Reccomended Bible Translations?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Arturo_Ortiz
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Arturo_Ortiz

Guest
So as for now i have a Douay Rheims bible which i use mors for prayer and devotional purposes, as well as for understanding the literal writing as it is translated from the Vulgate. I also have a Haydock commentary that I use for interpretation.

I also have a Nabre New Catholic Answer Bible that i use mostly for apologetics. I use it mostly since it is more of a modern English translation, as well as it being used at Mass.

I finally just bought a Latin Vulgate Clemsntine Juxta Version as I want to learn to read the original language.

I would like to get your favoritw bibles and reccomebdations?
 
Arturo_Ortiz said:
So as for now i have a Douay Rheims bible which i use mors for prayer and devotional purposes, as well as for understanding the literal writing as it is translated from the Vulgate. I also have a Haydock commentary that I use for interpretation.

I also have a Nabre New Catholic Answer Bible that i use mostly for apologetics. I use it mostly since it is more of a modern English translation, as well as it being used at Mass.

I finally just bought a Latin Vulgate Clemsntine Juxta Version as I want to learn to read the original language.

I would like to get your favoritw bibles and reccomebdations?
Click to expand...
I love the Douay Rheims Bible, but one of my favorite translations is the Revised Standard (Catholic Edition). I don’t care much for the New Revised Standard, but it’s more of an aesthetic preference than anything else.

There are also some pretty good interlinear Bibles with the Greek and Hebrew out there, unfortunately most of them seem to be designed for Protestants because they’re missing books.

If you don’t mind reading online, this is a good website with an interlinear Bible: interlinearbible.org/. I use it more for the New Testament because (1) the OT is the Protestant canon, and (2) the NT has more information, with a gloss of the Greek word by word with grammatical information.

I have yet to find a good interlinear copy of the Septuagint, but if anyone else knows of one, let me know!
 
I’m also fond of the D-R and RSV-CE. The NAB can bug me the way it translates some stuff; but I use it most of the time in my Catechism class because the kids hear it at Mass.
 
Arturo_Ortiz said:
So as for now i have a Douay Rheims bible which i use mors for prayer and devotional purposes, as well as for understanding the literal writing as it is translated from the Vulgate. I also have a Haydock commentary that I use for interpretation.

I also have a Nabre New Catholic Answer Bible that i use mostly for apologetics. I use it mostly since it is more of a modern English translation, as well as it being used at Mass.

I finally just bought a Latin Vulgate Clemsntine Juxta Version as I want to learn to read the original language.

I would like to get your favoritw bibles and reccomebdations?
Click to expand...
I enjoy the Douay-Rheims Bible for its beautiful language; when I read in my home, however, I use my family’s New American Bible (St. Joseph Edition) - I do not enjoy the translation of “Hail, favored one!” in the stead of “Hail, full of grace!” but I make do.

I would also suggest the Revised Standard Version (Catholic Edition) Bible; you can find it online by EWTN. Another one would be the Knox Bible, which I use on occasion (not to read, but rather to use passages).
 
I read Jerusalem Bible and I find it more “poetic” compare to other translations I have read. I also read New American Standard Bible. I also have New American Bible and Good News Translation but i like best the Jerusalem Bible.
 
I have found myself loving the Douay Rheims more over time, because first of all you cannot go wrong with it, and also since it is a translation of the Vulgate, I find that it blends great with medieval commentaries on the Bible, in which I work with all the tme. I don’t depend on English for reading the Bible so the outdated English in the Douay Rheims does not bother me like it use to. I think a mild revision of the Douay Rheims in order to replace words like thee, thou, shalt, art, ye,etc would be wonderful.

As for commentaries, the Haydock Bible is another source that you cannot go wrong with. Bishop John McEvilly is another that is awesome, though he did not comment on every book! As for my favorite commentaries not yet fully translated into English, I love Hugh of St. Cher, the Glossa Ordinaria, and Cornelius a Lapide (though some of his are translated). My favorite commentator of all is St. Thomas Aquinas!
 
I personally use the New American Bible: Revised Edition. I like it out of the fact that I have a really nice ultra soft leather copy of it, it has pretty good footnotes on Catholic doctrine, and its the official bible of the church here in the U S. I get people’s objections to it and I enjoy the Douay-Rheimes version but the NABRE is so easy to read and comprehend. I especially try and stay with that bible for our liturgy in the church. I haven’t tried many catholic study bibles but I’m sure that Ignatius press has many good study bibles.

