The following PDF is a list of all the Bibles in my collection.  There's a very good possibility I may have skipped a few, as I haven't been all that meticulous at adding new Bibles to the list lately.  But it should be a pretty close representation of all the Bibles I have, in their various formats.  Now I've just got to figure out where to put them all...

If you're interested, the slide show below is available for free download at the Common English Bible website.

In case anyone's interested, there is yet another new English translation that has shown up on the already crowded Bible scene.  It's called the International English Bible, and as far as I can tell, it is the work of one man.  I believe his name is Andrew Jackson (at least, that's how he's credited on the Kindle Version of the IEB's New Testament), and the website refers to him as "a Bible teacher familiar with the original languages and the historical and geographical context of the New Testament."  There really isn't any more info on the site than that.  But you can browse the entire New Testament on the site, and leave feedback for the translator.  I haven't had a chance to look at much of the IEB, but I did take a peek at Romans, and found that he follows Luther's famous example in Romans 3:28.  See below...

I tell you the truth: A person is declared righteous, by faith alone, apart from the human works of the law of Moses. (emphasis mine)

Feel free to check out this version and give the translator your feedback.  Also, if you want to give me any feedback on this blog, I would be interested in other people's opinions.

I really thought, by this time, that the CEB would be making a little better showing.  Of course, the stores represented by the CBA presumably tend to have a pretty conservative clientele.  So it's possible that this list doesn't really reflect the actual performance of the CEB.  The NIV is certainly holding its position at the stores represented on this list, despite some of the public outcry against the NIV 2011 from some conservative denominations.

[I received a free ebook of The Voice for my Kindle through Thomas Nelson's blogger program at booksneeze.com.]

I have blogged about the original edition of The Voice a few times on my main blog at caspianrex.posterous.com.  So I was naturally curious to see what changes have been made in this new 2011 edition.  Before I give some of my thoughts, I would like to point out that one point of view I do not share with my more "conservative" brethren is that The Voice is some sort of ghastly perversion of Scripture.  In fact, reading The Voice (both in its original form and this newer edition), I am not struck by any significant "liberal agenda" in the work.  Certainly, there is a great deal of non-traditional language, and more importantly, a very modern approach to issues of formatting of text.

That being said, I can't say I believe The Voice is really a translation of Scripture, in the same way that the NIV, or the ESV, or even the NLT or Good News bibles are.  The Voice goes a bit beyond paraphrase, into the realm of reinterpretation. This could be one problem with the new edition. In the original edition of The Voice, the editor referred to the work as a "retelling" of Scripture, which it certainly is.  The new Preface often refers to The Voice as a "translation."  There seems to be an attempt in the new editorial material to place The Voice on the same plane as other translations.  I think this may be a bit disingenuous.  Perhaps the following example will make it clear what The Voice really is like.

Right towards the beginning of the New Testament we see how interpretive The Voice is.  Consider this passage from the first chapter of Matthew:

20Now when Joseph had decided to act on his instincts, a messenger of the Lord came to him in a dream.

Messenger of the Lord: Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to wed Mary and bring her into your home and family as your wife. She did not sneak off and sleep with someone else—rather,she conceived the baby she now carries through the miraculous wonderworking of the Holy Spirit.  Matthew 1:20-21 [italics from original]

Now, the introductory material to The Voice clearly states that italics are used to indicate explanatory additions to the text.  The problem is, to my way of thinking, that these additions go beyond simple clarification, and into the area of interpretation, and even character analysis.  Why must the reader be told that Mary didn't act unfaithfully?  Is the addition for Joseph or for the reader?  In other words, what we have here is not simply translation; it is, rather, full blown interpretation.  And whereas I agree with the editors' contention that all translation involves some degree of interpretation, I think The Voice goes significantly further than most versions. I do believe, howver, that The Voice is a dynamic retelling of the New Testament story, and as a sort of companion to Scripture, it could be a very useful tool.

What makes this edition of The Voice different from the first edition, other than its Preface?  Well, there is definitely some reworking of some pretty important terminology.  For example, in the original version, the word Christos was usually translated "Liberating King," which was certainly an extremely interpretive rendering of the Greek.  The new edition uses the term "Anointed One" more often, lining up more squarely with the traditional (and more accurate) understanding of Christos as the Greek equivalent of Messiah.  

Also, gone are the somewhat cheesy monologues that introduce the different books of the Bible.  For example, the original intro to John's Gospel began this way: "My name is John. My father's name was Zebedee."  The new edition has a more typical historical intro, as in many study Bibles,  Of course, there are still lots of somewhat disruptive interruptions throughout the text, that attempt to explain the plot, as it were.  Ironically, I find that these constant interruptions in the flow of the text make this "easy to read" version much more difficult to read!  You can't make it through more than a few verses before the editors barge in to explain what's going on.

