Somebody Help Me!

In a course I was teaching, the topic of baptism came up. We discussed various passages dealing with baptism. Prominent among these in our discussion was the story of the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8.26-40). During our discussion, it was noted that some of our Bibles contained v.37, "And Philip said, 'If you believe with all your heart, you may.' And he replied, 'I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God,'" while other Bibles omitted it. One student promptly raised her hand and told us how the evil modern versions were "taking verses out of the Bible because they don't want us to know the truth." I proceeded to give a brief explanation of textual criticism and how that sentence was probably not original, but added later. Her response was, "Well you can't just skip a verse! You have to have verse 37!" I then proceeded to explain how editors of printed Bibles had added verse numbers in the 1500's and how they weren't actually original. Her eyes were as wide as if I had told her Jesus is just some guy who doesn't really matter.

In fact, verse numbers are one among many innovative helps that have been added to the Biblical text for our benefit. The original text contained no verse numbers, no chapter numbers, no system of capital/lowercase letters, no punctuation, no paragraphing, and no spaces between words. The OT did not even have a system of vowels.

THENTWOULDHAVELOOKEDSOMETHINGLIKETHIS
THOTWLDLKLKTHSEXCPTBCKWRDS

In addition to these innovations, modern Bibles contain section heading, red lettering for the words of Christ, cross-reference systems, footnotes, study notes, chain reference systems, maps, concordance, etc...

All of this raises the question for me, how many of these "helps" are really helpful? The anecdote above shows how verse numbering can cause difficulty. Similar arguments could be made about red lettering causing readers to value those words above other words, the insertion of letters in the text for a footnote or cross reference system making it difficult to enjoy reading, and others. Once, I actually had a teen say something like, "The Lord is our shepherd, I shall not F want." She read the letter pointing her to footnote F as if it were part of the text.

For me, I like a minimal number of helps. I am not going to try to argue against verse and chapter numbering, although I think offering editions of the Bible without these would be awesome. I do however, prefer a simple, unadorned paragraphed black letter text edition. I understand the need for study and reference Bibles, and I appreciate them. But for daily use, I prefer to simplicity of a text edition.

What kind of helps do you like in a Bible? Which ones do you think should be taken out?

Lost in Translation(s)

Another year, another new Bible translation. The Common English Bible is causing quite a stir in Christian community right now.There are roughly 15 standard translations in relatively common use among Christians: KJV, NKJV, RSV, NRSV, ESV, REB, NIV, TNIV, NLT, HCSB, NASB, NJB, NET, NAB, & CEV. In my experience, most people have strong opinions about one or more of these translations whether positive or negative.
But what is the difference between all of these versions, really?
As I see it, 5 issues really seem to differentiate translations.
1) Theological Perspective of the Translators - Is it a Roman Catholic translation (NAB)? Protestant (Most)? Evangelical (ESV, NLT)? Or was it translated by a good mixture of people (NRSV, REB)?
2) OT Textual Criticism - Does the text follow the Masoretic Text faithfully (Most), or is it more willing to consider readings from the Septuagint, Dead Sea Scrolls, Peshitta, and other sources (RSV, NRSV, REB)?
3) NT Textual Criticism - Does the text follow the Textus Receptus (KJV, NKJV), or a more modern Greek NT (All Others)?
4) Literal vs. Dynamic Philosophy - Are the translators attempting to be as literal as they can be (KJV, NASB, ESV), or to make the text as readable as it can be (NIV, NLT, CEV)?
5) Gender Translation - Do the translators use man/men when the passage clearly includes women (NIV, ESV), or do they try to make it more neutral (NRSV, NLT, TNIV)?
I am an NRSV guy. On these 5 issues the NRSV is as follows: ecumenical team of translators, eclectic textual criticism in the OT and NT, literal translation philosophy, and more gender neutral.
If I had to pick one that I would not personally want to use, it would be the NKJV. I understand the spirit of the NKJV, but if I wanted a translation that followed the Textus Receptus, the original KJV is just so beautiful.
What about you? Which translation(s) do you like and why? Which translation(s) do you think should not be used and why?

My Dream Bible...

Over the past few months, I have become a fan of The Bible Design and Binding blog.  The blog is not so much about the content of the Bible as it is the physical aspects of the Bibles we purchase. The author posts reviews of various Bibles in his quest to find his perfect Bible.

If I lived in an alternate universe, where publisher allowed people to design their own perfect Bible (instead of mass producing them in cookie-cutter fashion) here are some things I would request in my perfect Bible:

NRSV translation (my fav, yes we will discuss translation in a later post).
It would have a soft, flexible, but durable black leather cover with the words Holy Bible stamped on the spine, and no other words anywhere.
The dimensions would be roughly 5x7x1.5, small enough to carry, but big enough to read.
When you open the Bible there would be a real leather lining inside the cover.
It would have nice thick paper so you cannot see the words on the next page.
The text would be single column like a novel, black letter, and paragraphed but without section headings.
It would have a nice classic font at a readable 9pts.
The end of the Bible would contain the NET Bible maps (holy cow those are cool), and a handy concordance.
It would all be topped off with three thick dark red ribbons.
Perfect.

I actually had an NRSV Bible rebound by Leonard's Book Restortation. I attempted to incorporate many of the my 'dream' features. Here are a couple of pictures.

What would your dream Bible look like? If you have a Bible you love, what do you love about it?
Do you think the physical aspects of a Bible are worth discussing?  Or do you think this is a frivolous discussion?