God bless!
 
I have come to love the littrle-known Confraternity, or CCD Bible. It was used from 1941-1969 and is the immediate predecessor of the NAB. It is a combination of the Douay OT and the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine NT translation, but was still based on the Latin Vulgate. Some editions, depending on the year of publication, have updated OT translations in them. It was a work in progress that was supplanted by the NAB. I think it bridges the gap nicely between the somewhat archaic D-R and the “modern” Catholic bibles. As well, the Old Testament retains the older linguistic style, while the New Testament has a 20th century style, while yet preserving the “thees and thous.” To me, this lends an air of distinction between the two testaments. You can buy them new, or there are great bargains on eBay or, with a bit of luck, at local thrift stores.
 
jrecortel said:
I read Jerusalem Bible and I find it more “poetic” compare to other translations I have read. I also read New American Standard Bible. I also have New American Bible and Good News Translation but i like best the Jerusalem Bible.
Click to expand...
I have thought about buying a Jerusalem bible as well. Is it a good translation? I have heard that it is Mother Angelica’s favorite
 
Arturo_Ortiz said:
I have thought about buying a Jerusalem bible as well. Is it a good translation? I have heard that it is Mother Angelica’s favorite
Click to expand...
I have a family bible called The Holy Bible Hail Mary Edition. I believe it contains the Confrateenity text. I love this bible as it has Jesus’ words in red and is readable yet contains the Old Englis of thou and thee.

This is the bible that got me close to my faith:)
 
Arturo_Ortiz said:
So as for now i have a Douay Rheims bible which i use mors for prayer and devotional purposes, as well as for understanding the literal writing as it is translated from the Vulgate. I also have a Haydock commentary that I use for interpretation.

I also have a Nabre New Catholic Answer Bible that i use mostly for apologetics. I use it mostly since it is more of a modern English translation, as well as it being used at Mass.

I finally just bought a Latin Vulgate Clemsntine Juxta Version as I want to learn to read the original language.

I would like to get your favoritw bibles and reccomebdations?
Click to expand...
Douay-Rheims thumbs down ( :

God bless
Merry Christmas
 
The bible I have is copyrighted 1951 and consists of the Confraternity New Testament–Douay Rheims Challoner Old Testament–and an English translation of the New Latin Psalms authorized by Pope Pius XII.

I really do believe that this combination bible–while not perfect–is the least inaccurate English translation of the bible.

It is based on the Vulgate which the council of Trent declared was “free from error concerning faith or morals” and could be used “in all disputations”.

The Confraternity New Testament is based on the Vulgate with reference to the Greek. It couldn’t stray far from the Greek because it could be used in the liturgy It has the passage about the angel stirring the waters at the pool where Jesus healed a man who wasn’t able to jump in the waters fast enough to be healed.

It gets “Hail Full of grace” in Luke correct. It gets “a virgin will conceive” in Isaiah 7:14 correct.

It gets “in the PERSON of Christ” correct in 2 Corinthians 2:10.

It has conservative notes and conservative introductions to all the books in the bible.

The New Latin Psalms aka the Bea Psalter get some of the verb tenses more correct than the Douay Rheims Challoner Psalms but the language is much better than the Confraternity Psalms–more majestic.

The Bea Psalter was criticized by many because it wasn’t good for singing or for chant but I do believe that it was more accurate.

Any of the Confraternity Douay combination bibles from 1941 to 1969 beat what is published today.

The ultimate best English translation Catholic bible in my opinion would be based upon the Nova Vulgata and then lightly revised with reference to original language texts when those texts were clearly superior.

Alas–that bible we will probably never see.

I hope and pray that the NEXT translation of the NAB that will MATCH the liturgy and will be used also for study and devotional reading will be a good one.

I hope it at least gets the “Hail Mary full of grace” and “a virgin will conceive” correct–2 Corinthians 2:10 correct where St. Paul offers the incestuous Corinthian who had been excommunicated ABSOLUTION correct–Hebrews 11:1 correct–“Faith is the SUBSTANCE of things hoped for–the EVIDENCE of things not seen”. Pope Benedict XVI has stated that this is the superior translation of this verse.

And I hope that they get rid of a lot of the overly historico-critacalist MODERNIST notes in the NAB.

My second favorite bible is the RSV-CE2. It is Protestant biased in a few verses but is the best Catholic polished Protestant bibles out there.

The ESV and the NASB are also good Protestant bibles but my advice for ANY Catholic is to use CATHOLIC translations.
 
