Latin Vulgate and Douay-Rheims errors

  • Thread starter Thread starter tobinatorstark
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

tobinatorstark

Guest
quote from NDfan

Yes that’s the problem. The errors start with the Latin Vulgate. Jerome himself demanded that the Vulgate be corrected against the original languages. That of Hebrew for the OT and Greek for the NT. Over 8000 textual errors have been documented in the Latin Vulgate. But I don’t want to derail this thread. If you’d like to discuss I’d be happy to go to another thread.

PEACE

please give some sources and documentation
 
tobinatorstark said:
quote from NDfan

Yes that’s the problem. The errors start with the Latin Vulgate. Jerome himself demanded that the Vulgate be corrected against the original languages. That of Hebrew for the OT and Greek for the NT. Over 8000 textual errors have been documented in the Latin Vulgate. But I don’t want to derail this thread. If you’d like to discuss I’d be happy to go to another thread.

PEACE

please give some sources and documentation
Click to expand...
8000 Textual errors!?

I take it you’re not a Douay Rheims person?

🙂
 
I am the person who quoted isn’t. I think he is blowing smoke myself. I happen to read both side by side. I was just seeing if he could provide any evidence, then he logged off. BTW I consider the Douay-Rheims the best English, although many disagree with me on that.
 
St. Jerome is the author of the Latin Vulgate. My understanding is that he referred to the original languages in making the translation - Hebrew for the OT and Greek for the NT. Maybe I’m wrong.

Like you, everytime I’ve referred back to the original languages for some reason, I find the Douay provides the most literal translation. (In all honesty, I have to admit this doesn’t happen a whole lot. I have not made any sort of study concerning it.)
 
tobinatorstark said:
I am the person who quoted isn’t. I think he is blowing smoke myself. I happen to read both side by side. I was just seeing if he could provide any evidence, then he logged off. BTW I consider the Douay-Rheims the best English, although many disagree with me on that.
Click to expand...
My favorite English translation is the English Standard Version. It’s great. 👍
 
Nita said:
St. Jerome is the author of the Latin Vulgate. My understanding is that he referred to the original languages in making the translation - Hebrew for the OT and Greek for the NT. Maybe I’m wrong.

Like you, everytime I’ve referred back to the original languages for some reason, I find the Douay provides the most literal translation. (In all honesty, I have to admit this doesn’t happen a whole lot. I have not made any sort of study concerning it.)
Click to expand...
Yes Jerome is the author and he did use Hebrew and Greek original texts. However in the last 200 years people have claimed that the texts the have found were older than those that Jerome had used. These text do exist, but the where is the proof that they are older than those that Jerome had used. The ones that Jerome used withered away. I am a fairly literal person when it comes to the Bible, that is why I like the Douay. It isn’t for everyone, there are some wonderful Catholic Bibles as well as non Catholic Bibles
 
I’ve always wanted to read the Latin Vulgate but I don’t know Latin. I plan on taking it in college while I major in theology, but I was wondering if there are any places (preferably free) on the internet where I can learn Latin?

I personally love the D-R version, I find it hard to understand occasionally but I just have to read it over a few times :D.
 
tobinatorstark said:
I am the person who quoted isn’t. I think he is blowing smoke myself. I happen to read both side by side. I was just seeing if he could provide any evidence, then he logged off. BTW I consider the Douay-Rheims the best English, although many disagree with me on that.
Click to expand...
No tobinator I’m still here friend. I never logged off I was disconnected by Comcast so I ate dinner with my family. Is that not acceptable?? As far as not wanting to find the link I didn’t know to look in sacred scripture.

As far as blowing smoke. I don’t think so. The Latin Vulgate has many textual errors and Jerome did not use the original Hebrew for the OT. He had no choice for the NT but there are still textual errors. He supposedly used the Septuagint for the OT.

Jerome even confessed that he translated the OT outside of what the Hebrew allows.
 
tobinatorstark said:
Yes Jerome is the author and he did use Hebrew and Greek original texts. However in the last 200 years people have claimed that the texts the have found were older than those that Jerome had used. These text do exist, but the where is the proof that they are older than those that Jerome had used. The ones that Jerome used withered away. I am a fairly literal person when it comes to the Bible, that is why I like the Douay. It isn’t for everyone, there are some wonderful Catholic Bibles as well as non Catholic Bibles
Click to expand...
No he most certainly did not use the originals for the OT. The NT yes but as stated in another post there are several textual errors made.
 
