Making lists of one's favorite bible translations appears to be the thing to do on blogs such as this, so here's mine. I'll do it in a series of posts, ranking my top five, with a follow up post or two discussing some of the translations that didn't make my list and a few comments on why they didn't.
For this introductory post, I'll limit myself to discussing some of the criteria I used in judging these translations.
Main Criteria
(1) Fidelity to the source text combined with readability (which I distinguish from what translation theorists refer to as transparency).
There's an old Italian saying that translators often like to quote in their prefaces: traduttore, traditore or "the translator is a traitor" (or more literally and thus less treacherously, "translator, traitor"). If this is true, and anyone who knows more than one language knows that there's a great deal of truth in this saying even if it may be an exaggeration, then every bible translation is the fruit of treachery.
My general preference in a translation is to be as literal as possible while still maintaining as much readability as possible within this framework.
More than anything, since I can read Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, and have spent almost all of my adult life studying the bible, I don't really need or want a translator telling me what a Hebrew or Greek idiom "really" means by couching it in a contemporary equivalent.
(2) Audience
In Albert Pietersma's introduction to NETS (p. xiv), he cites Nida and Taber on the three main audiences for any translation of the bible:
It is usually necessary to have three types of Scriptures: (1) a translation which will reflect the traditional usage and be used in the churches, largely for liturgical purposes (this may be called an "ecclesiastical translation"), (2) a translation in the present-day literary language, so as to communicate to the well-educated constituency, and (3) a translation in the "common" or "popular" language, which is known to and used by the common people, and which is at the same time acceptable as a standard for published materials.
I like the emphasis on audience since it acknowledges the need for different types of translations for different people/purposes, so I'll address this matter with each of my favorite translations since I often use different translations for different purposes.
(3) Availability in a nice reader-friendly format
Also a big factor in this list is the wide availability of nice editions for any given translation. Features I look for include black letter, single column, paragraph format, on paper that has minimal bleed-through, with sewn bindings that lay flat and accompanied by an affordable price tag (i.e., under $50 including taxes and shipping).
I am realistic however, and understand that I won't get everything I want in a bible for a cheap price. None of the editions I own is ideal.
I include this because translations are meant to be used, not simply admired in isolation from the form in which it will come packaged. What use is good content (a fine translation) if it doesn't come in a correspondingly good form (a nice edition)? Not much if you ask me.
I simply won't use a translation that I can't find published in an attractive format that doesn't include most of the features I listed above. I don't find that the quality of the translations differs all that much on the top end. They all have their own peculiar flaws as well as their own peculiar strengths. Therefore, format often makes the difference for me.
This list is highly personal. I'm not making any grandiose claims for any of these translations as far as which is better or worse, except as it pertains to me (see criteria #2). All of the translations on my list have their problems. While I will often engage in some mild hyperbole in the posts to come, I actually do appreciate how tough it is to produce a good translation.
In the posts to come, I've not only ranked my favorite bible translations but have included the date of publication of the version of the text that I use in brackets.
My Top Five Bible Translations: #5 TNIV (2004) My Top Five Bible Translations: #4 My Top Five Bible Translations: #3 My Top Five Bible Translations: #2 My Top Five Bible Translations: #1
The recent HarperCollins editions were where I looked first. The Standard and Go Anywhere editions are frankly huge disappointments. (I saw both in a bookstore; it unfortunately didn't carry the NRSV XL.)
The Standard has terrible bleed-through problems, making it unusable for anything longer than a quick check of a verse or two. It's a shame, really, since it is in single column format (though the poetic sections are in double columns to save space, which leads to chopped up poetic lines).
If anything, the Go Anywhere is even worse, since it still has bleed-through problems and is printed in dual columns. As Bertrand rightly points out, the format screams single column, but the dunces at HarperCollins are blinded by bible-making tradition. In addition, though it is supposed to be portable, it is actually quite unwieldy to handle.
I don't have a picture of the Go Anywhere, but this is the NASB Compact Reference, which is similarly ridiculous in insisting on double columns, resulting in columns averaging a paltry 6 words per line.
