Goodrich, Richard J. and Albert L. Lukaszewski, eds.

A Reader's Greek New Testament, 2nd ed.

Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2007. Pp. 575. Leather. $34.99. ISBN
9780310273783.

Nick Norelli
Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth
New Jersey

One Amazon reviewer opined with regard to the RGNT2:

For the money this is great—in fact for the money I'd give it 4.5 stars—but you're
much better off, assuming it's within your budget, applying the price of this
volume to the UBS Reader's edition. There's no comparison between the two.

Although I understand the sentiment, I ultimately disagree. These are certainly comparable
products and because a reader's budget is a factor, one will probably be more suited to some than
the other. Having already reviewed1 the UBS Greek New Testament: A Reader's Edition
(UBSRE) I will approach this review in a comparative manner. The features I outlined in that
review will be outlined in this as well, with a conclusion as to which resource wins the day in
each category and then in overall usefulness.

The Text

The same reviewer lamented that the RGNT2 doesn't use the "standard text" (UBS4/NA27) but
surely this is not grounds for criticism. The introduction clearly states:

The Greek text presented in A Reader's Greek New Testament is the eclectic text
that underpins the Today's New International Version. . . .The critical apparatus
included with modern versions of the Greek New Testament alerts the reader to
the possibility of other readings. One of the preliminary tasks of any translator is
to review the variants found in a source text. The Committee on Bible Translation
(the body responsible for the translation of the NIV) subjected the Standard Text
to a critical review, and somewhat unsurprisingly, their independent scholarship
led them to favor different readings in the case of selected variants. (9-10)

1
Available online here: http://rdtwot2.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/book-review_aland-aland-eds.pdf
I can be no more disappointed that the RGNT2 differs from the UBS4/NA27 than I can be that
the UBS4/NA27 differs from the Westcott-Hort GNT. This is a welcome addition to my ever-
growing library of GNT texts, as it shows the weight that certain scholars felt certain variants
held in their composition of an eclectic text. The more the merrier I say! I would also add that
there are footnotes in the places where the RGNT2 differs from the UBS4/NA27 which makes
for easy cross-referencing.

Main Features

• Footnoted definitions of all Greek words occurring 30 times or less

• Mini-lexicon of all words occurring more than 30 times
• Greek text underlying Today’s New International Version
• Footnotes offering comparisons with UBS4
• 4 pages of full-color maps

Aesthetic Features

I can't express how much I love the look of this Bible.

• Designer box (pictured above)

• Beautiful burgundy Italian Duo-tone cover
• Burgundy ribbon marker
• Sewn binding which allows the Bible to lay flat in your hand or on your desk
• Ultra-thin paper (with gilded edges) making it a very slim volume

Generally, bleed-through is a problem with Bibles that use ultra-thin paper, but not so in this
volume because the Greek font used is rather thin, a little too thin if you ask me. Having seen
the difference between the font used in the first edition and the font used in this edition (pictured
on the back of the box) I would say that this is an improvement, but only slightly so. I've never
been one to complain about italicized Greek fonts (which the first edition employed). Size-wise,
I prefer RGNT2 over the UBSRE because it's much lighter and only about half as thick. It has a
much better feel in your hand as well, and lends itself to travel much better than the UBSRE in
my opinion.

Photo by Rick Mansfield

Functionality

My comments on the functionality of the UBSRE can be equally applied to the RGNT2. With the
amount of vocabulary I have memorized, this makes reading the GNT much easier since it lists
the words I'm not familiar with in the apparatus. But concerning the apparatus I will express
some disappointment with the layout. For starters, it appears in paragraph form. This makes it
harder than it has to be to pick out the gloss you're looking for. In this area I much preferred the
"itemized" (for lack of a better term) layout of the UBSRE.

I also found it strange that it listed words that appear more than once in a given passage with
separate footnotes for each. This can't even be explained by the context denoting different uses
of the word, as in some cases the glosses are exactly the same. E.g., the noun κλέπτης in John
10:1 and 10:10 is glossed in the apparatus both times as: "κλέπτης, ου, ὁ, thief" under
different footnotes (3 & 15 respectively). (224) The UBSRE on the other hand defines it in only
its first use (277). Had the RGNT2 followed this approach it would have saved the mistake in
Matthew 12:31 where βλασφημία appears twice and is footnoted twice (n. 60 & 61 respectively),
but the gloss for the second occurrence is actually the gloss for δένδρον in Matthew 12:33 which
was also numbered as 61 in the footnotes (44).

But the UBSRE is not without its peculiarities, and it was only by comparing it with the RGNT2
that I was able to notice some of them. One thing that jumped out at me was the fact that the
verb ἐγένετο appears 162 times in the UBS4/NA27, yet it is inconsistently footnoted in the
apparatus of the UBSRE. For example, of the 13 times this verb appears in Matthew, it is
footnoted in:

• Mat. 7:28 (20)

• Mat. 9:10 (24)
• Mat. 11:1 (30)
• Mat. 26:1 (79)

But not in:

• Mat. 8:24, 26 (22)

• Mat. 11:26 (32)
• Mat. 13:53 (42)
• Mat. 17:2 (51)
• Mat. 19:1 (56)
• Mat. 21:42 (65)
• Mat. 27:45 (88)
• Mat. 28:2 (90)

The RGNT2 is consistent in not footnoting this verb throughout. An example of where the
RGNT2 should have had a footnote but didn't (perhaps due to an oversight) is with the verb
διαρπάσει which occurs only twice in the NT (Mat. 12:29 & Mk. 3:27). The RGNT2 has the
footnote in Mark 3:27 but not in Matthew 12:29. The case is reversed in the UBSRE where
διαρπάσει is footnoted in Matthew 12:29 but not in Mark 3:27.

And the last area of functionality in the apparatus that I wish to comment on is the parsing (or
lack thereof) in these two GNTs. The RGNT2 unfortunately does not give parsing information in
the apparatus (whereas the UBSRE does), although it does have various "definition tags" for
words that "change their meaning depending on their syntactic function." (11) I've found that the
more detailed parsing information in the UBSRE is useful, but I have to question how necessary
it is if the goal is simply reading the GNT. Ultimately, it's not a necessity for the goal of reading,
but one can easily see the benefits it has in learning the language to the best of one’s ability.

Finally, a word on the lexicons in each of these Bibles: The RGNT2 has a six-page lexicon of all
Greek words that appear more than 30 times in the GNT with very simple (usually one or two
word) glosses. The UBSRE has a twenty-two-page lexicon with fairly detailed definitions that
outline the different possibilities depending on context. The definitions in the RGNT2 are based
on Warren Trenchard's fantastic work The Complete Vocabulary Guide to the Greek New
Testament, whereas the definitions in the UBSRE are based on Barclay Newman's A Concise
Greek-English Dictionary of the New Testament. I have to give the advantage to the UBSRE
here.

Conclusion

I think that both the RGNT2 and the UBSRE will benefit the person seeking to simply read
the New Testament in Greek equally. In terms of look and feel, I prefer the RGNT2; this is the
Bible I'd rather travel with. In terms of apparatus I think the UBSRE wins the day. It's both
easier to read and more informative. But as I said in the beginning of this review, price is a
factor. The RGNT2 is much more affordable and so for those on a budget, I'd recommend it
without hesitation. If you have the money and can only get one, then I think the UBSRE would
be the more beneficial of the two. If money is no object then get both, because there's enough
difference between them to warrant owning one of each. In the end I give the RGNT2 a strong
recommendation with hopes that subsequent editions will revise the apparatus to be easier to use and
more appealing to the eye.