T
tobinatorstark
Guest
However we must have reverence to the Didache
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
J
Jerry-Jet
Guest
The Vulgate in one account of the Our Father says “supersubstantial bread”. Tell me how there is no no doctrinal difference.
The Vulgate translates “In the person of Christ” in 2 Corinthians 2:10. Protestant versions and yes the Jerusalem bible the NAB and the RSV-CE all translate “In the presence of Christ”. Tell me there is no difference there.
We do know as Catholics that Trent stated that the Vulgate does not err on matters of doctrine.
Now I’m not saying that the Vulgate does not err in minor details or is flawless or perfect but until the day I die I will trust the Ecumenical Council of Trent that the Vulgate does not err on doctrine.
“Supersubstantial bread” has direct bearing on the Eucharist.
“In the person of Christ” has direct bearing on absolution.
Can versions of the bible other than the Vulgate be superior in some words of the bible–yes.
When there is a conflict involving doctrine which does not err? The Vulgate.
The Vulgate translates “In the person of Christ” in 2 Corinthians 2:10. Protestant versions and yes the Jerusalem bible the NAB and the RSV-CE all translate “In the presence of Christ”. Tell me there is no difference there.
We do know as Catholics that Trent stated that the Vulgate does not err on matters of doctrine.
Now I’m not saying that the Vulgate does not err in minor details or is flawless or perfect but until the day I die I will trust the Ecumenical Council of Trent that the Vulgate does not err on doctrine.
“Supersubstantial bread” has direct bearing on the Eucharist.
“In the person of Christ” has direct bearing on absolution.
Can versions of the bible other than the Vulgate be superior in some words of the bible–yes.
When there is a conflict involving doctrine which does not err? The Vulgate.
T
tobinatorstark
Guest
Thank you, Thank you, Thank you!!!The Vulgate in one account of the Our Father says “supersubstantial bread”. Tell me how there is no no doctrinal difference.
The Vulgate translates “In the person of Christ” in 2 Corinthians 2:10. Protestant versions and yes the Jerusalem bible the NAB and the RSV-CE all translate “In the presence of Christ”. Tell me there is no difference there.
We do know as Catholics that Trent stated that the Vulgate does not err on matters of doctrine.
Now I’m not saying that the Vulgate does not err in minor details or is flawless or perfect but until the day I die I will trust the Ecumenical Council of Trent that the Vulgate does not err on doctrine.
“Supersubstantial bread” has direct bearing on the Eucharist.
“In the person of Christ” has direct bearing on absolution.
Can versions of the bible other than the Vulgate be superior in some words of the bible–yes.
When there is a conflict involving doctrine which does not err? The Vulgate.
B
brianmichael
Guest
I, for one, would like to see an english transl. that’s 1000% Catholic from the first word in Genesis to the last word in Revelation.Thank you, Thank you, Thank you!!!
i hate to quote off “Spaceballs” but the problem is merchandising: the Church knows that it can’t force people who want:
inclusive lang.
“Hail, higly favored daughter!”
“daily bread”
“in the presence of Christ”
etc…
etc…
B
brianmichael
Guest
next thing you know they’ll ask you “why don’t you just learn the Latin?” this is America, the land of choices…
i personally read the RSVCE (not the 2nd one) but can i force you to read the RSVCE? Heck no!!! This is the problem: the Church can’t force you to read anything you don’t want to read
(why don’t they teach Latin in schools these days?!?)
i personally read the RSVCE (not the 2nd one) but can i force you to read the RSVCE? Heck no!!! This is the problem: the Church can’t force you to read anything you don’t want to read
(why don’t they teach Latin in schools these days?!?)
C
CHRISTINE77
Guest
Personally, I think people are really nitpicking over different translations. There just isn’t that much difference. Modern translations are much easier to comprehend that the Old English translations.next thing you know they’ll ask you “why don’t you just learn the Latin?” this is America, the land of choices…
i personally read the RSVCE (not the 2nd one) but can i force you to read the RSVCE? Heck no!!! This is the problem: the Church can’t force you to read anything you don’t want to read
(why don’t they teach Latin in schools these days?!?)
