D
DanteAlighieri
Guest
I have limited exposure to the D-R Bible, but my gut reaction to it has been that its high, Elizabethan English is perhaps a turn-off to many who would otherwise read the Bible more thoroughly. Lord knows how much trouble I’ve had getting my students interested in Shakespeare for that reason!
Despite this, however, it seems (based on many posts that I’ve read here) that the D-R is the most (or, at least, one of the most) reliable and faithful English translations around – which I am not disputing.
My question is this: what English translation strikes the best balance (from a Catholic perspective) between fidelity of translation and ease of reading? In the “Why Douay-Rheims” thread, I noted that many of the inconsistencies cited come from the NAB (New American Bible?), which I had thought was a reputable translation, but is apparently not. Is the same true for the New Jerusalem?
Are there any that you’d recommend?
PS: Please let’s keep this thread from becoming a hatefest for D-R or any other Catholic translation – ASSUME that I am not interested in NIV or KJV, or any other Protestant translation.
Peace,
Dante
Despite this, however, it seems (based on many posts that I’ve read here) that the D-R is the most (or, at least, one of the most) reliable and faithful English translations around – which I am not disputing.
My question is this: what English translation strikes the best balance (from a Catholic perspective) between fidelity of translation and ease of reading? In the “Why Douay-Rheims” thread, I noted that many of the inconsistencies cited come from the NAB (New American Bible?), which I had thought was a reputable translation, but is apparently not. Is the same true for the New Jerusalem?
Are there any that you’d recommend?
PS: Please let’s keep this thread from becoming a hatefest for D-R or any other Catholic translation – ASSUME that I am not interested in NIV or KJV, or any other Protestant translation.
Peace,
Dante