Catholic with a NASB

[Catholic4Christ]

9 or 10 years ago, my grandmother (Protestant, not Catholic), a wonderful lady, gave me my first Bible. This was a few years before I took an interest in religion and began to form my own opinions about my faith. The Bible she gave me is The New American Standard Bible - Updated Edition, which I believe was the version published originally in 1995. It is a pretty nice-ish Bible, and has my name on the front (as a little kid I used to joke with people that this was proof that I wrote the Bible ). Though not a Catholic Bible, I do have an attachment to it as my first Bible. Lately, however, the Bible I use for study and Scripture-reading is my NAB. I keep my NASB at home and use my NAB when I’m away at school.

Very recently, my grandmother passed away. While she and I rarely had serious conversations about religion, she was the kind of person who was very close to God and acted out her faith superbly. Thus, I have recently felt a closer attachment to the NASB she gave to me when I was younger.

Now, I know what I believe, and I can usually pick out a verse of Scripture that is translated in a way I might not agree with. However, I am by no means a Biblical Theologian. I can appreciate my NASB as a non-Catholic Bible, but if I need to use it when I am at home, I’d like to have some idea of what I might be getting.

So, my question is, does anybody know where my NASB - Updated Edition (1995) stands when it comes to accuracy to the Catholic faith? I know it wasn’t written with the purpose of teaching Catholicism, but besides the missing books and marginal notes, does anybody know if this translation would be (for the most part) suitable for the study of scripture by a Catholic and without major error in doctrine? Thanks in advance

 

[Zenkai]

9 or 10 years ago, my grandmother (Protestant, not Catholic), a wonderful lady, gave me my first Bible. This was a few years before I took an interest in religion and began to form my own opinions about my faith. The Bible she gave me is The New American Standard Bible - Updated Edition, which I believe was the version published originally in 1995. It is a pretty nice-ish Bible, and has my name on the front (as a little kid I used to joke with people that this was proof that I wrote the Bible ). Though not a Catholic Bible, I do have an attachment to it as my first Bible. Lately, however, the Bible I use for study and Scripture-reading is my NAB. I keep my NASB at home and use my NAB when I’m away at school.

Very recently, my grandmother passed away. While she and I rarely had serious conversations about religion, she was the kind of person who was very close to God and acted out her faith superbly. Thus, I have recently felt a closer attachment to the NASB she gave to me when I was younger.

Now, I know what I believe, and I can usually pick out a verse of Scripture that is translated in a way I might not agree with. However, I am by no means a Biblical Theologian. I can appreciate my NASB as a non-Catholic Bible, but if I need to use it when I am at home, I’d like to have some idea of what I might be getting.

So, my question is, does anybody know where my NASB - Updated Edition (1995) stands when it comes to accuracy to the Catholic faith? I know it wasn’t written with the purpose of teaching Catholicism, but besides the missing books and marginal notes, does anybody know if this translation would be (for the most part) suitable for the study of scripture by a Catholic and without major error in doctrine? Thanks in advance

The NASB is a very good translation and it should be fine for study. The only major differences between Catholic and Protestant translations are the number of books.

 

[Zenas]

I use the NASB as my “default” reading bible, and I would say that their translators were not anti-Catholic. Among the modern Protestant bibles, I would call it more accommodating to the Catholic perspective than the New International Version (NIV), the Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB) and probably more than the English Standard Version (ESV). I would put it more or less on par with the Revised Standard Version and somewhat less Catholic friendly than the King James Version, which is probably the most Catholic friendly Protestant bible.

I have noticed two areas where the NASB deviates from Catholic beliefs in its translation:

(1) Matthew 18:18. “Truly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.”

Compare this to the same verse in the KJV: “Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

In the NASB the binding and loosing occurs first in Heaven and then on earth; in the KJV (and all Catholic bibles) the binding and loosing occurs first on earth and then in Heaven.

(2) 2 Corinthians 2:10. “But one whom you forgive anything, I forgive also; for indeed what I have forgiven, if I have forgiven anything, I did it for your sakes in the presence of Christ.”

Compare this to the same verse in the KJV: “To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ.”

The KJV shows Paul acting *in persona Christi *where the NASB does not.

Other than these two verses, I would regard the NASB as being basically Catholic friendly.

 

[Catholic4Christ]

I use the NASB as my “default” reading bible, and I would say that their translators were not anti-Catholic. Among the modern Protestant bibles, I would call it more accommodating to the Catholic perspective than the New International Version (NIV), the Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB) and probably more than the English Standard Version (ESV). I would put it more or less on par with the Revised Standard Version and somewhat less Catholic friendly than the King James Version, which is probably the most Catholic friendly Protestant bible.

I have noticed two areas where the NASB deviates from Catholic beliefs in its translation:

(1) Matthew 18:18. “Truly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.”

