Question about the Catholic Bible

[DylanO]

Hi everyone,

I’ve always heard that the Catholic Bible is translated from the Septuagint, but after comparing my Douay-Rheims to the Septuagint I noticed that the Douay-Rheims matched the Masoretic more closely.

So, is the Septuagint excepted as the correct translation over the Masoretic by the Church? Or is the Masoretic more accurate? I know the writers of the New Testament used the Septuagint so I am puzzled as to which is the one to use.

Thanks in advance.

 

[tealblue]

From what I understand the Catholic bible only uses the sepuigent as a guide for variational differences of the masoretic text only.

 

[TheMese]

What do you mean by the Catholic Bible? Are you talking about your American NAB. There are about a dozen versions approved for use by Catholics.

 

[TheMese]

You’ve got your wires crossed somewhere. The Douay Rheims which is a,not the, Catholic Bible was translated from the Latin Vulgate which Jerome translated from Hebrew texts. Jerome’s use of the Hebrew was extremely controversial at the time. It is commonly thought that the Hebrew texts Jerome had access to were of a slightly different and earlier stream to the texts the Jews preserved as the ‘Masorete.’ So neither the DRB or the Vulgate has a Greek / Septuagint base.

Prior to that the older Latin versions had been made from the Septuagint. Jerome did not want to make a translation from a translation.

The Greek Orthodox, then as now, use the Septuagint. A forthcoming English release of the Septuagint will be called the Orthodox Study Bible. The NT is the NKJV and the OT uses the NKJV Old Testament as a template but modified in line with Septuagint.

While we are at it someone needs to revise the Douay Rheims in the same way the King James was rendered into the NKJV. The latter is a beautiful, yet non-archaic translation. We need one!

Just be grateful that you don’t have to struggle away to decipher the olde English of your archaic Douay Rheims Bible, translated from the Latin Vulgate, in turn translated from the Greek Septuagint, in turn translated from the Hebrew originals. This would not be good physics my friend!

 

[inthecloud]

Just use the Orthodox Study Bible.

 

[DylanO]

Thanks for the replies but what I’m asking is which version, the Septuagint or Masoretic, is regarded by the Catholic Church as the most accurate translation?

 

[Irish_Saints]

Thanks for the replies but what I’m asking is which version, the Septuagint or Masoretic, is regarded by the Catholic Church as the most accurate translation?

I don’t know whether the Church has made any definitive statement with regard to which text is “most accurate.” I think that all comes down to solid scholarship and textual criticism. It may be in certain cases that the older texts win out, while at other times a majority reading may be preferred.

It all comes down to nibs and nubs anyway…well over 98% of the Scriptures are uncontested for its accuracy. Of the remaining 1+%, it usually comes down to alternate readings, inclusion or exclusion of letters or words, etc. Even where there is some discrepency, there is no doctrine that hangs in the balance of a disputed passage.

William Shakespeare should have such durability in his extant manuscripts! And he came along 1500 years afterwards!

 

[Jolly_Joe]

The Vulgate used the Septuagint for the Psalms and the additions to Esther. The rest of the protocanonical books were done from Hebrew, but the exact text is unknown. Recent Catholic approved translations have been entirely Massoretic text based. I’m not aware of any approved recent translation done from the Septuagint, though every translation seeks the help of other witnesses in some difficult passages in the Massoretic text.

JJ

 

[lanceg]

Thanks for the replies but what I’m asking is which version, the Septuagint or Masoretic, is regarded by the Catholic Church as the most accurate translation?

I do not know that the Catholic Church has an official position on which text is more accurate.

The official Bible for the Latin Church is the Vulgate.

The official Bible traditional for the Byzantine Church is the Septuagint.

I will say this: the Masoretic text obscures Messianic prophecies.

One must conclude that either

a) The Rabbis changed the text to down play Messianic prophecies

or

b) the Septuagint is inspired in its own right, a view which was held by ancient Christians and contemporary Orthodox and Byzantine Christians.

If you rely on the Masoretic text only, you water down Christological prophecy.

The Church preserved the Bible text most excellently in the Septuagint, Vulgate & Peshitta (ancient Syriac).

I actually find in the Psalms the DRB matches Septuagint readings in some key places, most especially in Psalm 50 (51) and Psalm 84 (85).

 

[RedSoxFan]

You’ve got your wires crossed somewhere. The Douay Rheims which is a,not the, Catholic Bible was translated from the Latin Vulgate which Jerome translated from Hebrew texts. Jerome’s use of the Hebrew was extremely controversial at the time. It is commonly thought that the Hebrew texts Jerome had access to were of a slightly different and earlier stream to the texts the Jews preserved as the ‘Masorete.’ So neither the DRB or the Vulgate has a Greek / Septuagint base.

Prior to that the older Latin versions had been made from the Septuagint. Jerome did not want to make a translation from a translation.

The Greek Orthodox, then as now, use the Septuagint. A forthcoming English release of the Septuagint will be called the Orthodox Study Bible. The NT is the NKJV and the OT uses the NKJV Old Testament as a template but modified in line with Septuagint.

While we are at it someone needs to revise the Douay Rheims in the same way the King James was rendered into the NKJV. The latter is a beautiful, yet non-archaic translation. We need one!

Just be grateful that you don’t have to struggle away to decipher the olde English of your archaic Douay Rheims Bible, translated from the Latin Vulgate, in turn translated from the Greek Septuagint, in turn translated from the Hebrew originals. This would not be good physics my friend!

And get rid of the Archaism? Shame on you!!!

 

[TheMese]

I’m fine with it. I’ve studied Shakespeare and love Hamlet. But I don’t believe it’s suitable for general Catholic use in the third millenium.

The DRB was made in the contemporary speech of the day: as all bibles are.

 

[inthecloud]

I will say this: the Masoretic text obscures Messianic prophecies.

One must conclude that either

a) The Rabbis changed the text to down play Messianic prophecies

or

b) the Septuagint is inspired in its own right, a view which was held by ancient Christians and contemporary Orthodox and Byzantine Christians.

If you rely on the Masoretic text only, you water down Christological prophecy.

I have heard the same from a Messianic Jewish Rabbi, he suspects that the Masoretic has watered down messianic passages and that NT quotes matches the Septuagint not the MT.