The Healy's have certainly been doing their part to get the economy going. Buying baby stuff, travelling to see family and to professional conferences. I should also mention that our new computer arrived--and Clifton picked up a few books this week.
Our old Compaq Presario 4112, though still plugging away, was finally getting to the point of relative disuse. It still runs on Windows 95, and does okay, but more and more even free downloads have compatibility issues. Plus, with 16M RAM and a 2G hard drive . . . well, let's just say that when Clifton says he's going to be on the computer for awhile, he means for . . . a . . . WHILE! But the worst part of it is that the monitor is just plain shot. Since about Christimas, it's been slowly fading to black, literally. I noticed certain colors were getting difficult to see clearly (blue, mainly). JPEGs weren't as sharp. And it was one of those 14" screens.
My wife and I have been talking about a new computer for a couple of years now. Originally, we were talking about getting a laptop. But we kept putting it off, not willing to get serious about working the financing. But with the slow decline of our old PC, Anna's need to have a computer that would have the capacity to handle possible "work from home" arrangements during her maternity leave, and a helpful special from Dell, we finally bit the bullet and got a new PC. We called them last Tuesday. Computer arrived Friday. I've been playing for two days.
Also, N. T. Wright's new book, The Resurrection of the Son of God came out and I saw it for the first time in the bookstores this week. I've already read the second volume in the series, Jesus and the Victory of God (for a seminary class on the historical Jesus), and have the first volume, The New Testament and the People of God, in queue to be read. Originally, Wright had planned for the third volume to be on Paul. But when JVG was going to press, the original section on the Resurrection had to be left out due to publishing constraints. Originally intended to be about 70 pages, it turned into a 700+ page book. Presumably volume four will be on Paul.
I also got a grammar on Church Slavonic. I can use Greek and Latin, and figured I should learn the other major ecclesiastical language, and, though Slavonic differs markedly from Russian, I figure it will give me the impetus I need to eventually learn Russian and read Dostoyevsky in the original. However, any learning of new grammar will have to wait another year as I finish my course work. (And I've got an Anglo-Saxon grammar I need to work through, too.)
Finally, on the recommendation of my priest, and having thought about it for several months, I finally purchased the Third Millennium Bible (New Authorized Version). Essentially it is the 1611 King James Bible (with Aprocrypha), with some minor updates of language (archaic uses of words that would confuse: "prevent" for "precede" and "wist" for "know", and so forth). But it retains the rest of the text in its essential form. It's a single column format, which will take some getting used to. And the words of Christ are in indented bold italics instead of flush with the text in normal or red font. That is a bit distracting. But then, so, too, is red font, to me. It contains the original KJV marginal Scripture references, as well as the chapter summaries and the postscripts to the Pauline epistles.
What "sold" me on it, that is to say, what induced me to purchase it, is the growing respect I have for liturgical language. It started from a feeling of discontent I had when I was a senior minister to a small church in 1995. Ever since junior high I had use the New International Version for reading and study. I couldn't handle the "thee's" and "thou's" of the King James--and anyway, as a teenager, the KJV was just not cool. I'd tried the New American Standard Bible, but this was before the NASB Updated, so language addressed to God still retained the "thee's" and "thou's" and archaic verb forms. (They were on to something then, but I didn't know it.) The Good News Bible and the Living Bible were just too goofy for me. So the NIV was it. But in 1995, I experienced a deep restlessness regarding my personal worship time (essentially Bible reading and prayer requests). I tried different things, but couldn't shake the deep dissatisfaction I had from my own personal devotions. So I went on a two year quest to find the right Bible translation. I read everything, but eventually settled on the New Revised Standard Version (with Aprocrypha). I still kept my NIV and NASB (as well as a few others), but Scripture reading was never quite the same as prior to 1995. (In 1999 I moved to reading the Greek and Hebrew, then later just the Greek, on a more regular basis, and so translation matters moved to the background.)
Finally, when the Living Bible was revised as the New Living Translation, and when even the NASB updated it's God-language, I shook my head in disbelief. The fragmentation in the Protestant churches filtered down from denominations to Scripture translations, as not only churches but even Bibles began to be marketed to ever-more precise demographics. There might be one main translation (usually the NIV) in a congregation, but that NIV was now splintered into women's bibles, men's bibles, teen bibles, twelve step bibles, leadership bibles--and who knows how many others. I recognize that the differences in these bibles has to do with the "extra" matter (commentary notes, outlines, maps, study notes, etc.), but the implicit message is: the bible isn't sufficient by itself for you to understand how it applies to you, you need a special bible to help you.
Arrgh!
Plus, I'd already become aware, through learning Greek, Hebrew and Latin, how insufficient almost all the modern English translations are in varying respects. The NIV has a "flesh" problem and frequently reflects a Calvinistic understanding of salvation. The NASB, while perhaps the most "accurate," nonetheless sometimes reads like Anglicized Greek (and Hebrew). The NRSV, while correcting some of the RSV's poor translation choices ("young woman" in Isaiah 7.14--though technically a "correct" translation of the Hebrew--is clearly an improper rendering when one takes into account the much older Septuagint and Vulgate translations as well as the authority of the New Testament itself when it quotes the passage), nonetheless fell prey to some severe mishandling of various texts to conform them to "gender neutral" ideology. Psalm 1 begins "Blessed is the man who . . ." which clearly, from New Testament usage and Church teaching is a reference to Jesus. But in the NRSV it runs "Happy are those who . . ." Lost is any understanding of Psalm 1 as teaching about Christ. In short the NRSV have made an interpretation of Psalm 1 that eliminates the Christological reference from the Psalm.
So with all the plethora of goofy--and really, just plain awful--new translations, the significant problems of the three main English translations, and the fact that none of these works as well in liturgical reading as does the KJV, it just made sense to look into the TMB (NAV). The introduction also makes the argument that the KJV English was not, nor intended to be, "common" street-level English. That is to say, the KJV translators intentionally used forms that served the purposes of worship and communal reading than they did the setting of private devotions to which the modern Protestant translations direct their main efforts.
As it so happens, I'm reading through the Psalms right now, so it's a good time to pick up the TMB and have a go.
All this acquistion, however, may not have been good for my soul. I find myself this morning anxious and restless. I'm sure it has a lot to do with the coming transition of having a baby, looking for work, teaching (summer second session begins in a week), and all that. But I sure am unquiet today.
Posted by Clifton at June 22, 2003 12:00 PM | TrackBack