RSV 2nd Edition

  • Thread starter Thread starter WesleyF
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
W

WesleyF

Guest
Hi everyone. I am currently using the NRSV Bible but I want to switch to the RSV. I am quite excited about the new RSV 2nd Edition Bible available from Ignatius Press.

ignatius.com/ViewProduct.aspx?SID=1&Product_ID=2766&SKU=IBL2-P&ReturnURL=search.aspx%3f%3fSID%3d1%26SearchCriteria%3dbible

Jimmy Akin also has a post which talks about this new edition.

jimmyakin.org/2006/02/revised_ignatiu.html

I need a Bible which will be THE Bible I use for the rest of my life. I want to read and memorize scripture, but I want to make sure I memorize from the right version, or else all my effort will be wasted.

Please give me your feedback about this new Bible translation. Is it as good as the RSV or even better? What would you recommend? RSV or this second edition?
 
You have the wrong attitude toward Bible versions. There has never been one definitive edition of the Bible, only these words and letters, in only this order, in only this language, etc. God has given the Church very many different manuscripts, versions, translations, editions, in many different languages. You should not pick only one edition to use exclusively for the rest of your life.

The RSV CE2 is a good edition.
 
WesleyF said:
Hi everyone. I am currently using the NRSV Bible but I want to switch to the RSV. I am quite excited about the new RSV 2nd Edition Bible available from Ignatius Press.

ignatius.com/ViewProduct.aspx?SID=1&Product_ID=2766&SKU=IBL2-P&ReturnURL=search.aspx%3f%3fSID%3d1%26SearchCriteria%3dbible

Jimmy Akin also has a post which talks about this new edition.

jimmyakin.org/2006/02/revised_ignatiu.html

I need a Bible which will be THE Bible I use for the rest of my life. I want to read and memorize scripture, but I want to make sure I memorize from the right version, or else all my effort will be wasted.

Please give me your feedback about this new Bible translation. Is it as good as the RSV or even better? What would you recommend? RSV or this second edition?
Click to expand...
As Ron Conte said, there is no perfect Bible, and you should always have a few to switch between.

(some traditionalists will say the Douay-Rheims is perfect, but that’s not true)

I have the RSV-2CE, NAB, Douay-Rheims, and recently got the NRSV-CE

Personally, I like the NRSV-CE, especially for devotional reading since its easy to read but also more literal than the NJB.

My biggest fret with the NRSV is it has a lot of inclusive language. Inclusive language is bad, but not always. I liken inclusive language when the Hebrew and Greek imply the text to be inclusive. Unfortunately English is more exclusive and if someone sees “people” instead of “men” he flips! 🤷

The NRSV uses inclusive language a little too much though-
for example: “mortals” instead of “the son of man.” in Hebrews 2; which does cause confusion at times :confused:

The NRSV is sometimes more careful than the NAB in using inclusive language like in Romans 5
(NRSV- “one man, Jesus Christ” & NAB- “one person, Jesus Christ.”)

However, when it comes to Catholic study, the RSV-CE and RSV-2CE are the best. Only problem is they use older manuscripts than the NRSV and ESV. So always leave your choices open for future translations.
 
I have all the Catholic translations of the Bible, but the RSV-2CE is my main translation. I think it is the right combination of formal and contemporary language. I personally like the changes that were made over the RSV-CE; esp. (“Hail full of grace, the Lord is with you!” and “Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall be called Immanuel.”) There are many other changes made that I like, (removing the thees and thous and some other arcahic language.) Some people prefer that language and stay with the RSV-CE, I hope Ignatius continues publishing both editions. Like the RSV-CE it continues using non-inclusive language. I don’t think you can go wrong with your choice, every translation has its problem verses which probably could have translated differently, but I am not a Bible translator.
 
Thanks for the feedback. I will definitely get the RSV CE2.
 
WesleyF said:
Thanks for the feedback. I will definitely get the RSV CE2.
Click to expand...
👍 It is a great edition! I am hoping that eventually they will put the study bible together! I know they will have the New Testament out in one edition in the Spring, I think.
 
**The RSV CE 2nd Edition is a good translation, I have it, and it is great. However, if you want a commentary to accompany your bible reading experience you will be greatly disappointed with it. The commentary is extremely minimal. But, on the plus side, you probably wouldn’t have to worry about heterodox modernist interpretations that is evident in the current editions of the NAB. The NAB is currently being revised using the formal equivalence translation method like the RSV and eliminate inclusive language in order to be more acceptable by the Vatican for liturgical use. But, I don’t think their commentary will be orthodox, since the Catholic Biblical Association of America tends to be very heterodox in their exegetical methods.

