What Bible should i get?

  • Thread starter Thread starter dlobrien
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

dlobrien

Guest
I read that the New American Bible, Revised Edition is the best for Catholics, but should I get a study Bible or just the Bible itself? I am a cradle Catholic wanting to learn more about the Catholic faith and what it really means so I can have a better relationship with God instead of being pulled lots of different directions from my Protestant friends. I am currently reading the NASB, which I like, but I just found out the NAB-RE is the only approved one for Catholics, so I am looking into getting a new Bible.

So a study Bible or just the Bible itself?

I am studying Catholocism and the Bible no matter what I get, but I just don’t know if getting a study Bible would make much of a difference…

Thanks!
 
I have both the Catholic Study edition and the standard NAB, and I find myself using the standard version for just prayerful reading.

It’s smaller and is easier to handle just reading in an easy chair.

Jim
 
A lot of controversy here, as the NAB(/RE), while being approved by the USCCB, had to be heavily modified before the Vatican would allow its use in the liturgy. The problem was mostly the rampant use of gender neutral language. A few of my reasons:
  1. Mary is not full of grace in the NAB/RE
  2. Paul did not forgive sins in the person of Christ in the NAB.
  3. You will not find the word “hell” in the NAB/RE
Being a stickler for detail, these, and other factors, bug me. Jimmy Akin holds that the NAB/RE is a ‘squishy’ translation. I believe that you might be better served by a copy of the Revised Standard Version, Second Catholic Edition, also known as the Ignatius Bible. There is a study version, but only of the New Testament for now. Or you might look for a used Confraternity Bible, a little known but excellent US Catholic version, or the Knox Translation, which was favored by Bishop Fulton Sheen.
 
I second the recommendation of the RSV-2CE, and suggest the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible for further reading. I have the New Testament of this study bible and have found it very good overall. The last I knew they had only published some individual books of the Old Testament, but I’m not made of money and am holding out for the complete ICSB Old Testament, if they ever publish one.
 
Hopefully. . . a hand-me-down.

OR, a future hand-me-down. 😉

Fill the loose binding pages at the front with your family tree, and GOD BLESS you and your’s 'til eternity.
 
Least said:
Hopefully. . . a hand-me-down.

OR, a future hand-me-down. 😉

Fill the loose binding pages at the front with your family tree, and GOD BLESS you and your’s 'til eternity.
Click to expand...
Search eBay and stop at thrift stores, like St. Vincent de Paul or Goodwill. Some examples I have seen:

1949 Leather-bound Confraternity Bible $1.99
1967 Papal Edition Confraternity Bible $3.99
1914 Douay-Rheims $9.99
1953 Belmont Abbey Catholic Action Bible $4.99
1952 pocket-zied Confraternity NT $2.42

They are dirt cheap and most are in very good-excellent condition (shame on us for not reading them).
 
dlobrien said:
I read that the New American Bible, Revised Edition is the best for Catholics, but should I get a study Bible or just the Bible itself? I am a cradle Catholic wanting to learn more about the Catholic faith and what it really means so I can have a better relationship with God instead of being pulled lots of different directions from my Protestant friends. I am currently reading the NASB, which I like, but I just found out the NAB-RE is the only approved one for Catholics, so I am looking into getting a new Bible.

So a study Bible or just the Bible itself?

I am studying Catholocism and the Bible no matter what I get, but I just don’t know if getting a study Bible would make much of a difference…

Thanks!
Click to expand...
I have the Study Bible of the NAB sitting on my desk and would strongly recommend against it. The intro and notes are soaked in the kind of historical-critical method condemned by Benedict XVI in Jesus of Nazareth. I only use it still b/c I have handwritten so many notes in it over the years.

I also have the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible and I highly recommend it for study. The notes are by Dr. Scott Hahn and you don’t get much better than that. As a plus, the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible uses the RSV-CE translation instead of the NABRE, which is a much nicer translation to read (and the one Benedict’s Bible quotes in English are translated from).

I’ve also used the New Jerusalem Study Bible - I’d also stay away from this, semi-heretical footnotes and a highly unorthodox usage of the Tetragrammaton instead on the “the LORD” in the OT.
 
Why commit to one? Get a few. If you need specific commentary on Catholic doctrine, that’s easy to come by if the Catechism doesn’t suffice.

Myself, I have a KJV, an RSV, an NAB, a Knox, a Greek language NT, a Good News… a parallel Gospel, a Jefferson Bible, a Jerusalem Bible, and probably a few more I can’t think of at the moment.

Learning a bit of koine Greek is a fascinating exercise too, and will enhance your NT reading: roots and stems and a little grammar goes a long way… you can then look up key words for nuance &c.

Plus there are all kinds of resources online. And the best part of being Catholic is, you can always find out what the definitive teaching is on a given passage… at least, any that are problematic. It’s been covered, for lo, there is nothing new under the sun.

Btw, get a small paperback edition for reading in bed. Dozing off with a big hardcover in hand is not recommended. 😃
 
PietroPaolo said:
I have the Study Bible of the NAB sitting on my desk and would strongly recommend against it. The intro and notes are soaked in the kind of historical-critical method condemned by Benedict XVI in Jesus of Nazareth. I only use it still b/c I have handwritten so many notes in it over the years.
Click to expand...
Care to elaborate on this? I read Jesus of Nazareth by Pope Benedict XVI and don’t recall any condemnation in it, but I’m curious.

Jim
 
JimR-OCDS said:
Care to elaborate on this? I read Jesus of Nazareth by Pope Benedict XVI and don’t recall any condemnation in it, but I’m curious.

