Bible?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Misguidedyouth
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Misguidedyouth

Guest
Hello,

What’s the best ‘version’ of the Bible? I heard that many Christians are disapointed in the NIV (New International Version) because it cut out a lot of parts. I found out that in they cut out some parts or part I should say.

" Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me "

King James Bible Online

vs.

“Go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

NIV

Ok I don’t know where the NIV came from, It was copied from a message I received from somebody on DA in response to a question (I’m still not sure I understand 🤷 but until I can talk to an -english speaking- preist, I dont feel like anything will help. I digress). Anyways, so which version is better? I think the ‘take up the cross’ was a bad thing to cut out, and personally I cant see anything wrong with it. I know it’s ‘international’ so they (whoever published it?) might want to be PC about it. But it’s still the Bible! I mean, theres no points being so politically correct about it. Where else to find words like Cross, Jesus, God, etc than in the Christian Bible? Anyway, like Isaid I don’t know where this person got this text. I don’t know if they edited it or not. Any thoughts about which Bible is best?
 
Best is always debatable.

Perhaps you should read Catholic Bibles such as the New American Bible (which is used at Mass), or the Ignatius Bible (aka NRSV Catholic Edition, which is used in most books on Catholicism), or the Douay-Rheims (a classic translation from around the time of the KJV), or the New Jerusalem Bible (a personal favorite).

I’m not familiar with the NIV, but I do enjoy the KJV – be sure to get one with the Apocrypha included or else you’ll get an incomplete Bible. Note that I wouldn’t use the KJV for Bible study, though I do enjoy its rich use of language.
 
The best translation of the Bible is the one you’ll read. 😉

I would recommend reading this helpful, handy tract for some more background info:

Bible Translations Guide

I don’t know that I’ve ever come across Catholic editions of either the NIV or the KJV. Those translations are more common in Protestant circles. The most common Catholic translations are the New American Bible [NAB] (and now the recently released New American Bible Revised Edition [NABRE]), the Revised Standard Version [RSV], (New) Jerusalem Bible, and Douay-Rheims.

FYI, the Ignatius Bible is not the NRSV. The New Revised Standard Version is a different (and IMO inferior) translation from Ignatius’ RSV, 2nd edition.

Generally speaking, no translation is perfect. They all have strengths and weaknesses. It’s good to look at a few different translations. If you encounter a passage that doesn’t look right, use it as an opportunity to learn more by reading up on it. 🙂
 
Personally I use the Jerusalem Bible, it was given to me when I was in RCIA and I really like it. I don’t like the New JB that much, I prefer the style of the JB.
 
Joe_5859 said:
FYI, the Ignatius Bible is not the NRSV. The New Revised Standard Version is a different (and IMO inferior) translation from Ignatius’ RSV, 2nd edition.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the clarification, Joe!
 
I_Thirst said:
Thanks for the clarification, Joe!
Click to expand...
No problem! 🙂 It does get quite confusing! I think Catholic Answers should produce a “Catholic Acronyms” tract to help us make sense of all the abbreviations. 😛
 
I did have a copy of the 2nd Catholic Edition of the RSV (Ignatius Bible), but I gave it away to a random person on the street who begged me for a Bible (strange things do happen!)

The Douay-Rheims translation is a literal translation ot St Jerome’s Vulgate. Since the latter was declared by the Church to be the definitive version of the bible at Trent in 1546, I am inclined to believe that it is worth having a side-by-side Clementia Vulgata and Douay Rheims for the purposes of clarification of exact meaning. However, I do concede that the Jerusalem Bible is probably one of the easiest to read and I beleive that it is used for the readings at most English Masses.

However, the point of having any Bible is not to quote individual verses of scripture at people, but you need to understand the message. For this purpose, one can read any translation in reality, but it needs to be done under the guidance of a spiritual director or a good Bible scholar. You not only need to read scripture, but there is a vast amount of background knowledge that one needs to appreciate before one can read the Bible independantly. You need to know exactly what you are reading before you can understand it, such as the difference between a Psalm, Proverb, Epistle, Gospel, Philosophy, etc, otherwise you are likely to land in a big mess of trouble.

The same thing goes for reading any textbook too, which is why we have lectures and tutorials at university, not just a list of books to read before an exam.
 
hartleymartin said:
The Douay-Rheims translation is a literal translation ot St Jerome’s Vulgate. Since the latter was declared by the Church to be the definitive version of the bible at Trent in 1546, I am inclined to believe that it is worth having a side-by-side Clementia Vulgata and Douay Rheims for the purposes of clarification of exact meaning.
Click to expand...
True.

A good online comparison:

newadvent.org/bible/
 
hartleymartin said:
However, I do concede that the Jerusalem Bible is probably one of the easiest to read and I beleive that it is used for the readings at most English Masses.
Click to expand...
Except for us here in the U.S. where the readings are from the NAB (with a few modifications to make up for where the translation is lacking).
 
