Catholic Study Bible?

[SyriacAlbion]

I’d like your review of the New American Catholic Study Bible (Second Edition).

Is this a good Bible for someone who’s pretty studied in the Bible?

I’d like a reader’s opinion who actually has this Bible and studies from it.

Thanks alot, Albion

 

[puzzleannie]

if you are speaking of the Oxford Press edition yes that is the bible I use most often for teaching, CCD, confirmation, RCIA and parish bible studies. The reason is that this is the translation used in the lectionary, and we incorporate the lectionary readings in most sessions. I prepare beforehand with passages we will be using, both lectionary and other passages related to the doctrinal portion of the lesson, from commentaries and other sources. no single bible can be stand-alone because footnotes alone cannot contain all the relevant commentary required when teaching esp. on a controversial or ambiguous passage.

 

[SyriacAlbion]

Is the REVISED version (Second Edition) any better than it’s earlier sister translation?

Is this a good overall study Bible?

Thanks for your help, Albion

 

[lak611]

Is the REVISED version (Second Edition) any better than it’s earlier sister translation?

Is this a good overall study Bible?

Thanks for your help, Albion

The Revised edition (RNAB) is not a good translation. The Psalms were rejected by the Vatican for use in the Mass. See this thread. I would suggest the RSV-CE, Douay-Rheims, or NJB, rather than the RNAB.

 

[Fidelis]

It’s an OK study Bible. It gets tiresome sometimes weeding through the many modernist and anti-supernatural assumptions in the study guides and the NAB introductions and footnotes, but when it is good, it is very good. It is certainly the most thorough and comprehensive single-volume Catholic study Bible out there.

Just remember that scholarly theories about composition dates, authorship, and after-the-fact editing are just that: scholarly theories and are not de fide, but can be used if helpful, and discarded if not.

I also use the NAB for leading Bible studies and other parish teaching because it is the version that most Catholics are likely to use. My personal preference, of course, is the RSV-CE. Maybe in my lifetime Ignatius will complete their Study Bible based on this version.

 

[Michael_Mary]

It’s an OK study Bible. It gets tiresome sometimes weeding through the many modernist and anti-supernatural assumptions in the study guides and the NAB introductions and footnotes (clipped for brevity)

If I’m correct, it “answers” the miracle of Jesus walking on the water by saying the original word could have meant “sandbar.” I too, found such to be distracting.

 

[lak611]

If I’m correct, it “answers” the miracle of Jesus walking on the water by saying the original word could have meant “sandbar.” I too, found such to be distracting.

Yes the footnotes do say the it could have meant “on the seashore”.

 

[DHC1Chipmunk]

Yes the footnotes do say the it could have meant “on the seashore”.

The entire footnote at John 6, 19 reads:

6, 19: Walking on the sea: although the Greek (cf 16) could mean “on the seashore” or “by the sea” (cf 21, 1) the parallels, especially Mt 14, 25 make clear that Jesus walked upon the water. John may allude to Job 9, 8: God “treads upon the crests of the sea.”

End of note.

Hope this helps.