• Christ is Risen!
  • Please remember: Pray for Ukraine in the Prayer forum; Share news in the Christian News section; Discuss religious implications in FFA: Religious Topics; Discuss political implications in Politics (and if you don't have access, PM me) Thank you! + Fr. George, Forum Administrator

The Eastern Orthodox Bible

Joined
Apr 22, 2010
Messages
269
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
United Kingdom
Please would someone with knowledge of the project share what happened to the plans to produce a complete version of the Eastern Orthodox Bible?

I have the Gospel Book in this translation and see that the New Testament is available on Lulu. However, the Septuagint Old Testament seems not to be in evidence and the website of the project is now defunct, available as an archive only.

Although the language leaves something to be desired in places, it is infinitely better than most of what is widely available in Orthodox liturgical books in that it avoids the faux Ye Olde Worlde Englyshe that so many publishers seem to favour, and would have been a good complement to the OSB.

Does anyone know whether this is still in the offing?
 

Iconodule

Hoplitarches
Joined
Jan 2, 2010
Messages
16,486
Reaction score
20
Points
38
Age
39
Location
PA, USA
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
Patriarchate of Johnstown
The New Testament is currently in print from New Rome press: https://www.newromepress.com/products/eob-new-testament

As far as I can tell the project is chiefly the work of one priest (Fr. Laurent Cleenewerck) and he may have bitten off more than he can chew.
 

WPM

Taxiarches
Joined
Jan 6, 2012
Messages
7,775
Reaction score
14
Points
0
Age
39
Faith
Ethiopian Jew
That's good ... Please quote Scripture to me.
 

Alpha60

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
5,793
Reaction score
16
Points
0
Location
Alphaville Zone Sud
Faith
Christian
Jurisdiction
Orthodox
Subdeacon Michael said:
Please would someone with knowledge of the project share what happened to the plans to produce a complete version of the Eastern Orthodox Bible?

I have the Gospel Book in this translation and see that the New Testament is available on Lulu. However, the Septuagint Old Testament seems not to be in evidence and the website of the project is now defunct, available as an archive only.

Although the language leaves something to be desired in places, it is infinitely better than most of what is widely available in Orthodox liturgical books in that it avoids the faux Ye Olde Worlde Englyshe that so many publishers seem to favour, and would have been a good complement to the OSB.

Does anyone know whether this is still in the offing?
Therein however is the rub; you now have two alternate Orthodox NT study bibles, both in contemporary English.  I daresay if someone had merely appended a commentary to the Septuagint translation of Sir Lancelot Brenton, that would have worked rather better and provided an Ecclesiastical Jacobean English competitor to the OSB, whereas the EOB project at present is basically just more of the same, albeit the priest who did the EOB had to presumably retranslate the NT, whereas the OSB saved much time by using the NKJV translation of the NT.  And one would save even more time using Brenton, because Brenton is in the public domain, and Brenton is furthermore compatible with the traditional language liturgical books that at least half of all Orthodox parishes continue to use, for example, the Nasser Five Pounder, the Triodion and Festal Menaion of Metropolitan Kallistos and Mother Mary, the Horologia and Psalters of both Jordanville and Holy Transfiguration, the KJV-based Evangelions sold by Holvniak’s*, the Pentecostarion and Monthly Menaion sold by St. John of Kronstadt, et cetera.  Also the contemporary language material took a huge blow with the death of Archimandrite Ephrem, although I’ve been backing his work up via the Internet Archive.

The other thing I have to confess I don’t quite get about the EOB project is what it offers that the OSB doesn’t, or wouldn’t in the case of the LXX.  I have heard it suggested the EOB is more traditionalist, but there is nothing in the OSB that I have found that would raise the ire of an Old Calendarist, except perhaps the modern language of the translation, as in my limited experience with them Old Calendarist parishes strongly prefer traditional English translations.  This may not universally be the case and there is enough diversity in the Old Calendarist movement so that its quite possible some of the Old Calendarist parishes wouldn’t care one way or the other.  I suppose the main thing that might leave them incensed is the contribution of high profile “World Orthodox” figures to the work, such as Metropolitan Kallistos, and I can understand that.

There is however an even more traditional way of getting such a commentary and that is to read the Patristic commentaries on the different books of the Bible directly.  The idea of inline commentary dates to the Geneva Bible (inline comments also appear in the Challoner Douay Rheims and were intentionally excluded by royal directive from the Authorized Version) and the idea of commentary in numbered footnotes and the annotated Study Bible is an even more recent concept.  So that would be my opinion on this. 

That said, a copy of the EOB NT is on my “to buy” list and if Fr. should finish the LXX that would be a great achievement and I will definitely buy that as well, and I will pray that he is able to complete it, I hope he has not bitten off more than he can chew, as another member suggested, but is able to complete the LXX commentary.