NDfan said:
No tobinator I’m still here friend. I never logged off I was disconnected by Comcast so I ate dinner with my family. Is that not acceptable?? As far as not wanting to find the link I didn’t know to look in sacred scripture.

As far as blowing smoke. I don’t think so. The Latin Vulgate has many textual errors and Jerome did not use the original Hebrew for the OT. He had no choice for the NT but there are still textual errors. He supposedly used the Septuagint for the OT.

Jerome even confessed that he translated the OT outside of what the Hebrew allows.
Click to expand...
NDfan said:
No he most certainly did not use the originals for the OT. The NT yes but as stated in another post there are several textual errors made.
Click to expand...
Can you find legit proof and documentation??? That is what I am looking for. I use the Douay-Rheims and Latin Vulgate daily along with the CCC, Haydock Bible Commentary and Baltimore Catechism. What version is more correct in your view of all the different Bibles in English???
 
NDfan said:
No tobinator I’m still here friend. I never logged off I was disconnected by Comcast so I ate dinner with my family. Is that not acceptable?? As far as not wanting to find the link I didn’t know to look in sacred scripture.

As far as blowing smoke. I don’t think so. The Latin Vulgate has many textual errors and Jerome did not use the original Hebrew for the OT. He had no choice for the NT but there are still textual errors. He supposedly used the Septuagint for the OT.

Jerome even confessed that he translated the OT outside of what the Hebrew allows.
Click to expand...
I am not sure where you are getting your information, but the vast majority of the Old Testament – specifically those books, with the exception of Psalms, accepted by Protestants and Christians alike – is generally accepted to have been translated by Jerome from Hebrew Sources. The books that he did not translate from Hebrew were Psalms and the Deuterocanonical books. Psalms was translated from from the Septuagint and the New Testament Vulgate is a mix of Jerome’s Greek Translations for the Gospels and older Latin versions for the other works.

In any case define errors, and in which edition of the Vulgate are you referring to?

–
Bill
 
a short comparison:

KJV:
“And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.” – Romans 11:6

DRB:
“And if by grace, it is not now by works: otherwise grace is no more grace.” – Romans 11:6

“The LORD liveth; and blessed be my rock; and exalted be the God of the rock of my salvation.” – 2 Samuel 22:47 (KJV)

“The Lord liveth, and my God is blessed: and the strong God of my salvation shall be exalted:” – 2 Samuel 22:47 (DRB)

I see no change in the message, but the translations do differ. The DRB also is different from the NJB: especially regarding all the “rock” verses of the Old Testament.
 
Shlomey said:
a short comparison:

KJV:
“And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.” – Romans 11:6

DRB:
“And if by grace, it is not now by works: otherwise grace is no more grace.” – Romans 11:6

“The LORD liveth; and blessed be my rock; and exalted be the God of the rock of my salvation.” – 2 Samuel 22:47 (KJV)

“The Lord liveth, and my God is blessed: and the strong God of my salvation shall be exalted:” – 2 Samuel 22:47 (DRB)

I see no change in the message, but the translations do differ. The DRB also is different from the NJB: especially regarding all the “rock” verses of the Old Testament.
Click to expand...
True the translations differ, but NDfan can’t give any proof of textual errors of the Latin Vulgate (Clementine or before) or the Douay-Rheims. (or least he hasn’t presented any proof of errors). All Catholic Bibles lead you down the same path and have the same doctrine. Non Catholic Bible produce different doctrine in some areas than Catholic Bibles do, but the same doctrine in other areas
 
I am guessing NDfan couldn’t come up with proof. Such a shame I was looking forward to his response
 
Consider these two translations of Proverbs 30:8 and 30:9

Douay-Rheims

8 Remove far from me vanity, and lying words. Give me neither beggary, nor riches: give me only the necessaries of life:

9 Lest perhaps being filled, I should be tempted to deny, and say: Who is the Lord? or being compelled by poverty, I should steal, and forswear the name of my God.

New International Version (NIV)

8 Keep falsehood and lies far from me;
give me neither poverty nor riches,
but give me only my daily bread.
Code: 
9 Otherwise, I may have too much and disown you 
   and say, 'Who is the LORD? ' 
   Or I may become poor and steal, 
   and so dishonor the name of my God.
I know they are saying the same thing, but what hits you harder? I say NIV is the better translation.
 
CHRISTINE77 said:
Consider these two translations of Proverbs 30:8 and 30:9

Douay-Rheims

8 Remove far from me vanity, and lying words. Give me neither beggary, nor riches: give me only the necessaries of life:

9 Lest perhaps being filled, I should be tempted to deny, and say: Who is the Lord? or being compelled by poverty, I should steal, and forswear the name of my God.

New International Version (NIV)

8 Keep falsehood and lies far from me;
give me neither poverty nor riches,
but give me only my daily bread.
Code: 
9 Otherwise, I may have too much and disown you 
   and say, 'Who is the LORD? ' 
   Or I may become poor and steal, 
   and so dishonor the name of my God.
I know they are saying the same thing, but what hits you harder? I say NIV is the better translation.
Click to expand...
Why so??? The NIV isn’t approved by the Catholic Church in any way, plus it is missing 17 verses (give or take a few). An example of this is Matthew 15:10-12. Verse 11 doesn’t exist. Doesn’t that go against Deuteronomy 4:2, Proverbs 30:6, and Revelations 22:18-19, but may be subject to 2 Timothy 3:15-17? Why or why not?? BTW all Catholic Bibles approved by the Catholic Church or any Catholic material have an Nihil Obstat, Imprimatur, Imprimi Potest or some approval by a Bishops Committee
 
CHRISTINE77 said:
Consider these two translations of Proverbs 30:8 and 30:9

Douay-Rheims

8 Remove far from me vanity, and lying words. Give me neither beggary, nor riches: give me only the necessaries of life:

9 Lest perhaps being filled, I should be tempted to deny, and say: Who is the Lord? or being compelled by poverty, I should steal, and forswear the name of my God.

New International Version (NIV)

8 Keep falsehood and lies far from me;
give me neither poverty nor riches,
but give me only my daily bread.
Code: 
9 Otherwise, I may have too much and disown you 
   and say, 'Who is the LORD? ' 
   Or I may become poor and steal, 
   and so dishonor the name of my God.
I know they are saying the same thing, but what hits you harder? I say NIV is the better translation.
Click to expand...
The Douay-Rheims does
 
CHRISTINE77 said:
Consider these two translations of Proverbs 30:8 and 30:9

Douay-Rheims

8 Remove far from me vanity, and lying words. Give me neither beggary, nor riches: give me only the necessaries of life:

9 Lest perhaps being filled, I should be tempted to deny, and say: Who is the Lord? or being compelled by poverty, I should steal, and forswear the name of my God.

New International Version (NIV)

8 Keep falsehood and lies far from me;
give me neither poverty nor riches,
but give me only my daily bread.
Code: 
9 Otherwise, I may have too much and disown you 
   and say, 'Who is the LORD? ' 
   Or I may become poor and steal, 
   and so dishonor the name of my God.
I know they are saying the same thing, but what hits you harder? I say NIV is the better translation.
Click to expand...
You’re kidding, right? The poetic beauty and majesty of the Douay-Rheims knocks the socks off of the NonInspiringVersion. Not to mention the D-R is very probably closer to the Hebrew base than what the NIV claims to be.

If I were an evangelical Protestant (which I’m not), my version of choice would be the New American Standard Bible (NASB); it hews much closer to the Hebrew and Greek than does the NIV, which tends too much toward dynamic equivalence.
 
BTW all Catholic Bibles approved by the Catholic Church or any Catholic material have an Nihil Obstat, Imprimatur, Imprimi Potest or some approval by a Bishops Committee
Click to expand...
A Bishops Committee has no teaching or authority charism like a Bishop in his own Diocese has, or the Pope, or a Council of Bishops. 😉
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top