On the NAB Revised New Testament

[Omyo12]

PART 1:

Since a revision to the NAB Old Testament is being published soon, I’ve decided to do a little comparison between the New American Bible (revised) New Testament and the Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament to see how literal or dynamic it is.

I have only compared the Gospels so far in depth, though I’ve glanced at the Acts, the Letters, and Revelation

In regards to the word-for-word sentence structure, I find the NAB NT is a nice balance between literal and dynamic leaning more literal. It sometimes changes the sentence structure more than I’d prefer:

John 1:6

“εγενετο ανθρωπος απεσταλμενος παρα θεου ονομα αυτω ιωαννης” (Nestle-Aland)

“There-was man having-been-sent from God name his John.” (word-for-word)

“There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.” (RSV-2CE)

“A man named John was sent from God.” (NAB)

However, it overall does a decent job in keeping to the original.
According to the Preface, it’s literal but worded in formal English speech.

I’d have to say the Gospel of John is the most lacking
(though I think it is still a good translation)

The thing I like about the NAB NT is its literal rendering of some words, however it’s not great.
I’ll give a list of a few important renderings I like and some I do not like as much

I like…
Αμην αμην - “Amen, amen” instead of “Truly, truly”
Αλληλουια - “Alleluia” instead of “Hallelujah”
Συμεων - “Symeon” instead of “Simon”

I kinda like…
Γεενναν - “Gehenna” instead of “fires of hell”
Τάρταρος - “Tartarus” instead of “hell”

I’m disappointed with…
Αδου is inconstant, it is usually rendered “netherworld” (which I am really not a fan of) but there are two places in Revelation where it is rendered “Hades” which is a literal translation. (In the Douay Rheims it is translated “hell”)

πρεσβυτερους is also inconsistent, it is sometimes translated literally as “presbyters” but other times it is translated “elders.”
I would have actually preferred “priests” as in the Douay Rheims or at least consistently “presbyters” or “elders” (choose one!!)

Χριστου is also inconsistent because it is literally translated “Christ,” but also “Messiah,” and “Annointed”
To the credit of the NAB editors, it is translated “Christ” when talking about Jesus Christ and “Messiah” when speaking about the title itself.
However, I would have liked it to be consistent.

Κύριος is sometimes translated “Lord” and other times “Master”

Κεχαριτωμενη is translated “favored one”
For a Catholic translation, I’d prefer “full of grace,” or at least something like “fully favored”

σταδιων δωδεκα χιλιαδων is translated “fifteen hundred miles” but it literally means “twelve thousand stades”

These are just a few examples that really caught my attention…

 

[Omyo12]

PART 2:

Now for the infamous inclusive language,

I heard most of the fret people have with the inclusive language is located in Paul’s letters. From what I’ve seen, the inclusive language is rather tame when I compared it to the NRSV. The NAB NT, really does not add to the text such as when the NRSV adds “and sisters.” I’ve heard anti-NABers say the NAB does this as well however I’ve yet to find any. This leads me to believe some of these naysayers are just repeating what they hear and don’t look at the text itself.

People usually point out Romans 5:17

For if, by the transgression of one person, death came to reign through that one, how much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of justification come to reign in life through the one person Jesus Christ.

This is surely a slippery slope. I can see why the editors used “person” however like I said… VERY slippery

Now since I advocate a literal translation, I would like to see the inclusive language removed from the text and instead a footnote be inserted to indicate the word should be understood in the “inclusive sense” (In conformity with the Liturgiam Authenticam).

All in all, I like the NAB NT. I don’t absolutely love it; I think there could still be many improvements to it…
I still use it from time to time.

I’m all for an ecumenical translation, however I do not want to conform to Protestant renditions such as “teachings” in place of “traditions” or “highly favored” in place of “full of grace”

For English speaking Catholics (at least the Roman Rite), I personally think there should be a standard, literal but readable Catholic Bible that’s actually used in mass and conforms to the rules of the Liturgiam Authenticam, and also a simplified version for people who are new to English or if the standard text is difficult to understand. Maybe this simplified version could have inclusive language where the standard would have a footnote instead…

The RSV-2CE is pretty close to meeting these qualifications. However, it needs some work.

I pray the revised NAB Old Testament really conforms to the Liturgiam Authenticam…