I have all Bibles I want to have, and too many e-book Bibles in Logos. I have many commentaries too, four of the commentaries that I’ve rated ***** and that are available in Logos, are:
  • A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians, Volume 1 chapters 1-7, by Thrall
  • 2 Corinthians 8 and 9: A Commentary on Two Administrative Letters of the Apostle Paul, by Betz
  • Matthew 8–20: A Commentary on Matthew 8–20, by Luz
  • Believers Church Bible Commentary: Proverbs
There is a discussion on Christianforums where You can discuss commentaries, feel free to bump it: christianforums.com/t7541241
Another good commentary, that I use just for 1 Thess, is: Believers Church Bible Commentary: 1 and 2 Thessalonians
It varies from one part of the Bible to another how much commentaries I buy. On some parts I don’t even have any commentaries, and on some parts I’m still waiting for good enough commentaries to be released: for example Eph.

I don’t recommend any study-Bibles.

Paideia is also available in Logos, but I have Ro as printed matter, bought it a year ago, have soon read it through twice.

Here is my previous answer from 3 weeks ago: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=10143151#post10143151
… SEE THAT POST!
… there is a link to a discussion at Christianforums where You can discuss OT versions, feel free to bump it! OT versions is a tricky question. For the books where the Qumran cave 4 manuscripts matter, it’s hard to find any version that is good and up-to-date. The 1995 NASU isn’t recent enough, maybe I will use the forthcoming NET 2nd Edition? Luckily those are mostly less important parts of the OT, so this is not such a critical issue as many would think. I’ve been using the NABRE for many of those parts of the OT.

I’m using NABRE (I never used the NT a lot) and NET less and less. I use the NJB extremely little. I don’t have Knox.

I use the NLT for just one verse in the entire Bible, 1 Jn 2:5 (because of the recommendation in: christianforums.com/t7611271-2/#post60073334 ), and I’m NOT going to use it for more verses ever, period!

I have the 1970 NAB too (OT in Logos, and NT as a 2-volume folio), and I use it for Is 7:14.

Besides the verse I mentioned in the post I referred to, I use the Douay-Rheims Challoner also for Is 5:6 and Song of Solomon.

Ortiz, The Jerusalem Bible is very good, I use it often. All of You who would like to have the Jerusalem Bible in a Bible study software, please go to either of the following two threads and post:
community.logos.com/forums/p/55583/401606.aspx#401606
community.logos.com/forums/t/63201.aspx
Arturo_Ortiz said:
I have thought about buying a Jerusalem bible as well. Is it a good translation?
Click to expand...
 
My favorite bible is The New Jerusalem Bible
Arturo_Ortiz said:
So as for now i have a Douay Rheims bible which i use mors for prayer and devotional purposes, as well as for understanding the literal writing as it is translated from the Vulgate. I also have a Haydock commentary that I use for interpretation.

I also have a Nabre New Catholic Answer Bible that i use mostly for apologetics. I use it mostly since it is more of a modern English translation, as well as it being used at Mass.

I finally just bought a Latin Vulgate Clemsntine Juxta Version as I want to learn to read the original language.

I would like to get your favoritw bibles and reccomebdations?
Click to expand...
 
Jerry-Jet said:
The bible I have is copyrighted 1951 and consists of the Confraternity New Testament–Douay Rheims Challoner Old Testament–and an English translation of the New Latin Psalms authorized by Pope Pius XII.

I really do believe that this combination bible–while not perfect–is the least inaccurate English translation of the bible.

It is based on the Vulgate which the council of Trent declared was “free from error concerning faith or morals” and could be used “in all disputations”.

The Confraternity New Testament is based on the Vulgate with reference to the Greek. It couldn’t stray far from the Greek because it could be used in the liturgy It has the passage about the angel stirring the waters at the pool where Jesus healed a man who wasn’t able to jump in the waters fast enough to be healed.

It gets “Hail Full of grace” in Luke correct. It gets “a virgin will conceive” in Isaiah 7:14 correct.

It gets “in the PERSON of Christ” correct in 2 Corinthians 2:10.

It has conservative notes and conservative introductions to all the books in the bible.

The New Latin Psalms aka the Bea Psalter get some of the verb tenses more correct than the Douay Rheims Challoner Psalms but the language is much better than the Confraternity Psalms–more majestic.

The Bea Psalter was criticized by many because it wasn’t good for singing or for chant but I do believe that it was more accurate.