Based on a few reviews I gathered from the web from the usual suspects (Iyov and Bertrand, plus the reviews on Amazon and CBD, I chose the NRSV XL because it appeared from these reviews that this edition avoided the worst of the problems associated with the other two.
Since these other bloggers have reviewed this edition already, I'll simply post some pictures along with some brief comments underneath.
For the sake of comparison, I've lined it up with the ESV Personal Size Reference on the left and the TNIV Reference on the right. The NRSV XL with Apocrypha measures 8 1/8" wide x 8 1/4" high x 1 1/2" thick. The form factor takes some getting used to, but I actually like it. The only real problem I have with it is that you can't just flip the page over without a second thought (you have to be careful) like you can with most other bibles, since the pages tend to want to curl back over on itself.
Here are the same three bibles stacked with a view of the bindings. The large font and the addition of the Apocrypha make this a rather thick bible, even with the very thin paper, which unfortunately allows for a little too much bleed-through for my taste.
Despite my afinity for single columns, this particular edition would look silly in such a format. I'd say each column averages a respectable (though sub-optimal) 9 words per line. The font is nice and clear at 13 pt and the spacing of the lines does not feel cramped. Here's a look at the poetic sections. Unfortunately due to the large font size, the lines are often chopped up. Still, though I don't need a large font (I can comfortably make out the ESV Deluxe Compact type), it's a nice change of pace.
The binding is craft sewn, whatever that is. I presume that it isn't as good as smyth sewn, but it does allow this bible to lie completely flat in the middle and I expect that the binding will last a whole lot longer than a glued one.
Towards the ends of the bible, one side will hang in mid-air. This is a shot of the book of Jude. When held in one open hand (i.e., without a thumb or pinky holding it open), you can have it open at Genesis 1 or Revelation 22 and it won't close on you.
A few random notes and then some final comments:
One great thing about the NRSV is that you can purchase editions that include the full Apocrypha, as this one does. The editions with the Apocrypha are tan, the Catholic edition is green and the Protestant edition is brown.
The binding is a faux leatherette type material that is rather stiff but looks like it will last a few years of regular use. As noted above, it does nevertheless allow the bible to lay relatively flat due to the wide pages.
Thankfully, as with most NRSV bibles, this is a black letter edition.
It has one ribbon marker that isn't overly thick (at just over 1/4"), but isn't as thin as in some other bibles.
As alluded to above, there are two main problems with this edition:
I find the bleed-through a trifle distracting, though it isn't anywhere near as bad as in the Standard edition. This is much more of a problem in the poetic sections where there is a lot of blank space around the text; the narrative sections aren't much of a problem at all as far as I'm concerned (the bleed-through isn't any more distracting than in most bibles in the narrative sections; I believe this is due to the large print which is quite effective in drawing attention away from what can still be clearly seen on the other side of the page).
You have to be rather careful when flipping the pages because of the extra width; the pages tend to want to curl over rather than naturally lie flat when flipped.
Some suggestions for improvement:
Thicker paper. The bleed-through is borderline unacceptable for me in the poetic sections.
A slightly smaller font so that you can get the optimal 12 words per line, which would also lead to fewer chopped lines in the poetic sections. Since this would also save space, it could be used for thicker paper.
The concordance (about 50 pages) needs to go. Why do bible makers insist on including one? It's a waste of space/thickness in the bible. Use it for thicker paper instead.
An extra ribbon marker would be nice. And thicker paper too, please.
I'm quite a fan of the NRSV translation on the whole, though it's not as literal as I'd like. I think it's a shame that it appears to be well on its way to being relegated to a small niche (academics and the ever dwindling mainline denominations).
At one time I used to use the NRSV almost exclusively (for serious work, I'd often lean on the NASB), but I don't any longer. In those days, I was happy with a hardcover pew edition (without even the Apocrypha included), but I've gotten much pickier over the years, as my eyes have been opened to what is available in bible editions.
