How do we know that the modern translations of the Bible are accurate?

[cheezey]

I have heard that if you have a Bible you don’t want or is so old as to be useless you can dig a hole and bury it or you can burn it. Those are the two respectful ways to dispose of a religious object you no longer want. One thing I would not do is simply throw it in the trash, even if it is a bad translation of the scriptures. Does anyone else have opinions on this?

I have wondered on such things…Didn’t really want the tiny Bible from my wedding day, not because I am divorced, though there is that, so I held on to it quite a while til I discovered a St Vincent DePaul thrift store. Donated…
I don’t think I could bring myself to burn any book, especially a Bible…
Burying is an intriguing idea…but I have no yard…
Nah, can’t bury a Bible

 

[LegoGE1947]

I have wondered on such things…Didn’t really want the tiny Bible from my wedding day, not because I am divorced, though there is that, so I held on to it quite a while til I discovered a St Vincent DePaul thrift store. Donated…
I don’t think I could bring myself to burn any book, especially a Bible…
Burying is an intriguing idea…but I have no yard…
Nah, can’t bury a Bible

There are places you can donate things like old Bibles, such as homeless shelters, rescue missions, the county jail. I do that with my “Word Among Us” devotional magazines after I am done with them. I get together a collection of them and take them to the county jail. The people seem to appreciate having the reading material if nothing else.

 

[COPLAND_3]

That Jehovah Witness version is not something that you want to risk getting into someone else’s hands because its dangerous to peoples eternity because it can mislead others into things worse than heresy because its loaded with intentional errors. Its not to be considered a Holy Bible, and burning it is a very good option. Burying it leaves potential to be found, and the garbage is even more risky. I’d either keep it for apologetic purposes or shred it or burn it.

 

[LegoGE1947]

That Jehovah Witness version is not something that you want to risk getting into someone else’s hands because its dangerous to peoples eternity because it can mislead others into things worse than heresy because its loaded with intentional errors. Its not to be considered a Holy Bible, and burning it is a very good option. Burying it leaves potential to be found, and the garbage is even more risky. I’d either keep it for apologetic purposes or shred it or burn it.

I was referring to “real” Bibles not this thing the JWs refer to as a “bible”

 

[COPLAND_3]

I was referring to “real” Bibles not this thing the JWs refer to as a “bible”

I figured that is what you meant, I was speaking not concerning your post but in general.

 

[ProVobis]

There is no “original” Latin Vulgate. In the early Church, there were very many translations of Biblical books into Latin. Saint Jerome’s work in Latin is not extant.

One could say that. Actually it was called the Latin Vulgate because it became to be the most widely used Latin Bible. Of course, when it became copied, the copies themselves deviated from the original, mostly because of handwriting errors, etc. Once the Gutenberg press was ready to print, all available copies were gathered and consolidated into the Clementine Bible. This I believe became the Bible codified by Trent.

 

[ConstantineTG]

original Latin Vulgate

There is no such thing as an original Latin Vulgate. The entire Bible that the Church adopted was in Greek, including the Septuagint which was the Greek translation of the Old Testament.

 

[patrick457]

One could say that. Actually it was called the Latin Vulgate because it became to be the most widely used Latin Bible. Of course, when it became copied, the copies themselves deviated from the original, mostly because of handwriting errors, etc. Once the Gutenberg press was ready to print, all available copies were gathered and consolidated into the Clementine Bible. This I believe became the Bible codified by Trent.

You got the timeline backwards. The Clementine was published AFTER Trent to answer the demand for an official edition of the Bible.

 

[ProVobis]

You got the timeline backwards. The Clementine was published AFTER Trent to answer the demand for an official edition of the Bible.

I stand corrected. Thanks.

Of course, now we have the Nova Vulgata. Is this now officially the official edition of the Bible?

 

[Patrocinor]

Jesus promised to be with His Church until the end of time. The Holy Spirit was given to the Church to lead, guide and teach the Church in all things until Jesus returns. Therefore, with that faith and trust, I believe the modern translations as approved by the Catholic Church. For a list of approved bibles you may go to the US Conference of Catholic Bishops website and they will tell you what is approved by the Church.