Any of the Confraternity Douay combination bibles from 1941 to 1969 beat what is published today.

The ultimate best English translation Catholic bible in my opinion would be based upon the Nova Vulgata and then lightly revised with reference to original language texts when those texts were clearly superior.

Alas–that bible we will probably never see.

I hope and pray that the NEXT translation of the NAB that will MATCH the liturgy and will be used also for study and devotional reading will be a good one.

I hope it at least gets the “Hail Mary full of grace” and “a virgin will conceive” correct–2 Corinthians 2:10 correct where St. Paul offers the incestuous Corinthian who had been excommunicated ABSOLUTION correct–Hebrews 11:1 correct–“Faith is the SUBSTANCE of things hoped for–the EVIDENCE of things not seen”. Pope Benedict XVI has stated that this is the superior translation of this verse.

And I hope that they get rid of a lot of the overly historico-critacalist MODERNIST notes in the NAB.

My second favorite bible is the RSV-CE2. It is Protestant biased in a few verses but is the best Catholic polished Protestant bibles out there.

The ESV and the NASB are also good Protestant bibles but my advice for ANY Catholic is to use CATHOLIC translations.
Click to expand...
Well said. 👍 Why should it be difficult to defend Catholic doctrine from a Catholic bible? Something is clearly wrong with certain modern translations. Yet, the modernism began to creep in long ago: My 1949 and 1952 Confraternity bibles, in Genesis 3:15, reads:

“I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed. She shall crush thy head and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.”

But look at the difference in the 1953 Confraternity:

“I will put enmity between you and the woman, between your seed and her seed; he shall crush your head, and you shall lie in wait for his heel.”

No small difference. In 1953, the first 8 books of the OT were the Confraternity translation (in progress), whereas the 1952 and earlier used the Douay OT. It is no wonder I could never understand the reference of Mary as the woman in Genesis 3!
 
po18guy said:
Well said. 👍 Why should it be difficult to defend Catholic doctrine from a Catholic bible? Something is clearly wrong with certain modern translations. Yet, the modernism began to creep in long ago: My 1949 and 1952 Confraternity bibles, in Genesis 3:15, reads:

“I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed. She shall crush thy head and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.”

But look at the difference in the 1953 Confraternity:

“I will put enmity between you and the woman, between your seed and her seed; he shall crush your head, and you shall lie in wait for his heel.”

No small difference. In 1953, the first 8 books of the OT were the Confraternity translation (in progress), whereas the 1952 and earlier used the Douay OT. It is no wonder I could never understand the reference of Mary as the woman in Genesis 3!
Click to expand...
Wow what a difference. I didn’t know that just a small difference in the choice of words could change the whole text.

I guess I’ll stick to my 1944 Douay Rheims
 
Arturo_Ortiz said:
Wow what a difference. I didn’t know that just a small difference in the choice of words could change the whole text.

I guess I’ll stick to my 1944 Douay Rheims
Click to expand...
I can find no problem in the Confraternity New Testament translation. So, if you would like a more up to date NT combined with the Douay OT, consider looking for a 1941-1952 Confraternity bible. They are frequently found on eBay, and often begin at around $10.
 
Revised Standard Version - Catholic Edition
Revised Standard Version - Second Catholic Edition
Revised Standard Version - Expanded Edition
English Standard Version - Apocrypha
King James Version - Apocrypha
Douay-Rheims Bible
The Orthodox Study Bible

Waiting to be completed:
The Ignatius Study Bible (RSV-2CE)
Eastern / Greek Orthodox Bible
 
po18guy said:
Well said. 👍 Why should it be difficult to defend Catholic doctrine from a Catholic bible? Something is clearly wrong with certain modern translations. Yet, the modernism began to creep in long ago: My 1949 and 1952 Confraternity bibles, in Genesis 3:15, reads:

“I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed. She shall crush thy head and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.”

But look at the difference in the 1953 Confraternity:

“I will put enmity between you and the woman, between your seed and her seed; he shall crush your head, and you shall lie in wait for his heel.”

No small difference. In 1953, the first 8 books of the OT were the Confraternity translation (in progress), whereas the 1952 and earlier used the Douay OT. It is no wonder I could never understand the reference of Mary as the woman in Genesis 3!
Click to expand...
I’m not sure if it was St. Jerome who translated “she”, instead of “he”, or if this was a later addition, but unless you are translating from the Vulgate alone, there is not much justification to translate “she”. The Greek has “he”. It is hardly modernism…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top