Search by translation, redlettering, type size, binding and much more!
Item description for The New Jerusalem Bible by Henry Wansbrough...
In 1956, scholars from L'Ecole Biblique in Jerusalem set their minds to translating the Scriptures from the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts, hoping they could preserve the most sacred Christian traditions and stories. By 1966, the first English-language Jerusalem Bible was published. Since then it has become a favored text for lay readers and scholars alike. The accessible language and richly recounted stories, poetry, and letters in this edition is consistent with previous versions. However, this latest version stands out because of its clear format--clean double columns with easy-to-read type and quick reference headings. --This text refers to an alternate Hardcover edition.
From Library Journal
Catholic readers have made The Jerusalem Bible (1966) a perennially popular study Bible. The Jerusalem-based French scholars, upon whose translation the work is based, published a revised French edition in 1973, incorporating recent research. General editor Wansbrough and his colleagues base The New Jerusalem Bible on this revi sion, though they have depended less on the French version and more on the original languages than did the English translators. They have thoroughly re vised everything. The biblical text is loftier, more literal, and less colloquial. It is also less gender-specific, when this approach does not do violence to the original. A worthwhile purchase wher ever the earlier edition is popular. Richard S. Watts, San Bernardino Cty. Lib., Cal.
Copyright 1986 Reed Business Information, Inc.
The 1966 original Jerusalem Bible was immensely popular as an ecumenical version for study, liturgy, and personal reading. This 1985 revision takes note of recent biblical scholarship with rewritten notes and introductions, new translations to improve literary quality and accuracy, and eight pages of newly drawn maps. Some of the best features remain undisturbed: single-column format, verse numbers in the margins, chronological and genealogical tables, and an index of biblical themes in the major footnotes. 2136 pages, hardcover from Doubleday
-Single column format
-9 point type
-Footnotes 6 point type
-The Hasmonaean and Herodian Dynasties
-Tables of Measures and Money
-Alphabetical Table of the Major Footnotes
-Index of Persons
-Index to the Maps
-8 Full-color maps
-Hardcover with dust cover
-6 1/4" x 9 1/2" x 2"
Publishers Description Contains the complete text of the ancient canon of scripture, along with up-to-date and extensive introductions and notes. Eight pages of color maps and indexes, including biblical themes, personal names, and major footnotes.
Citations And Professional Reviews The New Jerusalem Bible by Henry Wansbrough has been reviewed by professional book reviewers and journalists at the following establishments -
Wilson Middle/Junior Hi Catalo - 01/01/2009 page 59
Library Journal - 02/01/1986
Wilson Senior High Core Col - 01/01/2007 page 61
Wilson Public Library Catalog - 12/31/2008 page 94
Promise Angels is dedicated to bringing you great books at great prices. Whether you read for entertainment, to learn, or for literacy - you will find what you want at promiseangels.com!
Studio: Doubleday Religion
Est. Packaging Dimensions: Length: 9.3" Width: 6.5" Height: 2.2" Weight: 3.5 lbs.
Release Date Oct 1, 1985
Publisher Doubleday Religion
ISBN 0385142641 ISBN13 9780385142649
Color: Full Color Point/Type Size: 0.00 Version: NJR Introduction: Yes - Features Introduction! Maps: Yes - Contains Maps Ribbon Marker: Yes - Keep's your place!
Availability 0 units.
More About Henry Wansbrough
The Very Reverend Dom Henry Wansbrough, is an English biblical scholar and a monk of Ampleforth Abbey, England. Dom Henry is Cathedral Prior of Norwich, Magister Scholarum of the English Benedictine Congregation, Member of the Pontifical Biblical Commission, Chairman of the Trustees of the Catholic Biblical Association, and Emeritus Member of the Faculty of Theology in the University of Oxford. He is Alexander Jones Professor of Biblical Studies within the Department of Theology, Philosophy and Religious studies at Liverpool Hope University. He has written twenty books, and over sixty articles He produces the -Wednesday Word- a not-for-profit collaborative Charitable Trust based at St Austin's Catholic Church
Reviews - What do customers think about The New Jerusalem Bible?
Best NJB edition Apr 12, 2010
The NJB, which I've just began to read, is a nice, easy to read translation thats less literal then the RSV for example, but the style is easy to read. It has a bit of inclusive langauge, but not as much as the NRSV.
I like the format (single column) and the notes at the bottom of the page, also near the page edge is referanced where passages is quoted in the other books of the Bible.
The format and font is clear and easy read, though the footnotes are a bit small, theres a good hard cover, but not sure if it will stand up to a lot of use!
One important thing is to make sure you get the Doubleday, hardback ISBN 0385142641, 2136 page edition if you want all the notes.
Personally, I think this Bible compliments the RSV and NAB Bibles I have very well.
