I am Catholic, I like the KJV and I don't care who knows it!

  • Thread starter Thread starter swampboy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

swampboy

Guest
In other posts I have ranted about finding the perfect translation. Well after serious consideration I have managed to figure out my problem…none of the Catholic translations in my opinion equal the Protestant translations that I used prior to entering the Catholic Church…they just don’t measure up, particularly when it comes to study bibles. The KJV and NASB study bibles I have blow away all of the Catholic so-called study bibles with the exception of the DR Haydock. They just can’t be beat as far as layout, readability, and other helps go. Unfortunately some of the notes are “too Protestant” theologically speaking but most are applicable to Catholics as they are just descriptives. I know these bibles don’t contain the deuterocanonicals but I have others that do, and I do not personally see a problem with reading such bibles as long as one is aware that there may be some Protestant bias interwoven into the fabric of the text…but then again the RSV is a Protestant based translation that has been embraced by Catholic scholars and lay-readers alike. Any thoughts??
 
Interesting…

Have you seen the Ignatius Study Bible RSV-CE?

As a former prot, I had a very well used and marked up Ryrie NASB study bible. After I gave that away, I marked up a NKJV.

I didn’t know RSV was a protestant based translation. What do you mean by that?

If it’s language you love, I’d suggest the DR Haydock’s. For so many years I memorized scripture out of the NASB, that I often go online to look at side by side translations, so I can see how it was worded in the NAS, then I select the RSV-CE, which is my current fave.

I personally have chosen to be Catholic and while I’m grateful for my twenty years of scripture study and teaching, I really don’t want to hang on to any of my protestant vestiges. It’s an act of my will over my sentiment.

Interesting thread.
 
Hello, friend.

I, too, am Catholic and like the classic KJV. The Shakespearean English there is beautiful. Despite the extraordinary elegance of the language, the authors managed to hone amazingly close to the meaning of the original ancient Hebrew and Greek verses

But, of course, 7 books and parts of two others have been removed from the KJV. Protestant commentators say that the Reformers did it because there is little evidence that Jesus made use of the texts. This is wrong. Jesus made massive use of Wisdom and Sirach.

Did you know that it is said by some that Shakespeare encoded his name into Psalm 46? Shakespeare was 46 when the KJV was published. If you go to Psalm 46, and count 46 words in from the beginning (skipping selah, a procedural instruction), you read “shake.” If you go to the end, and count 46 words up, it says “spear” – “shake-spear”!
 
I suggest try The New American Bible, St, Joseph Medium sized Edition.
It has just enough extra info with all the books and more footnotes in the NT than the OT. I got it on line for a good price new, but through amazon used books. I am so glad to read it.
 
swampboy said:
In other posts I have ranted about finding the perfect translation. Well after serious consideration I have managed to figure out my problem…none of the Catholic translations in my opinion equal the Protestant translations that I used prior to entering the Catholic Church…they just don’t measure up, particularly when it comes to study bibles. The KJV and NASB study bibles I have blow away all of the Catholic so-called study bibles with the exception of the DR Haydock. They just can’t be beat as far as layout, readability, and other helps go. Unfortunately some of the notes are “too Protestant” theologically speaking but most are applicable to Catholics as they are just descriptives. I know these bibles don’t contain the deuterocanonicals but I have others that do, and I do not personally see a problem with reading such bibles as long as one is aware that there may be some Protestant bias interwoven into the fabric of the text…but then again the RSV is a Protestant based translation that has been embraced by Catholic scholars and lay-readers alike. Any thoughts??
Click to expand...
That is fine and dandy that you like the KJV. I do too. My question for you is what will gain by using the KJV (not approved by the Church) as opposed to using the Douay-Rheims, Confraternity Edition or the Ronald Knox Translation?? I understand your concerns about modern translations. When I started reading the Bible, my Bible of choice was the NAB. As I went along I felt something was missing. I began to search for my answer and found it with the Douay-Rheims. Growing up Catholic I didn’t know the difference between Protestant Bibles and Catholic Bibles, because I only knew the KJV in title. I do have 3 KJVs at home and one is a Thompson Chains Reference Bible with my grandfather’s name on it. I would urge to continue to use the D-R Haydock but not do away with your KJV. Use the KJV for comparative analysis purposes in learning the Catholic faith. Noting differences were Protestantism prevails in the KJV as opposed to the Catholic D-R
 
swampboy said:
none of the Catholic translations in my opinion equal the Protestant translations that I used prior to entering the Catholic Church…they just don’t measure up, particularly when it comes to study bibles. Any thoughts??
Click to expand...
AHA!!!

