Ignatius Bible (RSV-CE) 2nd edition

  • Thread starter Thread starter Psalm45_9
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

Psalm45_9

Guest
I saw this Bible on Igantius Press’ website and I am seriously considering buying it. I already have the Ignatius Bible and I like to use it when I teach RCIA. I have done some research on this 2nd edition. Supposedly it avoids the inclusive language of the NRSV, avoids archaic language, and also translates the scripture to be more in complience with the current vulgate. Does anyone already have this Bible, and what is your opinon of it? I want to make sure that I am paying for something worthwhile.
 
I wish that a good portion of the old RSV-CE Needs corrections thread had not been lost with the hack-in, because I could have referred you to it.

Anyway, to answer your question, myself and a few others on this board had determined in the “Needs Corrections” thread that the revisions that it contains are just really not worth it, especially if you already have the original Ignatius Bible. We have come to the conclusion that the better buy is the new Oxford Press RSV-CE Reader’s Edition that comes out in December, which is based on the 1971 RSV instead of the 1959 RSV. It has MUCH more significant revisions, and is overall just better.

I will quote you any of the possibly important revisions that are strictly a part of the Ignatius Second Edition if you are interested, however, overall, the Oxford Press Reader’s Edition is a much more important edition to have.

My advice for anyone wanting to get the Ignatius Second Edition is, “ignore Isaiah 7.14 and get the Oxford Press Reader’s Edition.”
 
mmortal03 said:
I wish that a good portion of the old RSV-CE Needs corrections thread had not been lost with the hack-in, because I could have referred you to it.

Anyway, to answer your question, myself and a few others on this board had determined in the “Needs Corrections” thread that the revisions that it contains are just really not worth it, especially if you already have the original Ignatius Bible. We have come to the conclusion that the better buy is the new Oxford Press RSV-CE Reader’s Edition that comes out in December, which is based on the 1971 RSV instead of the 1959 RSV. It has MUCH more significant revisions, and is overall just better.

I will quote you any of the possibly important revisions that are strictly a part of the Ignatius Second Edition if you are interested, however, overall, the Oxford Press Reader’s Edition is a much more important edition to have.

My advice for anyone wanting to get the Ignatius Second Edition is, “ignore Isaiah 7.14 and get the Oxford Press Reader’s Edition.”
Click to expand...
mmortal,

Why don’t you just post the link to your comprehensive analysis of the various RSVs and the Douay-Rheims? Perhaps this poster can provide yet another angle from which to view the situation.

I still rue the day that all those great thread posts have been lost for good. Simply stated, such a situation sucks.
 
Psalm45:9,

I debated between the Ignatius and the Oxford myself. It was because of the other thread that I went with the Oxford RSV-CE. I love this little Bible, it’s about the size of a prayer book. It’s a real shame most of that other thread was lost because it was a real help in making my decision for me. Some of the differences were pretty glaring.

Just a note of interest. One of our Catholic bookstores ordered a bunch of the Oxford RSV-CE compact editions. I think it was about 20. They sold out with in 2 weeks! I noticed them when I went in one week. The next time I was in (2 weeks later) I managed to get the very LAST one. They still had TONS of the St Joseph NABs. The RSV-CE is in definite demand!
 
Psalm45_9 said:
Point blank, the NAB sucks, however I like it more then the NIV.
Click to expand...
Point blank, the NIV really sucks - ever see the way they represent numbers? (They use numerals, e.g., 144,000, instead of the literal one hundred and forty- four thousand.) Then there’s its tendency to paraphrase a bit too much…

There’s not a verse in the NIV that’s lyrical or memorable; it’s too contemporary.

However, I wish Oxford would somehow differentiate its RSV-CE from the Ignatius edition; there can’t - or, at least, there shouldn’t - be two different RSV-CEs going by the same name. At least the RSV-2CE can be distinguished from their original RSV-CE.

BTW - the Ignatius RSV-CE, with NT from 1959 with Catholic changes made in 1965, and the OT published in 1966, is the one known for years as the RSV-CE. I’m not sure what to make of the Oxford RSV-CE based on the 1971 RSV NT.
 
Psalm45_9 said:
Point blank, the NAB sucks, however I like it more then the NIV.
Click to expand...
😃 That’s why I was looking for another Bible. My mom took me to get a Bible when I was being Confirmed. I got the NAB since that was all they had.
 
