Customer Reviews

The New Oxford Annotated Bible, New Revised Standard Version with the Apocrypha, Third Edition (Hardcover 9700A)

5 star:		(109)
4 star:		(22)
3 star:		(9)
2 star:		(12)
1 star:		(17)

 

 

Oxford has greatly improved its New Annotated Study Bible. The notes are far more extensive than in previous editions. In addition to including the complete text of the NRSV in an easy-to-read typeface, this new edition contains notes pointing out information and meanings which are not obvious from just reading the text and, in places, indicating meanings from the underlying Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek texts which are not evident in the NRSV translation.

The notes are entirely scholarly and do not attempt to teach any religious doctrine.

In places, the NOAB Third Edition is less thorough in its notes than the competing HarperCollins Study Bible, but the notes are better written and far less tedious to read.

When the Oxford University Press labels this an "ecumenical" study bible, it's not kidding. The Apocrypha are included, naturally. (You don't have to read them, of course, but you will have to pay for them.) But the Old Testament is also respectfully referred to as "The Hebrew Bible". And all dates are given as BCE/CE rather than BC/AD. The annotations are just as scrupulously free of denominational bias. Of course, the only way it can manage that is by avoiding religious interpretation altogether. This makes the book less useful to those looking for an in-depth treatment of their particular faith, I suppose. But that's also what makes it invaluable to those of who are still "waiting in the hall" - as C.S. Lewis put it. That, combined with the title's decades of acceptance by men far more learned in the subject than I (and just the general classiness of the OUP), means I *trust* this Bible as I do no other I've seen on the market - as one can only trust someone who isn't trying to sell you anything. And, without wading too far into the muddy and turbulent waters of the translation issue, let me register my opinion that the New Revised Standard Version used here strikes me as the most literal translation that can still be considered good English. (It doesn't read with the absolute clarity of a good thought-for-thought version like the Good News Translation, but it far excels the New American Standard Bible - generally considered the single most literal English version - and the mega-popular but lamentable New International Version, which doesn't even have all-out-literalism as an excuse.)

Furthermore, as a specimen of book manufacture, the New Oxford Annotated Bible is a giant among dwarves. The uncluttered double columns of text [11-pt. Times New Roman, I'm guessing] and single column of annotations at the bottom of the page, set with half-inch margins, printed on opaquer-than-average paper, is more readable than any non-Giant Print Bible I've ever seen. The words of Jesus are not printed in red, but if you're afraid you'll lose track of them, you can always highlight them with a red marker and draw pointing arrows labelled "Over Here!"

I've read a couple of Bible translations now, and with most of them, they're written for religon. Which makes sense. That was never why I was reading them, however; I've always looked at the Bible in a more literary or philosophical way.

This particular version marked the end of my search for a Bible. I bought it for a class this semester, but found myself reading up on the Apocrypha and the neglected books in my precious spare time. The translation is fully detailed in the copious footnotes and introductions at the beginning of each book. Nuances in language, shifts in dialouge, it's all explained nicely, so you don't need to speak Greek and Hebrew to get it all.

Whether you're doing what I did, and studying the Bible, or if you're looking for a religious text, or both, this is definitely the way to go.

I used this Bible for two classes in college, one on the Hebrew Bible and one on the Christian Scriptures. This translation is not only one of the most accurate in English but also is much easier and more fun to read than more archaic versions. I have nothing against the King James Version for its use of language, but when you're mostly interested just in what happened and don't need it to sound poetic, this version is better. It also has useful notes at the bottoms of the pages and maps in the back for all the periods of time the Bible covers.

The editors have made every effort, consistent with the results of current textual scholarship, to keep within the tradition of English translation extending back to Tyndale and the Authorized Version. The remnants of antiquated language that the RSV kept in select passages (e.g., Psalm 22) have been removed. The translation is not always elegant, but it is highly serviceable, especially for those who do not have command of Hebrew or Greek. Do not be put off by the reviews lamenting its "political correctness": the editors do use inclusive language for humankind, in places where context and/or language clearly warrant (e.g., *adelphoi* in the epistles is rendered "brothers and sisters" rather than "brethren" - does anyone seriously doubt women were among the auditors when these letters were read?); otherwise, their practice is fairly conventional. If there is a political agenda in this debate, I do not think it can be laid at the doors of Messrs. Murphy and Metzger.

The NOAB 3rd Edition with the Apocrypha (NRSV text) ranks right up there with my HarperCollins Study Bible (also NRSV with the Deuterocanon).