The one huge drawback of the translation, and the single biggest reason I don't use it much anymore except (more recently) when reading the LXX in English (thanks to NETS) and in ecumenical contexts (which for me, nowadays, is typically limited to academic conferences, like SBL), is it's been very poorly served by its various publishers.
This edition goes some way to addressing this, since it's quite nice, but it isn't good enough for me to switch away from the editions I mentioned above for day-to-day use, especially since I like most of those translations (i.e., TNIV excepted) as much as I do the NRSV. I'm still glad I bought the NRSV XL, however, since the large print is a novelty to me (it's the only large print version I own), and it contains the Apocrypha.
The iPhone (3G!) is finally coming to my part of the world, and as I contemplate the wisdom of purchasing one (along with the baggage that comes with it in the form of a 3 year contract at no doubt outrageous monthly premiums), I eagerly await the expected flood of 3rd party applications that will finally be released (early July) in a form that isn't tied to a wireless connection of some sort (i.e., cellular or internet). (For examples of what's available right now on an iPhone or iPod Touch that is tethered to some sort of connection, see this post by Mark Bertrand and this one and this one by Rick Mansfield.)
I'm particularly interested in bible software, of course. I'm not sure how much use I'd really get out of it (I can't imagine myself using my Touch in church or in a classroom or devotions), but I'd like to have it just because it would be cool to be able to look things up at a whim no matter where I happen to be at the moment.
I'm sure we'll see a variety of translations made available, but what I'd really love to see is the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia and the Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament (27th ed.) on my iPod Touch, with as many goodies included as possible (tagged for quick lemma searches, parsing, diglots, etc.). Of course this assumes that the iPhone will eventually support Hebrew which it apparently does not yet do.
What would be really outstanding is if some enterprising bible software company (esp. Logos or BibleWorks) would make available some of their other primary texts (Josephus, LXX, Philo, Pseudepigrapha, DSS, etc.) available as well, even if it was only in English. But that's probably asking for too much.
In my first post, I promised I'd write a review of the new translation of the Septuagint when I got it, but I see that Iyov has already beaten me to the punch, and since I don't think I'll have much to add, I'll probably renege.
I have received another book in the mail in the meantime, however. It's what I'm sure will be an absolutely wonderful book by James Kugel, one of my favorite scholars, entitled How To Read the Bible: A Guide to Scripture Then and Now. From the brief time I've spent with it, it appears that he will be addressing the issue of traditional belief and historical critical method while providing a survey of the Hebrew Bible. Kugel is ideally suited for such a task since he's a practicing Orthodox Jew as well as a widely respected scholar.
Kugel has written many, many important books and journal articles, but one volume in particular should be of broader interest (than merely those in the scholarly world, I mean): The Bible As It Was. This is a book that brings together various snippets of texts from the Second Temple period through early Christian and rabbinic writings that interpret 25 core stories from the Pentateuch (15 from Genesis) in some very interesting ways, usually addressing some perceived problem in the text. It's an excellent guide to the way that ancient readers read the bible.
A final note: unlike most bible scholars, Kugel has a gift with words (he's a published poet) so, though this is a long book, it should be a pleasure to read. He has the ability to explain complex ideas in clear, accessible, interesting prose, that is mostly jargon free.
For further information on Kugel and this book in particular, see his website here.
I'm not an American, but I usually get interested in American politics during the run-up to national elections.
I find Obama a fascinating candidate, mostly because of the phenomenon that he represents (hope?), no doubt aided by the fact that we know very little about him (voters tend to fill in the blanks with their own wishes and desires).
I'm too old and cynical to buy into the hype though; I much preferred Clinton for the nomination because she just seems much tougher than Obama, a quality I think is simply crucial in a political leader.
In my own country, the leader of the opposition is not unlike Obama in the fact that he is a professor, but he is also a complete wimp, allowing everyone (especially power brokers within his own party) to run roughshod over him. The example of Socrates, Thucydides, Xenophon, and a few others from a bygone era notwithstanding, I think the two (intellectual and wimp) tend to go together. (I say this as someone who is well on the road to becoming an "intellectual" and is a certifiable wimp to boot; but I wouldn't vote for me as president either.)
