Bible recommendations

[CalCatholic]

Wow! This was just the kind of information I was seeking… Thank you!

I can see that I need to do more research. Many of these selections are not available in my little small-town holy goods store, and one of the things I think is important is the way it feels in my hand and if it lays open nicely. I live about about an hour and a half from DC and I hear that there is a wonderful bookstore at the Basilica there. I’ve been thinking about a trip there for some time.

I do have a parallel NT with 8 versions (though one is the original Greek and incomprehensible to me) and that is very helpful when I am seeking to dig into the nuances of the text, so I don’t feel that there is a huge amount of urgency here… I would rather take my time and get something I will be happy with.

Khalid, one follow up question. You said the RSV CE2 is good for the NT but problematic for the OT. You seem to be very knowledgeable about translations… Can you be more specific about its OT issues?

Thank you all, again!

The RSV-2CE is used in the (English speaking) Catholic Mass by the Antilles Episcopal Conference and now in parts of Africa. It is approved for liturgical use by the Vatican without having to be altered (like the NAB, NRSV, etc.) That is good and accurate enough for me!

 

[Beeline]

The RSV-2CE is used in the (English speaking) Catholic Mass by the Antilles Episcopal Conference and now in parts of Africa. It is approved for liturgical use by the Vatican without having to be altered (like the NAB, NRSV, etc.) That is good and accurate enough for me!

If someone reads the Bible daily and is engaged in reading it from front to back, OT-NT, on a regular lifelong basis to be able to understand all of it, then unfortunately the RSV-2CE and NAB although approved , both need supplemental resources, other Bibles to help you understand some of the oddly chosen words and poorly configured sentences. The NAB being less problematic, than the RSV-2CE(primarily OT, but good for NT).

As to the Knox Bible that po18guy recommended that is a ‘Art-Thee-Thou-Thy and Thine’ Bible:

biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+12%3A13&version=KNOX

which is essentially a non-starter for many of us. Its old english which more or less faded out about the turn of the 20th century(by the early 1900’s) , but still saw some or little published use beyond that.

 

[Khalid]

An excellent alternative to new is a used bible, either on eBay or in thrift stores. Extremely sad to say that being Catholic is a used bible collector’s delight, as most are nearly unused My daily reader is a seemingly little-known Catholic bible: the Confraternity (CCD) bible, the predecessor of the NAB. Produced form 1941-1969, the versions before 1953 have the Douay OT combined with a fresh, first-half 20th century American English vernacular NT. It was an in-progress update of the Douay-Rheims that, in finished form, was never published under a single cover, as it died when the NAB was adopted. I happened upon a leather bound 1949 version in excellent condition for $2 in a thrift store. Using a CPI calculator to adjust the original penciled-in 9.90 price, it would run $95 today.

The CCD is an excellent NT and a decent OT to boot. The Psalms are kind of bad, and the tradition of Catholics using bad English in our Bible translations which stretches back to the Douay-Rheims is present - although not to the degree of the NAB or other more modern versions - but the translation and notes are orthodox, from what I can tell. It’s like a New American Bible with an editorial board not filled with heretics.

 

[Khalid]

Use Amazon and dont underate the ‘look inside the book feature’ that is enabled for much of their books.

In addition, Amazon is much cheaper.

I can answer adequately to that: OT RSV CE2: psalms the language is not beautiful or flowing, sometimes just darn hard to understand what they are talking about, this problem is throughout the OT, but is profound in psalms. Whereas the NT in the RSV…, little to no problems.

NAB has same problems but to a much lesser degree and sprinkled throughout(OT & NT), thats why the NIV is a good backup resource to a NAB.

The ESV fixes most of those problems (although it gives short shrift to priests “elders”] and bishops “overseers”] in the NT, as do many modern Catholic versions), and is being adapted to be the future lectionary pretty much everywhere but the US.

Not to mention the ESV is a good deal more accurate than the NIV. Neither one uses an excellent Greek text, but the ESV translation is much better.

