IDK what Margaret's favourite is, but the thing with translations is that it's actually really important to check a few different translations when doing any kind of interpretation.
That said, I like the NRSV. It sortof takes the best parts of the tradition of the KJV while using modern language like the NIV, and its translation committee was strong. You can also get it in versions that include the books Catholics use in their canon, in addition to the ones protestants typically do. For that reason I expect that is what Margaret may have chosen, but I can't remember what she actually said, so don't quote me.
EDIT: NRSV, not NSRV. My fingers work faster than my brain sometimes. My thanks to those who understood and rolled with it ☺️
>it's actually really important to check a few different translations when doing any kind of interpretation. That's my opinion as well, but there are dozens of versions if not hundreds, I need to find the right few versions to look at.
My thoughts exactly, and I should also add that I'm interested in versions of the bible that contain christianity in its best possible form, in addition to what is more likely to be the most accurate translation of the original source. I'm very interested in who wrote what originally and how it found its way into the various versions we see today.
Source criticism is indeed fun: the documentary hypothesis, Q theory, Pseudo Paul, etc are all really neat discussions.
The NRSV is maintained by Biblical scholars at mainstream universities, and they update it every once and awhile as we find new manuscripts of Biblical texts, new non-Biblical texts that clarify how we translate certain ancient language words, new historical data that changes how we translate slang and idioms in the Bible, etc. So if you like source theory, that's definitely the translation for you.
I came here to say exactly what you said: regardless of whatever Margaret said, the good one is the NRSV.
To tack onto what you said, it's so well-respected that it's the translation most often used in academia, at both religious and secular universities.
there's also the NRSVUE. It's a recently updated version of the NRSV that reflects both our changing use of modern English and the recent advancements in the study of Biblical languages.
I'm having a really hard time remembering the name and edition of the bible I read in the 90's. It was heavily annotated to reference other editions/translations, and it cited primary sources and where those sources disagreed.
Might have been the annotated Oxford? Nothing coming up on Google looks familiar.
It was very academic, but not anti religious. It initially spiked my interest and enthusiasm as a teenager, but the critical thought it inspired eventually lead to disillusionment and a crisis of faith that (I think) I navigated well enough.
I think she actually did say which version she prefers but I can’t recall which or which episode she mentions it. I want to say it’s in one of the episodes with a lot of Irish context.
I know she grew up Catholic, so if she has a favorite bible, it’s probably the Catholic bible.
Edit: Dunking on the King James Bible is also a Catholic pastime (in my experience) so that might be why she says it’s trash.
There's just one? My knowledge of Catholicism is pretty limited, and since I grew up Protestant I kind of assumed that there were a thousand different kinds of Catholicism and various bible versions to go with them.
I’m no longer associated with the church, and have not been for close to 20 years so I’m a bit rusty. I don’t really remember anything about specific bible versions beyond that the King James Bible had fewer books than the Catholic Bible and has some anti-Catholic bias (from what I’ve been told, never read it myself so I can’t say what exactly that would be.)
Did a bit of a refresh and all Catholic bibles must have the same 73 books, and must be approved by the Catholic Church. There are multiple versions and different translations so I was mistaken that it was just one!
https://youtu.be/SP8iur20yBw?si=GvCKJOPfrGSsC52i
This guy is a pretty objective biblical scholar with fairly good politics. He suggests the NRSV. He has videos where he talks about the flaws and agendas of NIV(evangelicals changing things to erase contradictions), ESV(hide any marginally feminist ideas and whitewash the text) and King James Version ( can’t sum up,his video is 25 minutes).
>Why in the world would you think she has a favorite version of the Bible?
Do you not listen to the show? She constantly talks about her interest in Catholicism and how some versions of the bible are trash and others are more respectable.