As earlier posters have said, it is good to use more than one Bible translation in order to compare and contrast them. But, of course, you would have to pick a Bible translation that you will use as your primary reference. Unfortunately, much like all things in life, all translations have imperfections and deficiencies. It is understandable also that some might not be able to afford to purchase so many bibles and also some might not be as theologically and biblically literate as others. So, just pick one Church approved bible that fits your reading level, language preferences, and is comfortable for you. Then just ignore those imperfections or deficiencies in it. Learn also Church teaching on proper interpretation and translation of the bible.**
 
Aside from “inclusive language”, what are other strengths and weakness of other translations? Like DR, NASB, NAB, NRSV, etc… I have almost all of the translations popularly discussed, but I am plagued by doubt as to which is more reliable. Any help is appreciated.
 
Pilgrim365 said:
Aside from “inclusive language”, what are other strengths and weakness of other translations? Like DR, NASB, NAB, NRSV, etc… I have almost all of the translations popularly discussed, but I am plagued by doubt as to which is more reliable. Any help is appreciated.
Click to expand...
Douay-Rheims
Pros: very traditional, translated from the traditional Latin Vulgate, literal translation
Cons: “outdated” text (similar to the KJV), older English

NASB
Pros: considered the most literal English translation
Cons: the Deuterocanon is NOT available

NAB
Pros: literal(ish) translation, scholarly, the official American Catholic Bible (used in liturgy)
Cons: poor sentence structure, questionable renderings of some texts (Luke 1:28)

NRSV
Pros: very scholarly, literal but readable (great balance)
Cons: questionable renderings of some texts (such as Luke 1:28)

As for reliability, it depends on what you want: want something traditional or academic?

For academic I’d recommend the RSV-CE or NRSV-CE
the RSV-CE is more literal, but the NRSV-CE is more scholarly

When it comes to inclusive language, I don’t have a huge problem with it as others do since Greek/Hebrew sometimes implied inclusiveness. The NRSV I think takes it too far, but its still a good Bible.

I’d stick with the RSV-CE for study; but leave your options open for better future translations since the RSV itself has some questionable renderings such as Psalm 45:6 and the text is a little outdated.
 
Unfortunately, almost every translation claims to be literal. Each person claims that their favorite version is literal or is most literal. This is simply not true.

Also, the most literal translation is not the best translation. An extremely literal translation is called an inter-linear translation; these are useful for study, but not for most other purposes. Even a very literal translation, other than an interlinear, may make numerous passages difficult to comprehend.

As time has passed, translations have become more and more loosely translated. And as a result, what is considered ‘literal’ has loosened also. When Martin Luther debated translation methods with Catholic scholars of his day, he advocated only a modest loosening of translations from the strictly literal; his approach was broadly rejected by Catholic scholars as being too loose. But today, his approach would be considered overly-literal by many scholars.

The original Douai Rheims Bible - very literal

Challoner Douay - signficantly looser than the original, but more literal than most today

NAB 1970 - a loose paraphrase translation
more recent revisions of the NAB have been somewhat more literal, but still retain an overall approach to the text which is willing to rephrase any verse for any scholarly reason.

JB and NJB are both fairly loose translations. Although the NJB was intended to be a more literal edit of the JB, with the passing of time what was considered ‘literal’ had changed. So some of the edits are more literal, and some are less literal.

NRSV - a loose translation which freely changes the text itself on the basis of various flimsy or even spurious ‘scholarly’ reasons.

NASB - a Protestant translation and certainly NOT the most accurate from a Catholic or even a scholarly point of view; in some places gives the appearance of being literal, by the use of outdated language (such as Mary calling herself the ‘bondslave’ of the Lord). In very many places, the text is freely rephrased.

RSV CE - A Protestant translation adapted for use by Catholics; suffers from Protestant influence in some ways, such as that the OT is not translated in light of the NT, and the influence of Catholic doctrine on the translation is minimal.

RSV CE2 - corrects many of the problems with the ealier edition; one of the better modern English Catholic translations; does not take much account of the Latin source texts.
 
Thank you Omyo12 & Ron Conte. Those were very helpful remarks. I sometimes wonder exactly what the extent of Protestant influence to the RSV CE. I just bought an RSV CE yesterday, and I have liked what I read. NAB has some bad wording. DR can be choppy. NRSV is pretty good.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top