 

[Tous_Logous]

I’m not sure I have a favorite translation to recommend, but I am too overwhelmed by all the different English Bible translations (just as you are, whether they are Catholic, Protestant, etc. translations).

Since you are familiar with the NAB, maybe go for the NAB: Revised Edition. I have a very nice, small leather NAB-RE Bible I picked up from the protestant bookstore (that’s all there is around here) for about $25 or $30. Comes with photos of the Holy Land, color maps, and paintings of Bible stories. Also includes a Bible dictionary and doctrinal index. Overall, a nice price and the text isn’t so small that I can’t read it. I don’t use it as my main translation for devotional reading though; mostly I use it to compare NT Greek translations with English translations. There are other NAB-RE Bibles you can get as well (with larger text) but chances are, they are far more expensive. This version I have is the St. Joseph edition of the NAB-RE.

Another translation I recommend is the Jerusalem Bible (not the New Jerusalem Bible; the original JB translation from 1966). Chances are it’s out of print, but you can look on ebay and amazon for a good used one. I was absolutely lucky in picking a huge hardcover, very good condition JB from a used bookstore for only $6.99! Believe it or not, they are more expensive on ebay! So if you can, check any used bookstores around to see if they have a used JB. You never know, you may get lucky like I did. The only thing I don’t like about the JB is that sometimes the English is quirky and difficult to understand, probably because it’s originally a British English translation. You can’t go wrong though with the JB.

You can also try the Revised Standard Version-Catholic edition. Currently, I don’t have any qualms about it but the language is sometimes…odd. I believe the RSV-CE dates at least from the late 1940’s/early 1950’s, so that’s probably why, or it may be in the style of earlier English language.

 

[Khalid]

The RSV-2CE is a good deal superior to the RSV-CE, as it removes the misleading use of “thou” to refer to deity which subconsciously casts doubt on that of Christ (as “thou” is never used of Christ). It is from 2006, but its core is from the 1950s. Remember that Newer does not mean Better; the KJV and DRC are still the two best English Bibles available, and are over 400 years old. The best Spanish Bible is of similar age, with the second-best being just over 100 years old. The best Arabic Bible is from the late 1800s. The best Syriac (~200 AD), Latin (~400 AD, Clementine recension ~1600 AD), and Greek Bibles (~400-1600 AD, definitive printed recension ~1550 AD) date from, sometimes, 1600-1800 years old in their original form.

The Jerusalem Bible is good for reading large chunks of the Bible for the gist of it, and is decent for devotions, but is poor for actual study: it is a pretty loose rendering. The notes in the full version are moderately offensive, similar to the NAB, but it’s nearly impossible to find a full version. If you buy a Jerusalem Bible, be absolutely certain to import one from England that is printed by Darton, Longman, and Todd, and under no circumstances buy the horrible American printing by Doubleday. The Darton, Longman, and Todd edition has a blue cover; the American version does not.

The American Doubleday Jerusalem Bible is almost impossible to read: it has the unmistakable aura of a photocopy five or six generations removes from the original. The English DL&T Jerusalem Bible is not printed well by any stretch of the imagination (e.g. LEGO SpA or Joengbloed printing), but is readable; many pages in the American edition are actually unreadable.

 

[Beeline]

The ESV fixes most of those problems (although it gives short shrift to priests “elders”] and bishops “overseers”] in the NT, as do many modern Catholic versions), and is being adapted to be the future lectionary pretty much everywhere but the US.

Not to mention the ESV is a good deal more accurate than the NIV. Neither one uses an excellent Greek text, but the ESV translation is much better.