Compare this to the same verse in the KJV: “Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

In the NASB the binding and loosing occurs first in Heaven and then on earth; in the KJV (and all Catholic bibles) the binding and loosing occurs first on earth and then in Heaven.

(2) 2 Corinthians 2:10. “But one whom you forgive anything, I forgive also; for indeed what I have forgiven, if I have forgiven anything, I did it for your sakes in the presence of Christ.”

Compare this to the same verse in the KJV: “To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ.”

The KJV shows Paul acting *in persona Christi *where the NASB does not.

Other than these two verses, I would regard the NASB as being basically Catholic friendly.

This is very helpful, thank you. Usually things like this aren’t huge deals to me - I recognize it more as a semantics thing rather than “wrong,” but I will be sure to be on the lookout for little things like these. NASB sounds like a pretty solid Bible.

 

[pnewton]

The NASB is, in my opinion, the most direct translation on the market. By the very nature of the translation, it is hard to insert any denominational slant. It is probably the best one can get without reading the original language. As far as the New Testament is concerned, the phrasing of the verbs is particularly consistent with the Greek tense. Prepositions are a little trickier and often have multiple possible translations, all of which are equally valid.

 

[garysibio]

I use the NASB as my “default” reading bible, and I would say that their translators were not anti-Catholic. Among the modern Protestant bibles, I would call it more accommodating to the Catholic perspective than the New International Version (NIV), the Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB) and probably more than the English Standard Version (ESV). I would put it more or less on par with the Revised Standard Version and somewhat less Catholic friendly than the King James Version, which is probably the most Catholic friendly Protestant bible.

I have noticed two areas where the NASB deviates from Catholic beliefs in its translation:

(1) Matthew 18:18. “Truly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.”

Compare this to the same verse in the KJV: “Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

In the NASB the binding and loosing occurs first in Heaven and then on earth; in the KJV (and all Catholic bibles) the binding and loosing occurs first on earth and then in Heaven.

(2) 2 Corinthians 2:10. “But one whom you forgive anything, I forgive also; for indeed what I have forgiven, if I have forgiven anything, I did it for your sakes in the presence of Christ.”

Compare this to the same verse in the KJV: “To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ.”

The KJV shows Paul acting *in persona Christi *where the NASB does not.

Other than these two verses, I would regard the NASB as being basically Catholic friendly.

First, i agree with you entirely about the NASB. I have a copy of it and it is a very nice translation. I once wrote to the publisher and asked that they consider doing a Catholic version. They were very nice but said that would be very unlikely.

You mentioned that the NASB is probably more accommodating to the Catholic perspective than the ESV. I’m just curious. Why do you rate the ESV lower in this regard? I use it a lot also and have never seen anything that would be problematic to me as a Catholic. What am I missing?

 

[Zenas]

You mentioned that the NASB is probably more accommodating to the Catholic perspective than the ESV. I’m just curious. Why do you rate the ESV lower in this regard? I use it a lot also and have never seen anything that would be problematic to me as a Catholic. What am I missing?

I mentioned the ESV because it is the absolute favorite of Calvinists and assumed that since it is so loved by them it would not be Catholic friendly. In fact I only recently started using it with some regularity and am not as familiar with it as some other translations. Before answering your post, I perused it some more and now I must say it is very fair and objective in the translation. The only thing I found that is not Catholic friendly is its rendition of 2 Corinthians 2:10, which is just like the NASB.

 

[garysibio]

I mentioned the ESV because it is the absolute favorite of Calvinists and assumed that since it is so loved by them it would not be Catholic friendly. In fact I only recently started using it with some regularity and am not as familiar with it as some other translations. Before answering your post, I perused it some more and now I must say it is very fair and objective in the translation. The only thing I found that is not Catholic friendly is its rendition of 2 Corinthians 2:10, which is just like the NASB.

Thanks

 

[Elvis_Guy]

9 or 10 years ago, my grandmother (Protestant, not Catholic), a wonderful lady, gave me my first Bible. This was a few years before I took an interest in religion and began to form my own opinions about my faith. The Bible she gave me is The New American Standard Bible - Updated Edition, which I believe was the version published originally in 1995. It is a pretty nice-ish Bible, and has my name on the front (as a little kid I used to joke with people that this was proof that I wrote the Bible ). Though not a Catholic Bible, I do have an attachment to it as my first Bible. Lately, however, the Bible I use for study and Scripture-reading is my NAB. I keep my NASB at home and use my NAB when I’m away at school.

Very recently, my grandmother passed away. While she and I rarely had serious conversations about religion, she was the kind of person who was very close to God and acted out her faith superbly. Thus, I have recently felt a closer attachment to the NASB she gave to me when I was younger.

