The New Jerusalem Bible

Hi, Ben...

Sevaral years ago I bought a copy of the original JB. I have no problem with it having the Apocrypha because I realize it was translated as a Catholic Bible. I think the thing I found a bit troublesome was the verse numbering system. I cut my teeth on the "single verse as a mini-paragraph on its own" numbering system that is found in the KJV, the NKJV, the NASB, and almost any number of versions you care to look at. I guess you could say I'm really a traditionalist at heart. I have no problem with the verse numbering system based on any doctrinal stance, but it just felt strange to me. But nowadays we have "The Message" with its paragraphs, but I tend to stay away from all the paraphrase versions (matter of preference).

 

I like the OT translation of Yahweh instead of LORD in the NJB. It was translated I believe by liberal leaning Roman Catholic scholars BUT despite that and it being a loose translation it might make a good secondary Bible to refer to at times(Much like a NCV, NLT) BUT it is not a solid translation in the tradition of the KJV, NKJV, ESV, NASB, NIV etc...

 

Hi, you need to check out Matthew 1:25 in this version, as it was corrupted to show that Mary had no other children after Jesus was born. This was done to support their heresy that Mary was always a "virgin". This version is Roman Catholic, and unless you are think of becoming one, don'e waste either your time or money with it.

 

The Wikipedia is your friend in this case.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerusalem_Bible

A much better friend than certain pundits on this board...

 

I was in a Christian bookstore recently and checked out the New Jerusalem Bible. I am thinking of getting it as it has the apocrapha in it.

If all you want is an Apocrypha, there are probably better choices than a specifically Romanist translation. For example, the NRSV is a good ecumenical translation that is published with the Apocrypha in some editions.

 

I have the NT .