What is the Most accurate Bible Translation

  • Thread starter Thread starter RepentorPerish
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
demerzel85 said:
Sinag-Tala prints whole of the Confraternity Bible as well as just the New Testament.
Click to expand...
Thank you for bringing it to our attention, Demerzel85! I looked it up on the internet, and found where we can order it!

For those interested, here is where you can buy a brand new complete Bible in the Confraternity version:

sinagtala.com/bibles_catechisms.htm

Edited by lanceg ( 3 seconds ago)
 
Mannyfit75 said:
I don’t think it does promote sola fide the version I have contains the Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation Dei Verbum.

In the introduction page it said.

This edition of the Revised Standard Version of the Bible has been prepared for the use of Catholics by the Commitee of Catholic Biblical Association of Great Britain. It has been published with ecclesiastical approval and agreement with the Standard Bible Commitee and the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of Churches of Christ in the United States of America.

The RSV-CE is even used for the Catechism of the Catholic Church and widely used by Catholic theologians based on the search that I done on it.

I give it credit than the NRSV-CE Bible…
Click to expand...
People,

Just a couple of corrections:

(1) neither the Protestant RSV nor the RSV-CE is a (mis)translation of the Latin Vulgate; the RSV was translated from original-language sources,

(2) the CCC made use of the NRSV (sadly) and the RSV, but not necessarily the Catholic edition; I would suspect the translators wanted as unbiased a translation as they could find, and the RSV most probably was that version.
 
Mannyfit75 said:
This edition of the Revised Standard Version of the Bible has been prepared for the use of Catholics by the Commitee of Catholic Biblical Association of Great Britain. It has been published with ecclesiastical approval and agreement with the Standard Bible Commitee and the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of Churches of Christ in the United States of America.
Click to expand...
Which means that if the ‘Standard Bible Commitee and the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of Churches of Christ in the United States of America’ insist on a mistranslation, well it stays there. Why? Division of Christian Education of the National Council of Churches of Christ in the United States of America owns the copyright period.
The RSV-CE is even used for the Catechism of the Catholic Church and widely used by Catholic theologians based on the search that I done on it.
Click to expand...
The CCC uses the 1973 RSV not the RSV-CE or the RSV-2CE. This edition from my understanding is not available in print.

Most widely used? Well just saying the ‘Hail Mary’ you are using the Douay Rheims 😉 In terms of scholarship, with a 300 year history the Douay Rheims has been used by many brilliant Catholic theologians.
 
lanceg said:
Thank you for bringing it to our attention, Demerzel85! I looked it up on the internet, and found where we can order it!

For those interested, here is where you can buy a brand new complete Bible in the Confraternity version:

sinagtala.com/bibles_catechisms.htm
Click to expand...
lanceg-
Did you know that as the forerunner to the New American Bible, much of the Confraternity Old Testament is the same as the NAB? Some more info here. Then click in the upper right to open the whole thread if desired.
 
Cranch said:
lanceg-
Did you know that as the forerunner to the New American Bible, much of the Confraternity Old Testament is the same as the NAB? Some more info here. Then click in the upper right to open the whole thread if desired.
Click to expand...
Though overall the Confraternity Version is still a stronger translation and does not have questionable footnotes.
 
RepentorPerish said:
Im looking for the bible that has the best interpetation of the orginial documents.

Also with good Orthodox footnotes with some qoutes of the fathers.

Thank you all and God bless you for your advice
Click to expand...
The Orthodox are completing a translation of the Septuagint. It is the first time in modern history that this will be done.

lxx.org/

The are making it a study bible with many notes and tools for study.

Accuracy of translation is subjective. King Jame’s users will insist that it is the only reliable Word of God, even though the original translators denied this claim.

I use the NAB. It is used in the lectionary at all masses in the United States.

Have a wonderful Easter,
Subrosa
 
Cranch said:
lanceg-
Did you know that as the forerunner to the New American Bible, much of the Confraternity Old Testament is the same as the NAB? Some more info here. Then click in the upper right to open the whole thread if desired.
Click to expand...
Yes, I am aware that the translations of the Confraternity Old Testament later were used with some revision in the NAB.

Some of the old testament Conf/NAB rendering are not that bad.

But for me the problem with the NAB is too many skeptical footnotes, and too much bending to gender neutral language in the revised NT & Psalms. The fact that it is the chosen translation for the Mass is a very unfortunate, and does not legitimize its translation philosophy.

I am not one of these people who thinks he is more catholic or orthodox than the pope. I am not even a traditionalist by most people’ s standards.

It is simply a wretched translation, which has footnotes undermining Catholic faith.

I am not the only one- see the link to First Things on Bible Babel Parts 1 & 2:

firstthings.com/article.php3?id_article=2183&var_recherche=bible+babel

firstthings.com/article.php3?id_article=66&var_recherche=bible+babel
 
demerzel85 said:
The central problem with the RSV-CE for me however is that it is essentially a Protestant Translation of the Latin Vulgate, which gets stuff like John 3:16 translated wrongly to promote sola fides. Even in the CE and 2CE this has not been corrected.
Click to expand...
Reading John 3:16 from my Ignatius RSV 2CE:

For God so loved the world that he gave his only-begotten Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.

From DRBO.org:
16 For God so loved the world, as to give his only begotten Son; that whosoever believeth in him, may not perish, but may have life everlasting.

