Reader's Digest Bible?

I had to search for my Readers Digest Version.

It got pushed off the shelf I have reserved for various Bible versions because it is so infrequently used (no, not true, I should really say it's never used).

The Reader's Digest Bible is condensed from the Revised Standard Version.

It's general editor was Bruce Metzger (1982).

From the dust jacket:

IMHO, unless you find this book at a yard sale, save your money.

Rob

 

55% of the OT and 25% of the NT is missing, but "without affecting the essentials," they say. I'd thumb through it first. I don't know if it is gender-neutral. Probably not, since it was first released in 1982. If it is, I wouldn't buy it.

 

I honestly cant see a use for it.....I'd relish someone informing me of one.

 

DeclareHim said:

DesiderioDomini said:

There have to be some good uses for it, don't there? It could be kept as a curiosity, or used as a door stop or paper weight...

Seriously, God's word has come down to us just as He intended for us to have it. This is true no matter what Bible version we use. But when people go chopping up the word, taking out hunks of it and "condensing" it, I have to really question their motives.

Genesis12 said:

I'm not in favor of gender neutrality or "political correctness," but something doesn't have to be gender neutral to be a poor "translation."

Deacon said"

I'll second that!

The RDB was not the first "translation" to condense the Bible. For more on this topic, see the web page (link) Reader's Digest Version.

 

DD said:

I honestly cant see a use for it.....I'd relish someone informing me of one.

The use is what the second post said it was for: people who wanted to get a firsthand knowledge of the Bible but are daunted by the full Bible's size.

I've got no use for one myself, but I don't see it as significantly different in intent from the selected Bible readings one of my English profs provided us, as part of the recommended background reading for the English literature survey courses.

 

I stand corrected! My point was simply that I dont ever see the need for a new translation unless it serves a new purpose or is an improvement upon one before it.

For instance, do we really need another translation like the NLT? Do we need another message? No, we dont.

So, I guess I didnt understand why someone who feels daunted by the size of the bible cant just read the parts they want? However, as long as the reader is MADE AWARE of what is missing, then I can see it being useful.

 

Just by hearing that I wouldnt trust it! thanx for the Info

 

Mr. Correa, apparently you want to hijack this discussion, too. Why don't you just let it rest? Despite what you may think, people can have an intelligent discussion of Bible versions without you throwing in your 2 cents worth.

 

I beg your pardon who made you the moderator of this thread? I can say what ever the Good Lord Puts on MY heart to say! If you are impliing that I am A Terrorist then I suggest that before you go any further with your comments re think. I have apologized for my innapropriate posts in the past but my stance is the same on the KJB! So before you say any thing else to me personally; pray for me and I shall pray for you! And Please don't shoot the wounded! I have said my peace! Amen God Bless you! Go KJB!

 

Living languages that are in use by people are constantly changing, so eventually we will need revisions for every translation we have if we want it to communicate effectively in the receptor language.

 

No, I wouldn't waste time nor money on the RD vrsion. A full Bible has ALL that God intended for all mankind to have.

I hate seeing a movie on TV that has been butchered to fit the time period allotted by TV, and I wanna read a COMPLETE novel or story, and not an "edited" version of it.(What's unimportant to an editor may be important to ME.) This is DOUBLY true for the Bible, which is far more important than all the movies or novels ever made. I mean, shoot, I don't even own any of those "pocket Testaments" as they're not complete Bibles.

That's why I recommend that every Bible student obtain a copy of the AV 1611, complete with the Apocrypha and the translators' comments & notes, with nothing left out, as is omitted in current KJV copies.

 

DD asked:

So, I guess I didnt understand why someone who feels daunted by the size of the bible cant just read the parts they want?

It's more than just reading the parts one wants. Remember, the point is not merely to excerpt the Bible, but to condense it: to shorten it in a way that the reader can still see the overall "plot." Someone approaching a Bible with little or no prior knowledge wouldn't be able to do that for himself; it takes a skilled Bible scholar, such as Bruce Metzger, to do the trimming.

 

No, and did you miss the post where I said I personally have no use for the condensed Bible?

I mean simply that if you must shorten the Bible, then get someone with some skill with the text to do it well instead of poorly.

 

My grandmother gave me one years ago. I don't have it now and don't ever remember using it.