NAB compared to Douay-Rheims

[GodIsGracious]

I’ve been reading the NT out of my NAB version. I went yesterday and picked up a Douay-Rheims version.

I’ve noticed that names of books are different between the version. (i.e. Paralipomenon / Chronicals). I’ve also noticed that Macabees 1&2 are in two different places between the version. Example:

NAB: Maccabees 1&2 is between Esther and Job.
DR: Maccabees 1&2 is after Malachias and right before the NT.

Why? I’m confused. Does it even matter?

For the record, I did purchase this book (and my NAB version 10 years ago) at local Catholic bookstores. Before I start putting the tabs I bought on this book, should I go back and exchange it for a different version?

I had been reading that while the NAB version is ok, there are other “better” versions and I thought it was the Douay-Rheims version which is why I went and picked it up. Should I take it back for the New Jerusalem version?

Thanks for the help!

 

[Eucharisted]

The order of the Scriptures is important, as it holds theological and historical weight; but in my opinion, as long as the Old and New books are in it, it’s fine. The Vatican has the NAB on its website, so it must think highly of the translation.

 

[Augie1530]

Do you plan to LIMIT your catholic sources to just two approved catholic bibles ? If I were you I would keep all of the approved RC approved bibles and use all of them to study and see which one helps you understand scripture with the HELP of the Holy Spirit , as ALL THREE versions are good for daily study as each one has a different view point in its translation synoptic semantics. My personal preferences are The Jerusalem Bible Ca 1970 and the NEW AMERICAN Bible, Oxford English Bible( English Catholic Edition) and in “GIANT” Print which makes it much easier to read as a person gets older

 

[StCsDavid]

It’s an apples to apples comparison…only one apple is a Red Delicious and the other apple is a Granny Smith. Both are good apples, but some prefer one over the other.

 

[JeanneH]

I’ve been reading the NT out of my NAB version. I went yesterday and picked up a Douay-Rheims version.

I’ve noticed that names of books are different between the version. (i.e. Paralipomenon / Chronicals). I’ve also noticed that Macabees 1&2 are in two different places between the version. Example:

NAB: Maccabees 1&2 is between Esther and Job.
DR: Maccabees 1&2 is after Malachias and right before the NT.

Why? I’m confused. Does it even matter?

For the record, I did purchase this book (and my NAB version 10 years ago) at local Catholic bookstores. Before I start putting the tabs I bought on this book, should I go back and exchange it for a different version?

I had been reading that while the NAB version is ok, there are other “better” versions and I thought it was the Douay-Rheims version which is why I went and picked it up. Should I take it back for the New Jerusalem version?

Thanks for the help!

I don’t think it matters what order the books are in. It doesn’t matter that the names are different. I have the DR and put the bible tabs in it. I don’t like the NAB. My favorite is the Jerusalem 1960’s version and the DR.
I wouldn’t take back the DR. I think once you get used to it it will become your favorite.
This is just my opinion.

Jeanne

 

[Bible_Reader]

My personal preferences are . . . [the] Oxford English Bible( English Catholic Edition)

I do not know exactly which Bible you are referring to. Oxford University Press publishes Bibles in many, many different translations.

Among English translations which Oxford has published in the last few years are:

Christian Community Bible [New Testament only]
Contemporary English Version [New Testament only]
Douay Bible [Deuterocanon only, out of print]
English Standard Version
Good News Bible [New Testament and Apocrypha only]
Holman Christian Standard
Inclusive Version [New Testament only, out of print]
Jerusalem Bible [New Tesament only]
King James Version
Knox Bible [Deuterocanon only, out of print]
Message, The
New American Bible
New American Standard Bible
New Century Version [New Testament only]
New English Bible [out of print]
New English Translation of the Septuagint
New International Version
New Jerusalem Bible [New Testament in print; full Bible out of print]
New Living Translation
New Revised Standard Version
New Revised Standard Version, Anglicized
Revised English Bible
Revised Standard Version
Revised Standard Version - Catholic Edition
Rheims New Testament
Tanakh (Jewish Version)
Today’s New International Version [New Testament only, out of print]

Perhaps you meant to refer to the Oxford Study Bible, which currently uses the Revised English Bible (previous editions used the New English Bible). However, to the best of my knowledge, this work does not come in a Catholic edition, and while it was co-sponsored by the Catholic Churches in England, Wales, and Scotland and had Catholic observers on the translation team, it was never granted imprimatur.

 

[GodIsGracious]

Thanks folks! I’ll keep this. I’ve put the tabs in it. And I like the way this one reads better than the NAB.

Mostly, I was wondering why the books were in a different order. I’d still like to know what the reason behind that is if possible.

 

[Omyo12]

I’ve been reading the NT out of my NAB version. I went yesterday and picked up a Douay-Rheims version.

I’ve noticed that names of books are different between the version. (i.e. Paralipomenon / Chronicals). I’ve also noticed that Macabees 1&2 are in two different places between the version. Example:

NAB: Maccabees 1&2 is between Esther and Job.
DR: Maccabees 1&2 is after Malachias and right before the NT.

Why? I’m confused. Does it even matter?

For the record, I did purchase this book (and my NAB version 10 years ago) at local Catholic bookstores. Before I start putting the tabs I bought on this book, should I go back and exchange it for a different version?

I had been reading that while the NAB version is ok, there are other “better” versions and I thought it was the Douay-Rheims version which is why I went and picked it up. Should I take it back for the New Jerusalem version?

Thanks for the help!

As other people are saying, both the NAB and the Douay Rheims are great.
For study, I would recommend you get the Revised Standard Version - Catholic Edition

There is going to be a new revised version of the NAB by the end of the year to early 2010!
So I say wait to get that.

