Really, how inaccurate is the Jerusalem Bible?

[jcrichton]

I’m afraid I gave everyone the wrong impression about what I was trying to say.

I’m certainly not denying or belittling the role of the Holy Spirit in forming what we now call Holy Scripture. The only point I was trying to make was that neither oral tradition or written scripture tradition could possibly contain the full meaning of all things God wants us to learn via His word as contained in the Bible. We can do all the research and study we please and we still won’t get the meaning of various words and phrases in Scripture in their entirety unless we also allow the same to be “written” in our hearts and souls.

I guess my view, in part, is formed by the fact that I’ve always lived in places where the scriptures are preached and practiced from a legalistic, if not literal, viewpoint. There’s much more to Scripture than that. And that’s where I believe the Paraclete takes over again- if the Holy Spirit isn’t allowed into our souls as we ponder God’s Word, then no amount of searching for the “true meanings” will allow us to discern what God wants to say to us.

I apologize not only to you, Angel, but to all others on this thread for not making my meaning more clear in the original post.

Pax tecum,
ROb

Hi, Rob!

I understand… I think that we all suffer from the same problem: we have a mental picture of what we believe is clear and exact but when we attempt to convey the thought we omit pertinent information or emphasize something that may not seem as clear to others…

I concur with you that the text of the Holy Scriptures, in of itself, is limited and that it is only through the guidance of the Holy Spirit that we can come to the full measure of God’s revelations (St. John 16:5-15); St. Paul understood that this exact problem would hinder our spiritual growth as he spoke to the Corinthians reminding them that it is through God’s Holy Spirit that matters of the Spirit can be understood (1 Corinthians 2:1-16).

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

I completely agree. I believe the ‘Scripture Only’ concept kept me from God for a long time because I did not understand the historical context or do my own research into finding the true meaning of the verse. I think as a new Catholic I feel very angry about how much was kept from me by my family and my protestant religion. Although, I am thankful it was my minister that encouraged me to become Catholic if I felt that would deepen my faith.

Somehow the concept of ‘less is more’ is just sad to me in regard to my relationship with God. How can anyone want less of God? I have learned so much over the past four years that I may have never had if I had not become Catholic.

I do hear what you are saying Rob. A lot of what your bringing up is because the ancient Hebrew can be translated into many different words. One word for many things…so it does not change the big picture or meaning to the stories, but it can make them a little different. Like Joseph’s many colored coat…the word for many colored can also mean long tunic or long sleeved. This is where the historical context is so valuable because we know everybody had coats with and without sleeves, long and short…but, to make it woven with many colors was hard work and an act of great sacrifice and love…men had to stir the dyes themselves…this would make people jealous. Plus, we have samples of coats made long before Christ that were so beautiful and ornate…more colorful than our clothing today.

So, is it inaccurate? Not necessarily because the Hebrew has several meanings and interpretations. And not if God is telling you to dig deeper…the deeper we dig the better our understanding and the more we embrace the God of our understanding. It takes a lot of Holy Spirit burning within us to look for more…God must be preparing you for testimony…(smile)! I like an NIV Bible and I use several Biblical Reference books with it. I do miss the Apocrypha so I have my Catholic Bible from my Catechism to fill in for that and I love it, too. I am not sure the translation…Roman?

So, accuracy can be in how you feel when YOU are reading it. Does the page open up for you like a movie unfolding that you just can’t stop watching? Then that is your book!!! I love the KJB, but I have to look up so many words that it made reading it like pulling teeth and I found myself not wanting to pick it up. Not MY book

Heather

Hi, Heather!

Welcome to the forum!

Thank you for sharing your experience! Don’t worry about what you’ve missed; it seems to me that you are deep in the Faith and that is what ultimately counts (remember the parable of the workers where all got paid the same amount?); perhaps your experience will aide you in bringing others to the fullness of Truth!

