Bible translations in the Eastern Church?

[DoulaMama]

What translation of the Holy Scriptures do most Eastern Catholics use?

 

[bpbasilphx]

Most Eastern Catholics where? In the USA or homelands?

And which Eastern Catholics, which are NOT a monolithic, homogenous entity?

The official Bible of the Greek Churches is the Greek NT (received text–actually the Liturgical Text), and the Septuagint–LXX.

The official Bible of the Slavic Churches is the Slavonic Bible, based on the Greek Liturgical texts of the OT and NT.

For the Syriac Churches, their basic Bible is the Peshitta (sometimes spelled Peshitto).

Most Melkite Churches in the USA use an Epistle and Gospel lectionary translated by Baron Jose de Vinck and the late Abp. Joseph Raya, which is now out of print.

Most Ruthenian Churches in the USA use English lectionaries based on the older NAB, which I admit leaves a lot to be desired.

 

[Freeway4321]

Orthodox in communion with Rome = Orthodox Study Bible.

The rest of the lot = NRSV, NAB, etc…

 

[searn77]

Orthodox in communion with Rome = Orthodox Study Bible.

The rest of the lot = NRSV, NAB, etc…

I wouldn’t use the Orthodox Study Bible unless you have another bible along with it. There are many errors in this bible including grammatical, chapters mixed up, references to other parts in the bible are wrong, etc. I only use it for the study notes.

 

[Nine_Two]

I wouldn’t use the Orthodox Study Bible unless you have another bible along with it. There are many errors in this bible including grammatical, chapters mixed up, references to other parts in the bible are wrong, etc. I only use it for the study notes.

This is the first I’ve heard of this. Do you have examples? It is based off the LXX rather than the more common MT, is this what you’re refering to?

 

[Parascheva1014]

We use the Orthodox Study Bible. I have not come across these errors spoken of nor have I seen anyone else bring up these supposed errors.

 

[searn77]

Well a couple of big ones I noticed were these. Look at Jeremiah chapter 25 verse 15 through the rest of Jeremiah. It doesn’t match up with my other bibles which are NKJV and Douay-Rheims. Jeremiah becomes mishmashed at this point so that Jeremiah 38 is really Jeremiah 31 for example. Also, 3 Kings 21 is actually 3 Kings 20 in my other bibles. And then there are the minor errors like incorrect spelling, having a footnote that tells me to look at a different footnote in a different chapter to gain more of an insight, but when I go to where it’s listed, it isn’t there. Sometimes the cross that tells you to look at a footnote isn’t at the end of the verse. Sometimes the cross will be at, for example, verse 32 when really the footnote talks about verse 33 as well. And I don’t know if the extra verses in Proverbs (I know for certain chapters 1-3) are because of the OSB being from the LXX or if it’s just another error in it. And it’s also a pain that for some reason they have titles throughout the text to let you know what’s going on (for example at Luke 24 it is titled "The Women Find the Tomb Empty), except for the book of Isaiah, which doesn’t have any titles.

I think there are some more major errors like the first two I mentioned but I haven’t kept track of all the ones that I come across. So I read from a different bible and look at the notes in the OSB. Does any one else have these problems in their version of the OSB (mine by the way is the OSB with the Old and New Testaments, and it was the newest version that they had when I received it as a gift last year’s Christmas). Are any of the problems I mentioned because of the OSB being translated from the LLX?

 

[Nine_Two]

Well a couple of big ones I noticed were these. Look at Jeremiah chapter 25 verse 15 through the rest of Jeremiah. It doesn’t match up with my other bibles which are NKJV and Douay-Rheims. Jeremiah becomes mishmashed at this point so that Jeremiah 38 is really Jeremiah 31 for example. Also, 3 Kings 21 is actually 3 Kings 20 in my other bibles. And then there are the minor errors like incorrect spelling, having a footnote that tells me to look at a different footnote in a different chapter to gain more of an insight, but when I go to where it’s listed, it isn’t there. Sometimes the cross that tells you to look at a footnote isn’t at the end of the verse. Sometimes the cross will be at, for example, verse 32 when really the footnote talks about verse 33 as well. And I don’t know if the extra verses in Proverbs (I know for certain chapters 1-3) are because of the OSB being from the LXX or if it’s just another error in it. And it’s also a pain that for some reason they have titles throughout the text to let you know what’s going on (for example at Luke 24 it is titled "The Women Find the Tomb Empty), except for the book of Isaiah, which doesn’t have any titles.

I think there are some more major errors like the first two I mentioned but I haven’t kept track of all the ones that I come across. So I read from a different bible and look at the notes in the OSB. Does any one else have these problems in their version of the OSB (mine by the way is the OSB with the Old and New Testaments, and it was the newest version that they had when I received it as a gift last year’s Christmas). Are any of the problems I mentioned because of the OSB being translated from the LLX?

I only checked that Jeremiah issue you mentioned, more because of time constraints. I used an MT translation (NAB) and two LXX translations (OSB and the Brenton bilingual edition), You are correct that verse Jer. 38 in the OSB is the same as Jer 31 in a MT translation, however my other LXX translation was in agreement with the OSB.