*Holvniak’s was a church supply house although as I noted elsewhere, their product range has expanded in entirely novel directions.
 

platypus

High Elder
Joined
Apr 20, 2018
Messages
713
Reaction score
6
Points
0
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
Orthodox Church in America
Alpha60 said:
The other thing I have to confess I don’t quite get about the EOB project is what it offers that the OSB doesn’t, or wouldn’t in the case of the LXX.  I have heard it suggested the EOB is more traditionalist, but there is nothing in the OSB that I have found that would raise the ire of an Old Calendarist, except perhaps the modern language of the translation, as in my limited experience with them Old Calendarist parishes strongly prefer traditional English translations.  This may not universally be the case and there is enough diversity in the Old Calendarist movement so that its quite possible some of the Old Calendarist parishes wouldn’t care one way or the other.  I suppose the main thing that might leave them incensed is the contribution of high profile “World Orthodox” figures to the work, such as Metropolitan Kallistos, and I can understand that.
Here's a few selling points for the EOB:
1. It's translated from the Patriarchal Text of the New Testament, whereas I think the OSB/NKJV used the Textus Receptus.
2. The supplemental material in the EOB is really fantastic. There's a very detailed essay on the filioque, an explanation of the alternative endings in Mark's gospel, and other scholarly material that the OSB doesn't provide.
3. The language of the EOB is a lot more contemporary than the OSB. Thee/thou and ye were completely done away with. It means less precise pronoun translations, but improved readibility for most people.
4. The EOB was translated by an Orthodox Christian rather than Protestants, and this is reflected in places like Luke 1:28. "Rejoice, full of grace" instead of "Rejoice, highly favored one." I will say, though, that the NKJV New Testament does reflect Orthodox theology better than many other translations. It also means you're supporting the Orthodox Church when you buy it. I don't mean to throw shade on those who buy heterodox Bible translations; I do too.
5. Here's the real selling point for me: the EOB is printed with a very readable font and no bleed from the opposite side of the page. Reading the OSB is a struggle.
 

Iconodule

Hoplitarches
Joined
Jan 2, 2010
Messages
16,486
Reaction score
20
Points
38
Age
39
Location
PA, USA
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
Patriarchate of Johnstown
It's not a dealbreaker for me but I think it's very odd and annoying that the EOB calls priests "presbyters" but bishops "overseers." The justification is that the "overseers" back then were not really the same as our bishops today. But neither are the presbyters... I think this is the kind of quirk that pops up when the work is all done by one man with his own strongly held ideas.
 

WPM

Taxiarches
Joined
Jan 6, 2012
Messages
7,775
Reaction score
14
Points
0
Age
39
Faith
Ethiopian Jew
it's bull because this board shys away making a real reply
 

WPM

Taxiarches
Joined
Jan 6, 2012
Messages
7,775
Reaction score
14
Points
0
Age
39
Faith
Ethiopian Jew
Alpha60 said:
Subdeacon Michael said:
Please would someone with knowledge of the project share what happened to the plans to produce a complete version of the Eastern Orthodox Bible?

I have the Gospel Book in this translation and see that the New Testament is available on Lulu. However, the Septuagint Old Testament seems not to be in evidence and the website of the project is now defunct, available as an archive only.

Although the language leaves something to be desired in places, it is infinitely better than most of what is widely available in Orthodox liturgical books in that it avoids the faux Ye Olde Worlde Englyshe that so many publishers seem to favour, and would have been a good complement to the OSB.

Does anyone know whether this is still in the offing?
Therein however is the rub; you now have two alternate Orthodox NT study bibles, both in contemporary English.  I daresay if someone had merely appended a commentary to the Septuagint translation of Sir Lancelot Brenton, that would have worked rather better and provided an Ecclesiastical Jacobean English competitor to the OSB, whereas the EOB project at present is basically just more of the same, albeit the priest who did the EOB had to presumably retranslate the NT, whereas the OSB saved much time by using the NKJV translation of the NT.  And one would save even more time using Brenton, because Brenton is in the public domain, and Brenton is furthermore compatible with the traditional language liturgical books that at least half of all Orthodox parishes continue to use, for example, the Nasser Five Pounder, the Triodion and Festal Menaion of Metropolitan Kallistos and Mother Mary, the Horologia and Psalters of both Jordanville and Holy Transfiguration, the KJV-based Evangelions sold by Holvniak’s*, the Pentecostarion and Monthly Menaion sold by St. John of Kronstadt, et cetera.  Also the contemporary language material took a huge blow with the death of Archimandrite Ephrem, although I’ve been backing his work up via the Internet Archive.