I know that due to our human nature we fail to seek and live the Truth as we embrace human reason rather than Yahweh God’s Wisdom; we must be constant in our prayer asking the Holy Spirit to keep us strong and to grant us to be that Light that will bring others to the Body of Christ!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[richarde]

I grew up as a member of a small Bible Baptist church in my little hometown reading the King James Version of the Bible (Talk about hard to read and understand). Though I am forever grateful to the Baptist church for introducing me to Christ, I am now a happy convert to Catholicism since 1980.
I took a couple of college courses in the early 90s at the Catholic, Kansas Newman University in Wichita in Old and New Testament Theology and I was required to buy the New Jerusalem Bible, 1990 edition, which we used to read and study the courses.
I really like reading it and I still use it today.
Although I realize the phrasing is different, I still enjoy its readability and content.

If we know that certain phrases are somewhat skewed, such as ‘highly favored’ instead of ‘Full of Grace’, I still enjoy some of the modern phrasing such as ‘had intercourse with him’ instead of ‘knew him’.

Now as a Catholic, I appreciate the interpretation of the bible the Church uses and realize that there is no literal meaning to each bible verse like my Baptist upbringing instructed me, but one has to take it as a complete work.
Fr. Corapi says, that one cannot fully understand the Old Testament without reading and understanding the New Testament. He also says that Christ is present from Genesis to Revelation and if we read the bible in its entirity, we will see the prescence of our Savior from beginning to end in collaboration with the Father and with the Holy Spirit.

I continue to study and read the Word of God daily (New Jerusalem Bible) and hope to one day understand it completely.
After all, don’t we have an eternity to learn from it?
Praise God and the Holy Spirit for giving us the Word of God in many different forms.
Richard

 

[swampboy]

I grew up as a member of a small Bible Baptist church in my little hometown reading the King James Version of the Bible (Talk about hard to read and understand). Though I am forever grateful to the Baptist church for introducing me to Christ, I am now a happy convert to Catholicism since 1980.
I took a couple of college courses in the early 90s at the Catholic, Kansas Newman University in Wichita in Old and New Testament Theology and I was required to buy the New Jerusalem Bible, 1990 edition, which we used to read and study the courses.
I really like reading it and I still use it today.
Although I realize the phrasing is different, I still enjoy its readability and content.

If we know that certain phrases are somewhat skewed, such as ‘highly favored’ instead of ‘Full of Grace’, I still enjoy some of the modern phrasing such as ‘had intercourse with him’ instead of ‘knew him’.

Now as a Catholic, I appreciate the interpretation of the bible the Church uses and realize that there is no literal meaning to each bible verse like my Baptist upbringing instructed me, but one has to take it as a complete work.
Fr. Corapi says, that one cannot fully understand the Old Testament without reading and understanding the New Testament. He also says that Christ is present from Genesis to Revelation and if we read the bible in its entirity, we will see the prescence of our Savior from beginning to end in collaboration with the Father and with the Holy Spirit.

I continue to study and read the Word of God daily (New Jerusalem Bible) and hope to one day understand it completely.
After all, don’t we have an eternity to learn from it?
Praise God and the Holy Spirit for giving us the Word of God in many different forms.
Richard

Thanks for your post. I have heard before that many universities use the NJB for scripture studies. I guess it is because it has such an extensive array of notes and x-references. It is not a bad translation…it really straightened out some of the original JB quirks…although I do like the 1966 JB better is some ways (but it is not as accurate as the NJB). I find that I like both the N/JB translations for helping me understand the scriptures, much more so than the NAB. Like I noted previously, I always find myself gravitating back to it no matter where I go off to…I go through phases of reading the DR and the RSV, and while I like them, particularly the DR, I feel better when I can easily understand what I am reading. Honestly, although scholars mostly choose the RSV, that does not mean that I or anyone else has to do so, or that the RSV is better than any other. Having been in academia, I can tell you firsthand that just because one smart guy likes it does not mean it is right.

 

[Eucharisted]

The Jerusalem Bible translation is so inaccurate that you can’t get it out of accurate

I’ve only read the JB once, and never read it again after I found the verse “Happy are the poor in spirit.”

 

[swampboy]

The Jerusalem Bible translation is so inaccurate that you can’t get it out of accurate

I’ve only read the JB once, and never read it again after I found the verse “Happy are the poor in spirit.”

For all the wonderful language in the JB, it’s the phrases like that that make me cringe…which is why I initially bought the NJB, as those phrases have been corrected. So despite the inclusive language at least it is better in the accuracy department. However, after some research and some thought I am not sure now if it is an accuracy issue or just the fact that it is being compared to traditional phraseology and/or literal translations…so when it doesn’t read the same it is automatically taken as being wrong when in fact it may not be incorrect.

