Thursday, February 8, 2018

RNJB on February 15th?

According to the Amazon listing, the Revised New Jerusalem Bible (NT and Psalms) will be published on February 15th.  The price is quite good, coming in under $10.  It will be interesting to see if this is the actual date of publication this time around.  A reminder that the Psalms appear to be the 2010 Revised Grail Psalms.  I have it pre-ordered and will let you know if I get a shipping notice.

Once again, here is the description:
A Bible for study and proclamation. The Revised New Jerusalem Bible presents anew the scholarship, character and clarity of the 1966 Jerusalem Bible (the first modern English version) and the 1985 New Jerusalem Bible. It is a Bible that prioritises accuracy of translation and richness of tone, written that `the message might be fully proclaimed' (2 Ti 4:17). This volume presents the full New Testament and the Psalms, and a comprehensive set of study notes, cross-references and book introductions. `Clear read' style. The biblical scriptures were written to be proclaimed, so the RNJB uses linguistic style and speech patterns best suited for being read out loud. Formal equivalence. The language, concepts and imagery of the original scriptures are presented more accurately by the RNJB than the colloquial approach of many other modern translations. Gender inclusion. The message of the Bible is for all people, so care has been taken to avoid traditional male bias of the English language, while remaining faithful to the meaning of the original scriptures. Revised Grail Psalter. The book of Psalms is based on the text of the 2010 translation of The Revised Grail Psalms. Modern measurements. Ancient systems of measuring and timing have been replaced by modern, metric equivalents. Comprehensive study notes. The notes, cross-references and book introductions of the JB and NJB are replaced in the RNJB by new materials which reflect the fruit of the most up-to-date and ecumenical scholarship. The Revised New Jerusalem Bible has been prepared and edited by The Revd Henry Wansbrough OSB, who was previously General Editor of the New Jerusalem Bible.

15 comments:

Jeff S. said...

The Book Depository in England also says February 15.
I ordered 5 copies in the first week of December and so
am hoping that date is correct.

https://www.bookdepository.com/The-RNJB-New-Testament-and-Psalms-Dom-Henry-Wansbrough/9780232533613?ref=grid-view&qid=1518114321614&sr=1-1

Deacon Dave said...

Thanks for the reminder. I pre-ordered my copy. I’ve been silent a long time but still read your blog daily.

Deacon Dave said...

Thanks for the reminder. I pre-ordered my copy. I have been silent for quite a while but I read your blog every day.

Jeff S. said...

Could those of you who are into this please list what you feel are the key "litmus test" lines in the Psalms and the New Testament. That way I can get a quick
report back to this blog site as soon as I get my copies from
Book Depository. (actually, in retrospect, I probably should have
ordered from Amazon, since the latter would probably have gotten
to me sooner since I'm here in the midwest USA). But maybe
Book Depository will get their copies sooner since they're
over in England where DLT, the publisher, is.

By "litmus test", I mean something like Luke 1:28 where the
classic Catholic desired phrasing is something like
"Hail Mary, full of grace..."

And for the first line of Psalm 1, the classically preferred
phrasing is "Blessed is the man".

Extending that concept by induction to all the phrasing,
one would get that the ideal text would be the original
Douay-Rheims! :)

Looking forward to doing this as soon as my copies come.
I ordered five copies in the first week of December for me
and four friends from Book Depository.

Hopefully it will cause some fun and interesting conversation.

Timothy said...

Jeff,

I’ll be happy to share some verses once I get it, but let’s avoid phrases like “litmus tests.” It can tend to divide people. One thing I have noticed, personally, is that over the years I have avoided certain books or even bible translations because people read reviews that base whether they like a bible solely on a few verses. I get what you are saying, don’t get me wrong, but there won’t be any condemning of any translation based on the rendering of a verse or two.

Jeff S. said...

Tim,
I didn't mean it in a pejorative way. I have noted over several
years I go to your website - which is every day! - this is a concept
that comes up often and I've seen it quite often on other websites
including non-Catholic websites. Many people seem to have certain
passages that they wish were translated in a certain way.