Also In the translations from the Vulgate there were errors, such as Moses having horns on his head after he came down from the mountain, and creatures such as unicorns living in the land.
I think the most important thing is to READ the Bible, and STUDY it, and THINK ABOUT IT - no matter which translation of it you choose to read.
T
tobinatorstark
Guest
I personally don’t read a Bible for readability. Modern Bibles are designed for readability and accuracy. I read the Latin Vulgate for accuracy. Christine77 please give Book, Chapter and verse as which you are talking about. The Vulgate is most accurate Bible and those are following the most accurate Bible are accurate. There are errors of moral or doctrinal issues. Unicorn doesn’t mean a mythological creature like we think of today. It has a different meaning. Many words in the Douay-Rheims have words that have different meanings. You stated in one post that it has serious errors but you have given proof as to how many errors that the Douay-Rheims has. The Douay-Rheims has far less errors than the NAB, NJB, JB, NRSV and RSV-CE combined. You also thought that the NIV was a better translation than the Douay-Rheims and other Latin Vulgate based Bibles. What proof do you have??? The NIV is missing the books of the Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, 1 Machabees, 2 Machabees, parts of Esther and parts Daniel as well as Matthew 18:11. All Protestant Bibles added to Matthew 6:13. That is wrong. Think about it. If you are going to rattle of that the Douay-Rheims has serious errors give Book, Chapter and Verse(s). It is that simple.Personally, I think people are really nitpicking over different translations. There just isn’t that much difference. Modern translations are much easier to comprehend that the Old English translations.
Also In the translations from the Vulgate there were errors, such as Moses having horns on his head after he came down from the mountain, and creatures such as unicorns living in the land.
I think the most important thing is to READ the Bible, and STUDY it, and THINK ABOUT IT - no matter which translation of it you choose to read.
C
CHRISTINE77
Guest
This is from Douay Bible:I personally don’t read a Bible for readability. Modern Bibles are designed for readability and accuracy. I read the Latin Vulgate for accuracy. Christine77 please give Book, Chapter and verse as which you are talking about. The Vulgate is most accurate Bible and those are following the most accurate Bible are accurate. There are errors of moral or doctrinal issues. Unicorn doesn’t mean a mythological creature like we think of today. It has a different meaning. Many words in the Douay-Rheims have words that have different meanings. You stated in one post that it has serious errors but you have given proof as to how many errors that the Douay-Rheims has. The Douay-Rheims has far less errors than the NAB, NJB, JB, NRSV and RSV-CE combined. You also thought that the NIV was a better translation than the Douay-Rheims and other Latin Vulgate based Bibles. What proof do you have??? The NIV is missing the books of the Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, 1 Machabees, 2 Machabees, parts of Esther and parts Daniel as well as Matthew 18:11. All Protestant Bibles added to Matthew 6:13. That is wrong. Think about it. If you are going to rattle of that the Douay-Rheims has serious errors give Book, Chapter and Verse(s). It is that simple.
**29 And when Moses came down from the mount Sinai, he held the two tables of the testimony, and he knew not that his face was horned from the conversation of the Lord. 30 And Aaron and the children of Israel seeing the face of Moses horned, were afraid to come near. **
Now we know that “horned” really meant “shining with rays of light”.
T
tobinatorstark
Guest
What Which book and chapter?? I got the verses, but I need the Book and chapter. I guess I wasn’t clear the first time.This is from Douay Bible:
**29 And when Moses came down from the mount Sinai, he held the two tables of the testimony, and he knew not that his face was horned from the conversation of the Lord. 30 And Aaron and the children of Israel seeing the face of Moses horned, were afraid to come near. **
Now we know that “horned” really meant “shining with rays of light”.