Here’s the difference…

Protestant study bibles are published in order to make money and in order to spread the views of the author of the study notes. Within the study notes of a particular edition, you basically get a mini “systematic theology.”

As Catholics, no individual’s study notes are going to be sufficient. We have the Magisterium which cannot be improved upon. If you need study notes for scripture, we have the Catechism which can be referenced side by side.

Now, a really cool, but monstrous edition can be imagined. A “Study Bible” with the whole Catechism footnoted on the bottom of every page. There is also the reference work that goes with the CCC, The Companion to the Catechism of the Catholic Church: A Compendium of Texts Referred to in the Catechism of the Catholic Church which contains all the teachings of the Church Fathers that are referenced in the CCC.

amazon.com/Companion-Catechism-Catholic-Church-Compendium/dp/0898704510

So, how cool to imagine a gigantic work, with the Bible, whole CCC, and Companion to the CCC, all in one volume.

Unless, of course, you’re looking for “sound bites” which are often the content of “study bible” notes.
 
Personally, I do use the Haydock DR, which I think is one of the best study bibles Catholics have available to them. However, the change of names in the text and names of the books don’t fall well with me. The Jerusalem and New Jerusalem Bibles also are pretty good as they are laid out great, have excellent notes and an okay text, although some of the phrasing is awkward in spots, but I find this to be one of the best for general reading and reference purposes. However, others like the NAB and RSV either have little to no reference material, are laid out horribly to the point where they are nearly unreadable, have inclusive language, or contain notes and other information that from my point of view should not be considered any worse than reading a Protestant bible for those who judge such things.

As a Protestant I never had a dilemma about which bible to use, as those that were most commonly used all were decent and accurate translations, particularly the NASB. I have never been happy or comfortable with any of the bible translations in the 4 years I have been Catholic. All I seem to do is go back and forth between translations because one cannot get a single bible that does it all, whereas some of the Protestant translations do a much better job of enabling one to own a single bible. I only had 2 before I became a Catholic now I must have 6 different Catholic translations with several different books of certain ones. I personslly see that as a problem and think something needs to be done about it. So in the meantime I think I will just read what I like and not worry about it.
 
swampboy said:
Personally, I do use the Haydock DR, which I think is one of the best study bibles Catholics have available to them. However, the change of names in the text and names of the books don’t fall well with me. The Jerusalem and New Jerusalem Bibles also are pretty good as they are laid out great, have excellent notes and an okay text, although some of the phrasing is awkward in spots, but I find this to be one of the best for general reading and reference purposes. However, others like the NAB and RSV either have little to no reference material, are laid out horribly to the point where they are nearly unreadable, have inclusive language, or contain notes and other information that from my point of view should not be considered any worse than reading a Protestant bible for those who judge such things.

As a Protestant I never had a dilemma about which bible to use, as those that were most commonly used all were decent and accurate translations, particularly the NASB. I have never been happy or comfortable with any of the bible translations in the 4 years I have been Catholic. All I seem to do is go back and forth between translations because one cannot get a single bible that does it all, whereas some of the Protestant translations do a much better job of enabling one to own a single bible. I only had 2 before I became a Catholic now I must have 6 different Catholic translations with several different books of certain ones. I personslly see that as a problem and think something needs to be done about it. So in the meantime I think I will just read what I like and not worry about it.
Click to expand...
Why should that bother you to have many translations?I have tons of different ones and use my parallel bible all the time.Translations are interpretations-you cannot translate without a certain amount of interpretation-that’s true of the Bible and modern languages also.What is muddy in one translation can be much clearer in the other.The problem with older texts is that the advances in linguistics, and archaeology helped clarify what the text is saying.The same is true with any ancient text.Notice the proliferation of translations of ancient Greek poems and plays. .
 
