Jump to content

Ted Michael Morgan

Members
  • Posts

    56
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Ted Michael Morgan

  1. The Complete Gospels: Annotate Scholar's Version, edited by Robert J. Miller is an excellent resource from people in the Jesus Seminar.
  2. Comments on English Versions of the Bible and Study Bibles Study Bibles seem popular At least, publishers introduce, revise, and re-introduce many editions of them and members of study groups or Sunday school classes to which I belong often have study Bibles with various translations and with commentaries from diverse points-of-view. Barnes and Noble and other book stores display them in large numbers. Some editions seem to me whimsical. Others include commentary by distinguished biblical scholars. I have worn out several copies of succeeding editions of what is now The Oxford Annotated Bible with the Apocrypha Revised Standard Version, my old favorite study Bible that I first used in 1964 in classes at university. My parents gave me that first copy for Christmas, 1963. Today, I own and refer to several study Bibles, though they are sufficiently expensive that I recommend readers by only one or two study Bibles. I do believe that study Bibles help me read and better understand scripture, even though I realize that they have limited application simply because the commentators largely have to gloss the texts, even in these large books. Nevertheless, I think that to a degree the annotations and introductions can help readers grasp important aspects of biblical texts. The Bibles are still small enough to take to services, groups, and classes. Sometimes a simple reference can deeply enrich reading a text in a group or class. Many of the study Bibles I know use critical-historical methods to explore scriptures. Some others combine these with a canonical outlook that takes into account the way churches have historically understood the Bible. Further, other study Bibles interpret scripture from an evangelical viewpoint. I personally enjoy and frequently use Catholic study Bibles that uses a combination of critical-historical study methods with some general attention to Catholic doctrine and to what my mother names the plan of salvation. Members of the Disciple of Christ edited two of the best study Bibles. As I indicated, all study Bible necessarily have limitations. One criticism as indicated involves limitations of historical-critical readings of scripture. I do not know one that satisfactorily explores my theological concerns though there are study Bibles that use the teachings of the Reformed tradition as a basis for notes. A couple of study Bibles I use are devotional study Bibles. One The Spiritual Formation Bible (NRSV), published by the conservative Christian 1. publisher Zondervan and edited by staff from The Upper Room publishers, uses traditional ways of reading scripture as part of spiritual formation. Another, The Renovaré Spiritual Formation Bible (NRSV), edited by Richard Foster does much the same thing but from a slightly different outlook with attention to a broad range of matters that concern Christians. A group of editors and commentators from a broad range of Christian points-of-view produced this helpful devotional Bible. The texts for most of my study Bibles are the Revised Standard Version, its later revision the New Revised Standard Version, the New English Bible, and its later revision the Revised English Bible. These are translations from committees of scholar representatives from major Christian denominations, including the Roman Catholic and Orthodox denominations. I very much enjoy reading the Hebrew Bible in the Revised English Bible and I find the Oxford Study Bible: Revised English Bible (REB) with Apocrypha particularly helpful. The 23 articles in this edition are outstanding in their clarity and range for such short articles. The first two translations are generally one-to-one word equivalent translations. The second two are thought -to-thought equivalent translations. There are formal or technical names for kinds of translations. Formal equivalent is roughly a word for word translation. Dynamic equivalent is roughly thought for thought. There are also paraphrase translations. These divisions are not absolute. Translations tend to use all these forms because of difficulties transposing meaning from texts in biblical languages to other languages. Interestingly, early Christians, including the Apostle Paul, used Aramaic and Greek translations of the Hebrew Bible. A Google web search reveals articles about translation and about versions of the Bible. There are also interesting blogs. No translation is perfect and no Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek text is perfect or even original. All translations are in some sense interpretations. There are critics of all translations, including my favorite versions. Many critics offer alternative translations. Apparently, the best selling modern translation is the New International Version, translated by a committee of conservative Christian scholars, including some Mennonite scholars. This translation is largely a word for word equivalent translation, though some commentators find it a freer translation than the Revised Standard Version and even the New Revised Standard Version. Many critics and many members of groups and classes in which I take part highly regard the New 2. International Version. I know the NIV