Or I'm simply drawn to pictures more than words? Renderings of the Temple tend to catch my eye: page 20, if you're following along at home.
Looking over the blog in question, it's this post that's quoted with an illustration taken from the forthcoming ESV Study Bible, available 10/15 - a worthy date to me!
And, so, two things besides the obvious: (1) an ESV Study Bible1 and (2) further affirmation that the Garden Tomb isn't it. Beautiful pictures embedded in the text of the interview - all of Calvary's chapel, no small feat - moreover, deserted!
Let's hope that if enough authorities affirm Holy Sepulcher over against the Garden Tomb, Protestants will abandon their tradition in favor of
Ritmeyer's blog looks to be of interest to Holy Land archaeology buffs ... myself, I just like the pictures.
Previous posts on Golgotha ... ... I don't know why the topic interests me so much ...
1 Yes, a commercial for a Bible. Hard to stomach. Can we combine it with this, please, please?!
4 comments:
Since they are now going to have an ESV with apochrypha, do you think we'll ever see an ESV-Catholic Edition?
I have another translation question for you too - what is your general opinion of the NKJV? I bought a copy for $3 at Borders on discount a couple months ago. Comparing it to my RSV or NAB translations in many cases it appears "more Catholic" than those, which I thought was odd. It even has a dictionary in the back where it explains sacraments and other Catholic terms. This led me to believe it is probably used by Lutherans and Episcopalians a lot. Thoughts?
we'll ever see an ESV-Catholic Edition?
Did Catholics insist that certain passages in the RSV-CE be translated a certain way before giving approval?
No Catholics were involved in the preparation of the ESV. Unless Catholics get involved, I don't see an ESV-CE being approved.
Re: NKJV: I haven't done much reading in either the KJV or the NKJV; none of my Bible studies have ever used it as the translation of choice ... one of these days, I'll get to a Baptist study but until then ...
Apart from the textual issues - TR vs. NA27 for the NT - I think the KJV translation is well-done, very literal, almost mechanically so. Some see that as a defect - a lack of imagination or nuance - but I think it connotes consistency and reliability.
Yes, words have changed meaning over time, and I don't know how well the NKJV updates those obsolete terms and expressions.
For its time, being "more Catholic" isn't odd. What's odd is the disparity between its sacramental theology and that of its devoted readership.
This led me to believe it is probably used by Lutherans and Episcopalians a lot.
Um, no, it's used by Baptists.
I don't think that Episcopalians read the Bible!
This daily office uses the KJV and this lectionary site for the ECUSA suggests that either the RSV or the NRSV may be read.
Lutherans come in so many stripes, it's difficult to generalize. But, even the conservative WELS quotes from the NIV on its web site. The LCMS web site seems to be in transition, some quotes are from the RSV and some are from the ESV.
I'll put it this way: if I were going to a Bible study at a Lutheran church for the first time, I would bring an NIV. But I bring the KJV to the Baptist church when we go. IMO, the only Lutherans to use the N/KJV are those transplants from the Baptist Church!
charis
"I don't think that Episcopalians read the Bible!"
That made me chuckle. I supposed its true now that I think about it.
And yeah, Catholics had to change some of the parts of the RSV to make it Catholic and line up with parts of the vulgate I'm assuming. In the back of my RSV "pocket" edition from Ignatius and OUP, there is a table in the back with the differences. Some are extensive, some are very minor.
I supposed its true now that I think about it.
I made a knee-jerk observation but corrected myself with a reference to their liturgical books, their Office and BCP, which are chock full of Scripture. So, their tradition isn't lacking ... if folks would only make use of it.
I should have referred you to Michael Marlowe's Bible Researcher web site ... I've linked to him from Day One of blogging ... excellent resource. Note his opinion of the NKJV which boils down to not liking the underlying text or TR-only proponents. It was almost three years ago that I urged him to spruce up his contribution to an intro page on RC Bible versions. I think he complied.
Post a Comment