The NET Bible Large Print Thinline

[@RGrantJones]

This Bible may be purchased here www.christianbook.com/thinline-print-bible-genuine-leather-black/9780785253501/pd/253506 . I didn't mention gender inclusive language in the video, but I did check the NET Bible in a few passages. My impression is that its approach is somewhat similar to that of the ESV: It generally avoids 'he who' expressions in favor of 'the one who,' but the NET Bible does not usually replace gender inclusive grammatically masculine pronouns. The NET Bible retains 'brother' in Luke 6.42 and Mt 18.15, and 'brothers' in Acts 6.3. On the other hand, Romans 8.12 has 'brothers and sisters' instead of 'brothers', and Mk 2.27 reads, 'Then he said to them, "The Sabbath was made for people, not people for the Sabbath.' " Similarly, Mt 13.44 reads, 'The kingdom of heaven is like a treasure, hidden in a field, that a person found and hid ...'

[@albertritchot5393]

Over the years, I've come to appreciate, Mr. Jones, your reviews. I really love them and they instruct me on which Bibles I might want to purchase. Thank you for this.

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for the kind comment, Albert!

[@donaldmartineau8176]

Oh happy day! You're back with another review!

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for the kind comment, Donald!

[@SolitaireZeta]

When it comes to the NET bible, the notes really are the star of the show. Take those away, and you're left with a glorified NIV/CSB mostly stripped of any semblance of literary character.

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for commenting, Macross DYRL! From the little exposure I've had to the translation, I tend to agree with you. It will be interesting to see whether lightly annotated NET Bible editions like this one gain traction.

[@gilbertculloden87]

I not only agree with you on the NET but also commend your excellent taste in anime films!

[@mb9484]

(Macross is a wonderful franchise!)

[@carlbengtsson2266]

I really like the NET-translation. This Large Print Thinline is at the top of my wish list. I already got the Thinline brown leathersoft (8.75-point print size), but this would def. be a step up. I constantly use the NET Full Edition online resources - might get the Bible as well to my B-day.

[@fumastertoo]

Looks like a nice Bible, with decent print and font size. Another excellent review of course, and have a blessed day!

[@RGrantJones]

Thank you for the encouraging commenting, ThyMasterToo!

[@bstring3967]

It was only a matter of time before Bible companies picked up on sending our boy grant jones bibles to be arduously reviewed down to the nucleus of the atom.

[@RGrantJones]

Lol! Thanks for the kind and humorous comment, G String!

[@Runningtherace51]

Thank you for the review.

[@crucified4me]

Great review, as always! Super meticulous and informative. Mine came in today and right out of the box I fount the leather to be awesome at this price point.

[@RGrantJones]

I agree. Thanks for the kind comment, crucified4me!

[@mb9484]

Digging around online it seems like NET notes were (or were planned to be) made for the Apocrypha. Does anyone know if they still have plans to release them in print one day?

[@RGrantJones]

That's a great question, M B! I hope someone who knows the answer sees it.

[@edwardgraham9443]

I've tried to read the NET but just haven't mellowed to it. The translation itself doesn't appeal to me, the notes are unparalleled though and I think without the notes it's not going to last very long. That being said, this is a lovely Bible and the craftsmanship is well done. Great and detailed review from an A1 reviewer. Yours is the review I go to when I'm interested in a translation or a Bible to get. Excellent work sir Jones.

[@RGrantJones]

Thank you for your encouragement, Edward!

[@mikerichards1264]

I have owned a copy of the NET for several years. The distinct benefit that I have found is the notes of the translators. The translation itself has not been very useful to me. I always prefer a version that is as close as possible to what the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts say. The ASV-1901 and the RSV/ESV are outstanding study, preaching, and teaching versions.

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for commenting, Mike! I concur, although I could see myself sometimes using the NET Bible text as a second, less literal, supplementary translation.