This will sound terrible because of the following statement's unstated assumptions and implications, but I do think it would be good for America if Obama does win the presidency, though not because I think he'd be a particularly good president (I actually half expect another Jimmy Carter [= a naif]), but because it would help the US get past the whole race thing.
However, it's clear that Obama's securing of the nomination has brought out the crazies... in the Democratic party (hat-tip Politico):
"Fred Hobbs, a state Democratic Party Executive Committee member representing part of Davis’ district, said he understands why Davis is not endorsing Obama and is “skeptical” of the Illinois senator himself."
“Maybe [it’s] the same reason I don’t want to — I don’t exactly approve of a lot of the things he stands for and I’m not sure we know enough about him,” Hobbs said when asked why he thought Davis wasn’t endorsing Obama. “He’s got some bad connections, and he may be terrorist connected for all I can tell. It sounds kind of like he may be.”
I assume he's talking about Bill Ayers (one of the founders of the Weathermen) and Bernardine Dohrn, both of whom were indeed terrorists (apparently still unrepentent) during the turbulent 60's and 70's, when a lot of stupid young people did a lot of stupid things. Both now live in Chicago (they're married) where they apparently ran into Obama a few times. However, Obama's relationship to them appears to be limited to serving on the same board as Ayers at a charity and running around in the same social/intellectual circles in the Chicago (Hyde Park) area. Hardly justification for labelling or implying that Obama is a terrorist or terrorist sympathizer.
The more worrying aspect of Obama's associates, it seems to me, is his pastor of 20 years, Jeremiah Wright, precisely because they were so close for so long. He sounds like a race baiter of the worst kind to me; you have to wonder what it says about a person who attended a church like Wright's for 20 years.
Wright's sermons are simply inflammatory race-mongering and not a little crazy (note all the conspiracy theories). Have a gander at this ABC news story:
Here's some more raw footage:
Happily, Obama has now renounced Wright and left his church. I only hope it was for the right reasons.
I've never played golf in my life (I'm not counting pitch & putt courses or the driving range), so I'm not much of a golf fan. I am, however, a Tiger fan. Ever since he destroyed the field at the Masters in 1997, I've been hooked. I guess you can say I'm a fan of excellence, and whatever Tiger is, he is excellent.
Today, Tiger had one of his more amazing rounds, which is saying a lot, since he's had quite a few over the course of his career. NBC is providing footage of all of Woods' shots, round by round. Take a look at the long eagle putts on 13 and 18, as well as the amazing (flukey) birdie on 17.
Woods is a perfect 13 for 13 when holding at least a share of the lead after 54 holes in majors, which is simply unprecedented due to the enormous pressure on a final round leader in such tournaments. He's up one shot heading into tomorrow's finale, which doesn't bode well for his fellow golfers' chances.
BTW, this year's US Open is being held at Torrey Pines, where Woods has already won 6 times. By all rights, the US Open looks as if it's Tiger's, but there's the not so little issue of his knee which was definitely giving him trouble throughout the day. It should make things interesting.
Addendum: Here's video of Woods' three amazing shots from the 3rd round:
Addendum: Round 4, 18th hole, another one for the ages:
Sometimes it take a non-scholar to show scholars how to effectively put together a translation of a book written thousands of years ago so that it will have maximum impact on a modern audience.
This is what Robert Strassler has accomplished. He doesn't have any scholarly credentials to really speak of. He doesn't have tenure at a university and doesn't even read Greek or Latin. Yet he has produced the English editions to own of first Thucydides (The Landmark Thucydides, 1996) and now Herodotus (The Landmark Herodotus, 2007). Additional volumes on Arrian (2010), Polybius (2009), and Xenophon (2012) are forthcoming in the next few years.
What makes these editions special is the extra helps for the reader that he included. To draw a comparison with another series that aims to aid the reader, the Arden Shakespeare provides an extensive introduction and copious notes to the text of each play. However, while a few photos are included, they are typically photos of the various famous actors who have played the parts in question. In other words, true visual aids are few and far between, and most of what is included doesn't really help you understand what's happening in the play.