 

[Patrocinor]

There are places you can donate things like old Bibles, such as homeless shelters, rescue missions, the county jail. I do that with my “Word Among Us” devotional magazines after I am done with them. I get together a collection of them and take them to the county jail. The people seem to appreciate having the reading material if nothing else.

I used to live in California. The prison was about 2 miles from me. I used to donate my magazines and Catholic books to the prison system until they suddenly refused any more Christian material. I was shocked but that is what happened. But you did give me an idea to try it in my new state now and see what happens. Thank you.

 

[ajcstr]

There is no such thing as an original Latin Vulgate. The entire Bible that the Church adopted was in Greek, including the Septuagint which was the Greek translation of the Old Testament.

I am curious though. Once the Vulgate was completed, it pretty much was THE Bible for 1,000 years, correct? I mean the books in it were fixed? Was the Gutenberg Bible a translation of the Vulgate?

 

[Jon_S_1]

I am curious though. Once the Vulgate was completed, it pretty much was THE Bible for 1,000 years, correct? I mean the books in it were fixed? Was the Gutenberg Bible a translation of the Vulgate?

The latin vulgate was what was in use for liturgical purposes. The original Greek never went away and is still available today.

The Gutenberg Bible was written in latin and as far as my understanding is a printed copy of the vulgate.

The Inspired words of God are the words originally written…Greek.

All other languages are translations for ease of understanding yet may have shortcomings due to translation. You know…the term lost in translation applies.

 

[ajcstr]

The latin vulgate was what was in use for liturgical purposes. The original Greek never went away and is still available today.

I guess I am asking if there were different versions of the Vulgate with different books included. I am under the impression that the 7 Deuteros were always included in the Vulgate, but not sure why the Orthodox church includes more unless they just used a different version of the Septuagent than the Latin church did.

 

[Gorgias]

Learning Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic, or Latin does not guarantee the accuracy of a translation; then you would be depending on your own understanding.

Odd comment, from a guy who personally developed his own translation of the Bible…

However, many modern Catholic Bible translations are not translated or edited in the light of magisterial teaching. This can be clearly seen from the character of the footnotes and annotations.

Footnotes and annotations aren’t part of the Bible, per se. They may evidence an editor’s understanding and interpretation of a text, but they don’t affect the accuracy of the translation, per se.

Biblical scholarship, at the present time, is in a problematic state.

That depends on whom you’re listening to…

 

[LegoGE1947]

Odd comment, from a guy who personally developed his own translation of the Bible…

Footnotes and annotations aren’t part of the Bible, per se. They may evidence an editor’s understanding and interpretation of a text, but they don’t affect the accuracy of the translation, per se.

That depends on whom you’re listening to…

A lot of Protestants read the Schofield Bible and think the footnotes are as inspired as the text.

 

[COPLAND_3]

A lot of Protestants read the Schofield Bible and think the footnotes are as inspired as the text.

I had a Schofield Bible when I was Baptist, and I got it because I heard so much good about it, but I never personally got any benefit from it. There was the Schofield group and the Ryrie group among the fundementalists. The only Study Bible that ever enjoyed as a Protestant was the Life Application Bible, which had good notes other than the doctrinal errors.

 

[ProVobis]

The original Greek never went away and is still available today.

Not true. In fact some of the Greek is a translation of the Latin.

The Inspired words of God are the words originally written…Greek.

Hebrew and Aramaic would be closer to that. Greek was geared more for Mythology. As was Latin until the Church Christianized the vocabulary and grammar of Cicero.

All other languages are translations for ease of understanding yet may have shortcomings due to translation. You know…the term lost in translation applies.

Very true.

And English is probably the worst language to capture the nuances of the ancient languages.

 

[ProVobis]

I guess I am asking if there were different versions of the Vulgate with different books included.

It was named the Latin Vulgate because it was the most common version in Latin. (There is a corresponding Greek Vulgate as well.)

However, when it was copied (mostly by centuries of monks) many handwriting errors entered into the equation. It was resolved with the Clementine Bible.