 

[jcrichton]

Thanks for your post. I have heard before that many universities use the NJB for scripture studies. I guess it is because it has such an extensive array of notes and x-references. It is not a bad translation…it really straightened out some of the original JB quirks…although I do like the 1966 JB better is some ways (but it is not as accurate as the NJB). I find that I like both the N/JB translations for helping me understand the scriptures, much more so than the NAB. Like I noted previously, I always find myself gravitating back to it no matter where I go off to…I go through phases of reading the DR and the RSV, and while I like them, particularly the DR, I feel better when I can easily understand what I am reading. Honestly, although scholars mostly choose the RSV, that does not mean that I or anyone else has to do so, or that the RSV is better than any other. Having been in academia, I can tell you firsthand that just because one smart guy likes it does not mean it is right.

…wow… two revelations in one day… first Richard tells us the the KJV is not as easy to read version and now you share that smart guys do not always get it right; I can almost see them fuming!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

The Jerusalem Bible translation is so inaccurate that you can’t get it out of accurate

I’ve only read the JB once, and never read it again after I found the verse “Happy are the poor in spirit.”

Again, my question remains, why did the English translators chose to ignore the existing version in French which do not have these changes?

“Bienaventurados* los pobres de espíritu*,” (Spanish JB) (Happy/fortunate/blessed are the poor)

The notes on St. Matthew 5:3 are extensive but if anyone is interested I can post/send them…

Could it not be that the original writings contained a similar word, as that of the Spanish/French version, that has several values?

Granted, the English JB translators could have been seeking to leave their footprint on this “new and improved” JB version by injecting new terms into what they might have considered a tired translation–seems to me that they have, even if only as a failure!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

For all the wonderful language in the JB, it’s the phrases like that that make me cringe…which is why I initially bought the NJB, as those phrases have been corrected. So despite the inclusive language at least it is better in the accuracy department. However, after some research and some thought I am not sure now if it is an accuracy issue or just the fact that it is being compared to traditional phraseology and/or literal translations…so when it doesn’t read the same it is automatically taken as being wrong when in fact it may not be incorrect.

I fully concur with your final statement!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[Robertwilliam]

For everyone’s information, the Eastern Orthodox Church in America(pan-Orthodox) has come out with the Orthodox Study Bible published by Thomas Nelson. It is the FIRST English Orthodox Bible based on the Greek Septuagint Old Testament. It has all the Deutro-Canonical books in their proper places. You can order it from Conciliar Press. Hard bound is about $50.00 Check it out.

 

[swampboy]

For everyone’s information, the Eastern Orthodox Church in America(pan-Orthodox) has come out with the Orthodox Study Bible published by Thomas Nelson. It is the FIRST English Orthodox Bible based on the Greek Septuagint Old Testament. It has all the Deutro-Canonical books in their proper places. You can order it from Conciliar Press. Hard bound is about $50.00 Check it out.

I took a look on Amazon and this bible looks pretty interesting…but what I find really interesting is the fact that it uses the NKJV translation for the New Testament–which is fine with me as I love that translation (looking at it right now)

 

[Robertwilliam]

I took a look on Amazon and this bible looks pretty interesting…but what I find really interesting is the fact that it uses the NKJV translation for the New Testament–which is fine with me as I love that translation (looking at it right now)

I was actually kind of disappointed with the NKJV being used for the N.T., There is an Orthodox Monastery in Buena Vista Colo. which made their own N.T. Translation called the Orthodox New Testament.
It is very good. I really don’t appreciate the NKJV because it is a very Protestant version.

 

[Manfred]

The Jerusalem Bible translation is so inaccurate that you can’t get it out of accurate

Huh? Come again. please.

I’ve only read the JB once, and never read it again after I found the verse “Happy are the poor in spirit.”

My all-time favorite is from 1 Corinthians 7:2: “… since sex is always a danger…”

 

[Manfred]

For all the wonderful language in the JB, it’s the phrases like that that make me cringe…which is why I initially bought the NJB, as those phrases have been corrected. So despite the inclusive language at least it is better in the accuracy department. However, after some research and some thought I am not sure now if it is an accuracy issue or just the fact that it is being compared to traditional phraseology and/or literal translations…so when it doesn’t read the same it is automatically taken as being wrong when in fact it may not be incorrect.

