Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site cvl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!seismo!rlgvax!cvl!emma@uw-june.UUCP
From: emma@uw-june.UUCP@cvl.UUCP (emma@uw-june.UUCP)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: You gotta be kidding.....
Message-ID: <699@cvl.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 31-Oct-83 15:00:28 EST
Article-I.D.: cvl.699
Posted: Mon Oct 31 15:00:28 1983
Date-Received: Thu, 3-Nov-83 07:06:29 EST
References: ihuxr.736 <6084@unc.UUCP>
Sender: tms@cvl.UUCP
Organization: U. of Md. Computer Vision Lab
Lines: 21

OK, I'll bite.  The Bibles which have mentioned so far have indeed been
Protestant.  The Authorized Version, by the way, may or may not contain
the Apocrypha.  These books were translated at that time, but not all
editions and printings have included them.

I do not like the RSV, as it is mostly a paraphrase of the AV.  So I
don't trust it.  My favorite translation (for readability) is the New
International (often called NIV, by the way).

A couple of Catholic translations reputed to be good are the New
Jerusalem (with a couple of books translated by JRR Tolkien, by the
way) and the New American.  I don't have a copy of the NJ, so I only pass on
the recommendations I have heard.  I do most of my reading in the fairly
recent NABible (no, not the New American Standard Bible).
This is a translation from the original sources which is nearly as
readable as the NIV.  It is reputed to be accurate.  In addition, it is
cross-referenced and has some "official" interpretations in footnotes.
These footnotes range from very helpful and informative, to hilarious
half-hearted defenses of old Catholic heresies.

-Joe P.