Catholic Study Bible, 2nd ed

  • Thread starter Thread starter Scottish_Monk
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
thistle said:
The NAB translation is not a good one which is why the NABRE had to be produced.
The notes to the NAB are not good, often wrong, and sometimes verging on the heretical.
The people who are criticizing the NAB are theologians and bible scholars.
The OP is asking about a good bible for bible study. The NAB is not a good bible for that purpose.
Click to expand...
😃
And those who espouse heterodoxy are afraid of a Bible with a more literal than “dynamic equivalency” translation, and orthodox Catholic commentary, such as the Ignatius RSV CE II.
 
Faithdancer said:
😃
And those who espouse heterodoxy are afraid of a Bible with a more literal than “dynamic equivalency” translation, and orthodox Catholic commentary, such as the Ignatius RSV CE II.
Click to expand...
Personally, I like the D-R with the Haydock Commentary, and the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible RSV CE II.
 
thistle said:
Personally, I like the D-R with the Haydock Commentary, and the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible RSV CE II.
Click to expand...
Good point. Its better to have more than one, especially when its a cert that they`re both orthodox.

The New Advent site or better still, the CD (installed: otherwise, it`s painfully slow), is handy as well.
 
thistle said:
The NAB translation is not a good one which is why the NABRE had to be produced.
The notes to the NAB are not good, often wrong, and sometimes verging on the heretical.
The people who are criticizing the NAB are theologians and bible scholars.
The OP is asking about a good bible for bible study. The NAB is not a good bible for that purpose.
Click to expand...
:newidea:
Getting an idea for a new thread.
 
Julia_Mae said:
PLENTY of Catholic like the NAB and it is the translation the Church gave us to use in Liturgy in the United States. The translation is made specifically for the kind of English spoken here to make it the most understandable with all notes provided by the Church for our guidance.

I fail to see how one can claim to be loyal to the Church and diss the Bible the Church has given us to use.

I don’t think posters on a mesage board know better than the Church or the USCCB, new.usccb.org/bible/books-of-the-bible/ where we find the NAB online.
Click to expand...
I think it’s a matter of personal preference. Not to say that there’s any doctrinal errors or anything, but I believe it does take liberties in the translation. I have many bibles and bible study tools. Actually, the NAB is the one I take notes in, because it was cheap.
 
Pope Benedict XVI in his encyclical on faith said that Hebrews 11:1 would be better translated as faith is the SUBSTANCE of things hoped for the EVIDENCE of things not seen".

The NAB uses REALIZATION instead of SUBSTANCE.

If it is OK for the Pope in a papal encyclical to advocate a translation that is not the same as the translation approved by the USCCB for the NAB–don’t tell me that someone is being UNLOYAL or UNCATHOLIC for not agreeing with EVERY translation choice of the NAB!

The pope doesn’t!

And just because the USCCB approves ANY translation of the NAB that does not mean that they–the bishops of the USCCB AGREE with every translation choice of the NAB!

They don’t vote on EVERY translation choice!

You know what I think is UNLOYAL and UNCATHOLIC?

A translation of the bible that doesn’t say “A virgin will conceive” in Isaiah 7:14 or a translation that doesn’t even get the Hail Mary right and says “Hail favored one”!

You know what else isn’t CATHOLIC?

A translations that uses inclusive language to such an extent that the Holy See rejects it for use in the liturgy!

That at one time was the case for the NAB!

So yes NAB lovers there are reason why the NAB isn’t always right in its translation choices and it is VERY Catholic to not agree with any of its translation choices that haven’t been made with the lens of the Catholic church’s magisterium over the centuries!
 
Jerry-Jet said:
Pop[e Benedict XVI in his encyclical on faith said that Hebrews 11:1 would be better translated as faith is the SUBSTANCE of things hoped for the EVIDENCE of things not seen".

The NAB uses REALIZATION instead of SUBSTANCE.

If it is OK for the Pope in a papal encyclical to advocate a translation that is not the same as the translation approved by the USCCB for the NAB–don’t tell me that someone is being UNLOYAL or UNCATHOLIC for not agreeing with EVERY translation choice of the NAB!

The pope doesn’t!