New Testament well. During the eighties, I used it as my devotional New Testament. I do not know the Old Testament text. Zondervan, publisher of the NIV offers a wide range of study Bibles that use the NIV text. For myself, I find the NIV New Testament has a bias toward millennialism; however, The New Interpreter’s Bible uses it a one of its two texts and the Norton Critical Edition of the Writings of St. Paul also uses the NIV version. Another excellent conservative translation is the English Standard Version, which the translators model on the Revised Standard Version with certain corrections and revisions they deem important. These often have to do with translating the Old Testament from the Greek Bible that the writers of the New Testament used rather than the received Hebrew text. Some commentators find some of its rendering unnecessarily stilted. The publisher of this translation will introduce a study edition in October 2008. You can sample sections of it online. Most study Bibles that I know do not use other translations I enjoy reading. An exception is The Jewish Study Bible, edited by Adele Berlin and March Zvi Brettler, and published by Oxford University Press. This study Bible uses the text of the Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh translation. A positive aspect of this commentary is that it is Jewish and does not interpret the text in terms of the New Testament. Sometimes that is helpful even to Christians because it opens new readings to us and it helps us better and more fairly grasp Judaism for itself. By the way, I enjoy reading the New Living Translation as well as both the Contemporary English Version, and Today’s English Version from the American Bible Society. My brother David gave me my now well worn copy of the CEV several years ago. Elsewhere I have written my take on various study Bibles. I no longer have a single favorite. One reason that I use the Revised Standard Version, The New Revised Standard, the New English Bible, and the Revised English Version is that they include the Deuterocanonical (second canon) books. After all, they were part of the ancient Greek Bible in use at the time of Jesus and included in the scriptures of the early church. Most Christian churches included these books in their canons of scripture and even many Protestants have found reading them worthwhile. They do not change doctrines but they do nurture spiritual formation. Some modern translations do not include them. I do recommend, if you can afford to buy it, a one volume Bible commentary. The scope of these volumes let the commentaries explore topics, 3. frequently addressed only in abbreviated ways in study Bibles, with sufficient depth and range for lay readers. For over forty years, I profitably used an edition of Peake’s Bible Commentary as my single one volume commentary. There are several excellent one-volume Bible commentaries. I use the most recent of them--The Oxford Bible Commentary, The order in this commentary follows Protestant Bibles, but it includes articles on books included in Catholic and Orthodox Bibles. I use this commentary rather than The Jerome Bible Commentary simply because it is more recent and up-to-date. These one-volume commentaries are expensive but often not much more expensive than a study Bible and usually much less expensive than even one commentaries on an individual book of the Bible. The Baton Rouge Public Library offers all of these translations, study Bibles, and commentaries as well as major commentary series such as the Anchor Bible Commentaries. In addition, I own a copy of The Cambridge Companion to the Bible, edited by several distinguished scholars and published by Cambridge University Press. The text of this work is lucid, the format easy to use, and the commentary scholarly and up-to-date. The bibliographies are evocative and valuable guides to further reading and study. Study Bibles help me in my studies in small groups, classes, and in private study as well as even in my private devotions. Take a look at some of them the next time you are in the bookstore or library. There are many excellent choices.
  3. Sometimes, living in any congregation resembles living in minefield. That happens whether the pervasive tone of the congregation is evangelical, fundamentalist, orthodox, liberal, or whatever. Code words and shibboleths define almost invisible barriers. I generally keep my mouth closed. That is one reason that I look so unpleasant in Sunday classes and prayer groups. It would be the same way but in a different form if I were taking part in groups at the Unitarian-Universalist Church. The pervasive right-wing political ambience of our congregation is painful to endure, in part, because I am at base an old-fashioned Eastern Republican. The American flag, along with whatever that so-called Christian flag is, troubles me. I let that pass. Many denominations allow them. I suppose that we mean them to imply the subservience of the nations to God, but I suspect that they really say the opposite. The disdain for any open discussion of topics and theme in classes and groups does not really exclude conflict. It merely submerges discord. I would that we could learn to be more pluralistic. Pluralism transcends tolerance; it promotes faithful acceptance that allows for irreconcilable differences. I explore my own faith now in terms of materialist and rhetorical categories. I need companions in this journey.
