Quotation marks missing for God in NABRE? Why?

[Byzman]

Has anyone else noticed that there are no quotation marks in the new NABRE for when God speaks in the Old Testament? Why was this changed? and what does this mean?

 

[Tiberius1701]

Has anyone else noticed that there are no quotation marks in the new NABRE for when God speaks in the Old Testament? Why was this changed? and what does this mean?

Are there quotation marks elsewhere? My guess would be that it was done to reflect the fact that ancient languages didn’t have any such thing as quotation marks (they didn’t have spaces, either, so if that’s the reason, just be glad they left the spaces in…). I sincerely doubt it has any significant theological reason.

 

[Byzman]

Are there quotation marks elsewhere? My guess would be that it was done to reflect the fact that ancient languages didn’t have any such thing as quotation marks (they didn’t have spaces, either, so if that’s the reason, just be glad they left the spaces in…). I sincerely doubt it has any significant theological reason.

There still is quotations marks used when others are speaking.

 

[Salvatore123]

Byzman,

This, along with a whole host of other “odd” things about the NABRE (which have been discussed ad nauseum in other threads) makes me really wonder what kind of “vetting process” took place (if any) before the publishers published this bible . . .

 

[Bible_Reader]

Byzman,

This, along with a whole host of other “odd” things about the NABRE (which have been discussed ad nauseum in other threads) makes me really wonder what kind of “vetting process” took place (if any) before the publishers published this bible . . .

I note that you have frequently praised the Confraternity Bible on this forum. May I suggest that you may wish to look at how they used the exact same punctuation (no quotation marks for Divine speech; quotation marks for statements by others, including Jesus).

Since you are willing to condemn the NABRE for being improperly vetted on the basis of this punctuation, do I correctly understand that you are willing to apply the same criticism to the Confraternity Bible?

 

[Byzman]

I note that you have frequently praised the Confraternity Bible on this forum. May I suggest that you may wish to look at how they used the exact same punctuation (no quotation marks for Divine speech; quotation marks for statements by others, including Jesus).

Since you are willing to condemn the NABRE for being improperly vetted on the basis of this punctuation, do I correctly understand that you are willing to apply the same criticism to the Confraternity Bible?

So what you are saying is that the Confraternity Bible does the same thing as the NABRE in regards to leaving out quotation marks for when God speaks in the Old Testament? Is there a reason for this? I am not sure as to why this is done than.

 

[Bible_Reader]

So what you are saying is that the Confraternity Bible does the same thing as the NABRE in regards to leaving out quotation marks for when God speaks in the Old Testament? Is there a reason for this? I am not sure as to why this is done than.

Yes. The standard American edition (say, the 1899 edition) of the Douay-Rheims-Challoner left out quotation marks; and as the Confraternity Bible was produced, it was printed together with missing books drawn from the D-R-C. Apparently, this was done out of theological belief that “All Scripture is God-breathed,” so no quotation marks were needed for Divine statements.

As the NAB was produced, it was printed together with Confraternity books (this was not corrected until 2011 with the NABRE). Apparently, the convention was kept in the NABRE for consistency.

 

[Byzman]

Yes. The standard American edition (say, the 1899 edition) of the Douay-Rheims-Challoner left out quotation marks; and as the Confraternity Bible was produced, it was printed together with missing books drawn from the D-R-C. Apparently, this was done out of theological belief that “All Scripture is God-breathed,” so no quotation marks were needed for Divine statements.

As the NAB was produced, it was printed together with Confraternity books (this was not corrected until 2011 with the NABRE). Apparently, the convention was kept in the NABRE for consistency.

Wow! Than that’s a good thing to give much credit to the Scriptures as a whole as being God’s word! So in a sense(not meaning this literally) the Bible really should be all one big quotation mark…it should start with and end with a quotation mark.

On a serious note…since it is giving so much credit in this fashion to the word of God, as He is the Divine Author, this would actually be a good of the NABRE!

 

[Dave_Noonan]

Are there quotation marks elsewhere? My guess would be that it was done to reflect the fact that ancient languages didn’t have any such thing as quotation marks (they didn’t have spaces, either, so if that’s the reason, just be glad they left the spaces in…). I sincerely doubt it has any significant theological reason.

Actually, ancient languages do have ways of marking off direct quotations, only they do it with particular words used for that purpose, rather than with punctuation.