C
CHRISTINE77
Guest
Exodus Chapter 34What Which book and chapter?? I got the verses, but I need the Book and chapter. I guess I wasn’t clear the first time.
T
tobinatorstark
Guest
From the Haydock Bible Commentary Exodus 34:29
Ver. 29. Horned. That is, shining, and sending forth rays of light like horns. (Challoner) — Septuagint, “encircled with glory.” St. Paul (2 Corinthians iii. 7,) says, the Hebrews could not look steadfastly at the face of Moses, on account of the glory of his countenance. Hence, he was forced to have a veil, which, the apostle observes, was not taken off from the old law till Christ appeared. The Jews and heretics still read the law and the gospel with a veil over their eyes and heart, without understanding them, as they are hidden to those who perish, 2 Corinthians iv. 3. The Jews are much enraged at some Christians, who have represented Moses with horns, as if, they say, he were a devil, or his wife an adulteress. (Stacchus and Drusius.) — Hebrew, “his skin was radiant” all over his face. These rays commanded respect and awe from the people, who had before said contemptuously, Moses—the man, (chap. xxxii. 1,) as they shewed that God was with him. They had not appeared before, though he had often conversed with the Lord: but now, having seen the glorious vision, they adhered to him during the remainder of his life, particularly when he enforced the obligations of the law to the people. (Haydock) — The Arabs make their hair stand up like little horns, when they are about 40 years old. (Patric. ii. 4. Navig.) Homer mentions the like custom, and Diomed laughs at Paris calling him the pretty-horned. (Iliad xi.) Many of the ancient heroes and gods are represented with horns, particularly Bacchus, whose history reminds us of many particulars, which belong to Moses. He was born or educated in the confines of Egypt, was exposed on the waters, in a box; had two mothers, and very beautiful. While his army enjoyed the light, the Indians were in darkness. He was preceded by a pillar, had women in his train, dried up rivers with his thyrsus or wand, which had crawled, like a serpent, &c. (Huet. &c.) St. Epiphanius (her. 55,) says the Idumeans adored Moses. Their idol is called Choze by Josephus, (Antiquities xviii. 11,) which may be derived from Chus, the ancestor of Sephora, as Bacchus and Iacchus may denote “the son Bar, or the god Chus,” Jah-Chus, who was adored in Arabia; so that Moses, Choze, and Bacchus, probably mean the same person. Chus peopled that part of Arabia where the Hebrews sojourned, Numbers xii. 1. (Calmet)
Ver. 29. Horned. That is, shining, and sending forth rays of light like horns. (Challoner) — Septuagint, “encircled with glory.” St. Paul (2 Corinthians iii. 7,) says, the Hebrews could not look steadfastly at the face of Moses, on account of the glory of his countenance. Hence, he was forced to have a veil, which, the apostle observes, was not taken off from the old law till Christ appeared. The Jews and heretics still read the law and the gospel with a veil over their eyes and heart, without understanding them, as they are hidden to those who perish, 2 Corinthians iv. 3. The Jews are much enraged at some Christians, who have represented Moses with horns, as if, they say, he were a devil, or his wife an adulteress. (Stacchus and Drusius.) — Hebrew, “his skin was radiant” all over his face. These rays commanded respect and awe from the people, who had before said contemptuously, Moses—the man, (chap. xxxii. 1,) as they shewed that God was with him. They had not appeared before, though he had often conversed with the Lord: but now, having seen the glorious vision, they adhered to him during the remainder of his life, particularly when he enforced the obligations of the law to the people. (Haydock) — The Arabs make their hair stand up like little horns, when they are about 40 years old. (Patric. ii. 4. Navig.) Homer mentions the like custom, and Diomed laughs at Paris calling him the pretty-horned. (Iliad xi.) Many of the ancient heroes and gods are represented with horns, particularly Bacchus, whose history reminds us of many particulars, which belong to Moses. He was born or educated in the confines of Egypt, was exposed on the waters, in a box; had two mothers, and very beautiful. While his army enjoyed the light, the Indians were in darkness. He was preceded by a pillar, had women in his train, dried up rivers with his thyrsus or wand, which had crawled, like a serpent, &c. (Huet. &c.) St. Epiphanius (her. 55,) says the Idumeans adored Moses. Their idol is called Choze by Josephus, (Antiquities xviii. 