If the language doesn't agree in the Bible

  • Thread starter Thread starter Prodigal1984
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

Prodigal1984

Guest
If you are reading a Bible and a passage is different in Latin, Greek, or Hebrew etc; which language do Catholics use as the scripture, the Latin rendering? You see this a lot in annotated Bibles where it was say in a footnote that it differs in the Latin or Greek etc.
 
Prodigal1984 said:
If you are reading a Bible and a passage is different in Latin, Greek, or Hebrew etc; which language do Catholics use as the scripture, the Latin rendering? You see this a lot in annotated Bibles where it was say in a footnote that it differs in the Latin or Greek etc.
Click to expand...
The Catholic Church approves certain Bible versions. Those are the ones’ we prefer.

Is there a particular verse troubling you?
 
It’s like in the NRSV certain times it will say the Latin Vulgate is different from the Hebrew and it will say what the Latin or other language said. Usually it isn’t that much different just wording. No I have no specific verses that trouble me I just didn’t know how that worked.
 
Last edited:
I’ve also found that the differences are not very great. So, it doesn’t bother me.
 
It really depends on which Bible version you are using. If your Bible version relies upon the Latin or Vulgate as the manuscript tradition from which it translates, then I would place more weight on a more formal equivalency based translation that relies upon the Greek for the NT, and/or the Hebrew or Septuagint for the OT (OT gets a little dicey because there are multiple lines of transmission that could each make good claims for supremacy). The reason I would say this is because the Latin is a translation from the Greek scripts (NT) and the Hebrew or Septuagint manuscripts (OT). So you would essentially be looking at a translation of a translation which is less reliable. I personally place more weight on translations that use the critical Greek texts for their NT base and that use the Masoretic Text compared with Septuagint and Samaritan Pentateuch as their OT base.
 
Last edited:
Prodigal1984 said:
You see this a lot in annotated Bibles where it was say in a footnote that it differs in the Latin or Greek etc.
Click to expand...
It varies. Whichever seems to make the best sense. The editors will explain the difficulty in a footnote, provided the publishers want it to be the kind of Bible that has extensive footnotes.
 
Last edited:
Depends where you are. For instance, if you’re reading the gospels, I’d suggest choosing the translation closer to Aramaic, because that’s what language Jesus spoke. But that’s just my viewpoint. Other parts of the Bible use different languages, but ultimately, all translations Catholics accept are legitimate. When it comes to God’s word, it’s not the specific wording that matters, but the message that’s being said through any translations. So long as you can make head or tail out of it, it’s good.
 
The Church will look at scripture as a whole study, not just approve a particular language. That is, where there is a disagreement in versions, the Church has either determined that (most likely) it doesn’t impact the theological meaning of the text and therefore they’re just giving you the footnote as reference or they’ve noted the meaning in the proper document (e.g., Catechism). The Church usually isn’t in the business of nitpicking words in scripture or even defining entire verses.
 
In like manner therefore ought we to explain the original text which, having been written by the inspired author himself, has more authority and greater weight than any even the very best translation, whether ancient or modern; this can be done all the more easily and fruitfully, if to the knowledge of languages be joined a real skill in literary criticism of the same text. (Pope Pius XII’s 1943 encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu (On Promoting Biblical Studies), paragraph 16)
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Whether the “language doesn’t agree” or not is of little concern.

It’s not the language, but the message.

“Language” is an academic concern. The message is spiritual.

St. Augustine (I paraphrase) said that if approach scripture with charity, even if we are wrong in its interpretation, no sin has been committed.

I may often be wrong, academically, or even in regards to the teachings of the Church on some readings, but I trust in the Holy Spirit to guide me and enlighten me on my road to the truth.
 
Before Trent, the Vulgate (Latin) was authoritative version of the Bible used in the Church. This was an era when bibles were handcopied, which meant accidental variations in any version.

Reverence for Scripture led to the development of textual criticism, the effort to standardize the text and establish what was original. This means the original languages are the basis for understanding and applying Scripture.

Again, the invention of the printing press enabled the sharing of a standard text, making the establishment of a standard possible. Access to information and facsimiles has standardized the texts from which translations are made.

But I am sure for some purposes, the Nova Vulgata, the Vatican’s official version of the Vulgate, is used.
 
Usually the common response is to go to the “original” language texts. As the Latin is viewed as “less reliable” because it is a translation of a translation.

However, that is too simplistic of a response and doesn’t always settle the issue. Even the original language texts don’t always agree. They are undoubtedly copies of copies, as we do not have the originals. And more often then not when you look at a Bible such as the Douay Rheims and the Latin Vulgate, you find that their wording and translation reflects the true meaning of a passage far better then most newer modern bibles.

The issue you described is a common problem among Scripture studies and for me is another reason why the Protestant belief of Sola Scriptura is flawed. Thankfully we have the Church to guide us is in the understanding of such passages.
 
Okay, so translation is hard. Everyday, I translate the New Testament readings from French using La Bible de Jérusalem (the basis for the English Jerusalem Bible). What I do, is to make sure that I have translated it correctly, is compare it to several English versions. I’ll notice that there’s something slightly different, but basically the same, and I think the word doesn’t work as well that translators used. French is at least an Indo-European language, as is Greek, Hebrew on the other hand…
There actually was something that was different in the New Testament, in some versions of the Bible, it says “72”, it other versions it says “70”, An error in a number is not an error in Faith and morals, so that doesn’t really bother me. You do have a good question, though.
 
adamhovey1988 said:
There actually was something that was different in the New Testament, in some versions of the Bible, it says “72”, it other versions it says “70”, An error in a number is not an error in Faith and morals, so that doesn’t really bother me. You do have a good question, though.
Click to expand...
How many times are we to forgive our brother (Matt 18:22)? In the Greek NT, Jesus says “seventy times seven,” but in many translations the figure has been slashed to “seventy-seven.”
The underlying meaning, of course, is that our forgiveness should be limitless, whichever number is quoted, which shows that the translators are concerned, in this case, purely with a question of language, not of theology.
 
Last edited:
With reference to the New Testament I think it mandatory to know greek, being the original written language.
There are textual Greek variations but textual criticism finds the finest text.

Next comes translation of the text.

Remember that in the original Greek text there was no space between words no punctuations and separation in verses and those we found now must be taken with care.

The problem of interpretation and understanding may be solved if :“who has ears to hear, let him hear”.
After knowing the historical background of the sentence, could it have a practical use?
 
Prodigal1984 said:
If you are reading a Bible and a passage is different in Latin, Greek, or Hebrew etc; which language do Catholics use as the scripture, the Latin rendering?
Click to expand...
Most of the old testament was written in Hebrew. The rest, and the New Testament, were written in greek.

Everything else is a translation from the original language.

Temper this with the deposit of faith into the Church, and the fact that the Bible itself is an exercise of its teaching authority.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top