The NRSV is perhaps the best translation available, even after 15 years from its print in 1989. Its combination of the formal equivalence translation method coupled with "idiomatic-correctness" in areas such as gender neutrality make it such an accurate translation. The fact that the Study Bible comes with the Deuterocanon of both the Western (ie: Vatican Catholic) and Eastern (ie: Eastern Orthodox) Churches makes it truly, as it professes, an "ecumenical study bible." Any person from these or any other liturgical church, from my Anglicanism to Oriental Orthodoxy, can really benefit from this.

The notes and introductions are spectacular; well-written, well argued, and well professed. I particularly enjoyed the nearly 100 pages of additional essays in the back, which makes up for its lack of "titles" between chief sections within the text (for example, "Creation" followed by "Another Account of Creation" or anything to that effect). Its maps, tables, and graphs are quite useful, and its nice to finally have a small concordance in the back of one of my Study Bibles.

Many argue that the annotations are "ungodly;" I must disagree completely and believe those who say such are only upset because they want everything in them to agree with what they think. I even don't always agree with the annotations, but then again, they aren't the Scriptures but aides to help one understand the Scriptures better. And to the most part, they are refreshing, well-documented in the social sciences as fact, and of tremendous help.

I would recommend this Study Bible to any seriously wishing to know the Bible better. I have absolutely no regrets for purchasing this most amazing Study Bible and have told many of my friends to get one ASAP!

This Bible has incorrectly been called everything from 'the PC Bible' to 'the ungodly "bible"'. This Bible, though, is absolutely essential to someone who may not have access to commentaries who needs an historically reliable resource. If it seems 'ungodly' it is because its annotations may differ from what your Sunday school teacher taught you. But remember, this Bible will not teach you the doctrine of any one church; it is ecumenical and (gasp!) allows the reader to make decisions for themselves. The annotations are not infallible any more than the NRSV text is. But they are excellent (as is the NRSV translation) and worth looking at for reliable information.

If you want a devotional Bible, look elsewhere. This is for the historically-minded individual who is ready to break the bonds of his Sunday school class.

When I first came in contact with this Bible I thought it above average. However as I have read more of it I find that it is very accurate. The NRSV has become my favorite translation, and the notes of the Oxford Study Bible are illuminating. The annotators are for the most part believing Christians, though they are more moderate than the NIV Study Bible annotators. The notes are fairly numerous and the essays and maps are a nice touch. There is also a small concordance in the back. I would never be without this Bible, and I am an orthodox, believing Christian. As always I advise consulting multiple versions when attempting to do a complete study.

When I began reading this bible, it was as if I never understood anything at all from the KJV. This bible, considered by some to be the most literal translation to date, has truly been a God send for me. Now that the Aprocrypha have been returned to their proper place, I get an even better picture of what the bible should look like.

I am sure you are getting tired of reading everyone's opinions. I am going to review the actual book. For starters, the NRSV text can be easily found in etext form by way of Google or a similar search engine, so go preview it if it is new to you. Next, the study notes are extensive and are concerned only with putting the text in historical context, discussing the difficulties of translations and little tidbits on what has been suggested by research. This means no doctrine whatsoever, and no attacks on believers of the doctrines. Whether you are Christian or not you should find this commendable, because that is a difficult thing to do.

Yes, some of what you are hearing about gender-neutral is true, 'brothers and sisters' in place of 'bretheren', 'humankind' in place of 'mankind' (what is the difference?), but don't worry, no 'Father-mother' combinations. The text still says 'Father'. That reviewer obviously knew nothing about what he was saying. Besides you would think Oxford scholars would have the sense to put 'Parent' if asked to eliminate 'Father'. Like I said, Google an etext and preview the translation.

I must admit I haven't read the essays in the back yet, but like anything else, including the study notes, I would definitely take these with a grain of salt. There is no reason to flip out if they don't coincide with your beliefs - they only would if you wrote the notes yourself, afterall. If you consider the Bible authoritative, it is perfectly okay to read this. Likewise if you believe the opposite. The annotations do not address this, and will give you an opportunity to see with an 'outside-looking-in' point of view. This could be very healthy.

As for the book's construction, it is bound well and will probably last through a good deal of use. Great typeface and size, and easy to read. Format is double column text with single column annotations. The original footnotes of the NRSV are present, there is a concordance, and about 14 maps. Timelines and topical index at the end behind the essays. Book introductions are longer than most study Bibles.

Why only four stars? It was glue bound and not woven.