11,) which may be derived from Chus, the ancestor of Sephora, as Bacchus and Iacchus may denote “the son Bar, or the god Chus,” Jah-Chus, who was adored in Arabia; so that Moses, Choze, and Bacchus, probably mean the same person. Chus peopled that part of Arabia where the Hebrews sojourned, Numbers xii. 1. (Calmet)
C
CHRISTINE77
Guest
Yes, but that is a modern explanation. People really did think Moses had horns before the modern translations. Michaelangelo even made a very famous statue of Moses with horns.From the Haydock Bible Commentary Exodus 34:29
Ver. 29. Horned. That is, shining, and sending forth rays of light like horns. (Challoner) — Septuagint, “encircled with glory.” St. Paul (2 Corinthians iii. 7,) says, the Hebrews could not look steadfastly at the face of Moses, on account of the glory of his countenance. Hence, he was forced to have a veil, which, the apostle observes, was not taken off from the old law till Christ appeared. The Jews and heretics still read the law and the gospel with a veil over their eyes and heart, without understanding them, as they are hidden to those who perish, 2 Corinthians iv. 3. The Jews are much enraged at some Christians, who have represented Moses with horns, as if, they say, he were a devil, or his wife an adulteress. (Stacchus and Drusius.) — Hebrew, “his skin was radiant” all over his face. These rays commanded respect and awe from the people, who had before said contemptuously, Moses—the man, (chap. xxxii. 1,) as they shewed that God was with him. They had not appeared before, though he had often conversed with the Lord: but now, having seen the glorious vision, they adhered to him during the remainder of his life, particularly when he enforced the obligations of the law to the people. (Haydock) — The Arabs make their hair stand up like little horns, when they are about 40 years old. (Patric. ii. 4. Navig.) Homer mentions the like custom, and Diomed laughs at Paris calling him the pretty-horned. (Iliad xi.) Many of the ancient heroes and gods are represented with horns, particularly Bacchus, whose history reminds us of many particulars, which belong to Moses. He was born or educated in the confines of Egypt, was exposed on the waters, in a box; had two mothers, and very beautiful. While his army enjoyed the light, the Indians were in darkness. He was preceded by a pillar, had women in his train, dried up rivers with his thyrsus or wand, which had crawled, like a serpent, &c. (Huet. &c.) St. Epiphanius (her. 55,) says the Idumeans adored Moses. Their idol is called Choze by Josephus, (Antiquities xviii. 11,) which may be derived from Chus, the ancestor of Sephora, as Bacchus and Iacchus may denote “the son Bar, or the god Chus,” Jah-Chus, who was adored in Arabia; so that Moses, Choze, and Bacchus, probably mean the same person. Chus peopled that part of Arabia where the Hebrews sojourned, Numbers xii. 1. (Calmet)
C
CHRISTINE77
Guest
More Douay innaccuacies:
The Hebrew phrase “Let the king live” is used several times in the OT writings. It is correctly translated in many places in the Douay (such as I Kings 1:31), which shows that the translators were aware of how to correctly render this phrase. However, in several places they substitute the British paraphrase “God save the king” (I Samuel 10:24; II Samuel 16:16, to give just a couple).
In Genesis 25:8 the Douay reads, “Then Abraham gave up the ghost…” Also this is in Luke 23, and other parts of the Bible. This is a very liberal paraphrase of a verb which simply means to “die, expire.” It says nothing at all about a “ghost” being given up by one’s physical body at death. Indeed, no such thing is taught in the Bible; this is a false teaching. This was a popular expression and belief in England at the time, however, and thus it was written into the text in place of the literal Hebrew “to die.”