  4. Thank you! I have seen the book at Barnes & Noble. Almost everything I have read about Islam is by Christian scholars, though ones knowledgable and sympathetic to the religion. I recently read Efraim Karsh’s Islamic Imperialism, which restores some balance about complaints about Western imperialism. However, it is a politcal work. I have several scholarly books on Islamic themes but nothing that is a simple introduction to the topic.
  5. That sounds good. I find that reading something by a scholar from within a tradition or a specialist on some religion is good. I do like Huston Smith. I find Karen Armstrong wrong on some points. However, I enjoy reading her books. I don't think that I ever quite grasp other religions anymore than I grasp Christianity. Recently, I have been looking at Islam, a religion that I did not like when I was younger. I would love recommendations from you folks about what to read.
  6. The eight points do define my experience of Christian life and faith. Every time I read them, I respond with joy.
  7. Roots of conflict with Europeans are older than the existence of modern Israel. If we think only short term without referral to the past, we miss the resonances that inflame Islamic resentment. The immediate problem, however, comes from the refusal of powerful people in the Islamic world to accord the right of Israel to its existence. Israel's national identity is no more precarious than is the existence of many modern Islamic states. We are all living the aftermath of European colonialism. I do not accept that the response of Israel to the attacks on its soldiers is excessive or inappropriate. The enemies of Israel provoked the violence. They are responsible for what Israel has had to do to protect its interests. One has to realize that the so-called innocent objects of Israeli attacks live among the monsters that attack Israel. Those people need to bring the matter to the source of their problem--extremists who will not accept the fact of Israel. Part of what is happening involves a shift in the relationships of different branches of Islam. Some Islamic groups need to realize that they are much closer to Israel than to their Muslim brothers. It is in the interest of most Muslims to accord Israel a right to exist. However, excellent arguments that might undermine some of what I advocate exist. For example, I highly recommend that one read The Great War for Civilisation: The Conquest of the Middle East by Robert Fisk. (Knopf, 2005). Clearly, we must resolve the just complaints of the Palestinians. At this moment, that is beside the point. This is a chance to eliminate a terrorist organization and a chance to call the bluff of the thugs in Iran. Israel has always sought to negotiate with Palestinians. Remember Israel's founders bought property in Palestine. They sought to create a state that tolerated Jewish, Christian, and Muslim people. The reaction of Palestinian extremists against this aim ignited the problems that have inflamed the region. The Arab League rejected the United Nations 1947 Partition Plan that Israel tentatively accepted. The problem today stems from that fateful rejection by Arab leaders. In the current matter, Hezbollah's Sheik Nasrallah deliberately provoked the crisis. Ehud Olmert may or may not be a damm fool for responding as he has. Regardless, Israel has every right to react to kidnappings and missile attacks. As for Israel attacking civilians, remember that Hezbollah places its thousands of missiles in unmarked homes and garages. Resolution of the immediate and current problems in Lebanon depends entirely upon the disarming of Hezbollah and the elimination of Sheik Nasrallah. Hezbollah nurtures the likes of Ehud Olmert. Syria has recently massacred some 10,000 to 20,000 of its people in Hama. I believe that most of those people were civilians. That is something any humane and just person does abhor and condemn. Syria supports the thug Sheik Nasrallah and his gang of thugs Nezbollah. I am concerned that Israel might over react to provocations. However, thus far, Israel has acted moderately in response to missile attacks and kidnappings.
  8. My purely lay opinion accords with your assessment of the New International Version. I think that it has a deliberate evangelical bias. It seems to be the favorite translation of many people in my church. At least, many of them seem to use it. However, they also use other popular translations such as the New Living Translation, which is quite easy to read, and various translations from the American Bible Society. I think that I am the only member of my congregation who uses the Revised English Version, though I most often read the New Revised Standard Version at church. Some members use the New American Bible. I was surprised in a class I attended at the local Unitarian-Universalist congregation that many students in the group I attended used the old Living Translation and the King James Version. The students seemed to have used these in their past church experiences. The pastor used an Oxford Study Bible Revised Study Version. The English Standard Version is an evangelical version based upon the Revised Standard Version but it is a modified version of that translation. I am not certain how closely it follows the RSV. I have not made a verse by verse comparison. It is a good version to use when you talk with evangelicals. Some very conservative folks endorse it. I think that the differences have to do with reading the Old Testament backwards from the New Testament. The Complete Gospels edited by Robert Miller from the Westar Institute is an excellent resource that I am not certain anyone here has mentioned. There are several study editions of the Revised Standard Version. One recent one is the New Intepreter's Study Bible. A new edition of The Harper Collins Study Bible is due for release in August. The Oxford Study Bible New Revised Standard Version remains an excellent choice for lay readers (in my humble lay opinion).