Thanks for suggestion about ESV, never knew it existed.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

An excellent alternative to new is a used bible, either on eBay or in thrift stores. Extremely sad to say that being Catholic is a used bible collector’s delight, as most are nearly unused My daily reader is a seemingly little-known Catholic bible: the Confraternity (CCD) bible, the predecessor of the NAB. Produced form 1941-1969, the versions before 1953 have the Douay OT combined with a fresh, first-half 20th century American English vernacular NT. It was an in-progress update of the Douay-Rheims that, in finished form, was never published under a single cover, as it died when the NAB was adopted. I happened upon a leather bound 1949 version in excellent condition for $2 in a thrift store. Using a CPI calculator to adjust the original penciled-in 9.90 price, it would run $95 today.

I just got a Douay OT/Confraternity (1961) for $16 at ebay (Leather with original cloth ribbon marker and all the family pages empty!!!), my wife said: “Another Bible!”

 

[po18guy]

I just got a Douay OT/Confraternity (1961) for $16 at ebay (Leather with original cloth ribbon marker and all the family pages empty!!!), my wife said: “Another Bible!”

The various forms of the CCD bible are rather curious, being that it was a work-in-progress. As Khalid noted, they have an absolutely great NT. The 1949 has the straight Douay OT, and Confraternity NT. The 1952 edition has the Douay OT with Confraternity Psalms. The 1953 edition has the first eight OT books, the Psalms and NT of the Confraternity, while the remainder of the OT is Douay. As to the Psalms, the Confraternity translations have very mixed reviews. The completed Confraternity bible was never published under a single cover, so most versions are true hybrid translations. As a practical matter, this can be a benefit.

What I find appealing from a daily reading standpoint in the 1941-1952 editions, is that the OT uses the older Douay English, and the NT the 20th century Confraternity English. Thus, the text itself reminds you of which testament you are reading via the antiquity or modernity of the English used. And, since the OT is Douay, it is above serious criticism.

Any of the CCD bibles, IMHO, are superior to the NAB, the NAB/RE, the incomplete bibles (NIV - dumbed down, the NASB - agenda driven), and virtually all other incomplete protestant/evangelical/fundamentalist translations. The intros to the CCD books are solid, lacking the modernist doubts and fuzziness that crept into the NAB and its descendant, the NAB/RE.

An important point is that all revisers of the Confraternity bible were Catholic clergy. Not so in the NAB or NAB/RE, which tilts toward ecumenism at a cost in accuracy, as I see it.

 

[Khalid]

How is the NASB agenda driven? I use it occasionally, and had a (Catholic) professor of OT who preferred it.

I wouldn’t go so far as to say many mainstream versions of the Bible are agenda-driven, even if in some (NAB/RE, RSV: ESV) one can detect hints of an agenda (denial of the supernatural, reduction of Bible/inspiration: doctrines of election, presbyterian polity, respectively): the NRSV is - the secular, evolutionist, non-inerrantist, liberal-feminist agenda; the NIV is, the free-grace Protestant agenda; the NWT is, the Arian agenda; and maybe a few others.

I don’t see that the KJV, NKJV, NASB, DRC have any agenda; they have all four always struck me as fair and faithful translations, all of them suitable for use by most any Christian, and ideal substrata for an “open Bible” accepted ecumenically. (The only problem, of course, being that the Vulgate is standard for traditional Catholics, the Critical Text for modern Catholics and liberal Protestants, and the Traditional Text for conservative Protestants and Orthodox: an NKJV-style apparatus could resolve this.)

 

[po18guy]

How is the NASB agenda driven? I use it occasionally, and had a (Catholic) professor of OT who preferred it.

Essentially all protestant and ecumenical translations are driven by the agendas of the groups which financed or otherwise sponsored those endeavors. It seems that, in many of the proof-verses in which there is an accurate but Catholic-friendly translation, as well as an alternative, it nearly always goes with the alternative. As with the RSV, the NASB would need polishing and seven additional books before it would be fully accurate and fully authentic for Catholic use. I can easily see why it would be preferred for NT use over the current Catholic bible. A well-catechized Catholic may use even the GNT to good effect, as they know the authoritative teaching behind the scriptures, regardless of the translation they are using.