CTS New Catholic Bible?

[Mattjolley]

Well then, that’s a lot more Catholics who prefer idiotic levels of gender-neutral language and cancelling Christ out of many passages than I expected!

 

[swampboy]

Well then, that’s a lot more Catholics who prefer idiotic levels of gender-neutral language and cancelling Christ out of many passages than I expected!

hahahahaha Sad but true…

 

[swampboy]

Well it is funny that they want to put things that are clearly not explainable outside of the supernatural from a naturalistic point of view.

Half of the Bible is like this! I mean really. Get these heretics away from scripture man.

The more you can undermine the word of God the more ‘scholarly’ you are. Go NJB and NRSV!!!

I mean seriously that pogue that said the Douay Rheims had shoddy scholarship!?!
Jerome had access to documents written in the second and third century and used em in translating the Vulgate. His translation would have been practically flawless to the Latin as he spoke the Koine Greek fluently and would converse with Hebrew Rabbis on the OT. What translator doing a modern translation does that now(especially pertaining to the Aramaic or Koine Greek)? Their application is theoretical. They never used the language in real life everyday usage. Im pretty sure the Priests translating the Vulgate spoke Latin, though I could be mistaken…
The Vulgate is a frozen in time copy of the some of the very oldest scripture manuscripts, not to mention the oldest reliable manuscripts as well. Not some fragments found in some dark corner somewhere, placed where someone wouldn’t easily find them for whatever reason(disposing without destroying maybe…), but complete works.
Hey but the NRSV translators don’t have an agenda… I mean they’re not Oberlin College flaming liberal or anything like that…NCCUSA isnt left of center at all… Im being sarcastic again, can you tell? Eco justice, really? I didn’t see anything on stopping abortion on there…
Here’s some reading for you.
bible-researcher.com/nrsv.html

It does seem as if many of these newer translations are full of a hidden agenda…which seems to me to revolve around making things less Catholic and obscuring meanings and references to Christ, particularly in the OT. Although it is typically presented in a subtle way in most translations, there seems to be something wrong. Maybe I am paranoid…but the more I talk with people on here and read on different tranlations, the more clear it becomes that it is worth the aggravation of reading the DR or the Confraternity Bible. I don’t think there were as many hidden agendas back when the Vulgate and DR were done

 

[ajcstr]

I’m confused.

RSV (Ignatius Bible) is recommended by some Catholic scholars, but it’s a Protestant translation so how does the Catholic church reconcile that…letting a Protestant translation have a stamp of approval…why? Since it’s a Protestant translation, is this why it’s not allowed to be read at Mass? Many traditionalists (online, I don’t know any in real life) seem to pooh-pooh this bible (either because it’s a Protestant translation or because it is associated with Opus Dei?) and then many like to read it so I don’t know, I give up.

Help!

Here is a link that shows the translation differences between the RSV and the RSV-CE

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revised_Standard_Version_Catholic_Edition

 

[Bible_Reader]

Well, of course, NRSV advocates don’t see it as “idiotic” or “canceling out Christ”. I can definitely understand your point of view. But they think it is a more accurate translation in capturing the semantic meaning.

My point is that it is great that we can have both translations – we can see both points of view – and let that inform us more broadly towards understanding the many different nuances and messages of Scriptures.

Usually, I prefer to read the Bible in Greek and Hebrew. But my favorite English New Testament by far is the Oxford Catholic Comparative New Testament. It is cheap (available for as little as $13), nicely packaged, and contains parallel versions of the Rheims (Challoner), RSV-CE, NRSV-CE, NAB, JB, NJB, Good News, and Christian Community Bibles. I like this version because I can see the whole spectrum of different translation styles – each with a valid imprimatur. I think it shows some of the translation issues with greater subtlety than we sometimes achieve in this forum.

But no matter what, I sincerely pray you grow closer to God through your studies of Scripture, no matter which translation you use.

 

[ajcstr]

How are the notes and cross-references in this new edition relative to the original JB? Are the notes/book intros liberal like in the NJB or NAB (i.e. borderline heretical)? .

Can you give some examples - I just started using the NJB because footnotes appear to be Catholic in their interpretation. I am not against what you say as I just started using it but I have read elsewhere that the footnotes are the strength of the bible.

 

[swampboy]

Can you give some examples - I just started using the NJB because footnotes appear to be Catholic in their interpretation. I am not against what you say as I just started using it but I have read elsewhere that the footnotes are the strength of the bible.

A few I can think of offhand include the notes for Genesis 1:2 (d), the introduction to the book of Matthew that indicates that the Gospel was not written by Matthew, footnote (u) for Lk 2:34, and the footnote for Mt 1:25 (k). I am highly suspect of this translation. It may be a little more accurate in some places relative to the original JB but I would rather deal with the odd renderings in the JB which has pretty orthodox notes than read the NJB with its liberal notes. The text is decent but the notes ruin the NJB IMO.

 

[KShaft]

Well then, that’s a lot more Catholics who prefer idiotic levels of gender-neutral language and cancelling Christ out of many passages than I expected!

LMAO!

Well put sir. It practically dilutes the Word into new age, pantheistic, feel good nonsense.
Perhaps they should just add in the gnostic gospels while they are at it. I know they want to.

 

[MoreCoffee]

I have frequent interactions with Protestants of various types and especially with “evangelical” protestants and I can only say that I am very glad that the Catholic Church has always emphasised the value of notes and the necessity of reading scripture in the context of the Church as the believing community of faith rather than reading it alone as if it would yield all truth without any need for the magisterium. The evangelicals I know are always on a quest for the perfect bible translation and that seems to result in them buying almost every new bible translation that the publishers release. As a Catholic I don’t want to be on a quest for the perfect bible translation, I’d rather have a decent bible that corresponds fairly closely to what is read in Church during the mass. I know that is a somewhat simplistic point of view and that folk can put forward all sorts of arguments for why this or that translation is superior to some other translation but in the end what really matters is living the faith in communion with God and his Church.

Phil

=====
PS: I live in Australia so for me the CTS New Catholic Bible is very helpful because it is very close to what is read from the lectionary at mass every day.