Enter your mobile number or email address below and we'll send you a link to download the free Kindle App. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
To get the free app, enter your mobile phone number.
Other Sellers on Amazon
+ $3.99 shipping
+ $4.49 shipping
The CEB Study Bible with Apocrypha Hardcover – October 15, 2013
"Children of Blood and Bone"
Tomi Adeyemi conjures a stunning world of dark magic and danger in her West African-inspired fantasy debut. Learn more
Frequently bought together
Customers who bought this item also bought
Customers who viewed this item also viewed
The Common English Bible, likely the largest cross-denominational translation project in recent memory, unites Baptist, Catholic, Evangelical, United Methodist, and numerous other faith traditions in a joint effort to create a complete but broadly accessible Bible for the 21st century. No single translation, despite the breadth of this committee's reach, is likely to please all, but this sincere and diligent effort goes far toward the creation of a plain-English version that, without falling into folksiness or false hipsterism, can be read and understood by a range of ages, educational backgrounds, and aptitudes.--Library Journal (03/01/2011)
Author interviews, book reviews, editors picks, and more. Read it now
Top customer reviews
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
This certainly is no insult against women, as motherhood is honorable in all women, and truly the Orthodox faith believes Mary had only Jesus as her only begotten Son, Again in my opinion, I view it as unnecessary to believe Mary was not different from every other mother. She bore God in the flesh, truly this has implications for her relationship with saint Joseph, who was above all a God fearing man, Therefore, I believe the CEB mistranslates Matthew 1:25: "But he didn't have sexual relations with her until she gave birth to a son. Joseph called him Jesus". (page 1.). Note: There are no Greek words "sexual relations" in the Greek New Testament. The Greek for "sexual relations" is "sexoualikes scheseis", and that is not in the Textus Receptus. Cf. Common English Bible, a fresh translation to touch the heart and mind. Holy Bible. [...] Here is the correct translation and interpretation (cf. Acts 8:30-31) of Matthew 1:24-25: "And Joseph, having been awakened from sleep, did as the angel of the LORD commanded him, and took to him his wife, 25. and was not knowing her until . she brought forth her Son, the firstborn; and he called His name Jesus". ONT, Orthodox New Testament, Volume 1, page 2. The Orthodox New Testament, Volume 1, The Holy Gospels, Evangelistarion. Buena Vista, CO: Holy Apostles Convent. Copyright 2000 by Holy Apostles Convent. Holy Apostles Convent, PO Box 3118, Buena Vista, CO 81211 ... [...] Notes. 1. Cf. ONT, note 5, on Matt. 1:25, cf. page 76, ONT: "He was not knowing her until" (ouk eginosken auten eos). Note the imperfect tense, continuous or linear action, "he was not knowing" or "he kept on not knowing." /"Saint John Chrysostom: "He uses herein he word "until", not that thou shouldest suspect that afterwards he did come to know her, but in order that thou mayest learn before the birth the Virgin was wholly untouched. But on what acc ount did he say the word "until"? Because it is usual in Scripture ohe fttimes to do this, and to use this expression without reference to limited times. .... When discoursing also of God, Scripture says, "From the age until the age Thou art [Psalm 89(90):2]," not as fixing limits in this case .. So then here ikewise, it uses the word "until", to make certain what was before the birth; but as to what follows, it leaves thee to make the inference." [Hom. 5, Commentary on St. Matthew the Evangelist, PG 57:77 (col. 58).]. "Saint John of Damascus: "While every virgin loses her virginity in bringing forth, she was a virgin before her delivery, a virgin in her delivery, and a virgin after she brought forth." ["Homily II on the Dormition," PG 96, fol. 722, in Toal IV:444.].". Therefore, I happen tersio disagree with the opinion of this version theCEB, the Common English Bible, and therefore this makes the CEB, at least this verse, an version for Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic, confessional Lutherans, traditional Anglicans, respectful Presbyterians and Calvinist, and fervent Methodists, to use this verse, for Luther, Calvin, Wesley, Cranmer, and the majority of Protestants before 1600 AD agreed with the historical sentiment of the ancient Church, that was the Mother only of Jesus. We believe this also because of the verse in Mark which calls Jesus the son of MARY, and does not say either a son of Mary, implying other children, nor does the New Testament anywhere say, these are the children of Mary and Joseph. Nowhere does the Bible identify the brothers and sisters of Christ as the children of Joseph with Mary. Most of all, we view it as convincing inescapable evidence that Christ did not ask these brothers and sisters to take care of Mary, for if they were Mary's children with Joseph, Christ would have done the right thing, and asked His half brothers or sisters to take care. of Mary. Instead, Christ asked John to take care of Mary, IF Mary had children with Joseph. God bless and save all of you in Christ Jesus, whether or not this, too, is your opinion. Take care. REVISED January 25, 2014 Scott Harrington
The physical book has an "economy" binding, but it seems reasonably sound for this price point. Overall, it's attractive and quite usable if one likes the "new, fresh and modern" aesthetic.
There's the easy part. The translation itself may be a bit more "fresh" than some are expecting, never mind the obvious example of "The Human One". The "smooth and natural reading experience" promised by this translation will not remove all difficulties. Let me offer an example.
In the CEB, Lamentations 3:38 reads: "From the mouth of the Most High evil things don't come, but rather good!"
That is a perfectly "smooth and natural" English sentence, and not hard to understand. But if one looks at other translations (I checked the NRSV, NASB, KJV, NJB, RSV, NEB, REB, GNB, NIV, NET, NJPS and a few others), they nearly all seem to say the opposite, that evil and good DO both come from the mouth of the Most High. Check for yourself, I may have missed something.
Are all these other translations wrong? Is the CEB wrong? What's going on here? With a little work, we can find a clue.
The venerable KJV translates Lam 3:38 "Out of the mouth of the Most High proceedeth not evil and good?"
Young's Literal Translation gives "From the mouth of the Most High go not forth the evils and the good."
If we can take these two translations as being fairly close to the underlying Hebrew, and then read them both as statements (AFAIK, Biblical Hebrew did not use question marks), we can see that the CEB's rendering of Lam 3:38 seems at least possible. We might ask why the translator made this choice rather than what seems to be the majority choice, but the CEB rendering seems a choice and not an error.
While I don't know Biblical Hebrew, I've sometimes earned my living by translating a non-biblical language in a specific context. Translation is not always easy, and translators sometimes have to make judgment calls -- sometimes even guesses. I understand that. Words can mean wildly different things depending on who is using them and in what context, and context can be difficult to recover after a few thousand years. So I expect to do a little head scratching when reading the Bible.
In this case, though, I felt in need of a little more help than the CEB gave me. "Heb. uncertain" or an alternative reading would have been helpful, particularly since both are readily used in the same chapter of the same book. The lack of an alternative reading may have been an oversight; this is a large project and it's not reasonable to expect it to be perfect on roll-out -- has that been true of any new translation? Still, this is not a typo but a translator's choice.
This does not make the CEB a bad translation. I don't mind being challenged to see things in a different way; it's often a good thing. I keep a copy of the New English Bible around partly because it has "adventurous" readings from time to time. Just remember that "smooth and natural" English does not necessarily mean that the underlying languages are clear and unambiguous.
EDITED FOR SPELLING ONLY.