The other thing I have to confess I don’t quite get about the EOB project is what it offers that the OSB doesn’t, or wouldn’t in the case of the LXX.  I have heard it suggested the EOB is more traditionalist, but there is nothing in the OSB that I have found that would raise the ire of an Old Calendarist, except perhaps the modern language of the translation, as in my limited experience with them Old Calendarist parishes strongly prefer traditional English translations.  This may not universally be the case and there is enough diversity in the Old Calendarist movement so that its quite possible some of the Old Calendarist parishes wouldn’t care one way or the other.  I suppose the main thing that might leave them incensed is the contribution of high profile “World Orthodox” figures to the work, such as Metropolitan Kallistos, and I can understand that.

There is however an even more traditional way of getting such a commentary and that is to read the Patristic commentaries on the different books of the Bible directly.  The idea of inline commentary dates to the Geneva Bible (inline comments also appear in the Challoner Douay Rheims and were intentionally excluded by royal directive from the Authorized Version) and the idea of commentary in numbered footnotes and the annotated Study Bible is an even more recent concept.  So that would be my opinion on this. 

That said, a copy of the EOB NT is on my “to buy” list and if Fr. should finish the LXX that would be a great achievement and I will definitely buy that as well, and I will pray that he is able to complete it, I hope he has not bitten off more than he can chew, as another member suggested, but is able to complete the LXX commentary.

*Holvniak’s was a church supply house although as I noted elsewhere, their product range has expanded in entirely novel directions.
Looks like the full meal deal ..
 

platypus

High Elder
Joined
Apr 20, 2018
Messages
713
Reaction score
6
Points
0
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
Orthodox Church in America
Iconodule said:
It's not a dealbreaker for me but I think it's very odd and annoying that the EOB calls priests "presbyters" but bishops "overseers." The justification is that the "overseers" back then were not really the same as our bishops today. But neither are the presbyters... I think this is the kind of quirk that pops up when the work is all done by one man with his own strongly held ideas.
Agreed. It's also the only translation I have that doesn't seem to be influenced by the KJV, and so a lot of the traditional phrasing I'm used to is gone. When Jesus says in the EOB "Beware the yeast of the Pharisees," there's a tiny part of my brain that says "no, leaven."
 

Iconodule

Hoplitarches
Joined
Jan 2, 2010
Messages
16,486
Reaction score
20
Points
38
Age
39
Location
PA, USA
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
Patriarchate of Johnstown
WPM said:
Alpha60 said:
Subdeacon Michael said:
Please would someone with knowledge of the project share what happened to the plans to produce a complete version of the Eastern Orthodox Bible?

I have the Gospel Book in this translation and see that the New Testament is available on Lulu. However, the Septuagint Old Testament seems not to be in evidence and the website of the project is now defunct, available as an archive only.

Although the language leaves something to be desired in places, it is infinitely better than most of what is widely available in Orthodox liturgical books in that it avoids the faux Ye Olde Worlde Englyshe that so many publishers seem to favour, and would have been a good complement to the OSB.

Does anyone know whether this is still in the offing?
Therein however is the rub; you now have two alternate Orthodox NT study bibles, both in contemporary English.  I daresay if someone had merely appended a commentary to the Septuagint translation of Sir Lancelot Brenton, that would have worked rather better and provided an Ecclesiastical Jacobean English competitor to the OSB, whereas the EOB project at present is basically just more of the same, albeit the priest who did the EOB had to presumably retranslate the NT, whereas the OSB saved much time by using the NKJV translation of the NT.  And one would save even more time using Brenton, because Brenton is in the public domain, and Brenton is furthermore compatible with the traditional language liturgical books that at least half of all Orthodox parishes continue to use, for example, the Nasser Five Pounder, the Triodion and Festal Menaion of Metropolitan Kallistos and Mother Mary, the Horologia and Psalters of both Jordanville and Holy Transfiguration, the KJV-based Evangelions sold by Holvniak’s*, the Pentecostarion and Monthly Menaion sold by St. John of Kronstadt, et cetera.  Also the contemporary language material took a huge blow with the death of Archimandrite Ephrem, although I’ve been backing his work up via the Internet Archive.

The other thing I have to confess I don’t quite get about the EOB project is what it offers that the OSB doesn’t, or wouldn’t in the case of the LXX.  I have heard it suggested the EOB is more traditionalist, but there is nothing in the OSB that I have found that would raise the ire of an Old Calendarist, except perhaps the modern language of the translation, as in my limited experience with them Old Calendarist parishes strongly prefer traditional English translations.  This may not universally be the case and there is enough diversity in the Old Calendarist movement so that its quite possible some of the Old Calendarist parishes wouldn’t care one way or the other.  I suppose the main thing that might leave them incensed is the contribution of high profile “World Orthodox” figures to the work, such as Metropolitan Kallistos, and I can understand that.

