What bible do you use?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholic_Ninja
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Catholic_Ninja

Guest
Just curious as to what translation others use. I’ve listed the most common Catholic translations (that i know of). If you use something other than whats listed please feel free to share it and why 😃

If you use more than one vote for each 🙂 as i use the NAB and the RSV-CE :cool:
 
I use the same two as you do.

Catholics should use a Catholic Bible, since Martin Luther removed 6 or 7 Books from the Old Testament, and the footnotes could vary.
Catholic Bibles have imprimaturs on the copyright page.
 
While I use the NAB for sake of reading the Mass readings ahead of time, I had to mark other as well. I use the RSV-2CE, The 1966 Jerusalem Bible, the NLT-Catholic reference edition as well.
 
bauerice said:
While I use the NAB for sake of reading the Mass readings ahead of time, I had to mark other as well. I use the RSV-2CE, The 1966 Jerusalem Bible, the NLT-Catholic reference edition as well.
Click to expand...
I didn’t know there was a NLT Catholic edition, how do you like it? Assuming it is a Catholic reference edition, is it safe to presume it contains the deuterocanonicals?
 
for RCIA and other teaching, because we have a lectionary focus in all our programs I use the NAB and resources based on it.

For personal devotional reading, esp. of the NT I prefer the original Jerusalem Bible.

For study I prefer the RSV-CE, and have just order the NT from Ignatius of their study edition. The bible I carry for travel is the small RSV-CE with the zipper cover from Ignatius, just the right size, no notes to bulk it up.

It has been hard to limit my bibles and bible resources to one bookshelf which will move with me, 6 linear feet of shelving, but I am giving the Spanish language bibles to the parish since I doubt I will be doing anything with them outside work in the parish. I am keeping the hardcover NAB Oxford edition, because I already have the tabbies and ribbons added, and I know how to find things. Wish the binding was better quality, but I made a cover for it and it is holding up very well. I will keep the RSV-CE travel size, and the new NT study edition. Reluctantly I have given the big Jerusalem bible to the parish library because it is so heavy for me to use with my arthritis, and I am keeping the NT from the New JB which I have had for years, because I am doing a study of John and Revelation, which I have been doing for over a year, and it is my favorite translation of John. Already gave our big wedding bible to DD so she can keep up with adding the family update info.

I also will keep a vest pocket NT, DR Confraternity version reprint by Scepter because of it’s nice cover and size, and readability. It is my bedside edition and still the one that “sounds like the bible” to me because I grew up with it. My brother wants my large DR-C and old confraternity bible from high school so he can have them. I am not into using big resources like atlases, dictionaries, commentaries etc. so will keep only concordance and one encyclopedic dictionary of the NAB from Word Among Us.

Total 3 crates of bibles and study materials to the parish library, not bad.

Remember I am an old lady and not into formal study much, just devotional study and lectio divina, and I am moving into much smaller quarters soon, so this route is not for everyone.
 
I use RSV-CE for daily readings etc. However, I have New Jerusalem, NAB, Douay Rheims, and King James that I use from time to time to check things.
 
UMMMM ALL OF EM

Nothing with “New” in the translation though…except the NKJV. Any other bible with “new” in it for some reason likes to make everyone genderless for some reason, obscure prophecy, and try to explain supernatural things naturally, denying the Omnipotence and Omniscience of the Lord. In short the the commentary is usually heretical.

So here’s the ridiculous list of translations I use.

NASB
ESV
RSV-2CE
RSV-CE
RSV (74 version)
NKJV (formerly used a lot as one was given to me at Parris Island, not used very much lately, but I think it is a very good translation)
KJV
CTS (Jerusalem with Grail Psalms)
Chanoller DR
Original DR (crazy literal)

I have more literal translations, because you just get more information out of em. Its nice and easy to read the CTS version but it just feels contrived, and then going to read the RSV or NASB I feel like Im actually reading what Paul or John actually said as opposed to a version of it. I know that sounds redundant, but If you read one and then the other say verses for verse or chapter for chapter, youll see what Im saying. I actually LIKE reading the more literal versions better and perhaps even think they are easier for the above reason.

Have a good one.
 
I have quite a few in my house (not all mine personally).