Am I missing something? Not asking sarcastically, I really want to know.
 
demerzel85 said:
The CCC uses the 1973 RSV not the RSV-CE or the RSV-2CE. This edition from my understanding is not available in print.
Click to expand...
This 1973 edition of the RSV is actually “The RSV Common Bible”, which contains the 1952 OT, the 1971 NT (2nd ed.), and the 1957 Apocrypha. As I recall, there are few notes or other study material in it. One can obtain the same collection of books, plus a few more in the Apocrypha that are used by the Orthodox, in the New Oxford Annotated Bible with the Apocrypha, which has a 1977 copyright.

What both of these editions have in their favor is that the texts, and, supposedly the notes and study material in the NOAB w/Apoc, are acceptable to Catholics, Protestants, and the Orthodox, in short, for all Christians. This may explain why this more “generic” RSV would be preferable to the RSV-CE in the CCC.
 
Dear Friends,

I wonder if the CCC would have used the 2nd Catholic RSV had it been available. I think most of Pope Benedict’s recent books are using it.

The ecumenical/Protestant version of the RSV is very good too, especially editions with the Apocrypha.

But what makes the Second Catholic RSV preferable for me is some welcome concessions to Catholic understandings in the text, such as Isaiah 7:14 (“virgin”), and Luke 1:28 (Hail, full of grace").

For those interested, here is a link to my review of the Catholic second RSV on Amazon.com, the one by Lance Goldsberry:

amazon.com/gp/product/customer-reviews/0898708338/sr=1-2/qid=1175830063/ref=cm_cr_dp_2_1/002-4002420-9531245?ie=UTF8&customer-reviews.sort%5Fby=-SubmissionDate&n=283155&qid=1175830063&sr=1-2
 
lanceg said:
Dear Friends,

I wonder if the CCC would have used the 2nd Catholic RSV had it been available. I think most of Pope Benedict’s recent books are using it.

The ecumenical/Protestant version of the RSV is very good too, especially editions with the Apocrypha.

But what makes the Second Catholic RSV preferable for me is some welcome concessions to Catholic understandings in the text, such as Isaiah 7:14 (“virgin”), and Luke 1:28 (Hail, full of grace").

For those interested, here is a link to my review of the Catholic second RSV on Amazon.com, the one by Lance Goldsberry:

amazon.com/gp/product/customer-reviews/0898708338/sr=1-2/qid=1175830063/ref=cm_cr_dp_2_1/002-4002420-9531245?ie=UTF8&customer-reviews.sort%5Fby=-SubmissionDate&n=283155&qid=1175830063&sr=1-2
Click to expand...
How do the RSV-CE and RSV-CE 2nd Edition differ? I have the original RSV-CE published in 1966.
 
DallasCatholic said:
Reading John 3:16 from my Ignatius RSV 2CE:

For God so loved the world that he gave his only-begotten Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.

From DRBO.org:
16 For God so loved the world, as to give his only begotten Son; that whosoever believeth in him, may not perish, but may have life everlasting.

Am I missing something? Not asking sarcastically, I really want to know.
Click to expand...
Just search for John 3:16 in the forum 😉
 
lak611 said:
How do the RSV-CE and RSV-CE 2nd Edition differ? I have the original RSV-CE published in 1966.
Click to expand...
Both the RSV CE and RSV 2CE are excellent. What has changed from the original RSV and RSV II?

the RSV II is even better- as mentioned above, Isaiah 7:14 is rendered using the term Virgin rather than young woman as in the original RSV and catholic RSV.

The RSV II does away with archaic language, no thees or thous. Some may regret this, but the RSV II is much more likely to be approved for any liturgical use and to gain a broader following for English speaking Catholics with the updated language.

The language update did not dumb down the RSV II; it is still a fundamentally literal, literary and graceful translation, and the text was changed relatively little, so that one can easily follow reading with one edition while the other one is being read. Most of the familiar rendering for the RSV remain in tact.

Also, I like that the explanatory notes are on the bottom of the page now rather than at the end of each testament, as in the original Catholic RSV.

Our church just placed an order for the RSV II for our Adult education classes and for our book nook. It is the version we are promoting in Bible study.
 
lanceg said:
Both the RSV CE and RSV 2CE are excellent. What has changed from the original RSV and RSV II?

The language update did not dumb down the RSV II; it is still a fundamentally literal, literary and graceful translation, and the text was changed relatively little, so that one can easily follow reading with one edition while the other one is being read. Most of the familiar rendering for the RSV remain in tact.
Click to expand...
I actually like the thees and thous in the Psalms.
Also, I like that the explanatory notes are on the bottom of the page now rather than at the end of each testament, as in the original Catholic RSV.
Click to expand...
I like my RSV-CE for that reason. I can easily focus on the actual text of the Bible without the footnotes getting in the way. Plus, there are not too many footnotes. They kept it very simple, only giving notes that are really necessary.
 
I wish my RSC-CE2 had more footnotes. I’m glad to hear that Scott Hahn et al. are putting out a study bible in pieces. I’ll had to pick up the single volume when it comes out.

Does anyone know when this might be?
 
How does the Confraternity Bible render John 3:16 and
2Corinthians 2:10?
 
Jerry-Jet said:
How does the Confraternity Bible render John 3:16 and
2Corinthians 2:10?
Click to expand...
John 3:16–For God so loved the world that he gave his only-begotten Son, that those who believe in him may not perish, but may have life everlasting.
2Corinthians 2:10–Whom you pardon anything, I also pardon. Indeed what I have forgiven—if I have forgiven anything—I have done for your sakes, in the person of Christ,
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top