Thanks to reader Devin for alerting me that the RNJB is now available from Darton, Longman, and Todd (DLT). Book Depository still lists July 29th as the projected date when they will have the RNJB in stock.
Now that the Old Testament portion of the RNJB has been released, Fr. Neil Xavier O’Donoghue has published a quick comparison between the Jerusalem Bible (JB), the English Standard Version (ESV), and the RNJB for all three lectionary readings for this Sunday (the 16th Sunday in Ordinary Time). Check out his post over at Pray Tell Blog!
Fr. Neil also published an article in the Tablet on the RNJB vs. the ESV. This article requires a free registration to view in full.
Looking forward to this one.
I just received an email from Book Depository this Thursday morning which said:
“Your pre-order has been released by the publisher and is on its way to our warehouse. Your order will be dispatched from our warehouse soon, and we’ll let you know once it’s on its way to you. Your items and delivery address are below, if these details have changed, please contact our Customer Service Team. ”
So I presume it might actually be sent out by the July 29 date the Book Depository website has been saying for a while.
And Devin is definitely correct in that the DLT website itself now lets you order directly from their website. I had noticed that too sometime in the past week or so.
Anyhow, when RNJB does arrive in the 5-8 business days from being dispatched which would mean
they’d arrive by Thursday, August 8, I’ll be glad to take cellphone pictures of desired passages and email them to Marc and he can post them.
Is this truly a “Formal Equivalence” translation or a mix of both Formal & Dynamic Equivalence?
All translations employ a mix of the two techniques, depending on the translators’ judgment of how to best communicate the sense of the original. The RNJB has moved in the direction of formal equivalence compared to the NJB, but it is still generally considered less formal than the RSV, ESV, NRSV, etc. The YouTuber R. Grant Jones created his own scale for measuring formal equivalence, and he ranks the RNJB as being more literal than the NJB and NIV, while at the same time less literal than the NABRE and NRSV. Here’s a link to his full review:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54kxnLeRVpk
I do wish DLT would publish the newly completed Revised Jerusalem Old Testament in a single volume.
-I already have the excellent New Testament and Psalms (used daily).
-The Whole RJB will be far too bulky and heavy for convenient meditative personal use.
-Having published the NT separately, it seems perverse not to publish the OT as well.
Most will agree that the Bible should be viewed as an autobiographical account of our Creator in His dealings with mankind.
He has used His name Yahweh in previous two versions of NJB nearly 7000 times. Why now change hence hide that illustrious name?
If our name was removed nearly 7000 times from our own autobiography when it went to print how would we feel? How does the Our Father prayer commence?
Finally, is the removal of anyone’s name the first step toward loss of identity let alone relationship?
Daniel, UK
Daniel, in 2008 the Chief Rabbi of Rome petitioned Pope Benedict XVI on the issue of vocalisation of the Holy Name, which is forbidden in Jewish worship. Therefore the LORD in small capital was approved of by the Pope for use in the Bible. And it has been also the tradition of the Church to use LORD in the Sacred Bible alongwith the Liturgy and Lectionaries.
I’m looking for a copy of the 1985 version of the New Jerusalem Bible, the one with all the references on the margins. It’s so disappointing to see that many of these have been removed from the revised version. I know many people who are looking for the 1985 version. Would you please, please, please reconsider printing the 1985 version again please.
Graciela, that bible is still available. DLT still have it available as the New Jerusalem Bible Standard Edition. The ISBN for the hardback is 9780232516500 and is available from Book Depository with free worldwide postage.
Does anyone know about these alleged grammatical errors or typos in the RNJB? As far as my friend and I are aware the standard Bible handed out in OCIA is the NABre… To me it looks a lot like the NABre has stranger sentence structure in Genesis 1 compared to the RNJB. Look:
1.) NABre – “…heavens and the eartha—
2
* and the earth was without form or shape, with darkness over the abyss and a mighty wind sweeping over the waters—b
3
Then God said: Let there be light, and there was light.”
2.) RNJB – “… hes vee at deep. Now the parth as a
3
sweeping over the waters. •God said, ‘Let there be light,’ and there was light.
451
God saw that light was good, and God separated light from darkness. •God called light ‘day’, and darkness he called ‘night’. And there was evening and morning, the first day.”
The peculiarity that we notice is how there is a lot of “—“ and the sentence just sounds weird like a broken up English.