Well, what the Arden Shakespeare series is to serious Shakespeare readers, the Landmark series is to readers of Greek historiography (which I hope he expands to include Latin historiographers), only more so. This is not only because the Arden series has its competitors in the Oxford and Cambridge editions when it comes to Shakespeare, while the Landmark series stands alone with respect to Greek historiography, but also because the Landmark series contains wonderful, highly-detailed maps along with other visual aids (charts, timelines, useful illustrations and photos) to help the reader. In addition, he has organized a highly detailed system that enables a reader to quickly ascertain where and when any part of the narrative takes place, as well as very useful paragraph summaries in the margin, along with many other useful features (like incredibly detailed useful indexes, numerous appendixes on background, a glossary, and numerous detailed notes).
The Landmark Thucydides contains over 100 maps (most are a full page) embedded directly into the text (approximately one map every 5.5 pages). You literally almost never have to flip more than 3 or 4 pages either way to get to a map that details exactly what you need to know to make sense of the narrative. For the Landmark Herodotus, Strassler upped it to 127 maps embedded in the text (approximately one map every 5.7 pages). These maps and other visual aids make reading these books much more fruitful, since the myriad of names, dates, and places can be quite confusing. If you are at all interested in these Greek historians, you need to get your hands on these editions.
Which brings me to the real subject of this post. Too often in the past, the producers of study bibles have taken the Arden Shakespeare approach: that is, aids that are dominated by text (i.e., detailed introductions plus copious notes). It looks like things are beginning to change. The people behind the ESV Study Bible (coming in October) have apparently gone to the trouble of embedding over 200 full color maps within the biblical text, along with numerous diagrams, illustrations, and over 200 charts. I'd say it's about time. Study bibles dominated by text are simply boring. A study bible chock full of visual helps is the next logical step. The potential in such a study bible is enormous if done correctly.
If you'd like to see a sneak preview of the ESV Study Bible, Mark Bertrand has photos of a mock-up made by the ESV people who displayed it at a recent conference. It's only the gospel of John bound over and over again to approximate the size of the actual study bible, but it gives you the basic idea. Most of the specs on the binding and format line up with what I like in a bible (i.e., single column, paragraph format, black letter, sewn binding, a wide variety of covers to choose from, etc.).
There's only a couple of things I worry about, based on the photos of the mock-up: (1) the text appears to sink into the gutter far too much (I suspect this is just a problem with the mock-up -- I wonder if the mock-up has a glued binding; but it would be a deal-breaker for me if the mock-up is a true indication of what the inner margins will look like); (2) there appears to be more bleed through than I would have hoped for.
Anyways, I'm looking forward to getting my hands on this study bible, because, despite the fact that I'll almost certainly not like a lot of what's in the footnotes (it appears to be heavily slanted in the Reformed/Baptist vein to tell from the buzz in the blogosphere), this appears to represent a quantum leap in the evolution of study bibles, which should be encouraged and supported.
I only hope that the HarperCollins people take note of what the ESV Study Bible has (likely) accomplished and incorporate some of the same insights the next time they publish a revision of their Study Bible.
One final note: I echo Mark Bertrand's enthusiasm and appreciation for the work that went into the website displaying the ESV Study Bible and the openness with which they've shared the details of the binding and format of the editions being released. I wish more bible publishers would be as diligent in putting out information about their bibles.
(Addendum: I should have known that Iyov would beat me to the punch on the Landmark series; see his post here).
I love diglots, but have found it difficult to find good ones. Needless to say, Interlinears don't count, since, though they often include an English translation in the outside column, it is more properly a language tool rather than a real bible. For one thing, the interlinear English distracts attention away from the original text, and for another, the English translation in the outside column is usually treated as an afterthought, with no care given to its presentation. It's hardly a bible that one would curl up with and read for either pleasure or devotional purposes.
So when I saw a post by Iyov taking to task Christian publishers for not producing more diglots, and Christians for not making more use of diglots, I not only had to sadly agree with his point, I thought I'd do my part to help remedy the latter by displaying the advantages of one particular Hebrew-English diglot that I've loved ever since I first purchased it in the hopes that a few more Christians will consider buying one.