DO NOT GET THIS! Apr 9, 2010
If you are looking for The New Jerusalem Bible you MUST get the version with the study notes. THIS version is the best study bible on the market:
ISBN-10: 0385142641 ISBN-13: 978-0385142649
Alex in Ohio Apr 3, 2010
I received this order in a timely manner ahead of estimations. The price was perfect. I love this translation. I read it with devotions along with another translation. Very pleased.
Exciting! Mar 10, 2010
The New Jerusalem Bible is an exciting translation! Even the "feel" of this edition is exciting! I am so very pleased!
A Winner Jan 18, 2010
The New Jerusalem Bible I've just received the New Jerusalem Bible. The notes are outstanding. The print is relatively small, but OK. But I have to use a magnifying glass to read the small text notations, "a," "b," "c," etc. The introductory articles are outstanding, too. I've checked it against my NIV and the JBJerusalem Bible-Jr (Bible Jb). They form together my gold standard:
Galatians 3, 16: (1) "Now the promises were addressed to Abraham "and to his descendants"--notice, in passing, that scripture does not use a plural word as if there were several descendants, it uses the singular: to his posterity, which is Christ." JB
(2) "Now the promises were addressed to Abraham "and to his progeny." The words were not "and to his progenies" in the plural, but in the singular "and to his progeny," which means Christ." NJB
(3) "The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. The Scripture does not say `and to his seeds,` meaning many people, but `and to his your seed,' meaning one person, who is Christ." NIV
The terms descendant/descendants along with "posterity," progeny/progenies, and seed/seeds all present problems. (1) JB has "descendants" as being singular in contrast to "descendants" in the plural. "Descendant" is the common contrasting singular form and should have been used to avoid ambiguity. The Greek lists contrasting forms, "spermati," singular, and "spermasin," plural (see [a link to an online interlinear translation of the Bible, which was removed; evidently outside links are not OK] ). In addition the JB uses the word "posterity" as if it were singular, pointing a single individual far removed from Abraham in time: it is only singular in form; it refers to all in his line. (2) The NJB uses a mass noun in a singular sense, resulting in ambiguity: for "progeny" means all the progeny. To construe it as singular means to confer on it a special, unfamiliar sense. (3) NIV's seed/seeds is used in a non-literal, figurative sense, taking the source, Abraham (as seed), for the result, Christ. Further, "Progeny" is a count noun, pointing to an entire descent from a source, rather than to a remote individual in the line. The 20-volume Oxford English Dictionary lists "Offspring, progeny" as rare, except in biblical phraseology. So as it is, the NIV takes the prize--but using terminology meaningful only to someone already grounded in the Biblical usage. If the JB had translated "spermati" in the singular, "descendant," it would have provided a sound translation for the general reader. The mass-noun/count-noun distinction is not rigidly followed, though one could expect it to be in a Bible.
In future I'll use the New Jerusalem Bible and the NIV as my gold standards. I haven't tagged my NIV because I'm not sure it is the latest.
12/23/10 I have since run onto problems with some notes commenting on the text. For example, the NJB note on the song of Simeon, Lk 2, 29-32, reads: "Unlike [the] `Magnificat' and `Benedictus' this canticle seems to have been written by Luke himself, using especially texts from Isaiah. . . ." The note on the "Magnificat," Lk 1, 46-55, is largely to the same effect. Here the commentator does not say flatly that it is the work of Luke himself, but that "Lk must have found this canticle in the circles of the `Poor,' where it was perhaps attributed to the Daughter of Zion. He found it suitable to bring it into the prose narrative and put on the lips of Mary." The commentator's use the word "`Poor`" without further explanation seems pejorative, i.e., as if to say "the poor and ignorant." The note on the "Benedictus," Lk 1, 68-79: "Like the `Magnificat' this canticle is a poem which Lk has drawn from elsewhere to put on Zechariah's lips, adding vv. 76-77 to adapt it to the context. . . ." ["All those who heard it treasured it in their hearts. . . ."]
These are offensive in tone. The comments not do justice to what Luke says at the start: Lk 1, 2-4: an account drawn up "as these were handed down to us by those who from the outset were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word[.] I in my turn, after carefully going over the whole story from the beginning, have decided to write an ordered account for you . . . ." When Luke says, for example, "treasured up in their hearts," this includes various memories by Mary and others. Textual criticism asks questions of a text, e.g., How do you come to know Mary's thinking?--Because she talked about it, reminisced about it with others: it was of increasing interest to them. These were religious people in touch with religious life: Elizabeth and Zechariah, and the bystanders at the critical times. They treasured it up in their hearts: their lives were coming to be defined by these "wonders." It should come as no surprise that their thinking tended to be expressed in terms of appropriate, familiar texts. Luke drew on the record of these memories as he wrote.
Today I'd give 3 stars to the New Jerusalem Study Bible, and only as a second Bible.