S
SacredHeartFan
Guest
Someone told me that the NAB is a bad translation and that the D-R is alot better tranlation. Should I go get a new BIble but still keep my NAB?
- Status
S
SuscipeMeDomine
Guest
The NAB is the version used at Mass, so it’s worth keeping for that reason alone.
L
lak611
Guest
Not exactly. See this link.
T
thistle
Guest
Wow that is confusing!
I’m not clear what Revised NT (unamended) means. Doesn’t revised by definition mean amended?
I just checked my NAB and it says it contains the Revised New Testament and the Revised Psalms. What don’t I have that still needs to be updated?
V
Veritas41
Guest
The Revised Standard Version is a good translation as well, recommended by scholars/theologians like Dr. Scott Hahn
M
Manfred
Guest
Yeah, right.
I am a reader at my parish, and winced when I had to read the following from Genesis 12:3 today:
"All the communities of the earth shall find blessing in you.”
Compare THAT to the Douay-Rheims:
“and IN THEE shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed.”
Or even to the RSV-CE, which some consider problematic (“bless themselves”, reflexive, as opposed to “shall be blessed”):
“and by you all the families of the earth shall bless themselves.”
Obviously, the NAB didn’t want to take a stand in this minor squabble, so it introduced a gem of its own.
I never cease to thank our beloved shepherds for furnishing us with such an awe-inspiring translation as the RNAB. :banghead:
L
lak611
Guest
I was responding to the poster who said that the RNAB is used in the lectionary for Mass. The text of the Bible does not correspond to the text of the lectionary. The Psalms in your Bible were completely rejected by the Vatican for use in the lectionary. Parts of the rest of the Bible needed to be changed for the lectionary. What you have is the amended Bible. The original NAB Bible was published in 1970 and is no longer in print. However, what you hear in the readings at Mass is not exactly the same as what is in your Bible. The Vatican rejected the Bible text for use in Mass and required that the US Bishops revise the text to conform to the guidelines for use in Mass. As far as I know, the only Bible translation that did not need revision for use in the lectionary is the RSV-CE, which is no longer used in any US lectionary. The USCCB owns the copyright for the RNAB, so they pretty much have a monopoly on which Bible translation is used for the lectionary. However, their Bible text had to be amended for the lectionary because the Vatican rejected it for Mass. If somebody has any doubts about the quality of the RNAB, he should keep in mind that as it is written, it is unsuitable for use in Mass according to the Vatican.
I have not even gotten into a discussion of the footnotes. I really do not have time to discuss them at the moment, but I am sure that other posters will bring them up. The footnotes in many cases are even worse than the actual Bible text.
M
MH84
Guest
SacredHeartFan,
You should probably use the bible that you are comfortable reading. So try to find one with a balance between accuracy and readabilty. There is no point trying to read the Douay Rheims when you are not familiar with the style (or you don’t want to learn to be).
I don’t have the NAB, but I have the DR translation and also a NJB and RSV CE(Oxford edition). I just bought a NIV as well actually, just for anytime reading. I also like that I have multiple translations. But having said that, while I find the DR to be a beautiful translation, it is hard to understand. The language is archaic.
So, if you are an average reader (like me) I would consider sticking with the NAB or try the RSVCE. The problem with the Ignatius Bible (the blue one) is that it is a quite a “utilitarian” bible and overpriced if you ask me. But its a good translation. I think the compact RSV’s are better aesthetically, but the print is smaller.
I also prefer the anglicised versions of names in other translations. For instance example:
DR __________________ Modern translations
Osse ___________________Hosea
Noe ____________________ Noah
Esaias __________________Isaiah
Others may have better suggestions than me, but if you are comfortable with the bible you have I recommend you keep it. Just read the notes cautiously as Ive heard that some of them are a bit controversial. But then again, when something is controversial it doesnt mean its not true necessarily.
Lastly, another point to consider is if you attend Traditional Latin Mass instead of the Novus Ordo. Because if you go to the TLM the DR version is used in the Lectionary. For the Novus Ordo in the States it is the NAB. Where I live we use the Jerusalem Bible.
I can’t believe I forgot to mention. Check out the D-R translation for yourself for free. There are good websites available, so you might not need to buy another bible if you don’t want to.
Try:
www.drbo.org
or
bible.crosswalk.com
Another one for generally Protestant translations is
www.biblegateway.com
This one does contain the DR, but you have to find it, because its not in the main menu of translations.
S
Safe_Eagle
Guest
The biggest thing for me with the NAB is the commentaries. They don’t seem to support catholic teaching as strongly as the DR.
