Years ago, I attended a “coffee break” bible study group at a local Christian Reformed Church which used the NIV.
I splurged and got the NIV study bible. I liked it for the easy, modernized translation.
The Catholic Church recommends that at a certain number of priest study the ancient languages so that the Church does not lose touch with the original versions, which, after all, are the only TRULY inspired versions.
The New Jerome Biblical Commentary (c.1992) quoted an early 20th century document of the Vatican that authorized Catholics (probably referring most to scholars) to read non-Catholic versions (including the Jewish Publication Society 1985 translation of the Hebrew Bible). That said, the Vatican was clear that it advised against reading any anti-Catholic versions.
I can’t find my copy of it right now (that’s two books I’m hunting for).
For the reason in the OP, I’d like to have the Catholic version of Strong’s exhaustive concordance. Failing that, I use strong’s to dig into the original language of texts.
**BUT NOTE: ** ya know, “traditions” are, in a very large sense, “teachings.” But, I see your point, that translators play games with their biases.
But, let’s look at the MOST controversial verse in scripture, Is 7:14. The masoretic text is alleged to say “a young woman shall conceive and bear a son.” But, the much older but Greek Septuagint says “a virgin shall conceive and bear a son.” What’s the saying? We’re between a rock and a hard spot (?). These variations don’t prove anything, really. The oldest Masoretic text is from around 900 AD. That gives PLENTY of time for Jewish scribes to have altered the Hebrew text, in a polemical way, against the Christian view of Mary’s perpetual virginity.
The Jews, themselves, translated Is 7:14 into Greek as “virgin” – and I happen to think that they knew what they were saying. Don’t take this the wrong way, but this is “Jewish scribe versus Jewish scribe.” AND, AND, AND, those versions were finalized LONG before the birth of Christ, when there was no ax to grind over the “virgin” question.
There were CENTURIES to correct the Septuagint, if it had a bad translation of Is 7:14.
And, I’ll point out for maybe the 11-teenth time on this website, that English translations of scripture are troubled by the legal requirement against plagiarism – so these various versions and editions virtually HAVE TO come out sounding differently, to avoid lawsuits against plagiarism and copyright violation.( All the more reasons I should have studied the ancient languages when I was young.)
When you catch somebody red-handed, like doing this in the NIV, it’s good to point it out, and often, until everybody knows. please see my next post.