Personally, I love my copy. It is a beautifully made Bible, too. I am a big fan of the Douay Rheims, but for a modern translation, IMHO,this is a great choice.

If you (or anyone!) does decide to get it, I paid only $25 (& change) for the leather one on Amazon. This also qualifies for free shipping, so it is a double good way to get it!!
 
Does anyone have this one? I’m thinking of getting it and would like to know if anyone has it and/or would recommend it.
 
Manfred said:
Point blank, the NIV really sucks - ever see the way they represent numbers? (They use numerals, e.g., 144,000, instead of the literal one hundred and forty- four thousand.) Then there’s its tendency to paraphrase a bit too much…

There’s not a verse in the NIV that’s lyrical or memorable; it’s too contemporary.

However, I wish Oxford would somehow differentiate its RSV-CE from the Ignatius edition; there can’t - or, at least, there shouldn’t - be two different RSV-CEs going by the same name. At least the RSV-2CE can be distinguished from their original RSV-CE.

BTW - the Ignatius RSV-CE, with NT from 1959 with Catholic changes made in 1965, and the OT published in 1966, is the one known for years as the RSV-CE. I’m not sure what to make of the Oxford RSV-CE based on the 1971 RSV NT.
Click to expand...
When I came back into the faith during my last two years of High School, I began to read the Bible. The only Bible we had in the house was the NIV, it was given to my father by his Evangelical friend. I had no idea that Catholic and Protestant Bibles were different, it wasn’t until I watched a Catholic Compas show on EWTN about the Jewish roots of our Catholic faith that I learned that Catholic Bibles have more books in them. I then went to the book store to find a Catholic Bible, the only one they had was the NAB. When I started reading it I did like it more then the NIV. Then when I discoverd Catholic Answers I saw then endorsing the Ignatius Bible and I saw many people on EWTN used that Bible. I bought it and I liked it even more then the NAB.

However I did find that there were still some problems with the translation and not matching up to the Douay-Rheims Bible. (Not that that translation is perfect either.) I do prefer the Douay-Rheims over the Ignatius, but the Ignatius is much more friendly to the reader, not having so much archaic language and Latin words remaining in the text. I heard the Knox Bible is even better then the Douay-Rheims, but it is out of print.
 
I wish everyone here would just stop trying to turn the sows ear RSV(whatever edition) into a silk purse. It IS a Liberal translation done by people who very liberal and many of whom did not believe the Bible is God’s Word. As an EvangelicalChristian I did use the RSV only because at the time there was little else as far as a modern translation goes. As soon as the New King James Version came out me and about 99 percent of other Evangelical Christians I knew went to that and dropped the RSV like a hot potato. Noe as someone who is contemplating becoming a Catholic the only rael option for me is the Douay-Rheims and the 1966 Jerusalem Bible, of which I own both. Until Thomas Nelson comes out with an NKJV with the Deutero-Canonical books IE apocrypha the DR and the 1966 Jerusalem are what I will be using. BTW Nelson has stated that they have no plans to have an NKJV edition with the Deotero-Canonical books.
 
A novice opinion here (compared with most of the high horsepower posters):

I have 4 bibles:

Douay Rheims
RSV-CE (compact version for on the road)
The Living Bible (not a Catholic Bible & paraphrased)
NAB

For casual reading, I use the NAB. It has a lot of footnotes and no archaic language.

If I am really interested in a particular passage from a theological perspective, I go to the Douay. If it is just “not clear” I try the RSV-CE or the Living Bible.

This seems to work well for me.
 
Zooey said:
Personally, I love my copy. It is a beautifully made Bible, too. I am a big fan of the Douay Rheims, but for a modern translation, IMHO,this is a great choice.

If you (or anyone!) does decide to get it, I paid only $25 (& change) for the leather one on Amazon. This also qualifies for free shipping, so it is a double good way to get it!!
Click to expand...
Right, I am not saying that the Ignatius 2nd Catholic Edition is a bad choice, I own one, what I am saying is that we have analyzed the changes made, and being that I already bought the Ignatius 2nd Catholic Edition, I am suggesting that people don’t, and instead get the Oxford Press RSV-CE Catholic Edition, as it is a MUCH BETTER choice.