Crimson_Seraph said:
Good for you! In terms of beauty and style, I have yet to read a Bible that comes close to matching the King James. The DR is close, but not quite the same in my opinion. If you could get a copy of a KJV with Apocrypha in it or one of the Apocrypha in a seperate little book to go with it you should be set. Here is one for ya that I have, it’s great.

amazon.com/Apocrypha-Baker-Publishing-Group/dp/0521506743/ref=pd_bbs_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1235941854&sr=8-1
Click to expand...
I couldn’t agree with you more…I like the DR as well but it just is not the same as the KJV. Thank you for the link…I have not seen that version. One I have stumbled across, but do not own, is this one which looks okay but I think the print is on the small side.

amazon.com/Bible-Authorized-Version-Oxford-Classics/dp/0199535949/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1235962407&sr=1-3
 
It’s interesting that the OP likes the NASB version too.
So do I. I have an NASB Harper Study Bible ((NOT to be confused with the Liberal "Harper-COLLINS Study Bible, which I advise everyone to avoid at all costs!!)), and my NASB Harper was my intro study bible when I first became a baptized Christian. I still have it. I like the single column format with copious study notes (non-catholic but quite conservative) at the bottom of the text.

I have two or three leather bound King James Version bibles, which I enjoy. I have the Catholic NAB, which is good EXCEPT for the liberal study notes and liberal book intros (UGH), and a Catholic readers edition of the NRSV (inclusive language, but still a pretty nice translation). I also have NIVs, “The Message,” etc. etc. etc.

My favorite Catholic STUDY bibles are:
The Douay-Rheims Haydock study bible and
The Ignatius Study Bible (RSV-Catholic Edition)
and
The Navarre Bible (almost as terrific as the Haydock).
God bless,
Jaypeeto4
+JMJ+
 
Jaypeeto4 said:
It’s interesting that the OP likes the NASB version too.
So do I. I have an NASB Harper Study Bible ((NOT to be confused with the Liberal "Harper-COLLINS Study Bible, which I advise everyone to avoid at all costs!!)), and my NASB Harper was my intro study bible when I first became a baptized Christian. I still have it. I like the single column format with copious study notes (non-catholic but quite conservative) at the bottom of the text.

I have two or three leather bound King James Version bibles, which I enjoy. I have the Catholic NAB, which is good EXCEPT for the liberal study notes and liberal book intros (UGH), and a Catholic readers edition of the NRSV (inclusive language, but still a pretty nice translation). I also have NIVs, “The Message,” etc. etc. etc.

My favorite Catholic STUDY bibles are:
The Douay-Rheims Haydock study bible and
The Ignatius Study Bible (RSV-Catholic Edition)
and
The Navarre Bible (almost as terrific as the Haydock).
God bless,
Jaypeeto4
+JMJ+
Click to expand...
I really like the NASB…a guy in the Baptist Church I used to attend turned me onto it…he was fluent in Greek and indicated that it was highly accurate so I bought one. Charles Stanley also likes that translation so I ended up buying the MacArthur NASB study bible which is okay but has some sketchy notes. But I love the translation, although not as much as the N/KJV.

I agree that the Haydock DR is the best Catholic study bible. The NAB notes are so bad I refuse to read it, although it is not too bad of a translation. The N/JB just can’t be beat for the references it provides, including the notes. I use a Nelson KJV study bible which is excellent with the exception of a few of the notes which are Protestant in nature…but overall it does not come off as being too liberal or anti-Catholic. In fact, the study notes in places notate Catholic doctrine, as well as teachings of the saints.
 
I can personally recommend the New Jerusalem Bible. Much more portable than the full set of Navarre (with commentary… which is great but you can’t lug it around easily), and enough commentary in the footnotes to suffice for study.

I find the language great compared to the KJV, which to me is excessively decorative and antiquated. Plus I have more faith in the accuracy of the translation itself.
 
