Fabian Posted July 9, 2021 Share Posted July 9, 2021 Hello I would love to see https://catholicbiblestudent.com/tag/esv https://www.catholicbible.org in Accordance. Thanks Fabian 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlm Posted July 9, 2021 Share Posted July 9, 2021 I’ve been curious about the ESV-CE since it was approved in India, but so far it’s so difficult to understand what was changed with respect to the ESV. The charts at the first link show the ESV-CE is much more of a change from the RSV than the RSV-CE2 is, but that’s pretty obvious, given that the ESV was a thorough revision. The one non-trivial change mentioned is that the book of Tobit is translated from the longer Greek text in the ESV-CE, whereas the RSV-CE2 used the shorter text—obviously, this book was not part of the ESV. But what did they do in the Gospels, or 1 Corinthians, or in other passages that the RSV-CE and RSV-CE2 changed? It’s still a mystery. Maybe now that the text is available for a competing program we’ll see some analysis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael J. Bolesta Posted September 23, 2021 Share Posted September 23, 2021 I would be interested in this Bible as a module. Thank you very much! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlm Posted December 19, 2021 Share Posted December 19, 2021 I've been thinking about this more, and if it was tagged with Strong's numbers, I would definitely buy this module. I want to use a tagged Catholic Bible, and whether or not they've done a good job of making a Catholic Edition, something ESV-based would be more to my taste than the NRSV. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ukfraser Posted December 20, 2021 Share Posted December 20, 2021 Ive always associated the jerusalem bible translation with catholics (since it was used by a number of catholics i met with regularly who introduced me to it as it wasnt used in the anglican circles i was in). However, it is neither tagged nor the 'study bible' version is in accordance. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Guy Posted December 20, 2021 Share Posted December 20, 2021 I would buy the ESV - CE with Strongs if Accordance were to make it available. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlm Posted December 21, 2021 Share Posted December 21, 2021 22 hours ago, ukfraser said: Ive always associated the jerusalem bible translation with catholics (since it was used by a number of catholics i met with regularly who introduced me to it as it wasnt used in the anglican circles i was in). However, it is neither tagged nor the 'study bible' version is in accordance. Do you mean the NJB? I don't know of a Bible program that offers the 1966 Jerusalem Bible, which was the family Bible of my childhood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ukfraser Posted December 21, 2021 Share Posted December 21, 2021 (edited) Sloppy typing on my part! Yes i was referring to the jb family of translations as we now even have the revised njb (2019) in line with everything else being revised and updated and and and... (i actually got my 1966 copy rebound many years before i got accordance and still treasure it.) Edited December 21, 2021 by ukfraser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlm Posted December 23, 2021 Share Posted December 23, 2021 So, about tagged Catholic Bibles: I think the basic problem is that translators who produce something exclusively for Catholics don’t care about Strong’s numbers. So tagging isn’t available from the publisher, and since it’s a lot of work to tag a Bible, a Bible software company is unlikely to do it unless there’s a huge demand. So my only hope for a tagged Catholic Bible is a Catholic edition of a Bible that has already been tagged in its base version. Today, the Jerusalem Bible, NJB, etc. is no longer my favorite translation, but I value it as a second opinion, because its origin is independent from the KJV and its many descendants. So in the Text Browser, you can have a word or an expression that is rendered almost the same way in the ASV, RSV, ESV, NASB, …, and the NJB will show you another way of putting it in English. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R. Mansfield Posted December 24, 2021 Share Posted December 24, 2021 21 hours ago, jlm said: So, about tagged Catholic Bibles: I think the basic problem is that translators who produce something exclusively for Catholics don’t care about Strong’s numbers. So tagging isn’t available from the publisher, and since it’s a lot of work to tag a Bible, a Bible software company is unlikely to do it unless there’s a huge demand. So my only hope for a tagged Catholic Bible is a Catholic edition of a Bible that has already been tagged in its base version. It's actually more complicated than that. Both the Strong's numbering and the Goodrick/Kohlenberger systems were designed by Protestants who didn't recognize a larger Old Testament canon. The LXX is the primary source for these additional books, but there are no Strong's numbers for the expanded vocabulary of the LXX. Thus, we would either have to come up with new Greek Strong's numbers to accommodate the additional vocabulary or come up with a different method altogether, not dependent on key word numbering. Personally, I would like to see us follow this latter option. