<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Accurate but Artless
Review: I grew up hearing the original New English Bible, as it was my father's favorite Bible. Therefore, I purchased this revision with interest in how the 'reading' had changed. Though this is a very readable translation of the Bible, to me it lacks the passion of other translations, particularly the King James and New King James. Like many others buying a new translation, I first leaved to many of my favorite passages in both the New and Old Testaments. They just don't 'stick' with me like the KJV. I prefer strongly the use of capitals when dealing with God and Jesus in the Bible; it is missing here and I'm not comfortable with it. In short, this is an excellent translation and one to which I'll refer during study, but it could never be my favorite due to the dry nature of the translation.
Rating:
Summary: Accurate but Artless
Review: I grew up hearing the original New English Bible, as it was my father's favorite Bible. Therefore, I purchased this revision with interest in how the 'reading' had changed. Though this is a very readable translation of the Bible, to me it lacks the passion of other translations, particularly the King James and New King James. Like many others buying a new translation, I first leaved to many of my favorite passages in both the New and Old Testaments. They just don't 'stick' with me like the KJV. I prefer strongly the use of capitals when dealing with God and Jesus in the Bible; it is missing here and I'm not comfortable with it. In short, this is an excellent translation and one to which I'll refer during study, but it could never be my favorite due to the dry nature of the translation.
Rating:
Summary: Lovely & stately, with a few imperfections
Review: In the Psalms, the translators of the REB use "happy" instead of "blessed" (the Vulgate's word is "beatus"), so Psalm 1 begins "Happy is the one." Such tonal flatness is mildly disheartening. Happy is the sobriquet of the late Mrs Nelson Rockefeller. Also, in the first psalm, the immortal rendering "his leaf does not wither" has been made to read "its foliage never fades"; we do not believe that this change is an improvement. In Psalm 136, the refrain repeated throughout the psalm is given as "his love endures forever." We recall translations that have "mercy" instead of love, and prefer that particular rendering. The Revised Standard Version has "steadfast love," the modifier adding some strength to a noun that has been weakened by much misuse and use. In the Song of Songs, for "Osculetur me osculo oris sui," the first verse of the Canticle, the REB gives us "May he smother me with kisses." A feasible translation, but we prefer the cadence of the New International Version's "Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth," which seems to be more accurate. Also, in the Song of Songs, the verse that is traditionally rendered "terrible as an army with banners" is given by the REB as "majestic as the starry heavens." Is there a justification for this rendering in the original Hebrew? We are very grateful for the inclusion of deuterocanonical books, often called the Apocrypha; some passages of Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus (Sirach) being worthy of memorization. The Apocrypha are placed intertestamentally, to coin an adverb, between the Old and the New, although this reader would not have objected if these books had been reincorporated into the Old Testament, following the lead of the Vulgate. In the New Testament, we find a few quirks, but nothing akin to the cacophonies of the NAB. In the Canticle of Zechariah, Luke 1.68 ff., we would prefer "Blessed be" rather than "Praise to." There are some delightful Anglicisms! St Stephen's words touched his hearers "on the raw," for instance, in Acts 7.54. John 7.53-8.11 is placed at the end of the Gospel according to St John, with the familiar caveat that some witnesses do not contain the passage. Still, to take this essential part of Sacred Scripture out of its customary place in the canon is to create an unnecessary distraction to the reader. Am not a Scripture scholar, and am innocent of both Greek and Hebrew, but the Revised English Bible seems to be accurate most of the time, and almost always free of the graceless cacophonies of some other translations we could name. There are those who will, with good reason, continue to prefer the Revised Standard Version or the New International Version or the brave effort of Msgr Ronald Knox, but the REB is not without its merits. Here is how the Magnificat appears in the Revised English Bible (Luke 1.46-55): "My soul tells out the greatness of the Lord, my spirit has rejoiced in God my saviour; for he has looked with favour on his servant, lowly as she is. From this day forward all generations will count me blessed, for the Mighty God has done great things for me. His name is holy, his mercy sure from generation to generation toward those who fear him. He has shown the might of his arm, he has routed the proud and all their schemes; he has brought down monarchs from their thrones, and raised on high the lowly. He has filled the hungry with good things, and sent the rich away empty. He has come to the help of Israel his servant, as he promised our forefathers; he has not forgotten to show mercy to Abraham and his children's children forever."