To me, it's kind of funny that someone would say that passage X
has wrong wording and thus the entire translation should be condemned.

My own "litmus test" is in regards to a few passages where "fraud"
is condemned. I love seeing the specific words "fraud" and "defraud"
used simply because I was on the receiving end of that in two particular situations and I relish seeing it specifically condemned in the Bible. And yet I'm sure most people could care less about the
wording in the particular passages I care about.

I mean for this exercise to be totally fun and I feel bad if my
wording could be interpreted to be looking for trouble.

Think of me as the 1985 Chicago Bears: "we're not here to cause no trouble, we're just here to do the Biblical Shuffle" ! :)

Timothy said...

Jeff,

Totally understand and should have made more of a point that my comment really wasn’t directed at you. But as you know, there are some who get into these debates on bible worthiness based solely on one or two verses. Not you. I have appreciated and continue to appreciate your comments and insight.

straykat said...

I don't know about this version, but even the newest French partly came about because of a small requirement. The Vatican has now prescribed that none of the publicly read scriptures have the tetragrammaton. That was one initial need at least. Litmus tests are at the highest levels.

I think litmus tests are fine when it comes to Christological issues. I think it's unfair to be picky outside of that (like on literary qualities). Holy scripture is pretty serious business.. how can you expect less? :) The bible business has an air of disposability and consumerism to it, but for a big market, it's actually still taken pretty seriously. I think that's a good thing.

Biblical Catholic said...

"I’ll be happy to share some verses once I get it, but let’s avoid phrases like “litmus tests.” It can tend to divide people. One thing I have noticed, personally, is that over the years I have avoided certain books or even Bible translations because people read reviews that base whether they like a bible solely on a few verses. I get what you are saying, don’t get me wrong, but there won’t be any condemning of any translation based on the rendering of a verse or two."

What about the translation of John 1:1 in the 'New World Translation' of the Jehovah's Witnesses 'the word was with God, the word was a god'?

I think that one translation of that one verse is by itself a reason for any Christan who accepts the Nicene Creed to reject the NWT, not that there aren't many others because there are.

There is a similar case in the James Moffat translation, 'the word was divine', an example frequently cited by the Watchtower Society to justify their own bizarre translation of this verse. Although, again, just like the NWT, Moffat provides a plethora of other reasons to reject his text.

Another one for me as a Catholic is NT Wright's translation of the NT where in the book of Matthew he translates that Joseph 'had no relations with Mary until AFTER she had delivered'. The word 'after' has absolutely no basis in the Greek, which is why no mainstream translation translates it that way. Pretty much all Greek scholars since St. Jerome agree that the Greek is intentionally silent on the issue of whether Mary and Joseph had relations after Jesus was born and that the point of the verse was sole to deny that Joseph was the biological father of Jesus. Wright added the word 'after' because he wants to force the text to explicitly deny the perpetual virginity of Mary because that is his personal view. Wright has several other bizarre translations in his text, but this one verse is the most egregious.

rolf said...

I went ahead a pre-ordered it from Amazon (again). For about $10 it is worth checking it out and deciding in October whether I want to buy the whole Bible!

Vincent La Marca said...

The complete bible is slated to be released in print and on the Kindle on October 2. You can preorder the title: https://www.amazon.com/Revised-Jerusalem-Bible-Henry-Wansbrough/dp/0525573194/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1518492179&sr=8-2

Timothy said...

Update:
My order, via the Book Depository, shipped today.

Jeff S. said...

Same here; I received an email from Book Depository this morning
saying:
"We're pleased to let you know that your order is winging its way to you, and is due for delivery according to the times below.
Dispatched
from the UK on 20 February 2018"

and according to their chart, being shipped from the UK to the USA
USA: 5-8 days. business days(Mon-Fri)

So that means sometime between next Tuesday-Friday next week.

Anonymous said...

Will some kind soul who has a copy please review it? I must say that the whole issue of gender inclusive language means I won't be touching this translation.

Timothy said...

Anon,

When I get it I will make some comments.