Because the LXX itself predates the MT (LXX originates between the 3rd and 1st century BC, while the MT originates around the turn of the 1st/2nd century AD) you can’t compare the two and say the LXX is wrong, especially when we know for a fact that the MT was created as the result of a massive redaction (in which entire books, chapters, and verses were removed), undertaken by a Jewish Council.

I wanted to get that basic answer out, I’m going to continue looking into what you’ve said to check, and I’ll make sure to say if I find anything though.

edit: The Brenton edition has a list of the differences between the two editions

 

[searn77]

Okay, I just found out that the Jeremiah problem is not an error, it’s just one of the differences between the LXX and MT. Sorry about that. Does anyone know about some of the other problems in the OSB that I mentioned?

 

[searn77]

I only checked that Jeremiah issue you mentioned, more because of time constraints. I used an MT translation (NAB) and two LXX translations (OSB and the Brenton bilingual edition), You are correct that verse Jer. 38 in the OSB is the same as Jer 31 in a MT translation, however my other LXX translation was in agreement with the OSB.

Because the LXX itself predates the MT (LXX originates between the 3rd and 1st century BC, while the MT originates around the turn of the 1st/2nd century AD) you can’t compare the two and say the LXX is wrong, especially when we know for a fact that the MT was created as the result of a massive redaction (in which entire books, chapters, and verses were removed), undertaken by a Jewish Council.

I wanted to get that basic answer out, I’m going to continue looking into what you’ve said to check, and I’ll make sure to say if I find anything though.

Yeah, I just looked up on that and you are right. Sorry about that

 

[Nine_Two]

Yeah, I just looked up on that and you are right. Sorry about that

Of course your comments about footnotes and spelling, though much more minor, are still valid. I haven’t noticed anything with the footnotes like that, however I do think they leave something to be desired in some places. I hope they’re working on a second edition OSB that will improve on the Study Bible aspect of it, but as far as a translation goes, it’s good. I’m still going to get the EOB when it comes out though.

 

[eucharisteo]

Of course your comments about footnotes and spelling, though much more minor, are still valid. I haven’t noticed anything with the footnotes like that, however I do think they leave something to be desired in some places. I hope they’re working on a second edition OSB that will improve on the Study Bible aspect of it, but as far as a translation goes, it’s good. I’m still going to get the EOB when it comes out though.

I"m glad to hear this because I’ve been considering getting a copy of the OSB. So for now I’ll just thing Order of St. Benedict for now .

 

[Nine_Two]

I"m glad to hear this because I’ve been considering getting a copy of the OSB. So for now I’ll just thing Order of St. Benedict for now .

I don’t mean to denegrate it. It is a good study bible, and for the Orthodox it’s all we have right now, it’s just not what I’d say is an “excellent” one, there is room for improvement, but at the same time it does its job.

The articles it has are excellent though (although they are designed mostly for those new to the faith, or uneducated), as are the icons it has on some pages, but the latter of those is just bonus, not something I expect from a study bible.

Basically I’d recommend for someone who is Orthodox, but even for someone who isn’t, it may be of some interest but depending on what you want it for, and what denomination you’re from, its value will change.

 

[searn77]

I just wanted to say that all the chapter errors that I said were in the OSB aren’t actually there. It’s just because the OSB is translated from the LXX. I didn’t realize how much the LXX differed from the MT. But all the other minor errors I listed, I have found in the bible. And I don’t understand why they didn’t put any titles in the Book of Isaiah when they put titles in every other book? But I’m glad I found out that the chapter errors aren’t actually errors, they’re just the translation.

 

[bpbasilphx]

I just wanted to say that all the chapter errors that I said were in the OSB aren’t actually there. It’s just because the OSB is translated from the LXX. I didn’t realize how much the LXX differed from the MT. But all the other minor errors I listed, I have found in the bible. And I don’t understand why they didn’t put any titles in the Book of Isaiah when they put titles in every other book? But I’m glad I found out that the chapter errors aren’t actually errors, they’re just the translation.

That is, true searn77–the LXX differs in many places from the MT.

One example that comes to mind is the two verses that appear in Jeremiah are in the LXX and liturgical version of the Canticle of Hanna (I Kings/I Samuel), but not in the Masoretic Text.

Also, frequently the LITURGICAL texts of pericopes given in the Menaion, Triodion, and Penetecostarion differ from both the MT and printed versions of the LXX. As Fr. Ephrem of UK says, the Lesson for Wendesday at 6th hour in the 4th week of Lent is actually more a targum of the LXX text.

 

[Nine_Two]

I just wanted to say that all the chapter errors that I said were in the OSB aren’t actually there. It’s just because the OSB is translated from the LXX. I didn’t realize how much the LXX differed from the MT. But all the other minor errors I listed, I have found in the bible. And I don’t understand why they didn’t put any titles in the Book of Isaiah when they put titles in every other book? But I’m glad I found out that the chapter errors aren’t actually errors, they’re just the translation.

Yeah, I just looked at Isaiah. That’s just weird. You’d think something so basic would be there.

 

[nikgary]

The Eastern Orthodox Church belief about Holy Scripture that is the Bible of the Old Testament and the New Testament we must be fully aware from within Holy Tradition. Tradition, is a life, a personal encounter with Christ our Lord in the Holy Spirit. Tradition then not only is kept by the Church - it lives in the Church, it is the life of the Holy Spirit in the Church. The Bible is then the supreme expression of God’s revelation to man.