Featured Odd/obscure/not-as-popular translation?

Interesting. I just looked up a chronological reading plan, might give it a whirl.

 

A Chronological Bible is merely a particular edition of coonly used translations. They are not stand-alone translations as such.
Back in America I have an NLT chronological translation. It's just another way of reading the Bible for understanding.

 

Those Bibles were not intended to for general use.

 

B/c of my affinity for David Alan Black, I have used the ISV regularly.

 

I've been in an Isaiah class, and Deacon helped me out with finding a free copy of Goldingay's commentary on Logos. When you scroll over a verse reference, it pops up in the LEB, so I've been reading quite a bit of it lately.

So far I like it. But even though I could use it on a digital format in the pews, I would find it too odd not to have a hard copy. Call me old school, I guess.

 

Obscure and not widely known are not the same as "odd-ball" translations.

I have Darby's N.T. translation and Goodspeed's An American Translation (1948 edition). My other more obscure translations in hard copy forms are scattered around in South Korea and America.

 

I've been using the LEB more often in my personal studies.
I find it akin to the NASB but easier to read, up-to-date and more transparent.
Yet I don't use it when teaching, most of my class uses the NIV, which after many years I've finally become accustomed to.

IMO Phillips NT is quite quirky and not so "modern" anymore!

Rob

 

I own 49 hardcopy English translations and revisions of the Bible, and another 24 hardcopy English translations and revisions of the of the New Testament, and very many additional English translations in electronic format. I also own many hardcopy translations of the Bible and the New Testament in languages other than English, and very many additional such translations in electronic format. I use most of these only for the study of translation theory. For Bible reading, I use primarily the NRSV but frequently compare it with the Updated NASB, the RSV, the ASV, and the KJV.

For Bible study, when using translations, I use primarily the NRSV but augment that study using the Second Edition (1971) of the RSV and the translations found in the 900+ commentaries that I own on the individual books of the Bible when the author provides his/her own translation.

 

When we compare the Bibles used by various Christian groups, we find the following writings that are not found in the Protestant Canon but which are found in the Bibles of other Christian groups:

Books and Additions to Esther and Daniel that are in the Roman Catholic, Greek, and Slavonic Bibles

Tobit
Judith
The Additions to the Book of Esther found in the Greek Version
The Wisdom of Solomon
Ecclesiasticus, or the Wisdom of Jesus, Son of Sirach
Baruch
The Letter of Jeremiah (Baruch ch. 6)
The Additions to the Greek Book of Daniel
The Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three Jews
Susanna
Bel and the Dragon
1 Maccabees
2 Maccabees

Books in the Greek and Slavonic Bibles; Not in the Roman Catholic Canon

1 Esdras (2 Esdras in the Slavonic Bible, 3 Esdras in Appendix to the Vulgate)
The Prayer of Manasseh
Psalm 151
3 Maccabees

A composite book in the Slavonic Bible and in the Latin Vulgate Appendix

2 Esdras (3 Esdras in the Slavonic Bible, 4 Esdras in the Vulgate Appendix; “Esdras” is the Greek form of “Era”)

(Note: In the Latin Vulgate, Ezra- Nehemiah are 1 and 2 Esdras.)

A book in an Appendix to the Greek Bible

4 Maccabees (This book is included in two important Bibles from the fourth and fifth centuries.)

The New Revised Standard Version is one of the very few translations of the Bible that are available in an edition that includes all of the books and additions to Esther and Daniel that I have listed above. Most editions of the New Revised Standard Version, however, are not this complete.

Like the Revised Standard Version before it, the New Revised Standard Version is translated in accordance with the very finest biblical scholarship. In addition, like the Revised Standard Version, it is a formal equivalence rather than dynamic equivalence translation. Some instances, however, of dynamic equivalence are found in it, especially in its use of gender-neutral language. The Old Testament portion, also as in the Old Testament portion in the Revised Standard Version, is translated by Christian scholars, but from the perspective of the Jewish community for which it was originally written. That is, the Old Testament portion is free of the Messianic interpretations that are found in nearly all other Christian translations.

No translation of the Bible is or could be perfect due to the huge differences between ancient Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek and contemporary English. Therefore, the New Revised Standard Version should be used in conjunction with other translations of the Bible. It should be noted, however, that the use of several or more translations of the Bible is greatly enhanced when the user carefully reads the preface to each of the translations and the user understands why the translations differ from each other.

The preface to the NRSV can be read here:

http://www.bible-researcher.com/nrsvpreface.html

The preface to the NRSV can be read here:

http://www.bible-researcher.com/rsvpreface.html

 

You can now get all those in an ESV, as featured over at TheGospelCoalition:

http://blogs.thegospelcoalition.org/justintaylor/2008/10/10/esv-with-apocrypha/