Overall, though, this new edition doesn't really tread as much new ground as one would think, compared to its earlier edition or to traditional translations.  Interestingly enough, when it comes to one of the more disputed terms in the New Testament, Paul's use of the word "flesh," The Voice doesn't attempt to interpret the word.  And they also retain the phrase "Son of Man," as it has traditionally been rendered.  (Unlike the recent Common English Bible, which has received all kinds of harsh criticism for its rendering "The Human One.")

So, bottom line for me is this: by all means, if you want to take a fresh look at Scripture, The Voice has potential to be an excellent, dynamic tool.  However, for heaven's sake, read it alongside an actual translation.  The Voice can not be said to be strictly a translation of Scripture; it's really more of a retelling of Scripture.  As such, it's pretty successful.  But as a standalone translation, I think it's way off base.

I'm having lots of trouble getting the Posterous bookmarklet to work today, so I'll try this the "old-fashioned" way.

http://www.cbaonline.org/nm/documents/BSLs/Bible_Translations.pdf#

No real surprises here--the NIV continues to dominate the list, despite some criticism of the 2011 update from conservative quarters. The CEB hasn't made a showing yet, but perhaps that will change when the 1984 NIV is no longer available.

Over on Facebook, I participate in a group that I created several years ago, called Bible Versions Debate and Discussion.  I stopped being an Admin of the group, because I hated trying to moderate discussions about the Bible.  It seems to me that is virtually impossible for some people to disagree with a Bible translation without resorting to overly dramatic or inflammatory language.  Case in point: the other day, I simply asked if anyone had any thoughts on the CEB, now that the version is complete.  Almost immediately, someone posted a YouTube video that, in its title refers to the CEB as a PERVERSION, and proceeds to rip the CEB apart (figuratively), using the King James Version as the ultimate criterion for orthodoxy.  Now, I do not understand this kind of approach.  Isn't it possible to critique a Bible translation, and even to indicate that you don't think it's a good translation, without accusing the translators of a wilful perversion of God's Word?  I mean, although I have followed the CEB with interest for some time, it's not my favorite translation in the world.  Some of the choices the translators made strike me as weak, inaccurate, or inelegant.  But that doesn't mean that the CEB translators have some secret agenda to erode people's faith in God and the Bible.  It simply means that the CEB and I disagree in places.  

When it comes to badly done translations, very few Bibles come close to the New World Translation, and even that one is not 100% horrible throughout.  Indeed, if I were to turn to a random page in the NWT, I would probably have no problems with what I read.  When they mess it up, they mess it up pretty badly, but the rest of it is okay.  But I don't spend all of my energy trying to show Jehovah's Witnesses how awful their official Bible translation is.  I don't write blog after blog about the "perversion" of the NWT.  If anyone askes me about it, I tell them that I would avoid it, and suggest a few better versions.  What makes some people have to excoriate everything with which they disagree?  "The King James Bible is the best translation ever made; therefore, every modern Bible translation is part of a plot by the devil (or the Roman Catholic Church or the New Age movement)."  Crazy.

My basic message to the people who insist on being the drama kings and queens of Christian faith is this: get over yourselves.

 I'm pretty sure this is all of 'em...all 204 of 'em.

A pretty diverse collection, really.  

I'm a little late writing about this, as the completed CEB became available over a week ago.  Right now, only the electronic version is available, which I think may become the normal way of releasing Bible versions in the future.  The 2011 NIV became available months before its release (it was actually available in late 2010, despite its 2011 copyright date).  I will attempt to do a more complete review very soon, but first some preliminary thoughts.  

