A Good Bible, The Only Version I'll Ever Use

  • Thread starter Thread starter Victory9
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes. Yes. Yes!
I love the Douay-Rheims. Love it.
However, I have a dozen bibles. And I like them all. (Except for the Living Bible)
 
Admittedly, ‘that sort of English’ does try one’s patience, as it doesn’t ‘flow’ like we’re used to, in this fast, modern time. And the spelling and grammar are very, very old. I don’t mind the “thee’s and thou’s.”, but “spake” instead of “speak” or “spoke”, “shew”, instead of “show”, gets on my 21st century nerves. However, the payoff, the consolation, is that this translation is as close to the original texts as can be had, and we can absolutely rely on the true translation, given the fact that St Jerome had access to texts that the modern, multi-denominational, feminist, politically correct, inclusive-language-oriented committees don’t have. And of course, the other reason, for me anyway, is that St Jerome is a Saint ~ which is reason enough to trust the translation, and also that the Douay-Rheims version is the only official version of the Holy Roman Catholic Church.
 
Victory9 said:
Admittedly, ‘that sort of English’ does try one’s patience, as it doesn’t ‘flow’ like we’re used to, in this fast, modern time. And the spelling and grammar are very, very old. I don’t mind the “thee’s and thou’s.”, but “spake” instead of “speak” or “spoke”, “shew”, instead of “show”, gets on my 21st century nerves. However, the payoff, the consolation, is that this translation is as close to the original texts as can be had, and we can absolutely rely on the true translation, given the fact that St Jerome had access to texts that the modern, multi-denominational, feminist, politically correct, inclusive-language-oriented committees don’t have. And of course, the other reason, for me anyway, is that St Jerome is a Saint ~ which is reason enough to trust the translation, and also that the Douay-Rheims version is the only official version of the Holy Roman Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
Just so you know, St. Jerome neither spoke English nor worked on the Douay-Rheims translation. And the Douay-Rheims is not in any way the official Bible of the Church, nor has it ever been.
 
MarkThompson said:
Just so you know, St. Jerome neither spoke English nor worked on the Douay-Rheims translation. And the Douay-Rheims is not in any way the official Bible of the Church, nor has it ever been.
Click to expand...
LOL, that post had me scratching my head.

I was also wondering if all my Bibles in Spanish were somewhat rendered “less” Catholic because they’re not English, I wasn’t informed the Vatican switched official languages!!!

As to the Douay-Rheims, it’s a translation from the Latin, wouldn’t the Jerusalem Bible be considered a “better” translation as it is solely based directly on the Hebrew and Greek texts?
 
Yes and no. St. Jerome translated the Vulgate from Greek and Hebrew, much like modern Bibles today. However, St. Jerome was a speaker of all three languages and likely knew each better than modern scholars, especially in cultural context. He translates certain phrases in a very specific way in Latin because the literal phrase (from the Greek/Hebrew) may not do justice in Latin (e.g. gratia plena, or full of grace, which is literally/roughly “highly favored” in Greek). So in short, we should always compare Englsih translations of Greek/Hebrew texts to what Jerome wrote in the Vulgate.
 
This is the Bible I have: biblio.com/books/134529764.html

The Holy Bible Papal Edition, with Old Testament Doauy-Challoner Text, New Testament Confraternity Text. Published 1952.

It has a Catholic baby name dictionary at the back. 😃
 
BertBlyleven said:
Yes and no. St. Jerome translated the Vulgate from Greek and Hebrew, much like modern Bibles today. However, St. Jerome was a speaker of all three languages and likely knew each better than modern scholars, especially in cultural context. He translates certain phrases in a very specific way in Latin because the literal phrase (from the Greek/Hebrew) may not do justice in Latin (e.g. gratia plena, or full of grace, which is literally/roughly “highly favored” in Greek). So in short, we should always compare Englsih translations of Greek/Hebrew texts to what Jerome wrote in the Vulgate.
Click to expand...
St. Jerome also had access to the older Latin, the Vetus Latina, which was supposedly of very poor quality.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vetus_Latina

I would agree with all those who check with the Latin Vulgate and/or Greek Vulgate for a better understanding of the English or whatever their mother tongue happens to be.

Greek English Latin:

newadvent.org/bible/
 
Most don’t realize this, but there are actually two errors in some Bibles these days.

In 1 john 5:7-8 being one of them. Those verses aren’t in the original Greek Manuscripts, and people erroneously keep them. I’m not sure if the Douay Rheims Bible still has this error, but I think it would be appropriate to get rid of it, since it was an error made in the 800s. The verse is obviously about the Holy Trinity, but there are other examples on the Holy Trinity we can use, so it won’t be missed.

-MontChevalier
 
It really doesn’t take long to get used to the language of the Douay-Rheims Bible, a few weeks at most. I suspect many people who don’t like its style have only read a bit of it and decided they didn’t like it, without giving it a chance to sink in. Took me a bit to get used to, but it was worth the effort
 
Victory9 said:
Admittedly, ‘that sort of English’ does try one’s patience, as it doesn’t ‘flow’ like we’re used to, in this fast, modern time. And the spelling and grammar are very, very old. I don’t mind the “thee’s and thou’s.”, but “spake” instead of “speak” or “spoke”, “shew”, instead of “show”, gets on my 21st century nerves. However, the payoff, the consolation, is that this translation is as close to the original texts as can be had, and we can absolutely rely on the true translation, given the fact that St Jerome had access to texts that the modern, multi-denominational, feminist, politically correct, inclusive-language-oriented committees don’t have. And of course, the other reason, for me anyway, is that St Jerome is a Saint ~ which is reason enough to trust the translation, and also that the Douay-Rheims version is the only official version of the Holy Roman Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
:confused:

🤷

I am going to politely suggest that you check your facts on a number of the statements you made.
 
svid2 said:
Yes. Yes. Yes!
I love the Douay-Rheims. Love it.
However, I have a dozen bibles. And I like them all. (Except for the Living Bible)
Click to expand...
I picked up a NLT (retranslation of the Living Bible) study Bible back in my Protestant days. I recently noticed how horrible it’s translation of Philippians 2:12 is. Totally re-worded to support sola fide and OSAS. No other translation is that off.
 
Adam95 said:
If the KJV was good enough for St. Paul, it is good enough for me.
Click to expand...
I don’t know how to tell you this, but St. Paul didn’t speak or write English. Actually the Bible wasn’t finished/compiled (or at least the version from which the KJV was translated) until well after he died.
 
ProVobis said:
I don’t know how to tell you this, but St. Paul didn’t speak or write English. Actually the Bible wasn’t finished/compiled (or at least the version from which the KJV was translated) until well after he died.
Click to expand...
It’s an old joke directed at KJV-onlyists.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top