Historic English line:

**Authorized “King James” Version (2 copies) **- by far the most beautiful of the lot, but I’m sadly not quite expert enough in the language to use it as my primary source.
**Revised Standard Version - ** this is the one my mother got from her church in the '60s. Halfway between KJV and NRSV, with “thou” for God but “you” for everyone else.
**New Revised Standard Version **- I read this the most often, having received it from my church in 3rd grade. It has my name in gold on the front. 🙂 You can definitely tell and trace a line of descent from KJV to RSV to NRSV, and normally it does “descend” in quality as you go to each newer version. But a few passages, like the first chapter of John’s Gospel, I think sound best in the NRSV.

New Protestant Translations:

New English Bible with Apocrypha - like the RSV preserves traditional language in certain places, but is boring.
"Teen Study Bible, New International Version - has some interesting notes, but again the text is boring.
Good news for Modern Man (NT only) - a very loose and modern translation, I can read it to get a totally different angle than any other Bible out there.

Catholic Translations:

Douay-Rheims OT, with newer translation of NT - this one bothers me a little, 'cause with its archaic language it sounds king-Jamesish, but then when I get to a familiar passage it sounds askew.
New American Bible - has lots of nice notes, but is probably the most boring-sounding of them all.
 
Use several…

but mainly RSV in its various incarnations…RSV… RSVCE
 
I just got back from vacation where I purchased a copy of the New Jerusalem Bible – I love it!
 
// i use the new jerusalem bible & the douay-rheims (challoner) bible…
 
I own many, but i only use a few.

The ones i use frequently are:

  1. *]Jerusalem
    *]RSV-CE
    *]KJV

    All of the Bible versions i own:

    1. *]Jerusalem
      *]New Jerusalem
      *]RSV-CE
      *]KJV
      *]NAB
      *]ESV
      *]Douay-Rheims
 
Catholic_Ninja said:
Just curious as to what translation others use. I’ve listed the most common Catholic translations (that i know of). If you use something other than whats listed please feel free to share it and why 😃

If you use more than one vote for each 🙂 as i use the NAB and the RSV-CE :cool:
Click to expand...
at last, another Catholic shinobi:p

Holy Script.in English:
the older DouayRheims
churchlatin.com/DouayRheims.aspx

Holy Script. in Japanese:
the Furanshisuko by Daughters of St Paul (Pauline Press)
shop-pauline.jp/?pid=2206098

Megumi ahureru, Sei Maria!
 
Would all the RSV supporters here still be RSV fans if they knew all the bad translation choices that are Protestant biased versus the Catholic truth of the Vulgate?

The RSV is not Catholic!

2 Corinthians 2:10 teaches the truth of absolution.

In the RSV you are not taught the truth of absolution.

“In personna Christi”–a real Catholic bible knows how to ranslate that.

RSV and other heretical Protestant translations do not!
 
Jerry-Jet said:
. . .
The RSV is not Catholic!

2 Corinthians 2:10 teaches the truth of absolution.

In the RSV you are not taught the truth of absolution.

“In personna Christi”–a real Catholic bible knows how to ranslate that.

RSV and other heretical Protestant translations do not!
Click to expand...
Interesting.

My older copy has:
a Nihil Obstat by Thomas Hanlon, S.T.L., L.S.S., Ph.L.
an Imprimatur by Gordon Joseph Gray, Archbishop of Saint Andrews and Edinburgh
and one by Peter. W. Bartholome, D.D, Bishop of Saint Cloud Minnesota

My New Testament has:
a validation by the Secretariat for Doctrine and Pastoral Practices, National Council of Catholic Bishops for the original Imprimatur by Bishop Bartholome

The Introduction, commentaries, and notes have
a Nihil Obstat by Rev. Msgr. J. Warren Holleran, S.T.D.
an Imprimatur by Most Rev. George Niederaurer, Archbishop of San Francisco
 
I use the Good News Catholic edition because it works well with my reading level.
 
Jerry-Jet said:
Would all the RSV supporters here still be RSV fans if they knew all the bad translation choices that are Protestant biased versus the Catholic truth of the Vulgate?

The RSV is not Catholic!