In Psalm 8:5 there is a very familiar quotation in the Douay: “For Thou hast made him a little lower than the angels.” The Hebrew word here is actually “Elohim” which means “gods.” The Douay translators were aware of this fact, for they correctly translated this word in Psalm 138:1 — “Before the gods will I sing praise unto thee.”
Genesis 12:19 reads, “Why saidst thou, She is my sister? so I might have taken her to me to wife.” The Hebrew text actually says, “I took her.” By changing the verb tense, the Douay has also changed the meaning!
In John 20:17 the Douay has Jesus saying to Mary, “Touch Me not.” It seems He is here forbidding what He has elsewhere allowed (Matthew 28:9). However, the Greek word employed here actually means “to cling to.” Jesus was not forbidding Mary to touch Him, but rather forbidding her to cling on to Him as if to prevent His departure — a completely different concept.
In Romans 3:25 ( and Matthew 26:28, Mark 1:4, Luke 3:3) the Douay speaks of “the remission of sins.” The Greek word actually refers to “passing over” sins, not the canceling or remitting of them. The Douay translators confused two similar Greek words here.
The Greek word agape (a self-sacrificial love) is used over 300 times in the New Testament writings. The Douay translates it “love” in most places. However, the Douay renders it “charity” in 26 different locations. Since “charity” conveys a different meaning today than it did in the 17th century, this has led to some confusion among readers. Some have assumed that “charitable acts of benevolence” are being referred to, rather than “love.” Such could easily have been avoided by consistent translation of the word in the Douay.
The Hebrew phrase “Let the king live” is used several times in the OT writings. It is correctly translated in many places in the Douay (such as I Kings 1:31), which shows that the translators were aware of how to correctly render this phrase. However, in several places they substitute the British paraphrase “God save the king” (I Samuel 10:24; II Samuel 16:16, to give just a couple).
In Genesis 25:8 the Douay reads, “Then Abraham gave up the ghost…” Also this is in Luke 23, and other parts of the Bible. This is a very liberal paraphrase of a verb which simply means to “die, expire.” It says nothing at all about a “ghost” being given up by one’s physical body at death. Indeed, no such thing is taught in the Bible; this is a false teaching. This was a popular expression and belief in England at the time, however, and thus it was written into the text in place of the literal Hebrew “to die.”
In Psalm 8:5 there is a very familiar quotation in the Douay: “For Thou hast made him a little lower than the angels.” The Hebrew word here is actually “Elohim” which means “gods.” The Douay translators were aware of this fact, for they correctly translated this word in Psalm 138:1 — “Before the gods will I sing praise unto thee.”
Genesis 12:19 reads, “Why saidst thou, She is my sister? so I might have taken her to me to wife.” The Hebrew text actually says, “I took her.” By changing the verb tense, the Douay has also changed the meaning!
In John 20:17 the Douay has Jesus saying to Mary, “Touch Me not.” It seems He is here forbidding what He has elsewhere allowed (Matthew 28:9). However, the Greek word employed here actually means “to cling to.” Jesus was not forbidding Mary to touch Him, but rather forbidding her to cling on to Him as if to prevent His departure — a completely different concept.
In Romans 3:25 ( and Matthew 26:28, Mark 1:4, Luke 3:3) the Douay speaks of “the remission of sins.” The Greek word actually refers to “passing over” sins, not the canceling or remitting of them. The Douay translators confused two similar Greek words here.
The Greek word agape (a self-sacrificial love) is used over 300 times in the New Testament writings. The Douay translates it “love” in most places. However, the Douay renders it “charity” in 26 different locations. Since “charity” conveys a different meaning today than it did in the 17th century, this has led to some confusion among readers. Some have assumed that “charitable acts of benevolence” are being referred to, rather than “love.” Such could easily have been avoided by consistent translation of the word in the Douay.
