L
lanceg
Guest
Nanzianzen is correct in pointing out the likely incorrect rendering of the KJV in Matthew 5:22; it reads in the King James: " But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment".
In the Douay-Rheims, it reads: “But I say to you, that whosoever is angry with his brother, shall be in danger of the judgment.”
All of the modern translations also omit the phrase, “without cause,” without even a footnote, so the KJV is likely incorrect in this case.
However, I think that the traditions represented by both the KJV and Douay Rheims are more accurate than many modern translations.
Ever since the English Revised Version of 1881 was produced, textual scholars have suspected that the vast majority of manuscripts were corrupted by orthodox churchmen in the 4th and 5th centuries.
Typically, modern translations of the Bible such as the RSV, NRSV, NAB, NIV, ESV, NASB, REB, NEB, etc., have followed since the time of the ERV what is known as an eclectic text. The eclectic text gives more weight to a handful of very old manuscripts, most notably Codex Vaticanicus and Codex Siniaticus, and a few others. The net result of this textual theory is to delete several passages, found not only in the King James tradition, but in the Douay Rheims tradition as well.
But other scholars, some who are Eastern Orthodox, and some who are conservative evangelicals have argued that majority manuscripts are more reliable than previously thought, showing remarkable agreement. Traditionalist Catholics also prefer the Douay Rheims and Confraternity Versions, which are based on the Latin Vulgate.
The majority manuscripts bear a close similarity to the traditional Byzantine Text, which has been the official text of the Greek Speaking Churches. The Church of Constantinople updated and revised the Byzantine Text in 1912.
For a more in depth scholarly article on these issues, see the essay, “Which Bible Should I use?” by Bishop Isaiah of the Greek Orthodox Diocese, at the following link: geocities.com/trvalentine/orthodox/bible_texts.html
To buy an excellent version of the New Testament from the 1912 version of the Byzantine Text, see these two links:
From Amazon: amazon.com/Orthodox-New-Testament-Translated-Leatherette/dp/0944359256/ref=pd_sim_b_1/104-6219538-4193543
or direct from the publisher:
holyapostlesconvent.org/HacWebStore/advanced_search_result.php
keywords=new+testament&osCsid=9d206409bdac68d979db9acb60d9bf87
The KJV and Douay Rheims keep several other phrases that are often dropped in more recent versions, that should not be.
I want to be clear here, I am not a supporter of King James-only-ism or Douay-Rheims-only-ism at all; I simply believe that the eclectic text is too skeptical, as Bishop Isaiah’s article points out, and that traditional textual traditions from the Byzantine Text and the Latin Vulgate are much more reliable. As such, nowadays I prefer to Douay-Rheims and Confraternity Versions, which are based on the Latin Vulgate, as well as the Third Millennium Bible and Orthodox New Testament, both of which are updates of the King James.
)
, but I want to suggest to you that any of these following versions would be 100x better than the NAB:
