Looking to buy a Bible

[captommo]

Best version depends upon use(s):

Study requiring accuracy - RSV-CE is best, NAB is also useful. HOWEVER, the original Jerusalem Bible (NOT the "reader’s version) has excellent and copious footnotes.

Reading/devotional - I think the NAB is good for this, Jerusalem Bible can be good for this. It is, however, a “dynamic equivalence” version, and its readings are occasionally off.

preaching - I would again go with RSV-CE, simply because of the need for accuracy.

Best for all three - I think the CCD (Confraternity edition) does a great job of being readable, reverent and accurate.

Keep in mind that it is SAID the NAB is the one approved for Lectionaries in the US, but if that’s the case, the text is revised in some cases (i.e. “Hail, full of grace”.)

 

[AndyF]

pawnraider:

I’m looking to buy a Catholic Bible and was wondering if anyone can recommend the Douay-Rheims version or give their thoughts on it?

A good bible should be an heirloom.

The New American Bible has excellent footnotes for the lay person and Catholic. It has a Biblical dictionary in the appendix, prayers for every occasion, pictorial proceedings of the mass,and way of the cross, and Constitution on Devine Revelation…

It has entry pages to insert new family member names and those who have gone on to Christ, wedding,baptismals and confirmations,etc.

It includes paintings by the masters, the lineage of the bible explained, reproduction manuscripts all in color.

This is the large uncondensed version and is quite hefty to handle. But it is gold trimmed and really a beauty with it’s white and gold binding.

Andy

 

[Lapsed]

AndyF:

The New American Bible has excellent footnotes for the lay person and Catholic. It has a Biblical dictionary in the appendix, prayers for every occasion, pictorial proceedings of the mass,and way of the cross, and Constitution on Devine Revelation…

The footnotes in the NAB are often suspect from an orthodox perspective as they accept things like the “Q” hypothesis and other theororetical concepts as though they are proven fact rather than treating them as the theories they are.

 

[AndyF]

Lapsed:

The footnotes in the NAB are often suspect from an orthodox perspective as they accept things like the “Q” hypothesis and other theororetical concepts as though they are proven fact rather than treating them as the theories they are.

I think with NAB having the approval of Pope Paul VI, we can at least say with certainty it meets De Defide Definita. Perhaps some other incidental areas may manifest some degree of Sententia Ad Fidem Pertinens or *Sententia Communis. *The young family today can be rest assured that it will fullfill it’s needs, and some.

Andy

 

[tjmiller]

See the thread, “Is the DRV a relaible text?”