T
tobinatorstark
Guest
In response to Christine77
Ver. 24. King. Our favourite song, “God save,” &c., is an amplification of this sentiment. (Haydock)
Ver. 16. Arachite; perhaps descended from the ancient Aracites, who dwelt near Arad and Tripoli, where the pretended Sabbatic river is said to flow; (Josephus, Jewish Wars xii. 13.) or rather, as the names are written in a different manner, this person might be a native of Arachi, in Benjamin, west of Bethel, Josue xvi. 2. (Calmet) — See chap. xv. 32. — Friend. This was his peculiar title of office, 1 Paralipomenon xxvii. 33. (Calmet) — King. (Salve.) Literally, “Hail, O King,” in both places. The salutation is repeated for greater emphasis. (Haydock)
Genesis 25:8 doesn’t read "Abraham gave up the ghost.
Here is the Douay-Rheims Genesis 25:8
8 And decaying he died in a good old age, and having lived a long time, and being full of days: and was gathered to his people.
Genesis 12:19 you still translated it different that what it actually says
Genesis 12:19 reads, “Why saidst thou, She is my sister? so I might have taken her to me to wife.” The Hebrew text actually says, “I took her.” By changing the verb tense, the Douay has also changed the meaning!
The real translation of Genesis 12:19
19 For what cause didst thou say, she was thy sister, that I might take her to my wife? Now, therefore, there is thy wife, take her, and go thy way.
If you are going to type it out type it right. There is no changed meaning in Genesis 12:19
John 20:27 you still mistranslated it.
In John 20:17 the Douay has Jesus saying to Mary, “Touch Me not.” It seems He is here forbidding what He has elsewhere allowed (Matthew 28:9). However, the Greek word employed here actually means “to cling to.” Jesus was not forbidding Mary to touch Him, but rather forbidding her to cling on to Him as if to prevent His departure — a completely different concept.
Jesus saith to her: Do not touch me, for I am not yet ascended to my Father. But go to my brethren, and say to them: I ascend to my Father and to your Father, to my God and your God.
Ver. 17. I will not leave you again; be not in a hurry to touch me; you shall all have this pleasure. I will remain with you some time, before my ascension. Announce my resurrection to my apostles. You shall see me again. This is the interpretation most modern commentators put upon this place. Others suppose, that Magdalene imagined he was risen from the dead to live with men as before, like Lazarus. He addresses these words to her to disabuse her of this notion. (Calmet)
Here cling and touch are similar words.
cont. next post
Ver. 24. King. Our favourite song, “God save,” &c., is an amplification of this sentiment. (Haydock)
Ver. 16. Arachite; perhaps descended from the ancient Aracites, who dwelt near Arad and Tripoli, where the pretended Sabbatic river is said to flow; (Josephus, Jewish Wars xii. 13.) or rather, as the names are written in a different manner, this person might be a native of Arachi, in Benjamin, west of Bethel, Josue xvi. 2. (Calmet) — See chap. xv. 32. — Friend. This was his peculiar title of office, 1 Paralipomenon xxvii. 33. (Calmet) — King. (Salve.) Literally, “Hail, O King,” in both places. The salutation is repeated for greater emphasis. (Haydock)
Genesis 25:8 doesn’t read "Abraham gave up the ghost.
Here is the Douay-Rheims Genesis 25:8
8 And decaying he died in a good old age, and having lived a long time, and being full of days: and was gathered to his people.
Genesis 12:19 you still translated it different that what it actually says
Genesis 12:19 reads, “Why saidst thou, She is my sister? so I might have taken her to me to wife.” The Hebrew text actually says, “I took her.” By changing the verb tense, the Douay has also changed the meaning!
