Hi folks, I was wondering what your estimation of the new cambridge paragraph bible is, obviously having the apocrypha included is a minus, but how does the text hold up to scrutiny? I have only seen a couple of sample pages.

Here is a link to a review from Trintarian Bible Society Australia.
http://www.trinitarianbiblesociety.o.../felcencpb.pdf

Cheers Ploughboy

[bibleprotector]

I have found Norton's work to be quite wayward. I do not think that the "New Cambridge Paragraph Edition" is at all for proper scholars or KJB textual investigators. The reason I say this is because Norton primarily does not accept the tradition of the King James Bible as it has come to us in through the Church by the Spirit in history.

These are his big problems:

1. He thinks that we must "correct" the present KJB to be in line not only with the 1611 edition, but with the partial drafts that may or may not belong to the translators' work in progress from 1604-1611.

2. He thinks that in so-called updating the spelling, it is okay to change things like "uttermost" to "outermost", etc. etc.

3. He believes on very flimsy evidence that Hosea 6:5 should read, "Therefore have I shown them by the prophets", etc. etc.

I strongly urge King James Bible people NOT to use his edition, as he has made numerous unauthorised changes of all sorts.

However, David Norton has a useful book for those who want to know about changes in words in time in the King James Bible (and to read his anti-providence philosophy) which is called "A Textual History of the KJB". This book is like F. H. A. Scrivener's book, "The Authorized Edition of the English Bible".

I have written a bit about Norton, and furthered and bettered their studies (because I am approaching the KJB from a believing point of view) in my book, a draft of which may be freely obtained from my website www.bibleprotector.com

I point out that the idea of purified seven times (Psalm 12:6, 7) can be applied to the editions of the King James Bible, and that while all KJBs in the traditional historical lineage are acceptable, obviously things have come to their conclusion with a purified edition being the result, as has been printed by Cambridge, Collins and other publishers in approx. the last hundred years or so.