I chalk up the JB’s “infelicitous renderings” (and there are many!) to “the spirit of Vatican II”, which can be characterized by “let’s be as innovative as we can and tell the faithful that they must get with it”.

 

[nnn]

I mostly read the Douay Rheims. The archaism can be annoying not just the thys etc but the accuracy and fidelity of the translations wins me over every time. The RSV-CE is not enough CE for me.

I agree the Douay Rheims bible has accuracy and fidelity lacking in many contemporary translations. The study version (big 2 volume paperpack) has excellent footnotes. As far as readiblity is concerned, my 13 year old sons and I are reading and discussing it each weekday morning before breakfast.

 

[adowcday]

I used my old JB (leather bound, gild edges) so much that all the gold is gone and the cover is literally worn off. I loved the translation and the cross-references, notes, etc. Every other translation sounded flat or stiff to me after that translation. I’m ruined for life!

 

[Canto]

I agree the Douay Rheims bible has accuracy and fidelity lacking in many contemporary translations. The study version (big 2 volume paperpack) has excellent footnotes. As far as readiblity is concerned, my 13 year old sons and I are reading and discussing it each weekday morning before breakfast.

Very cool

 

[Brian_Albin]

“readability is important. I love reading the DR Haydock, and think that if I could tolerate the archaic language it would satisfy all my needs…but I find myself quickly worn out when reading because I have a hard time figuring out what exactly I am reading!!! I always enjoy reading the JB, but get annoyed at some of the phrasing.”

You might enjoy the New Testament translated by Fathers Kleist & Lilly, published in the mid 1950s. I don’t know if the technical men call this a paraphrase or a dynamic translation, but it was meant to be a modern language Bible. But unlike those slang Bibles of the 1970s, this “Modern Language” Bible is in ordinary English such as we are using here in this forum.

For a complete Bible, the Monsignor Ronald Knox translation also from the mid fifties is said to be readable and elegantly worded. It is the bedside reading Bible of Fr John McCloskey as I once heard him tell on his book review television show a few years back on EWTN.

I have and like the Kleist & Lilly, I do not have the Knox but have read fragmentary quotations from it and have liked them. I think this shall be my next Bible purchase.

Both these versions must be bought on the used market as they have for some reason unaccountable to me, gone out of print.

“I am beginning to think that there is no “best bible” and that I should not worry about it and read what I like.”

I believe these are wise words

 

[Jermosh]

I use the NAB for reading and study, but will referance the KJV, Douay-Rheims for a backdrop. The wording is more fuller and gives better contrast, it also highlights the differances between Catholic and protostent faiths. Look at Hebrews 13:3-5 for instance.

 

[swampboy]

You might enjoy the New Testament translated by Fathers Kleist & Lilly, published in the mid 1950s. I don’t know if the technical men call this a paraphrase or a dynamic translation, but it was meant to be a modern language Bible. But unlike those slang Bibles of the 1970s, this “Modern Language” Bible is in ordinary English such as we are using here in this forum.

For a complete Bible, the Monsignor Ronald Knox translation also from the mid fifties is said to be readable and elegantly worded. It is the bedside reading Bible of Fr John McCloskey as I once heard him tell on his book review television show a few years back on EWTN.

I have and like the Kleist & Lilly, I do not have the Knox but have read fragmentary quotations from it and have liked them. I think this shall be my next Bible purchase.

Both these versions must be bought on the used market as they have for some reason unaccountable to me, gone out of print.

I believe these are wise words

Thanks for the info Brian…I am not familiar with the Kleist & Lilly translation but am always interested in anything to do with scripture so I may just have to try and track one down. I have heard that the Knox translation was pretty good…I think I have read portions of it online somewhere and found it to be okay. Like anything else I guess, it is a good thing to have the freedom and ability to choose from so many options, but it is almost too good of a thing as there are just too many options now!! I think the Church needs to develop a universal translation combining all of the best aspects of all the “approved” bibles and just be done with it. But then what would we talk about on here?