The real translation of Genesis 12:19
19 For what cause didst thou say, she was thy sister, that I might take her to my wife? Now, therefore, there is thy wife, take her, and go thy way.
If you are going to type it out type it right. There is no changed meaning in Genesis 12:19
John 20:27 you still mistranslated it.
In John 20:17 the Douay has Jesus saying to Mary, “Touch Me not.” It seems He is here forbidding what He has elsewhere allowed (Matthew 28:9). However, the Greek word employed here actually means “to cling to.” Jesus was not forbidding Mary to touch Him, but rather forbidding her to cling on to Him as if to prevent His departure — a completely different concept.
Jesus saith to her: Do not touch me, for I am not yet ascended to my Father. But go to my brethren, and say to them: I ascend to my Father and to your Father, to my God and your God.
Ver. 17. I will not leave you again; be not in a hurry to touch me; you shall all have this pleasure. I will remain with you some time, before my ascension. Announce my resurrection to my apostles. You shall see me again. This is the interpretation most modern commentators put upon this place. Others suppose, that Magdalene imagined he was risen from the dead to live with men as before, like Lazarus. He addresses these words to her to disabuse her of this notion. (Calmet)
Here cling and touch are similar words.
cont. next post
T
tobinatorstark
Guest
Romans 3:25
25 Whom God hath proposed to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to the showing of his justice, for the remission of former sins,
from the Haydock Bible Commentary
propitiation for the sins of all mankind, by faith in his blood; that is, by believing in him, who shed his blood and died for us on the cross. It is he alone,
Matthew 26:28
28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for many unto remission of sins.
In Romans 3:25 ( and Matthew 26:28, Mark 1:4, Luke 3:3) the Douay speaks of “the remission of sins.” The Greek word actually refers to “passing over” sins, not the canceling or remitting of them. The Douay translators confused two similar Greek words here. - Christine77
forgiveness and remission meant the same thing. You are ignoring the fact that meaning over time change.
Your attitude is very Protestant. You aren’t willing accept Catholic teaching among various sources. You haven’t shown me one piece of evidence where these verses disagree with that of the NAB, RSV-CE, JB, NJB, NRSV. If you look at Matthew 6:13 from the NAB it reads
9
5 6 "This is how you are to pray: Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name,
10
your kingdom come, 7 your will be done, on earth as in heaven.
11
8 Give us today our daily bread;
12
and forgive us our debts, 9 as we forgive our debtors;
13
and do not subject us to the final test, 10 but deliver us from the evil one.
14
The Douay translates it.
Thus therefore shall you pray: Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name. 10 Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.
11 Give us this day our supersubstantial bread. 12 And forgive us our debts, as we also forgive our debtors. 13 And lead us not into temptation. But deliver us from evil. Amen
and the RSV-CE translates it
9 Pray then like this: Our Father who art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.
10 Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, On earth as it is in heaven.
11 Give us this day our daily bread;
12 And forgive us our debts, As we also have forgiven our debtors;
13 And lead us not into temptation, But deliver us from evil
it seems like the RSV-CE and the Douay-Rheims mean one thing and the NAB means another. The Notes in the NAB indicate that as well.
25 Whom God hath proposed to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to the showing of his justice, for the remission of former sins,
from the Haydock Bible Commentary
propitiation for the sins of all mankind, by faith in his blood; that is, by believing in him, who shed his blood and died for us on the cross. It is he alone,
Matthew 26:28
28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for many unto remission of sins.
In Romans 3:25 ( and Matthew 26:28, Mark 1:4, Luke 3:3) the Douay speaks of “the remission of sins.” The Greek word actually refers to “passing over” sins, not the canceling or remitting of them. The Douay translators confused two similar Greek words here. - Christine77
forgiveness and remission meant the same thing. You are ignoring the fact that meaning over time change.
