern Bible translations in either electronic format or hard copy.  I have read the NIV and never fell in love with it.  There are too many places where the translators were too free in their rendering for my liking.  I have read the 2007 ESV.  There are some places where they have updated how the NASB has rendered a passage.  Yet, there are still some very awkward Anglicisms in the text.  I still believe that Crossway’s marketing department has portrayed/made the ESV as something that it is not, a more idiomatic translation.  I know that some will respond to that statement by pointing out that it is a formal-equivalence translation.  Yes, I agree it is.  The translators aimed for that form of translation.  The advertisments lean more toward a functional-equivalence translation.  I just have an issue with how many people are waxing eloquent about the ESV being so accurate, yet readable.  I would say it is accurate for the most part, be less readable than many are portraying it.  The HCSB on the other hand does seem to be more of what the ESV is being portrayed as.  I like the HCSB.  There are still some places where I am not as comfortable with the translators choice of rendering.  I can see and understand why they made the choices that they did.  There are just enough unique choices to make me cautious to jump on the bandwagon.  This is a switch from my previous opinion.

This brings me back to the NASB.  I know that many label it as “too wooden.”  I really believe that this is an unfair characteriziation.  The translation is a formal-equivalence work.  There are many places where the NASB is more readable than the ESV.  I have found that when it comes down to trusting a translation “getting it right” I choose the NASB.  The scholars are/were conservative evangelicals.  I write this post because of the “jockeying for position” that is going on among evangelicals over Bible translation.  I trust the NASB, I believe that it is accurate and as readable as possible without becoming a commentary rather than a translation.  I appreciate that the exegesis is left up to the reader rather than the translator.  I appreciate the ministry of the Lockman Foundation.

I truly believe that we must be very careful with the modern tendency of leap-frogging from translation to translation.  No translation is perfect.  Yet, this hopping around leaves fellow believers a bit confused and less confident in the accurate modern translation they currently use.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]