Thanks Jerry.  I'm saving this into a file called bible-versions so I 
can find it when needed.  I appreciate the going above and beyond.

Regards,
     Rick Parker

On 1/12/2012 6:58 PM, Jerome Walsh wrote:
> Dear Rick,
>
> Given the fundamental caveat of traductor traditor, choice of
> translation depends on what qualities one is seeking. A literal
> equivalence translation is best for discerning the underlying Hebrew and
> Greek (NT) structure, and for preserving intertextual allusions and
> verbal echoes. For these purposes, I usually recommend either the
> Revised Standard Version or the New Revised Standard Version to my
> students. A dynamic equivalence translation, however, can often capture
> and communicate emotional content, subtle nuances, and literary quality
> (such as the dense elegance of Second Isaiah or the grammatical
> inadequacies of Mark) better than a more literal version. Here, the
> Jerusalem Bible and the New Jerusalem Bible are occasionally
> outstanding; the New International Version, the Revised English Bible,
> the New American Bible Revised Edition, are all critically responsible
> versions. Every version, however, has weak points and strong points.
> Many--even among the critically respected translations--are
> theologically tendentious in unexpected places. Many have text critical
> biases that are not always apparent from their footnotes. For Hebrew
> Bible, I would single out the New Jewish Publication Society translation
> as especially useful. But my general recommendation would be to consult
> more than one version.
>
> Jerry Walsh
>
>
>
>
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     *From:* Rickard A. Parker <[log in to unmask]>
>     *To:* [log in to unmask]
>     *Sent:* Thursday, January 12, 2012 4:55 PM
>     *Subject:* Re: Strange Gods?
>
>     On 1/12/2012 12:14 PM, Jerome Walsh wrote:
>      > An oblique comment on the phrase "strange gods," from a linguistic
>      > perspective. "Strange" and "alien" are common traditional
>     translations
>      > of the Hebrew root nkr, which simply means "foreign." Both terms
>     often
>      > have heavily nuanced connotations in contemporary English--"strange"
>      > meaning "bizarre" and "alien" meaning "outré." But those connotations
>      > are not present in the Hebrew and, if read into the biblical phrase
>      > "strange gods," miss the point. "Strange gods" in the Hebrew
>     Bible are
>      > simply "foreign gods" or "gods other people worship that you
>     shouldn't."
>
>     Seems like "gods other people worship that you shouldn't" was what Eliot
>     had in mind in ASG.
>
>     My search actually led me first to http://bible.cc/deuteronomy/32-16.htm
>     which has parallel translations of the verse from different versions
>     of the
>     Bible. Some of the newer versions do use "foreign gods" in the
>     translation.
>
>     Which version(s) do you recommend for a good translation of the Hebrew?
>
>     Regards,
>     Rick Parker
>
>