Misguidedyouth said:
Hello,

What’s the best ‘version’ of the Bible? I heard that many Christians are disapointed in the NIV (New International Version) because it cut out a lot of parts. I found out that in they cut out some parts or part I should say.

" Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me "

King James Bible Online

vs.

“Go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

NIV

Ok I don’t know where the NIV came from, It was copied from a message I received from somebody on DA in response to a question (I’m still not sure I understand 🤷 but until I can talk to an -english speaking- preist, I dont feel like anything will help. I digress). Anyways, so which version is better? I think the ‘take up the cross’ was a bad thing to cut out, and personally I cant see anything wrong with it. I know it’s ‘international’ so they (whoever published it?) might want to be PC about it. But it’s still the Bible! I mean, theres no points being so politically correct about it. Where else to find words like Cross, Jesus, God, etc than in the Christian Bible? Anyway, like Isaid I don’t know where this person got this text. I don’t know if they edited it or not. Any thoughts about which Bible is best?
Click to expand...
The best I can understand about the NIV is that is was pieced together from different ancient manuscripts. Others versions may have been also I just only heard that about the NIV. Also, it was published not too long ago back in about 1973 and that it was based on different ancient manuscripts than most all other versions. I have heard from many that there are pieces cut out of the NIV and reworded to be very liberal. It is a protestant Bible in that it doesn’t have the all the books the Catholic Bible have. Zondervan publishing I believe has copywrites to the NIV.

I have both a New American Bible and a Douay Rheims. The Douay Rheims has the old English so if I have trouble understanding it I go to the New American Bible but I believe the Douay Rheims is best.

There are so many Bible versions out there it can be very confusing. I would go with one approved by the Catholic church.
 
Ruth_Catherine said:
There are so many Bible versions out there it can be very confusing. I would go with one approved by the Catholic church.
Click to expand...
I don’t think any particular translation has been “approved” by the Catholic Church. But I don’t know of any which has been condemned either.
 
Well first you should seek to use a bible with an Impramator, otherwile you will find it cut out more than just parts of verses… It will have cut out (probably) whole books from the bible. Like Wisdom, for instance.

I like the Haydock Doay Rheims for it’s language and notes, but I admit I can struggle with old english.

So I will back it up with a NAB (not the new version for me), and the RSV published by Ignatious press. I find reading several different translations can offer new perspective.
 
ProVobis said:
I don’t think any particular translation has been “approved” by the Catholic Church. But I don’t know of any which has been condemned either.
Click to expand...
Sorry, my bad.:rolleyes: I should say one with an impramatur: An official license by the Roman Catholic Church to print an ecclesiastical or religious book.

But I will also say I read this on EWTN’s website: There is only one English text currently approved by the Church for use in the United States. This text is the one contained in the Lectionaries approved for Sundays & Feasts and for Weekdays by the USCCB and recognized by the Holy See.

This they are referring to for use at Mass, meaning other Bible versions cannot be used at Mass except the NAB but here is the whole link where they discuss the many different Bible versions. It can be very helpful.
ewtn.com/expert/answers/bible_versions.htm

I especially find this paragraph helpful from their website.
*Bible translations developed for Catholic use are complete Bibles. This means that they contain the entire canonical text identified by Pope Damasus and the Synod of Rome (382) and the local Councils of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397), contained in St. Jerome’s Latin Vulgate translation (420), and decreed infallibly by the Ecumenical Council of Trent (1570). *
 
I own a NAB and the ICSB. I actually bought the ICSB for my kindle and a hard copy and would recommend either… or both 👍

I like the NAB a lot but the ICSB is far superior since it is a study bible in terms of notes and introductions.
 
Ruth_Catherine said:
Sorry, my bad.:rolleyes: I should say one with an impramatur: An official license by the Roman Catholic Church to print an ecclesiastical or religious book.
Click to expand...
Yes, an imprimatur literally means “let it be printed.” It confirms that there is nothing there in contradition to faith and morals according to the bishop(s) who state it.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nihil_obstat

That said, because it doesn’t have an imprimatur doesn’t mean it is condemned either. (The index of Forbidden Books was removed in 1965.)

Whatever is used in the liturgy must be settled with the publishers as they have copyright protection, with or without an imprimatur.
 
It depends why do you need the Bible.

To read at home, may be the best is the NAB (New American Bible), or if you do not mind some traditional grammar and words the Douay Rheims, Both available easily, either are book or online

To research are always use the KJV form blueletterbible.org/ it brings up the Hebrew and the Septuaguinta from the old Testament and two versions of Greek for the New Testament allowing to search through the Strong lexicon.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top