The New Testament is fairly well-served by the GBS edition that contains the Nestle-Aland 27th and the RSV and now the NET diglot (which I don't have yet, but they don't exactly make it easy, do they?). The former's existence, in particular, is fairly well known among Christian seminarians, I think, so I won't bother discussing the features of that edition. The only thing I'll say about the GBS edition is that I wish those folks would update the RSV and take out all the archaic thee's and thou's, since I doubt it would take much work in this age of computers (the archaic grammar I don't mind at all), or alternatively, use the NRSV as the English translation.
And now that there's a new translation of the Septuagint out, I imagine that it's just a matter of time before we see a new diglot. Anything's got to be better than the old Brenton one.
However, to finally get around to the subject of this post, the best Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) diglot I've seen is the one published by the Jewish Publication Society in four editions: pocket, student, cloth, and leather. I have two of the four (pocket and cloth) and wish that I had sprung for the real leather version when it was still in print (at the time, I was a poor graduate student and couldn't justify the extra dough).
(Addendum: David Stein, the original managing editor and co-designer of these editions left a comment below informing me that these are also available in electronic format--a PDF-based e-book--here.)
These have been around awhile (like the NASB Classic Companion I reviewed here), but since I haven't noticed anyone else giving it the Bertrand/Mansfield treatment, I thought I'd have a go.
The JPS Tanakh (Tanakh is a Hebrew acronym for Torah-Prophets-Writings = Christian Old Testament), for those who aren't familiar with it, is a fairly literal translation of the Masoretic Text (the version of the Jewish scriptures that the rabbis preserved). It isn't as literal as the NASB or even the ESV since it can be rather idiomatic in places (often it simply replaces an original Hebrew idiom judged to be unclear with something more contemporary that approximates it's meaning). I'd roughly equate it to the NRSV in terms of literalness.
Since it is a Jewish bible, it scrupulously follows the Masoretic Text (i.e., the Leningrad Codex, and as such is nearly but not quite identical to BHS), ignoring other texts and textual traditions in the text itself, though it does take note of textual variants, including possible emendations, in footnotes (unfortunately transliterated).
The cloth edition is quite a hefty volume (10 1/4" x 7 1/8" x 2 1/4"), while the leather edition is even larger.
For size comparison purposes, here is the TNIV Reference stacked on top of the JPS Hebrew-English Tanakh: Cloth edition. You can see the latter is quite a lot thicker.
The dark blue padded cover is very nice. It's essentially a hardback covered in a spongy faux-leather type material. It feels a lot like the covers on those old gi-mongous KJV family bibles that everyone used to own. The page edges are gilded with gold and there is one blue ribbon included.
Here they are side by side. The TNIV Reference is on the left, while the JPS Tanakh is on the right.
The text is presented in two parallel columns with English on the left and Hebrew on the right.
The text lays flat, even at Genesis 1.
The font is a nice size (I'd estimate about 10 pt.) with uncommonly generous spacing between each line. Lines average about 8 or 9 words in English. The Hebrew font is clear and easy to read, even the vowels and cantillation marks.
The Hebrew tends to be more compact than the English so the verses don't quite match up in the bottom half of each page, but I'm glad they didn't chop up the verses to simply match them up. It would have de facto turned this bible into one of those dreaded verse-by-verse editions. The editors have, however, gone to the trouble to re-align the text at each chapter and kept the Hebrew and English within one verse of each other at the bottom of each page.
The overall presentation is beautiful to look at and easy on the eyes, though I often wish that they had devoted each entire page to a single column, paragraph formatted text, English on one page and Hebrew on the facing page (like the GBS New Testament diglot), and that is lined up at every new paragraph, rather than dividing the page into columns and lining it up at every chapter as they did.
One of the few defects that mars this edition is some moderate bleed-through (If you click on one of the above images and blow it up, you can see what I mean). It isn't really any worse than the TNIV Reference or the ESV Personal Size Reference though, so if you can put up with it in those bibles, I daresay you won't find this appreciably worse. Another defect is that you don't get much in the way of margins.