  9. Excellent modern translations of scripture are the individual translations of Torah and other Hebrew scripture by both Robert Alter and Everett Fox. Cynthia Ozick's excellent essay in The Din in the Head explores and describes the power of Alter's translation.
  10. Yes, that is the format I use. The size is smaller than the posted limit.
  11. I have given up on posting an avatar here. I tried repeatedly. I was not able to introduce one.
  12. This topic intrigues me.I have feelings about it, but I want to listen.
  13. I hope to hear more from you about your explorations.
  14. I want to comment on this matter and I will. However, I am not up to doing that this evening. I believe one can be conservative politically and progressive in faith, but I say that with conditions.
  15. I really am radical in my politics and religion. I think about them in terms of domination and subjection—in economic terms. Many of those who talk the way I do had Marxist backgrounds. The only problem is that Marxists build their theories on a logical fallacy. You cannot assume as they do that something and its negation are simultaneously true. The argument against that objection is that things are rarely as clearly distinctive as we assume that they are. There are ranges of gray. However, if you say that A and not A are simultaneously true, you can logically prove anything is true from those propositions. That is, of course, nonsense. That is the foundation of Marxism.
  16. I think of Christianity in terms of important symbols. We are in an interval where we have to create symbols adequate for the problems we face. I think of religion more now in terms of domination and liberation. The theologian Paula Cooey has a new book coming in August that focuses on these matters. Gordon Kaufman writes about them as he has over a long and fruitful career.
  17. I have no problem with being called a liberal Christian, though I am not certain what that means. I am still a political conservative in some ways—I considered myself a liberal Republican for 40 years. That put me in the two percent minority of that party. I left the Republican Party after they stole to United States presidential election in 2001. I mention this because some people confuse the terms “liberal” and “conservative” as we use them in different contexts. Any general abstract nouns can cause problems. The same applied to “postmodern.” I really like the notion of redeeming the Enlightenment. I take the critiques of critics such as Horkheimer and Adorno or many Catholic commentators seriously. I am simply not all that impressed that postmodernism is yet that much of a change. Foucault’s work does impress me. Liberal connotes modernism to me. Progressive connotes postmodernims.
  18. The interval when I was at CTS was a difficult moment. That was 1976-68. The school was excellent. I was out-of-place there. I have an immensely high regard for the professors and classmates I enjoyed in the city. For a short time, I worked as an observer in then Mayor Lugar's office. He was (and is) a fine man. Thank you for the welcome. . Image of me about a month after I left Indianapolis in 1968:
  19. Thank you! It is an old image. I stopped letting anyone photograph me a few years ago! http://tedmichaelmorgan.blogspot.com/ My Webpage
  20. I do not see the depth developing from the theatrics. I have not experienced that happening.
  21. In my current congregation, I am already where you point. There has to be depth. Otherwise, we are just into the next fad.
  22. The Oxford Study Bible NRSV and The Oxford Study Bible REB are excellent English language study Bibles. I am not aware of them being progressive. They usually take a middle-of-the road view that is a consensus of scholarship. Some of the commentators are progressive—Richard Horsley in the NRSV. The old Oxford Study Bible RSV is a great resource. I very much like the Oxford Study Bible JPS. I use the Oxford Study NAB. The New Interpreters Study Bible NRSV helps pastors avoid making faux pas.
  23. I am enjoying this tread. Again, I recall this line of thinking from the experimental congregation of which I was a part in 1970-71. I find my current congregation moving in directions akin to what you envision.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

terms of service