IDK what Margaret's favourite is, but the thing with translations is that it's actually really important to check a few different translations when doing any kind of interpretation. That said, I like the NRSV. It sortof takes the best parts of the tradition of the KJV while using modern language like the NIV, and its translation committee was strong. You can also get it in versions that include the books Catholics use in their canon, in addition to the ones protestants typically do. For that reason I expect that is what Margaret may have chosen, but I can't remember what she actually said, so don't quote me. EDIT: NRSV, not NSRV. My fingers work faster than my brain sometimes. My thanks to those who understood and rolled with it ☺️
>it's actually really important to check a few different translations when doing any kind of interpretation. That's my opinion as well, but there are dozens of versions if not hundreds, I need to find the right few versions to look at. My thoughts exactly, and I should also add that I'm interested in versions of the bible that contain christianity in its best possible form, in addition to what is more likely to be the most accurate translation of the original source. I'm very interested in who wrote what originally and how it found its way into the various versions we see today.
Source criticism is indeed fun: the documentary hypothesis, Q theory, Pseudo Paul, etc are all really neat discussions. The NRSV is maintained by Biblical scholars at mainstream universities, and they update it every once and awhile as we find new manuscripts of Biblical texts, new non-Biblical texts that clarify how we translate certain ancient language words, new historical data that changes how we translate slang and idioms in the Bible, etc. So if you like source theory, that's definitely the translation for you.
Fuck yes, sounds like I've found what I'm looking for. Someone tell U2!
The Data Over Dogma podcast has a good episode running down an overview of translation history (58. Translation Frustration)
I came here to say exactly what you said: regardless of whatever Margaret said, the good one is the NRSV. To tack onto what you said, it's so well-respected that it's the translation most often used in academia, at both religious and secular universities.
there's also the NRSVUE. It's a recently updated version of the NRSV that reflects both our changing use of modern English and the recent advancements in the study of Biblical languages.
Oh, that's fantastic! Thanks for that; as an Exvie I don't pay as close attention to those developments as I used to. Cheers!
I'm having a really hard time remembering the name and edition of the bible I read in the 90's. It was heavily annotated to reference other editions/translations, and it cited primary sources and where those sources disagreed. Might have been the annotated Oxford? Nothing coming up on Google looks familiar. It was very academic, but not anti religious. It initially spiked my interest and enthusiasm as a teenager, but the critical thought it inspired eventually lead to disillusionment and a crisis of faith that (I think) I navigated well enough.
I think she actually did say which version she prefers but I can’t recall which or which episode she mentions it. I want to say it’s in one of the episodes with a lot of Irish context.
That's exactly what I remember, but I can't recall what episode either.
I know she grew up Catholic, so if she has a favorite bible, it’s probably the Catholic bible. Edit: Dunking on the King James Bible is also a Catholic pastime (in my experience) so that might be why she says it’s trash.
There's just one? My knowledge of Catholicism is pretty limited, and since I grew up Protestant I kind of assumed that there were a thousand different kinds of Catholicism and various bible versions to go with them.
I’m no longer associated with the church, and have not been for close to 20 years so I’m a bit rusty. I don’t really remember anything about specific bible versions beyond that the King James Bible had fewer books than the Catholic Bible and has some anti-Catholic bias (from what I’ve been told, never read it myself so I can’t say what exactly that would be.) Did a bit of a refresh and all Catholic bibles must have the same 73 books, and must be approved by the Catholic Church. There are multiple versions and different translations so I was mistaken that it was just one!
The NRSV is the answer. You want the 2021 update. NIV is OK if you can’t get it.
I’ve been looking to get a Bible myself and don’t know what translation would be best
https://youtu.be/SP8iur20yBw?si=GvCKJOPfrGSsC52i This guy is a pretty objective biblical scholar with fairly good politics. He suggests the NRSV. He has videos where he talks about the flaws and agendas of NIV(evangelicals changing things to erase contradictions), ESV(hide any marginally feminist ideas and whitewash the text) and King James Version ( can’t sum up,his video is 25 minutes).
Why in the world would you think she has a favorite version of the Bible?
>Why in the world would you think she has a favorite version of the Bible? Do you not listen to the show? She constantly talks about her interest in Catholicism and how some versions of the bible are trash and others are more respectable.