Jim
Click to expand...
Reread the Forward to the first book in the Trilogy.
 
JimR-OCDS said:
OK I will, but can you provide and example ?

Jim
Click to expand...
Long and short of it, BXVI condemns the presuppositions behind the use of the historical critical method. He says that these underlying premises distort the truth we know about Christ. For example, modern historical-critical Biblical scholars reject the miraculous a priori. So, when a prophet predicts something will happen that actually happens, the historical-critical scholar dates the prediction to after the event predicted (arguing "how else could have the prophet known what would happen?). It’s a recurring theme throughout the work, almost the reason BXVI wrote the series. I must admit, I don’t really feel like typing out a quote, if you have a copy on hand, look through the forward. If not, I’ll type something up for you.
 
I would strongly agree with idea of getting lots of translations (I am a Bible nut perhaps) but if you are like most people, having too many will actually cause you to jump around and not just sit and read scripture each day. That being said, I suggest the RSV-CE.

The NAB, in its “RE” version, is good in some places and downright lousy in others. But far more disturbing are its terrible footnotes and book intros, which cast all kinds of doubt on the inspiration of scripture, authorship and more! You describe yourself as a cradle Catholic, wanting to learn more about the faith and grow closer to God? I say stay clear of the NABRE, despite the fact that it’s used in the mass. Unless you have a lot of experience with textual criticism arguments, history of the Bible, etc., the footnotes will have you confused and doubting various doctrines in a jiffy, in my humble opinion. Actually, you don’t have to depend on my opinion, I have heard many smart priests, apologists and others harshly criticize those NAB footnotes. I don’t know how they were approved.

Talk to Jesus- tell HIM you want to learn more about the faith and grow closer to HIM, each time you open your Bible! Ask the Holy Spirit to open your eyes to the words as you read. Your approach to reading scripture is often more important than which translation you pick. In the beginning was the WORD…

(NOTE: while I don’t believe they actually “endorse” a particular translation, I have noticed the following: Pope Benedict, Fr. Mitch Pacwa, Cardinal Dolan, all cite RSV in their books, if I’m not mistaken. And as another poster mentioned, Jimmy Akin also seems to prefer it, for what it’s worth.) 👍
 
I am leaning towards getting the Ignacious RSV-CE from what you are all saying. Getting more than one version will probably just be really overwhelming (at least right now) and would be expensive. Out of curiosity, why is it called the “Ignatius” RSV-CE?
 
For prayerful reading, I recommend the 1966 Jerusalem Bible Readers Edition.

For study, you can’t go wrong with the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible.
 
Ignatius Press released an RSV, CE (Catholic Edition) a while back and for some time it was the only Catholic RSV out there. That’s why many people say “Ignatius Bible” when they probably are referring to the RSV-CE in general.

That edition was (and still is) a complete Bible, not just the New Testament.

Keep in mind also, when we say Catholic Edition, it does not mean it’s a “different” Bible! It just means Catholic scholars have looked it over, to see if any verses here and there have been translated with an obvious protestant bias. For instance, in many non-Catholic versions going way back to the King James, you may see a Greek word translated “works” in one place but translated “deeds” or some other way in another place. This is often to lend support to the protestant doctrines of “sola fide” or “faith alone.” But I digress…

These days, you can find great quality RSV-CE Bibles from not only Ignatius Press but St. Benedict Press. I highly recommend the St. Benedict products, as they offer leather, imitation leather and other rugged bindings that feel nice in the hand and will wear well, for a reasonable price.

books.benedictpress.com/index.php/Bibles-Revised-Standard-Version-Catholic

ignatius.com/Products/CategoryCenter/470/Bibles.aspx

Enjoy!
 
PietroPaolo said:
Long and short of it, BXVI condemns the presuppositions behind the use of the historical critical method. He says that these underlying premises distort the truth we know about Christ. For example, modern historical-critical Biblical scholars reject the miraculous a priori. So, when a prophet predicts something will happen that actually happens, the historical-critical scholar dates the prediction to after the event predicted (arguing "how else could have the prophet known what would happen?). It’s a recurring theme throughout the work, almost the reason BXVI wrote the series. I must admit, I don’t really feel like typing out a quote, if you have a copy on hand, look through the forward. If not, I’ll type something up for you.
Click to expand...
OK and thanks!

I remember reading Pope Benedict’s critique of historical data, but from I remember he didn’t condemn it so much as to put it in it’s proper place and to put the theological knowledge we have in context with historical data, which makes it more accurate.

One of the things I really loved about Pope Benedict’s Volume II was on the Last Supper.

I’ve seen Jews present the historical data that the Last Supper was not a Seder Meal and could not have been celebrated by Jesus on the year it is believed that he died, because Passover was on Saturday, not Thursday.

Pope Benedict XVI presents two historians who provide details on how it is believed that Jesus Last Supper was in fact, His Passover Meal, which was probably celebrated on Wednesday. They use the gospel of St John in showing that when the Jews brought Jesus to Pilate, they could not enter the palace for fear of defiling themselves because the Passover Meal had not yet been eaten. Well, this would’ve been on Friday of that year.

Also, because Friday 3 PM when it is believed that Jesus died, this was actually the eve before the Passover Meal, when the lambs for the meal were slaughtered. Jesus of course is the final and perfect lamb offered for sins for all time.

OK, now I’m off to look at the NAB study edition with Pope Benedict’s book as you pointed out earlier.

In Christ
Jim
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top