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fabian Posted December 24, 2021 Author Share Posted December 24, 2021 15 minutes ago, R. Mansfield said: It's actually more complicated than that. Both the Strong's numbering and the Goodrick/Kohlenberger systems were designed by Protestants who didn't recognize a larger Old Testament canon. The LXX is the primary source for these additional books, but there are no Strong's numbers for the expanded vocabulary of the LXX. Thus, we would either have to come up with new Greek Strong's numbers to accommodate the additional vocabulary or come up with a different method altogether, not dependent on key word numbering. Personally, I would like to see us follow this latter option. So I know https://www.apostolicbible.com has done a Strong's numbering on the additional books. I guess he has expanded the numbering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R. Mansfield Posted December 24, 2021 Share Posted December 24, 2021 9 minutes ago, Fabian said: So I know https://www.apostolicbible.com has done a Strong's numbering on the additional books. I guess he has expanded the numbering. Oh, I know some have done it. Personally, I think a completely different and better method could be used that didn't rely on key numbers. Just my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlm Posted December 25, 2021 Share Posted December 25, 2021 On 12/24/2021 at 8:25 PM, R. Mansfield said: It's actually more complicated than that. Both the Strong's numbering and the Goodrick/Kohlenberger systems were designed by Protestants who didn't recognize a larger Old Testament canon. The LXX is the primary source for these additional books, but there are no Strong's numbers for the expanded vocabulary of the LXX. Thus, we would either have to come up with new Greek Strong's numbers to accommodate the additional vocabulary or come up with a different method altogether, not dependent on key word numbering. Personally, I would like to see us follow this latter option. I was assuming I wouldn’t get any key numbers in the deuterocanonical parts of the OT: just having the rest of the Bible tagged would be a big help, and I expect most of it could just be copied from the base version. At least in the case of the RSV-CE, most of the text is the same, and the changes generally only regard translation, so the key numbers would be the same. If the deuterocanon is also tagged, so much the better. I’m mainly interested in seeing what word is being translated, either to look it up directly in a lexicon or to find it quickly in context with cross-highlighting. Either key numbers or something like the Targum word map would work for that. So I’m happy with either. However, key numbers might be preferable for other users who can’t read Greek. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fabian Posted March 7, 2022 Author Share Posted March 7, 2022 (edited) On 12/24/2021 at 8:54 PM, R. Mansfield said: Oh, I know some have done it. Personally, I think a completely different and better method could be used that didn't rely on key numbers. Just my opinion. I sad this years ago. The Goodrick/Kohlenberger Enhanced System would be better. But as I advocated it ... the thread are closed from the Accordance site. Really this was not nice. Only because Accordance had no serious argument. Accordance could make use of the G/KE numbers from the NT and add the missing words. I know I repeat me. Start as Strong's (use the apostolic Bible) and go forward on G/K to G/KE. "The CCATS is on an algorithm and not error free." (Joel Brown) Edited March 7, 2022 by Fabian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fabian Posted March 7, 2022 Author Share Posted March 7, 2022 Maybe one time the Word Map will be expanded to translations too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlm Posted April 13, 2022 Share Posted April 13, 2022 A month or two ago, I learned that the Augustine Institute only has the rights to distribute the ESV-CE in North America. So another company that offers the Augustine Bible in electronic form cannot sell it to me because I live in Europe. I hope Accordance will make the ESV-CE available also in Europe. It looks like the SPCK has the rights at least for the UK, and I know there are other SPCK publications available for Accordance, so presumably Oaktree already has a working relationship with them. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlm Posted May 30, 2022 Share Posted May 30, 2022 I recently came across a list (PDF) of the changes between the ESV and ESV-CE (apart from the addition of the deuterocanon). I was surprised at how few there are in comparison to the RSV-CE. Only a minority could have a theological motivation. In Luke 1:28 "O favored one" became "O highly favored one." In 1 Cor 7:25,34, "bethrothed" was changed to "virgins," but not in 1 Cor 7:28,36–38—a strange inconsistency. The double brackets indicating text-critical doubts were removed from Mk 16:9–20 and Jn 7:53–8:11. Most changes look like translator preference: capitalize "council" when it refers to the Sanhedrin; translate ἁγιάζω "consecrate … consecrated" instead of "consecrate … sanctified" in John 17:19; replace "pagans" with "Gentiles" in 1 Cor 5:1. On the positive side, transferring Strong's numbers to the ESV-CE should be an easy task. I could probably make my own bootleg 'ESV-CE minus the deuterocanon' in an hour by applying the changes in the list, but it's not an attractive idea because I'd lose the Strong's tagging. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.c3123c857d1029f98e39c9394adc358d.png)
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now