If you want to get a Bible that is a half-way revision in the right direction, get the Ignatius 2nd Edition to see what that means.
scapularkid8 said:
Does anyone have this one? I’m thinking of getting it and would like to know if anyone has it and/or would recommend it.
Click to expand...
I have it, and what I am suggesting to everyone is to wait two months and get the Oxford Press RSV-CE Reader’s Edition, instead.
 
kotek said:
I wish everyone here would just stop trying to turn the sows ear RSV(whatever edition) into a silk purse. It IS a Liberal translation done by people who very liberal and many of whom did not believe the Bible is God’s Word. As an EvangelicalChristian I did use the RSV only because at the time there was little else as far as a modern translation goes. As soon as the New King James Version came out me and about 99 percent of other Evangelical Christians I knew went to that and dropped the RSV like a hot potato. Noe as someone who is contemplating becoming a Catholic the only rael option for me is the Douay-Rheims and the 1966 Jerusalem Bible, of which I own both. Until Thomas Nelson comes out with an NKJV with the Deutero-Canonical books IE apocrypha the DR and the 1966 Jerusalem are what I will be using. BTW Nelson has stated that they have no plans to have an NKJV edition with the Deotero-Canonical books.
Click to expand...
Just out of curiousity have you looked at the NAB? It is far worse. The RSV-CE is actually much more traditionally in it’s sound. It uses mankind instead of humans like the NAB. The NIV also uses humans and is used by most of the Protestants I know. I don’t know to many people who use the NKJV. The DRV is definitely on my list. 🙂
 
kotek said:
I wish everyone here would just stop trying to turn the sows ear RSV(whatever edition) into a silk purse. It IS a Liberal translation done by people who very liberal and many of whom did not believe the Bible is God’s Word. As an EvangelicalChristian I did use the RSV only because at the time there was little else as far as a modern translation goes. As soon as the New King James Version came out me and about 99 percent of other Evangelical Christians I knew went to that and dropped the RSV like a hot potato. Noe as someone who is contemplating becoming a Catholic the only rael option for me is the Douay-Rheims and the 1966 Jerusalem Bible, of which I own both. Until Thomas Nelson comes out with an NKJV with the Deutero-Canonical books IE apocrypha the DR and the 1966 Jerusalem are what I will be using. BTW Nelson has stated that they have no plans to have an NKJV edition with the Deotero-Canonical books.
Click to expand...
Sorry to be blunt, but Evangelical Christianity may have tainted your perspective with false negative doctrinal reasons and unrealistic attachments to unnecessary, traditional, but not accurate Bible verse rendition requirements.

The following is only a pedagogical example, but it is like saying that it is really bad to dance and gamble, then finding a badly translated but traditionally worded passage in the KJV or NIV that supports this, and then stating that since that same passage in the RSV doesn’t support this, then it is a horrible translation, even though the RSV happens to be more accurate, and true Christianity doesn’t even have the same perspective.

The RSV isn’t perfect, but I wouldn’t place the NKJV above it because of a translation committee’s integrity, or the Jerusalem Bible above it because of translational methodology.

The Jerusalem Bible has a wealth of notes, though, and I own a copy. It is a good reference.

You mentioned the Douay Rheims. Pick one up; it is the lighthouse in a sea of liberal Catholic confusion these days.
 
mmortal03 said:
Right, I am not saying that the Ignatius 2nd Catholic Edition is a bad choice, I own one, what I am saying is that we have analyzed the changes made, and being that I already bought the Ignatius 2nd Catholic Edition, I am suggesting that people don’t, and instead get the Oxford Press RSV-CE Catholic Edition, as it is a MUCH BETTER choice.
Click to expand...
My compact RSV-CE bible says Ignatius on the box it came in, and Oxford University Press on the copyright page.

So I’m not sure what the heck I have!
 
ricmat said:
It matches the red, and the blue.

So does this mean I have the Oxford RSV-CE Catholic Edition?

PS it also says Ignatius on the leather cover.
Click to expand...
Yep, you have the Oxford RSV-CE Catholic Edition Compact. It is the same as the Oxford RSV-CE Reader’s Edition that comes out in December, except in compact size, and is how we found out about the differences with it in the first place. I did not know that Ignatius was re-branding them, but I did know that Scepter was.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top