• At the church where I direct choir, we have been using the CEB for some Bible studies, and the pastor preaches from it from time to time.  So far, reaction to the CEB seems to be positive overall.  Interestingly enough, my church is a rather elderly congregation for the most part, so it's particularly noteworthy that most of them seem to embrace it.
• Whereas the CEB has not been my personaly choice for my own reading and study, I do pick it up from time to time.  I don't think its accuracy level is quite comparable to the HCSB, which is one of my favorites of late.  But, in general, I find the CEB's translation choices very solid, and sometimes thought provoking.
• I am not extremely fond of the rendering "the Human One, " in place of the traditional "the Son of Man."  But I do understand, and even support, the choice, even though it's not exactly to my personal taste.  The idea seems to be that the phrase huiou tou theou is meant to emphasize Jesus' humanity, rather than his masculinity.  I think that's a valid point.  I just find "the Human One" sounds corny to my ear, like a line from a cheesy 50s science fiction film.
• Looking through the Psalms, I have some mixed feelings.  In Psalm 23, I don't think "he keeps me alive" quite captures the nuance of "he restores my soul."  That one seems to indicate the CEB translators' unease with the term "soul." Then there's the choice in Psalm 22:18: "they divvy up my garments among themselves."  Divvy? Seriously?  But the CEB of Psalm 8, for example, is far preferable to that found in the 2011 NIV.  
• Some choices made my the CEB translators will no doubt draw fire from conservative readers.  The old "litmus test" verse, Isaiah 7:14 reads, not surprisingly, "The young woman is pregnant and is about to give birth to a son, and she will name him Immanuel."  And nary a footnote indicating the traditional reading of "virgin."  That may lose them a few readers.  Also, the CEB opts for the less traditional, but possibly more accurate "When God began to create the heavens and the earth," rather than the familiar, "In the beginning, God created..."  I doubt many readers will have a serious problem with that, but you never know.

These are just a few impressions off the cuff.  I'll try to give a more complete review later.  Do yourself a favor, though, and check out the CEB.  Those who read it with an open mind may find enough difference between it and other modern translations to stimulate thought and discussion.  And that's always a good thing, as far as I'm concerned.

[I received copies of the iShine Bible in both the girls' and the boys' editions, as part of Tyndale's Blog Network program.  For more information on the program, go to the Tyndale Media Center website.]

One of the latest additions to the already overcrowded "niche Bible" market is the iShine Bible from Tyndale House Publishers.  These Bibles are marketed specifically to "tweens."  They consist of the entire text of the New Living Translation (NLT), a 46-page introductory section called the iShine Index, and three full-color sections of 8 pages each, which inform tweens that they are VIP's (a mnemonic device that presents the concepts of Value, Identity and Purpose).  At the end of the Bible there are a few more sections: Great Chapters, Great Stories and Great Verses to memorize.  All of the material is geared towards readers in the "tween" age group.

Let me start with the positives: first, the NLT is a good translation for the target age group, easy to understand but accurate; second, at a retail price of $19.99 for the entire Bible, both Old and New Testaments, the iShine Bible is certainly a better value than Thomas Nelson's famous (or infamous?) "Biblezines," which are New Testament only; finally, the compact size and sturdy binding make these Bibles a pretty good value as well.  Although they might not be as good a value as a simple gift and award Bible, you could spend a lot more for a lot less substance.  Now, on to the negatives...

I understand, to a certain extent, the marketing mission of Bible publishers, who are attempting to tailor different Bibles to individual age, gender, and lifestyle demographics.  The problem is, as I see it, that publishers have made the Bible just another one of the many style choices that kids (and adults) have to choose from.  Therefore, as kids are being bombarded with choices of what music to listen to, what clothes to wear, what TV programs to watch, etc., they now have stylish choices for which Bible to read.  And these style options always seem to buy into stereotypes to an extent that can be alarming.  Thus, with the iShine Bible, we have a boys' edition that features a stylized sillhouette of a boy wielding an electric guitar, as seen below:

The colors are "boyish" colors of blue and yellow.  The above-mentioned supplementary material, which is exactly the same content in both versions, features extremely hip, cool boy models in the boys' edition, and equally hip and stylish girl models in the girls' version.  Of course, it is assumed that all girls will want a pink, glittery Bible (presumably to match their girlish wardrobe choices), as seen in the photo below:

The first full color section in both Bibles lists some of the priorities a tween may have in his/her life: clothes, video games, school, family, God, music, friends.  Although God is presented in a larger font than the other items on the list, God is still listed as merely one of the many choices tweens will make in their lives.  Certainly, there is some truth to this concept in the real world, but I have serious doubts as to whether the version of God provided in this material is compatible with the God revealed in Scripture.  I guess the question boils down to: does the medium overshadow the message?  In other words, amidst all of the slick, glamorous production, will tweens really discover the Living God of the Christian faith, or will they make another lifestyle choice, in the same way they would choose a hairstyle or shoes?

I have struggled with this whole issue of "niche" Bibles and study Bibles many times in my life.  On the one hand, I believe it's a good thing for publishers to get the Bible into the hands (and hearts and minds) of as many people as they can.  On the other hand, the sea of marketing could very well overwhelm the reader's senses.  There is no simple solution to the problem of Bible marketing, especially where kids are concerned.  The iShine Bible is not the worst niche Bibel out there, but I believe parents need to be active in drawing their childrens' attention to the text of the Bible, and to help them get beyond the marketing on the outside to the message within.