As for the Douay Rheims:

The reason why some of the names are different is because it is not translated from the Hebrew or Greek. It is translated from the Latin Vulgate.

The Latin Vulgate itself was translated from the OT Hebrew/ NT Greek but the OT names came from the Greek Septuagint (which is the Greek Old Testament)

Whenever you see the New Testament quote the Old Testament… it was quoting the Septuagint. Hence no “YHWH” in the NT

It was not until 1943 that Pope Pius XII declared that all Catholic Bibles would be translated from the original languages.

However he also stated that the Douay Rheims was "free from any error whatsoever in matters of faith and morals."

The Douay Rheims was first translated in 1609 and revised in 1752 to make it more readable in English.

It was the only English Catholic Bible for over 300 years

The order of Scripture (with 1 and 2 Maccabees at the end) is the traditional Catholic order. However since the books of Maccabees are history books, they were recently changed to make more sense.

However the Nova Vulgata (1970) which is the official Catholic Bible, still has 1 and 2 Maccabees at the end of the OT.

 

[tobinatorstark]

I’ve been reading the NT out of my NAB version. I went yesterday and picked up a Douay-Rheims version.

I’ve noticed that names of books are different between the version. (i.e. Paralipomenon / Chronicals). I’ve also noticed that Macabees 1&2 are in two different places between the version. Example:

NAB: Maccabees 1&2 is between Esther and Job.
DR: Maccabees 1&2 is after Malachias and right before the NT.

Why? I’m confused. Does it even matter?

For the record, I did purchase this book (and my NAB version 10 years ago) at local Catholic bookstores. Before I start putting the tabs I bought on this book, should I go back and exchange it for a different version?

I had been reading that while the NAB version is ok, there are other “better” versions and I thought it was the Douay-Rheims version which is why I went and picked it up. Should I take it back for the New Jerusalem version?

Thanks for the help!

I have both the NAB and Douay-Rheims. I really recommend the Doauy-Rheims over anything else. I feel that it does matter what order the books are put in. I don’t necessarily care for the NAB, but it is a complete Bible and is Catholic. If you feel comfortable reading the NAB then by all means do so. The Douay-Rheims may be a tad bit harder to read, but it is worth it. The Haydock Bible Commentary may be of sort of assistance to you

haydock1859.tripod.com/

I do encourage the use of multiple translations that are Catholic only. I may not entirely agree with some verses, but they are Catholic and they are approved by the Vatican. Only you can make the decision on what translations work for you. Mine is pretty much the Latin Vulgate and Douay-Rheims, but I do use the NAB and the Grail Psalms with Liturgy of the Hours, RSV-CE in some cases, Confraternity, Ronald Knox Translation and Jerusalem Bible when needed.

 

[NoelFitz]

Here we are in the realm of opinions and tastes.

I prefer the NAB rather than the Douay-Rheims. The NAB is excellent, very scholarly and close to the best texts we have. The footnotes cause problems for some who prefer closed minds.

I find the Douay-Rheims old fashioned and archaic. I prefer modern language.

But I think we should not get too excited about this issue.

Which speaks more to you? Which brings you closer to God?

 

[tobinatorstark]

Here we are in the realm of opinions and tastes.

I prefer the NAB rather than the Douay-Rheims. The NAB is excellent, very scholarly and close to the best texts we have. The footnotes cause problems for some who prefer closed minds.

please explain

I find the Douay-Rheims old fashioned and archaic.

not so

I prefer modern language.

But I think we should not get too excited about this issue.

Which speaks more to you? Which brings you closer to God?

 

[NoelFitz]

tobinatorstark

Many thanks for your post.

In my email I was just expressing opinions.

I often think of two Latin tags:

quot homines, tot sententiae.
De gustibus non est disputandum.

I read somewhere a discussion between those two eminent philosophers, Linus and Charlie:

Linus: I have a theological question, when you die and go to heaven, are you graded on a percentage or a curve?
Charlie: On a curve, naturally.
Linus: How can you be so sure?
Charlie: I’m always sure about things that are a matter of opinion.

Recently I read in the DR version “contumelious”. That really is not a word used in modern English/American.

Here in CA I consider that some contributors thought that notes in NAB were heretical at times. I do not think this is so. Personally I prefer the traditional explanations, unless there is strong evidence to the contrary. Thus I hold that Paul wrote the Pastoral Epistles, and the onus is on those who hold differently to prove their views.

However I do hold that thinking Paul was not the human author does not offend Catholic teaching, once it is held that the Bible is inspired and God is truly the author.

 

[tobinatorstark]

tobinatorstark

Many thanks for your post.

In my email I was just expressing opinions.

I often think of two Latin tags:

I read somewhere a discussion between those two eminent philosophers, Linus and Charlie:

Recently I read in the DR version “contumelious”. That really is not a word used in modern English/American.

Here in CA I consider that some contributors thought that notes in NAB were heretical at times. I do not think this is so. Personally I prefer the traditional explanations, unless there is strong evidence to the contrary. Thus I hold that Paul wrote the Pastoral Epistles, and the onus is on those who hold differently to prove their views.

However I do hold that thinking Paul was not the human author does not offend Catholic teaching, once it is held that the Bible is inspired and God is truly the author.

Thanks for your response. I just wanted you to clarify your passage. This helps

 

[phoenix3212]

The order of the Scriptures is important, as it holds theological and historical weight; but in my opinion, as long as the Old and New books are in it, it’s fine. The Vatican has the NAB on its website, so it must think highly of the translation.

Nah, the only reason they have it on there is that Catholics own the copyright. The Vatican and NAB have had issues for years (see Psalms).