2 Corinthians 2:10 teaches the truth of absolution.

In the RSV you are not taught the truth of absolution.

“In personna Christi”–a real Catholic bible knows how to ranslate that.

RSV and other heretical Protestant translations do not!
Click to expand...
How does the original Greek read? I would think that St. Jerome translated it correctly or how it should have been read. He wasnt going off of a ‘dogma’ but just how the church understood it to mean.

That being said, the RSV is the best modern translation we Catholics have to go by. The NAB is horrible, the Jerusalem Bible also says in the ‘presence’ of, not too mention it takes a bit too many liberties for literacy’s sake. It dumbs it down too much, I was using the RSV and NASB(which is pretty literal) and the CTS would make it easier to read maybe a little but it misses a lot of the deeper meaning, or more precise wording.
Perhaps the Knox translation will be a good one when Baronius press comes out with it, hopefully its not too literary as opposed to literal. I dont think it will be quite so literal as a RSV per se, but hopefully it will be better than the CTS or Jerusalem(same just CTS has Grail Psalms) in that regard.

The RSV is really a beautiful translation. The DR is a bit difficult to read(no less beautiful but…), I mean even in comparison to a KJV bible. These difficulties come out of nowhere as most passages are easy enough, but out of nowhere some passages will sound very difficult or in a difficult word order where you have to read it over several times to get the meaning. The original DR(pre Chanoller) is very off rhythm, but VERY literal. Wooden as they say, but man you will get the pure meaning from it for sure. Lots of footnotes about the damn heretics too! Funny stuff(not then though, being killed by the bastards that bite the hands that fed em).
 
KShaft said:
How does the original Greek read? I would think that St. Jerome translated it correctly or how it should have been read. He wasnt going off of a ‘dogma’ but just how the church understood it to mean.

That being said, the RSV is the best modern translation we Catholics have to go by. The NAB is horrible, the Jerusalem Bible also says in the ‘presence’ of, not too mention it takes a bit too many liberties for literacy’s sake. It dumbs it down too much, I was using the RSV and NASB(which is pretty literal) and the CTS would make it easier to read maybe a little but it misses a lot of the deeper meaning, or more precise wording.
Perhaps the Knox translation will be a good one when Baronius press comes out with it, hopefully its not too literary as opposed to literal. I dont think it will be quite so literal as a RSV per se, but hopefully it will be better than the CTS or Jerusalem(same just CTS has Grail Psalms) in that regard.

The RSV is really a beautiful translation. The DR is a bit difficult to read(no less beautiful but…), I mean even in comparison to a KJV bible. These difficulties come out of nowhere as most passages are easy enough, but out of nowhere some passages will sound very difficult or in a difficult word order where you have to read it over several times to get the meaning. The original DR(pre Chanoller) is very off rhythm, but VERY literal. Wooden as they say, but man you will get the pure meaning from it for sure. Lots of footnotes about the damn heretics too! Funny stuff(not then though, being killed by the bastards that bite the hands that fed em).
Click to expand...
The Greek interlinear translation that I have (UBS 3rd edition) is: 'in the face of Christ.'
I agree with you the RSV-CE/2CE translation is beautiful and reads very well, especially in some of the difficult readings of Paul, where other newer and less formal translations attempt to smooth out the readings by adding extra words but wind up making it more confusing. The RSV-CE/2CE is used in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, in many cases it is the translation of choice when Pope Benedict’s books are released into english, is approved by the Vatican for use in the Liturgy, has an Imprimatur (1966) and is used and approved by many conservative Catholic Bible scholars and teachers. That is good enough for me! 👍
 
CalCatholic said:
The RSV-CE/2CE is used in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, in many cases it is the translation of choice when Pope Benedict’s books are released into english
Click to expand...
The RSV 2CE is NOT used in the Catechism of the Catholic Church…English verision

it came out years after the Catechism.

The Catechism though does use the RSV in other incarnations. And it seems the English translations of other documents prefer the RSV in one form or another as well.

and yes in some of his books it is used…well cause Ignatius is publishing them and the 2CE is from Ignatius

(nothing against the RSV 2CE of Ignatius…of course…(I love Ignatius) …this is simply a fact question)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top