Oh man, ugh, I’m really confused now. I was planning on getting an NJB, but now I’m not sure!! Darn, I don’t know what to do, maybe I’ll start a poll on the best Catholic translaiton or something…I don’t know which one to pick, why are there so many??😦
 
zach_dunn said:
Oh man, ugh, I’m really confused now. I was planning on getting an NJB, but now I’m not sure!! Darn, I don’t know what to do, maybe I’ll start a poll on the best Catholic translaiton or something…I don’t know which one to pick, why are there so many??😦
Click to expand...
I strongly suggest the Douay-Rheims. If you can afford the Haydock Commentary more benefit to you. The Douay-Rheims Challoner is English Bible of choice. I read that along with the Clementine Vulgate. An excellent combo. Mother Angelica recommends the Jerusalem Bible and doesn’t think highly of the NJB. The NAB, NRSV are terrible and the RSV-CE is decent but not the best choice for serious Catholics and I would never recommend it. The Ronald Knox Translation should be in print sometime soon. It is a great version as is the Confraternity Edition, if you can somehow find a complete Douay OT and Confraternity NT. I don’t believe reading the Protestant KJV is the way to go because it isn’t approved by the Church, but it blows the pants of the JB, NJB, NAB, NRSV and RSV-CE (That is you have a KJV with Apocrypha).
 
Crimson_Seraph said:
Good for you! In terms of beauty and style, I have yet to read a Bible that comes close to matching the King James. The DR is close, but not quite the same in my opinion. If you could get a copy of a KJV with Apocrypha in it or one of the Apocrypha in a seperate little book to go with it you should be set. Here is one for ya that I have, it’s great.

amazon.com/Apocrypha-Baker-Publishing-Group/dp/0521506743/ref=pd_bbs_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1235941854&sr=8-1
Click to expand...
The original King James Version of the Bible contained all the Deuterocanonical works. They were only removed later, to support Protestant theology.
 
Godfollower said:
The original King James Version of the Bible contained all the Deuterocanonical works. They were only removed later, to support Protestant theology.
Click to expand...
Didn’t know that.Thanks!
I like the old King James version for the beauty of the language, too but use the Douay Rheims for study.
 
Godfollower said:
The original King James Version of the Bible contained all the Deuterocanonical works. They were only removed later, to support Protestant theology.
Click to expand...
Quite incorrect. The Deuterocanon (aka the Apocrypha) was removed by publishers from the KJV to cut the printing costs and increase marketing appeal to non-Anglican readers, and this wholesale removal of the ‘Apocrypha’ only came into fruition during the 18th-19th centuries. From a purely commercial standpoint, this had the added bonus of increasing the printers’ profits, since they could sell the Deuterocanonical-less KJV for the same price as one who contained them.

So technically, the ones who struck the final blow and finally got rid of the Deuterocanon from the Authorized King James Version were not reformers, but printers; not (merely?) for doctrinal purposes, but for reasons of profit. What no cleric ever dared to do then was finally done by a publisher. Strange, isn’t it? 😉

The Authorized Version published in the United Kingdom still contains the Deuterocanonical works because it is under perpetual Crown copyright there (i.e. only publishers under letters patent are licensed to reproduce them), as far as I know.
 
swampboy said:
In other posts I have ranted about finding the perfect translation. Well after serious consideration I have managed to figure out my problem…none of the Catholic translations in my opinion equal the Protestant translations that I used prior to entering the Catholic Church…they just don’t measure up, particularly when it comes to study bibles. The KJV and NASB study bibles I have blow away all of the Catholic so-called study bibles with the exception of the DR Haydock. They just can’t be beat as far as layout, readability, and other helps go. Unfortunately some of the notes are “too Protestant” theologically speaking but most are applicable to Catholics as they are just descriptives. I know these bibles don’t contain the deuterocanonicals but I have others that do, and I do not personally see a problem with reading such bibles as long as one is aware that there may be some Protestant bias interwoven into the fabric of the text…but then again the RSV is a Protestant based translation that has been embraced by Catholic scholars and lay-readers alike. Any thoughts??
Click to expand...
There’s no such thing as a “perfect translation” (that’s an oxymoron). The KJV and DRB both have their errors (quite funny ones too - like turning CHRIST into SUBSTANCE [hupostasis] in Hebrews 11:1, but then turning Christ back into person [hupostasis] in Hebrews 1:3). Often times I find myself using the KJV, DRB and Geneva Bible in order to quote a verse and get the proper translation.

The King James Version does include the deuterocanoical books… You just have to get the 1611 version.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top