There is however an even more traditional way of getting such a commentary and that is to read the Patristic commentaries on the different books of the Bible directly.  The idea of inline commentary dates to the Geneva Bible (inline comments also appear in the Challoner Douay Rheims and were intentionally excluded by royal directive from the Authorized Version) and the idea of commentary in numbered footnotes and the annotated Study Bible is an even more recent concept.  So that would be my opinion on this. 

That said, a copy of the EOB NT is on my “to buy” list and if Fr. should finish the LXX that would be a great achievement and I will definitely buy that as well, and I will pray that he is able to complete it, I hope he has not bitten off more than he can chew, as another member suggested, but is able to complete the LXX commentary.

*Holvniak’s was a church supply house although as I noted elsewhere, their product range has expanded in entirely novel directions.
Looks like the full meal deal ..
I think this might become my standard response to the typical Alpha60 text block.
 

WPM

Taxiarches
Joined
Jan 6, 2012
Messages
7,775
Reaction score
14
Points
0
Age
39
Faith
Ethiopian Jew
biro said:
The snark continues.

About the Bible, anyone?
I have several different Bibles.
 

Alpha60

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
5,793
Reaction score
16
Points
0
Location
Alphaville Zone Sud
Faith
Christian
Jurisdiction
Orthodox
Iconodule said:
biro said:
The snark continues.
Or is it a boojum?
ROFL!
biro said:
The snark continues.

About the Bible, anyone?
Well Biro, if you have any other questions not addressed by my preceding post, I would be happy to provide a 2-for-1 New Calender Christmas Special.  :p

Seriously though, I did provide rather an exhaustive answer to the question, to the point in retrospect, I must concede, of verging on pedantry, so Iconodule’s slam is something I can take in good humour.  And I have to confess I am not sure there remains anything unaddressed in the OP.  With one exception:

platypus said:
Alpha60 said:
The other thing I have to confess I don’t quite get about the EOB project is what it offers that the OSB doesn’t, or wouldn’t in the case of the LXX.  I have heard it suggested the EOB is more traditionalist, but there is nothing in the OSB that I have found that would raise the ire of an Old Calendarist, except perhaps the modern language of the translation, as in my limited experience with them Old Calendarist parishes strongly prefer traditional English translations.  This may not universally be the case and there is enough diversity in the Old Calendarist movement so that its quite possible some of the Old Calendarist parishes wouldn’t care one way or the other.  I suppose the main thing that might leave them incensed is the contribution of high profile “World Orthodox” figures to the work, such as Metropolitan Kallistos, and I can understand that.
Here's a few selling points for the EOB:
1. It's translated from the Patriarchal Text of the New Testament, whereas I think the OSB/NKJV used the Textus Receptus.
2. The supplemental material in the EOB is really fantastic. There's a very detailed essay on the filioque, an explanation of the alternative endings in Mark's gospel, and other scholarly material that the OSB doesn't provide.
3. The language of the EOB is a lot more contemporary than the OSB. Thee/thou and ye were completely done away with. It means less precise pronoun translations, but improved readibility for most people.
4. The EOB was translated by an Orthodox Christian rather than Protestants, and this is reflected in places like Luke 1:28. "Rejoice, full of grace" instead of "Rejoice, highly favored one." I will say, though, that the NKJV New Testament does reflect Orthodox theology better than many other translations. It also means you're supporting the Orthodox Church when you buy it. I don't mean to throw shade on those who buy heterodox Bible translations; I do too.
5. Here's the real selling point for me: the EOB is printed with a very readable font and no bleed from the opposite side of the page. Reading the OSB is a struggle.
This is a compelling and interesting rationale for the EOB.  The readability issue doesn’t bother me personally as I use the OSB in ebook format (although I do have a physical copy).  So, food for thought on that point.  I’ve been waiting for an ebook of the EOB in fact...
 

Brilko

Elder
Joined
Jun 1, 2017
Messages
394
Reaction score
6
Points
18
Location
Deeper into the Shadows
Faith
Christian
Jurisdiction
?
Fr. Cleenewerck seems to be working on a catechism due out next year. His parish website contains contact information. http://www.eurekafirstchurch.com/about-our-pastor/
 

Iconodule

Hoplitarches
Joined
Jan 2, 2010
Messages
16,486
Reaction score
20
Points
38
Age
39
Location
PA, USA
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
Patriarchate of Johnstown
That catechism has been seriously due out “next year” since 2009. There was also supposed to be a Psalter.



“I’m... too sexy for this catechism, too sexy for this catechism...”
 

Brilko

Elder
Joined
Jun 1, 2017
Messages
394
Reaction score
6
Points
18
Location
Deeper into the Shadows
Faith
Christian
Jurisdiction
?
That doesn’t bode well for the completion of the EOB translation. He does look pretty young in that picture, maybe he’ll get around to it eventually.
 
Top