And just because the USCCB approves ANY translation of the NAB that does not mean that they–the bishops of the USCCB AGREE with every translation choice of the NAB!

They don’t vote on EVERY translation choice!

You know what I think is UNLOYAL and UNCATHOLIC?

A translation of the bible that doesn’t say “A virgin will conceive” in Isaiah 7:14 or a translation that doesn’t even get the Hail Mary right and says “Hail favored one”!

You know what else isn’t CATHOLIC?

A translations that uses inclusive language to such an extent that the Holy See rejects it for use in the liturgy!

That at one time was the case for the NAB!

So yes NAB lovers there are reason why the NAB isn’t always right in its translation choices and it is VERY Catholic to not agree with any of its translation choices that haven’t been made with the lens of the Catholic church’s magisterium over the centuries!
Click to expand...
Tell us how you really feel, JJ!🙂 RIght on! And “Hail, favored one” was a pet peeve of our Mariology professor last year. Intentional or otherwise, it is detrimental to the Marian dogma of the Immaculate Conception.

I’m sure for some, the NAB doesn’t go nearly far enough in its inclusive language. Romans 1 still condemns homosexuality absolutely, for example. Deo gratias!
[/QUOTE]
 
Julia_Mae said:
I fail to see how one can claim to be loyal to the Church and diss the Bible the Church has given us to use.
I don’t think posters on a mesage board know better than the Church or the USCCB, new.usccb.org/bible/books-of-the-bible/ where we find the NAB online.
Click to expand...
We are not told by the Church that the NAB is the only one we should use, so there’s no basis for saying that someone who prefers a different edition is disloyal to the Church.
Take a deep breath, hon.
 
CalCatholic said:
I like it. 👍 I bought ‘The Catholic Bible Personal Study Edition’ by Oxford instead of the ‘Catholic Study Bible’. The new NABRE version of the ‘Catholic Study Bible’ did not change the reading guide to reflect the changes in the new revised translation of the NAB (NABRE). The 'Catholic Bible personal Study Edition did make this revision of its study guide to reflect these changes.
Click to expand...
Anyone know if they are they still planning on correcting the Catholic Study Bible? Seems odd that it has been out this long without a revision.
 
It can certainly be Catholic if it is on the Vatican website–that doesn’t mean it is perfect because it is on the Vatican website–if that were true then why be attempting any further translation of it?
 
CalCatholic said:
I agree the the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible (NT) is very good, that does not make the Catholic Study Bible bad, they have a different type of notes, Ignatius’ notes lean more theological and the Catholic Study Bible are more historical-critical. You may personally not like them, and that also does not make them bad.
Click to expand...
Can we get some examples (I am not arguing the point, just trying to understand). I have always found the footnotes in the NAB and the NJB helpful but they usually get labeled as liberal.

I also like the Oxford Annotated version of the RSV. I find footnotes helpful in general but the RSV-CE has very few and the RSV study bible is only the NT currently so maybe when that changes I will make the switch.
 
ajcstr said:
Can we get some examples (I am not arguing the point, just trying to understand). I have always found the footnotes in the NAB and the NJB helpful but they usually get labeled as liberal.

I also like the Oxford Annotated version of the RSV. I find footnotes helpful in general but the RSV-CE has very few and the RSV study bible is only the NT currently so maybe when that changes I will make the switch.
Click to expand...
Here is one example:

“Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” (Matt 5:3, RSV-2CE)

**NAB - **The poor in spirit’: in the Old Testament, the poor (anawim) are those who are without material possessions and whose confidence is in God (see Is 61:1; Zep 2:3; in the NAB the word is translated ‘lowly and humble’, respectively, in those texts). Matthew added ‘in spirit’ in order either to indicate that only the devout poor were meant or to extend the beatitude to all, of whatever social rank, who recognized their complete dependence on God. The same phrase ‘poor in spirit’ is found in the Qumran literature (1QM 14:7).

ICSB-NT - ‘the poor in spirit’: Those who recognize their need for God and his grace. Unattached to this world, they find their security in the Lord and rely on his mercy rather than their merits or material wealth. The spiritually poor can also be economically poor, for these are often rich in faith (Jas 2:5). Full possession of the ‘kingdom’ will be theirs at the final Judgment (Mt 25:34) (CCC 2544-47).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top