N
nerddad
Guest
i was using an old DR bible i had inherited from my grandparents,
and i was reading the daily readings as posted in the bulletin —it didn’t take long before i ran into a reading that the verse number
didn’t exist in the DR…so i broke down and bought a NAB.
for a while i just used the readings on the USCCB.org site…
and i was reading the daily readings as posted in the bulletin —it didn’t take long before i ran into a reading that the verse number
didn’t exist in the DR…so i broke down and bought a NAB.
for a while i just used the readings on the USCCB.org site…
M
Michael_G
Guest
All ought to read which Bible should you read by Thomas A Nelson published by Tan, you will find roughly 20 verses which the meaning has been changed in other Catholic Bibles. One can view this on line at https://www.tanbooks.com/audio/wbsyr.pdf
R
Ron_Conte
Guest
{12:3} Benedicam benedicentibus tibi, et maledicam maledicentibus tibi, atque IN TE benedicentur universæ cognationes terræ.
{12:3} I will bless those who bless you, and curse those who curse you, and in you all the families of the earth will be blessed.
I’ve often read comments from persons saying that one translation or another is terrible, and another is wonderful. In my point of view, any of the modern Catholic translations can be used to great benefit by any of the faithful. One need not worry about having a bad Catholic translation.
However, I’m well aware that all the popular modern Catholic translations have significant translation and editorial flaws. I’m often surprised and appalled at the liberties taken by translators and editors with the text.
{12:3} I will bless those who bless you, and curse those who curse you, and in you all the families of the earth will be blessed.
I’ve often read comments from persons saying that one translation or another is terrible, and another is wonderful. In my point of view, any of the modern Catholic translations can be used to great benefit by any of the faithful. One need not worry about having a bad Catholic translation.
However, I’m well aware that all the popular modern Catholic translations have significant translation and editorial flaws. I’m often surprised and appalled at the liberties taken by translators and editors with the text.
C
Cranch
Guest
Restating lak611’s answer, this sentence from the article sums it up:Thus the revised Lectionary had to undergo extensive “repairs”; consequently, in the late 1990s, several US bishops and Vatican experts together amended the Lectionary text, to correct the defective translations.
The “revised Lectionary” refers to the one created from your version of the NAB, known as the RNAB (Revised NAB) and containing the 1986 revised NT and 1991 Revised Psalms. After a Vatican review, this unsatisfactory Lectionary was “amended” so it could be used in Mass. Unfortunately no one in authority seems inclined to incorporate these same emendations back into the RNAB. Thus the Revised NAB remains “unamended” and our official English-language bible does not match the Mass Lectionary.
C
Cranch
Guest
Your point is taken, but I wanted to make one correction: Isaiah is spelled Isaias in the D-R; not quite so weird.
S
SacredHeartFan
Guest
well my NAB was published last year by St. Mary’s Press (www.smp.org) it’s the Catholic Youth Bible Revised. It has Catholic Connection articles, Culture Connection, Pray It, Live It, Study It, Did You KNow Articles. I used to use their “Breakthrough” bible. But I love the KJV’s language, it just flows and it’s beautiful and my parish priest told me that that is how the DR version sounds. So I’m checking into prices online and at my Catholic Bookstore for one. 
L
lak611
Guest
If you love the language of the KJV, then you will love the D-R. Many of the verses are virtually identical.But I love the KJV’s language, it just flows and it’s beautiful and my parish priest told me that that is how the DR version sounds. So I’m checking into prices online and at my Catholic Bookstore for one.
M
Manfred
Guest
thistle,
The Vatican, Deo gratias, rejected the 1991 edition of the RNAB Psalms for use in the liturgy due to the excessive inclusive language. The Psalms used at Mass are for the 1970 NAB, but with a few concessions toward “horizontal” inclusive language.
The 1986 NT is the base of the RNAB lectionary, but many passages had to have the inclusive language removed. Fine, except it doesn’t appear to go far enough.
AFAIK, one cannot buy an RNAB that has all the changes made for the US lectionary. And you know what? I wouldn’t want one even if there were one.
T
thistle
Guest
Seems like I should stick to my D-R Bible then.
R
Ron_Conte
Guest
I have the original Douay Rheims Bible, translated in the late 1500’s. It is more literal that the Challoner revision (which is what most people mean when they refer to the Douay or Douay Rheims Bible). The margin notes are excellent; they combine apologetics with good Catholic commentary on the text.
Modern notes in Bibles are not generally apologetic, and often not specifically Catholic.
Modern notes in Bibles are not generally apologetic, and often not specifically Catholic.
L
lak611
Guest
Does the original D-R use archaic early modern English such as the original 1611 KJV? For instance, would I see something similar to this in the original D-R? From the original KJV:
- Status