@ Kerygma
I see a difference between whining and criticism. Whining is limited to \\"I\'m not getting what I want.\\" Criticism is constructive. Criticism recognizes strengths while not glossing over weaknesses.
I think a forum like this is a great place for people to express weaknesses in the OSB, with the idea in mind that the OSB II will be an even better product. At the same time, we can express here honestly the strengths that we see in the OSB that can be built upon in the next edition.
I agree with you that it is good that so many men and women dedicated themselves to many years in producing this new version of the biblical text with notes. I also applaud the connections being made between the Scripture and Orthodox tradition, via the notes and cross-references to liturgical texts.
At the same time, I see that on the scholarly side, more needs to be done. The Oxford \\"New English Translation of the Septuagint\\" does a superior job in selecting its Greek text and in translating consistently. The next edition should harness more Septuagint experts in translating and editing.
Personally, I found that some of the notes are inconsistent--some vague, some questionable, some spot-on. Maybe in the future there will be a way of uniting the notes more tightly thematically. Also, if there is any way to add better cross-references to the patristic texts cited, I would be grateful.
The net effect on me personally is that I\'m going to pass on this edition of the OSB. I\'ll stick with my old RSV and NKJV with minimal notes. For patristic references, I will continue to use the Ancient Christian Commentary series by Intervarsity Press. (Note that there are Orthodox scholars working on the latter series.)
Be the first person to like this.