Rating:
Summary: Lovely & stately, with a few imperfections
Review: In the Psalms, the translators of the REB use "happy" instead of "blessed" (the Vulgate's word is "beatus"), so Psalm 1 begins "Happy is the one." Such tonal flatness is mildly disheartening. Happy is the sobriquet of the late Mrs Nelson Rockefeller. Also, in the first psalm, the immortal rendering "his leaf does not wither" has been made to read "its foliage never fades"; we do not believe that this change is an improvement. In Psalm 136, the refrain repeated throughout the psalm is given as "his love endures forever." We recall translations that have "mercy" instead of love, and prefer that particular rendering. The Revised Standard Version has "steadfast love," the modifier adding some strength to a noun that has been weakened by much misuse and use. In the Song of Songs, for "Osculetur me osculo oris sui," the first verse of the Canticle, the REB gives us "May he smother me with kisses." A feasible translation, but we prefer the cadence of the New International Version's "Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth," which seems to be more accurate. Also, in the Song of Songs, the verse that is traditionally rendered "terrible as an army with banners" is given by the REB as "majestic as the starry heavens." Is there a justification for this rendering in the original Hebrew? We are very grateful for the inclusion of deuterocanonical books, often called the Apocrypha; some passages of Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus (Sirach) being worthy of memorization. The Apocrypha are placed intertestamentally, to coin an adverb, between the Old and the New, although this reader would not have objected if these books had been reincorporated into the Old Testament, following the lead of the Vulgate. In the New Testament, we find a few quirks, but nothing akin to the cacophonies of the NAB. In the Canticle of Zechariah, Luke 1.68 ff., we would prefer "Blessed be" rather than "Praise to." There are some delightful Anglicisms! St Stephen's words touched his hearers "on the raw," for instance, in Acts 7.54. John 7.53-8.11 is placed at the end of the Gospel according to St John, with the familiar caveat that some witnesses do not contain the passage. Still, to take this essential part of Sacred Scripture out of its customary place in the canon is to create an unnecessary distraction to the reader. Am not a Scripture scholar, and am innocent of both Greek and Hebrew, but the Revised English Bible seems to be accurate most of the time, and almost always free of the graceless cacophonies of some other translations we could name. There are those who will, with good reason, continue to prefer the Revised Standard Version or the New International Version or the brave effort of Msgr Ronald Knox, but the REB is not without its merits. Here is how the Magnificat appears in the Revised English Bible (Luke 1.46-55): "My soul tells out the greatness of the Lord, my spirit has rejoiced in God my saviour; for he has looked with favour on his servant, lowly as she is. From this day forward all generations will count me blessed, for the Mighty God has done great things for me. His name is holy, his mercy sure from generation to generation toward those who fear him. He has shown the might of his arm, he has routed the proud and all their schemes; he has brought down monarchs from their thrones, and raised on high the lowly. He has filled the hungry with good things, and sent the rich away empty. He has come to the help of Israel his servant, as he promised our forefathers; he has not forgotten to show mercy to Abraham and his children's children forever."
Rating: 
Summary: My opinion has subtly changed over the years...
Review: Since I first reviewed this translation a few years ago, my view has subtly changed. While the bulk of my comments remain unchanged, I have revised this review a bit to reflect my current thoughts.
The Revised English Bible, successor in lineage to the New English Bible, as a very interesting read, though like most modern translations, it leaves me feeling rather unsure of the text. There are too many "little changes" that mean a lot to me in style from the NEB that I cannot wholeheartedly recommend this as an individuals principal Bible.
First, the good points. The REB is quite nicely typeset, and is eminently readable. The selection of fonts, sizes, and pagination is outstanding, though I have to admit to perferring the 'paragraph style' of the old NEB. The return to verse numbers in a more traditional location (i.e., in the verse itself) is welcome. The margin versification of the NEB was pretty confusing at times (the Jerusalem Bible got it right by adding a dot in at the beginning of verses that started in the middle of a line).
At one time, my favourite part of the NEB was that, while the text of regular conversation was in full-blown contemporary English, the prayers and psalter were, insofar as possible, rendered in traditional - yet readable - language.
The loss of the traditional language prayers of the Bible was of immense sadness to me at that time, because I was using the traditional Book of Common Prayer with my NEB. Over time, my viewpoint on this has changed, and I welcome the modern language in the psalter and the prayers of the Bible. Sadly, however, Psalter of the REB has many problems that take away from the poetic nature of the Psalms. I also found the Creation account to be rather poorly phrased. The use of inclusive language is noticed and somewhat bemoaned by me, but I am somewhat conservative on that account, so take that as you will.
For those seeking a poetic translation, I would highly recommend the Jerusalem Bible, but the REB is a useful translation with many good points.
Rating:
Summary: Did we really have to revise the New English Bible?
Review: The Revised English Bible, successor in lineage to the New English Bible, as a very interesting read, though like most modern translations, it leaves me feeling rather unsure of the text. There are too many "little changes" that mean a lot to me in style from the NEB that I cannot wholeheartedly recommend this as an individuals principal Bible. First, the good points. The REB is quite nicely typeset, and is eminently readable. The selection of fonts, sizes, and pagination is outstanding (much better than the NEB!). The return to verse numbers in a more traditional location (i.e., in the verse itself) is welcome. The margin versification of the NEB was pretty bad. Now, the bad. My favourite part of the NEB is gone, and that was the fact that, while the text of regular conversation was in full-blown contemporary English, the prayers and psalter were, insofar as possible, rendered in traditional - yet readable - language. The loss of the traditional language prayers of the Bible is of immense sadness to this reader. The Psalter of the REB has many problems that truly prevents the reader from "praying the Psalter" with Christ. I also found the Creation account to be rather poorly phrased. All in all, this is okay for the most part, but I'll stick with my New English Bible w/ Apocrypha (that is, until it falls apart!)
<< 1 >>
| 