Your attitude is very Protestant. You aren’t willing accept Catholic teaching among various sources. You haven’t shown me one piece of evidence where these verses disagree with that of the NAB, RSV-CE, JB, NJB, NRSV. If you look at Matthew 6:13 from the NAB it reads
Code:
Do not be like them. Your Father knows what you need before you ask him.5 6 "This is how you are to pray: Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name,
10
your kingdom come, 7 your will be done, on earth as in heaven.
11
8 Give us today our daily bread;
12
and forgive us our debts, 9 as we forgive our debtors;
13
and do not subject us to the final test, 10 but deliver us from the evil one.
14
The Douay translates it.
Thus therefore shall you pray: Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name. 10 Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.
11 Give us this day our supersubstantial bread. 12 And forgive us our debts, as we also forgive our debtors. 13 And lead us not into temptation. But deliver us from evil. Amen
and the RSV-CE translates it
9 Pray then like this: Our Father who art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.
10 Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, On earth as it is in heaven.
11 Give us this day our daily bread;
12 And forgive us our debts, As we also have forgiven our debtors;
13 And lead us not into temptation, But deliver us from evil
it seems like the RSV-CE and the Douay-Rheims mean one thing and the NAB means another. The Notes in the NAB indicate that as well.
T
tobinatorstark
Guest
By the way Christine77 what is your beef with the Douay-Rheims??? Or don’t you understand what beef means??
C
CHRISTINE77
Guest
I have a copy. I just think you are OBSESSED with it.By the way Christine77 what is your beef with the Douay-Rheims??? Or don’t you understand what beef means??
T
tobinatorstark
Guest
I am not obsessed with it. I use it to refute a lot of misconceptions and I would rather use that to refute than the NAB, NJB and NRSV any day. The JB is a little better and the RSV-CE would be the only other Bible I could use in my debates. That is as far as modern translations. I would much rather use the Confraternity Edition or Ronald Knox Translation if the Douay or Vulgate isn’t availableI have a copy. I just think you are OBSESSED with it.
C
CHRISTINE77
Guest
Sorry, how about these though? All from DOUAY:In response to Christine77
Genesis 25:8 doesn’t read "Abraham gave up the ghost.
Here is the Douay-Rheims Genesis 25:8
8 And decaying he died in a good old age, and having lived a long time, and being full of days: and was gathered to his people.
Mark 15 Found phrase
37 And Jesus having cried out with a loud voice, gave up the ghost.
2 Luke 23 Found phrase
46 And Jesus crying out with a loud voice, said: Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit. And saying this, he gave up the ghost.
3 John 19 Found phrase
30 Jesus therefore, when he had taken the vinegar, said: It is consummated. And bowing his head, he gave up the ghost.
4 Acts Of Apostles 5 Found phrase
5 And Ananias hearing these words, fell down, and gave up the ghost. And there came great fear upon all that heard it.
5 Acts Of Apostles 5 Found phrase
10 Immediately she fell down before his feet, and gave up the ghost. And the young men coming in, found her dead: and carried her out, and buried her by her husband.
6 Acts Of Apostles 12 Found phrase
23 And forthwith an angel of the Lord struck him, because he had not given the honour to God: and being eaten up by worms, he gave up the ghost.
7 2 Machabees 3 Found 3
31 Then some of the friends of Heliodorus forthwith begged of Onias, that he would call upon the most High to grant him his life, who was ready to give up the ghost.
8 Matthew 27 Found 3
50 And Jesus again crying with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.
9 Mark 15 Found 3
39 And the centurion who stood over against him, seeing that crying out in this manner he had given up the ghost, said: Indeed this man was the son of God.
A lot of other people were giving up the ghost!
T
tobinatorstark
Guest
By the way, do you know how many times the Douay-Rheims is referenced in these forums. That goes to show you how reliable it is. Like I said earlier the Douay-Rheims has far fewer errors than any other English Catholic Bible. If you want I can find more errors in the NAB for you. Psalm 23 is an example. The NAB Psalm 23 is absolutely horrid and not quite accurate.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.