[@cmiddleton9872]

I enjoy the font and the paper looks far more opaque than my copy of the NET in leathertouch. I don’t quite understand most people’s dislike for the translation itself. It seems to read like the NIV without the NIV’s respect for certain historically translated phrases (e.g. John 3:16). Maybe the CSB would be a better comparison since it doesn’t closely adhere to traditional translations in the Wycliffe/Tyndall/KJV line, but the CSB seems far more formal equivalence to me. I gifted an NET to an unbelieving friend and I believe it helped him understand what he read.

[@BanishTheShadow]

They seem to particularly avoid using contractions at the beginnings of sentences.

[@JesusMessiahOnly]

This is the best study bible in my opinion. The notes have been very helpful to my own research to get closer to the original. The translation isn't too bad if you already have studied the issues with the manuscripts. I would say it's almost like the NLT.

[@Azilelom]

I have the hardcover full notes edition and I love it.

[@RGrantJones]

It's a valuable resource. Thanks for commenting, S H!

[@MAMoreno]

I'd compare the NET as a translation to the NAB: completely unremarkable and underwhelming when you strip the notes away. It lacks the literary power of the RSV family (and, to a lesser extent, the NKJV and NASB), and it can't compete with the liveliness of the JB, GNT, REB, and NLT. I get why certain translations go for that middle ground between formal and dynamic equivalence, but it's almost impossible to do so without getting a bland result.

[@shnorth888]

Printed in China. I guess alot of Bible's are being printed in China in order to keep cost down.

[@RGrantJones]

It's common these days. Thanks for commenting, shnorth888!

[@Airik1111bibles]

They could put an alternate reading at the bottom that says. Our religion is awesome ! 🤣

[@RGrantJones]

Lol! Thanks for commenting, Airik1111. Awesome, man.

[@CescoCyberMonkey]

My favorite Bible on english is and stand alway King James Version 1611er and in German Luther 1545 , 1912 , 1984 and now also 21

[@gleasonparker1684]

I think I prefer v x v. But this is nice. Thanks.

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for commenting, Gleason!

[@reneallen8302]

Maybe the Full Notes Edition is more appealing than this one. Will see if I can find a Review on that version. Good Review all the same.

[@stephengilbreath840]

Just not crazy about this translation

[@Geronimo_Jehoshaphat]

Why would a translation ever not capitalize the Deity pronouns?

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for the question, Geronimo! Two reasons come to mind. First, capitalized pronouns make the text more difficult to read. Second, the original language is sometimes ambiguous, so that it's difficult to tell whether the person the pronoun refers to is divine. But if the translation capitalizes pronouns for deity, the translators are required to make what is ambiguous in the original language unambiguous in English, and they may make the wrong choice.

[@Geronimo_Jehoshaphat]

@@RGrantJones I see. Thanks for the explanation. 👍

[@hassanmirza2392]

Another very good review, however this Bible is quite boring.

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for commenting, Hassan! It is fairly simple, just text with a few notes. I think its appeal will be to people who already use the NET Bible and want a portable copy.

[@hassanmirza2392]

@@RGrantJones Yeah, there are only few famous Bible translation families which are quite honest and academic, rest either not famous or sectarian.

[@hassanmirza2392]

@@RGrantJones World's oldest Bibles and Quran manuscripts, Magna Carta British Library. kzbin.info/www/bejne/qoS1ioGKbqt4e5I

[@RGrantJones]

@@hassanmirza2392 - thanks, Hassan! I'll watch it.

[@RGrantJones]

@@hassanmirza2392 - that video made me envious! I wish he had shot it with a 16:9 aspect ratio.

[@timotheospetros]

Printing 66/73 of the Bible and calling it "the Bible" is not just false advertising, it's also a grave sin.

[@cmiddleton9872]

Believe it or not, Christians in the first century would often just print (by hand) one book of the Bible at any given time-say, John or Matthew-and call it “The Bible.”

[@timotheospetros]

@@cmiddleton9872 Not true. βίβλος doesn't mean Bible, it means book (or more accurately, scroll). 'The Bible' is an English term for the collection of ALL 73 canonically recognized books of the Sacred Scriptures.