I'm no expert in bindings, but I'd hazard a guess from the above picture that it's sewn, though I can't be sure.
One drawback for Christians, is that the chapters and verses in this edition follow the Masoretic Text and thus won't always match up with what most are used to in the Old Testament. When reading alone this won't be a big deal, but in a group setting (e.g., bible study or following along in a sermon) this could be an annoyance (especially in books like the Psalms). Those who don't mind the KJV might appreciate Aron Dotan's Parallel Bible Hebrew-English Old Testament published by Hendrickson, since it preserves the Christian book order and versification (it's about to be re-printed).
Another feature of this bible that some will view as a drawback, but I view as a huge advantage (especially for Christians) is the order of the books, which generally follows the Leningrad Codex with a few concessions to the order of books found in most Hebrew printed editions. It could give Christians a fresh perspective on the Old Testament (e.g., Daniel is found among the Writings in the Tanakh, and not among the prophets, as in the Christian OT, and the Deuteronomistic History can be found intact, without the intrusion of Ruth).
Everything considered, I don't think you can go wrong with buying this edition, especially if you don't already own a copy of the NJPS translation, which you should have anyways.
If this edition is too large for you, the student edition and the pocket edition are still available for purchase.
However, I'm sad to say that I can't recommend the student edition. I saw it several years ago when it had just been printed (at the annual Society of Biblical Literature convention), and it had a very bad gutter problem. You had to pry the bible wide open to read the text which went right into the spine. I imagine that they've fixed it by now, but I'd have a look first to make sure. I was told by the JPS spokesperson at the exhibit that year that they'd be fixing it in the next print run (at the time, he said it would come in a matter of months), but when I checked again a couple years later, it still hadn't been fixed from what I could tell.
Here's a video I found of what looks like the student edition. At one point he opens it upand shows the text. Either the gutter problem isn't as bad as I remember it or they've somewhat alleviated the problem. To me, it still looks like the binding pinches the text too much in the gutter though. Too bad, since the size represents a good trade-off between form and function.
On the other hand, if you can get past the odd shape (6" x 4" x 1.75") of the "pocket" edition (you'd have to have pretty large pockets), it's quite functional. The layout is exactly the same as the cloth edition, only with smaller print, which is comparable to the print of the original ESV compact editions (not the deluxe compact). It retains the nice line spacing of the cloth edition though this extra space could have been used to increase the font size if they had gone to the trouble of specially formatting the bible for this edition.
The text block itself is almost exactly the same size in both editions since they both have the exact same number of pages. The slight difference in thickness is accounted for by the fact that the cloth edition has a very thick padded cover.
For those with poor eyesight, though, the Hebrew vowels and cantillation marks might be a little tough to make out. Also, the text does tend to run just a bit too far into the gutter (but not as badly as the student edition and just about par for the course in the current bible-making climate) and it still has the same moderate bleed-through problems as the cloth edition. (I tried to take a picture with my crappy camera but I can't get a decent one that isn't one big blur.)
All in all, though, I'm quite happy to have this small edition to lug around as the cloth edition is more or less anchored to my desk.
Oh yeah, one last thing: it doesn't exactly lay flat.
(Addendum: Iyov has posted some related thoughts here. I look forward to his posts on other Hebrew-English diglots.)
I want to thank a couple of bloggers for directing some attention to my blog: ElShaddai Edwards at He Is Sufficient and Iyov. They've both already directly influenced my blog: I've changed the name of the blog to exactly match the blog address.
Iyov heaps high praise when he refers to this blog as "important". I believe that's more than a bit premature, but I thank him for the compliment.
As for Iyov's expectations of comments on Jewish mysticism, I'm not sure I'll be able to oblige him in the way he means. I originally chose this blog title because my area of study is Second Temple Jewish literature (particularly early Jewish interpretation of scripture) and as such, the pseudepigraphic literature in general and the Enochic literature (especially 1 Enoch) along with the book of Jubilees (Enoch plays a small but very important role in this book) is of more than a passing interest to me. I actually went to the trouble of learning Ethiopic so that I could get as close as possible to the originals (which are unfortunately only completely available in a translation of a translation of the originals).