Now, I know what I believe, and I can usually pick out a verse of Scripture that is translated in a way I might not agree with. However, I am by no means a Biblical Theologian. I can appreciate my NASB as a non-Catholic Bible, but if I need to use it when I am at home, I’d like to have some idea of what I might be getting.

So, my question is, does anybody know where my NASB - Updated Edition (1995) stands when it comes to accuracy to the Catholic faith? I know it wasn’t written with the purpose of teaching Catholicism, but besides the missing books and marginal notes, does anybody know if this translation would be (for the most part) suitable for the study of scripture by a Catholic and without major error in doctrine? Thanks in advance

Good question…I have my MA in Comp Lit From Boston College (go Eagles) and in a Bible as Literature class I had a Wonderful Jesuit Priest Who was on loan from us from Vatican (a post had opened at an odd time), Fr. Case…and we worked through sections of Psalms, Proverbs and Narrative in…the AV…I once asked him about choice and he shrugged, said, Anglicans to Building English regarding an English Translation, what the Church Catholic did with Cathedrals. He added "protestant " bibles …well translated ones are “safe” without…annotations one often finds in many…which can be detrimental…I have a dear old Dominacan friend…left town a few weeks ago actually, he’s all over the place and like most Dominicans, Brad knows his Cannon Law, so he was with us and I got a coffee and he was closing a reddish had bound Bible…so I snagged it and sait what are ya hiding man…it was an ESV and they have one now with Apocrypha…he said he likes a lot about it, I did see some of his “personal” pen point translation Changes…but like Fr. Case…e hold to the "Accurate, well done, “protestant translations” Minus annotations …are pretty harmless…i shy from…overly loose translations, Paraphrases , paraphrastic leaning …simply the “loose” approach can by nature of the Tranlator…intoduce Bias and…error…that said I own an NASB, haven’t used it in a bit, it is…a tight literal translation,and the Protestant team…to give credit…kept it accurate enough to not shove doctrinal bias that I feel harmful (to a Catholic) Great question! Hope my ramble helped! God Bless!!

 

[saris093]

Beware of this version of the Bible!
I am not a theologies or anything, but I know flaws when I see them.

I just read the NASB and had to say something. I have been going to a Non-denominational Bible study at my university and have been using the NRSV Catholic edition and they the NASB version. I didn’t pay attention to the NASB until I got it for free at one of their service.

I saw I just pick a random passage in my NRSV Catholic Edition Bible, CSB Bible (Protestant), La Biblia Latinoamericana, and off course the NASB. What got for passage Hebrews 5:1-10 was this.

NRSV Catholic Edition

1 Every high priest chosen from among mortals is put in charge of things pertaining to God on their behalf, to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins. 2 He is able to deal gently with the ignorant and wayward, since he himself is subject to weakness; 3 and because of this he must offer sacrifice for his own sins as well as for those of the people. 4 And one does not presume to take this honor, but takes it only when called by God, just as Aaron was.
5 So also Christ did not glorify himself in becoming a high priest, but was appointed by the one who said to him, “You are my Son, today I have begotten you”: 6 as he says also in another place, “You are a priest forever, according to the order of Melchizedek.”
7 In the days of his flesh, Jesus offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to the one who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverent submission. 8 Although he was a Son, he learned obedience through what he suffered; 9 and having been made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him, 10 having been designated by God a high priest according to the order of Melchizedek.
NASB
1 For every high priest taken from among men is appointed on behalf of men in things pertaining to God, in order to offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins; 2 he can deal gently with the ignorant and misguided, since he himself also is beset with weakness; 3 and because of it he is obligated to offer sacrifices for sins, as for the people, so also for himself. 4 And no one takes the honor to himself, but receives it when he is called by God, even as Aaron was. 5 So also Christ did not glorify Himself so as to become a high priest, but He who said to Him, “You are My Son, Today I have begotten You”; 6 just as He says also in another passage, “You are a priest forever According to the order of Melchizedek.” 7 In the days of His flesh, He offered up both prayers and supplications with loud crying and tears to the One able to save Him from death, and He was heard because of His piety. 8 Although He was a Son, He learned obedience from the things which He suffered. 9 And having been made perfect, He became to all those who obey Him the source of eternal salvation, 10 being designated by God as a high priest according to the order of Melchizedek.

This although similar has in verse 5 a word added and in verse 9 the order in which the word were organize is subject to misinterpretation.

Taking a closer look to another protestant Bible (HCSB)

9 After He was perfected, He became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey Him,

Note that the order remains the same in which it is not accidental or aleatory and to a person of Catholic faith (or Protestant) this inverted order can lead to confusion taking of the focus of obedience for salvation rather having salvation for obedience.

Sorry for the long post, but I had to say what I thought. I am not sure if I am the only one who feels this way, but I hope this at least raised a more critical analysis regarding different versions of the Bible.

BTW sorry for my spelling/grammar mistakes