J
johndoe100
Guest
Now that many of the Anglican Church members have joined Rome, is the King James Version of Bible acceptable at Catholic bible studies?
- Status
D
Della
Guest
The KJV is an imperfect translation, especially the one that leaves out the Deuterocanonical books, but it’s serveable for most Bible studies. I wouldn’t rely on it for doctrinal issues, but for devotional use anyone is free to read it. It really has little to do with those coming in under the Ordinate, though since they are becoming Catholics using an approved Anglican rite not remaining Anglicans. 
P
PJM
Guest
No
Because is is: 1. Text Altered and 2. Lacks seven books
God protects only His truths which can be found only in His Catholic Bible. Amen
God Bless you.
pat/PJM
po18guy
Well-known member
Since the rejection of five of the seven Sacraments in the rebellion of 1517, we can see revisionism creeping in. Compare the KJV with its contemporary, the Douay-Rheims:
2 Corinthians 2:10
Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)
10 And to whom you have pardoned any thing, I also. For, what I have pardoned, if I have pardoned any thing, for your sakes have I done it in the person of Christ.
2 Corinthians 2:10
King James Version (KJV)
10 To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ;
Both support the status of the Priesthood, forgiving sins *in persona Christi. *
Now, compare those two to the linguistic revision in the (1979-1982) NKJV:
2 Corinthians 2:10
New King James Version (NKJV)
10 Now whom you forgive anything, I also forgive. For if indeed I have forgiven anything, I have forgiven that one[a] for your sakes in the presence of Christ,
The NKJV, as well as the NASB and the NIV, are modern, agenda-driven interpretations. They do not stand up well in comparison to the older translations.
J
johndoe100
Guest
Correct me if I am wrong, but I have always been under the impression that the NKJV didn’t simply contain the Word of God, but that it is the Word of God? *Notice how our Protestant friends preach. *I have yet to hear a homily that put much emphasis put on the Word of God. *Another thing that I noticed is that the word, “Jesus” is removed 20 or 30 times from the NKJV when reading the the New International *Version or Encyclical translations. *Not that I don’t use the NIV, because that is the Bible that I usually go to first.
I plan to join a 6:00 AM bible study from my parish, that is why I’m looking for opinions.
I plan to join a 6:00 AM bible study from my parish, that is why I’m looking for opinions.
po18guy
Well-known member
You cannot go wrong with an Ignatius Bible. The Douay-Rheims is also excellent and, being introduced just prior to the KJV, its language is quite similar to and easily understood for those who have been using the KJV.
P
PJM
Guest
Yes,
ONLY Catholic Bibles ARE Catholic bibles
God Bless,
pat/PJM
N
Nicea325
Guest
Indeed. However, the NAB reads:
Whomever you forgive anything, so do I. For indeed what I have forgiven, if I have forgiven anything, has been for you in the presence of Christ,
po18guy
Well-known member
Precisely why I do not rely on the NAB. Ecumenical to a fault, actually. The bible is neither new, nor American.Indeed. However, the NAB reads:
Whomever you forgive anything, so do I. For indeed what I have forgiven, if I have forgiven anything, has been for you in the presence of Christ,
N
Nicea325
Guest
So in other words, it is not a good Bible? I have to check my Catholic RSV second edition.
What about the Revised NAB which came out last year? Do you know anything about it?
M
mcrow
Guest
It depends on what you mean by acceptable.
It is not an approved translation by the church but it’s not a sin to use one if you like it.
As others have pointed out, it’s not a complete bible though unless you snag an old copy.
M
mcrow
Guest
I have not seen it myself but I know most people that have the new NAB like it.
J
Justice_Mercy
Guest
The wording of the NAB (and other translations that render it that way) is actually a more literal translation, so there is no reason to find fault with it, IMHO.
po18guy
Well-known member
The NABRE is undoubtedly better than the NAB - particularly in its footnotes. The NAB has footnotes that were horrible in places. I do not have a NABRE, but I am considering one for comparative purposes. It is hard to fault the Revised Standard Version, Second Catholic Edition, otherwise known as the Ignatius bible. Here is a link to comment on bible editions at EWTN.
po18guy
Well-known member
Disagree. In only one example, Jesus did not say “Who do people say that I am” (Matthew 16:13). I do not prefer the altered, gender-inclusive language or the quality of the footnotes. As to available bible editions or translations, there are many options that do not exhibit these limitations or concerns.
J
Justice_Mercy
Guest
I was replying concerning a specific verse, not regarding gender neutral language or any other things that someone would like or dislike about a certain translation
J
Justice_Mercy
Guest
Also, the RSV, which the Church has approved for use, renders it the way the person I was replying to said they did not like. Many translations, including the new NABRE render 2 Corinthians 2:10 they way this person did not like.
po18guy
Well-known member
This is an odd, modern translation, that is opposed to Saint Jerome’s translation in the Latin Vulgate, as well as the Douay-Rheims and even the King James version. I see it as clearly modernized, and tending to reduce scriptural evidence behind both the Catholic/Orthodox priesthood, as well as the Sacrament of Reconciliation.
As well, the modern wording seems redundant, since we are members of Christ’s Body, He is always present, right? As well, we are temples of the Holy Spirit. Is it not much more likely that Paul actually forgave in the person of Christ - “in persona Christi” as the Vulgate puts it? After all, the Church teaches that the Priesthood acts in persona Christi.
- Status