1 Enoch, Jubilees, many Qumran writings as well as a few other early pre-rabbinic Jewish texts certainly count as Jewish mystical texts in the broadest sense, since they are Jewish and they contain the typical mystical themes of esoteric knowledge, secret interpretations, divine visions, numerology, etc. But I'm sure he had something like Merkava/Hekhalot mysticism or perhaps the Kabbalistic literature in mind, and I have only a passing knowledge of the former and virtually none of the latter.
In addition, I never really intended to blog on Jewish mysticism at all since 1 Enoch, Jubilees and other early pre-rabbinic Jewish texts which might count under the broad definition (which are the only Jewish mystical texts that I know well) hardly make for compelling blog reading for the general public.
Anyways, congratulations to Iyov on his upcoming one year anniversary. He's averaged well over 8 posts/week for the first year for which he has nothing but my admiration. In comparison, I hope to average about 2-3 posts/week and would be ecstatic if I could keep that up for a few months.
The ESV Bible Blog recently issued an invitation to bloggers to outline the features they'd like in their idea of a "perfect" bible. They say they read every blog post they can find on the ESV, so this is a good way to give them feedback on the format that customers like to see in their bibles.
Since the English Standard Version is my translation of choice at the moment, and since, like Mark Bertrand, I am on my own quixotic quest to find the perfect bible (though unlike him, I'm unwilling to sink any serious money in anything less than perfection), I figured it's worth my while to put something together on this topic.
What I have in mind is a go-to bible that can serve as my main bible for studying, teaching, and preaching. Here is a list of features I'd like to see in my perfect bible:
A nice flexible cover that allows the bible to lay completely flat, even at Genesis 1 or Revelation 22. A premium cover would be nice, but a really soft, flexible manmade material would also be acceptable, provided it allows the bible to lay limp and completely flat (and I do mean completely flat).
A smyth sewn binding.
A single column format that averages out to approximately 12 words per line.
Paragraph format.
Black letter.
A 10 pt font minimum that is clear, crisp, and dark. I'd like to be able to clearly and easily see the text when I'm teaching or during those rare occasions when I preach from the pulpit and the text is at least a full arms length away.
Some space between the lines of text so that they don't feel so cramped and it's easier to follow the text all the way across the page without skipping down a line or otherwise losing track of it.
At least two thick, high quality ribbons.
Really wide margins, at least 1.5 inches on all sides (preferably 2 inches), even in the gutter if possible. At any rate, nothing should slip into the gutter at all, even cross references (as happens in the Personal Size Reference).
Cross references, if included (I'm ambivalent about them since they typically clutter up the text itself though they are nice to have to refer to), should be in the gutter, not the outer margin where they would form a barrier between my notes and the biblical text. This also prevents the biblical text from slipping into the gutter. The cross references in the text should be as unobtrusive as possible.
No book intros at all please. Especially shaded with a different background color.
No lines around the text. They're unnecessary and get in the way of notes. Plus they're distracting to look at.
No concordance in the back. It's an absolute waste of space. I don't think I've ever used a concordance that came in the back of a bible. For that matter, aside from a few color maps, a table of weights and measures, and perhaps a detailed historical timeline covering both testaments, extra material in the back should be kept to an absolute minimum. Use the saved thickness for thicker paper. Speaking of which...
Nice thick paper with no bleed-through at all. If the price is a thicker bible, so be it. My notes should also not bleed-through the paper.
Finally, everything about the construction of the bible should enable it to last 20 years. This is absolutely crucial for a bible that I would devote hours to writing notes in.
The above features were designed with a large wide margin bible in mind. But I'd also like to see a bible with similar features in a compact edition: essentially a Personal Size Reference edition with a few improvements (i.e., columns that average fewer words per line, elimination of the gutter problem, a sewn binding with a premium cover, thicker paper, a slightly larger, darker font, no concordance, and a few maps).
