What version of the bible should I read

  • Thread starter Thread starter Trap_344
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The Catholic Bible of course!! 😉😇. Currently, the Bible used in mass is the Revised Standard Edition. But if your ever uncertain, look in the index for Tobit. If that book is in there I give it a thumbs up .
 
Trap_344 said:
The title says it all
Click to expand...
Except it cannot be answered so easily…it depends on for what use you are reading it.

RSV2CE is good as a reference to support most academic and lay apologetic commentaries, NAB (or NABRE) is good to read daily Mass readings (in the US), others are just good for easy reading.

The best bible (with a full canon subscribed to by the Catholic Church being a given), as the old saying goes, that is the best is the one you read!
 
Hereiam said:
I think in the US, its the New American Bible.
Click to expand...
Oops I am wrong. But I think it’s actually a blending of the two. I think it’s Nabre not Nab. New American Bible Revised Standard Edition. There we go.😉 Let me know if I’m wrong again. It happens often
 
Last edited:
I prefer the Jerusalem Bible. It is a good study bible with very informative intros to each Chapter and excellent notes as you go.

What else would you expect from a devoted group of Dominicans assigned to make it.

Peace
 
The Ignatius RSVCE is a good study (and devotional) Bible. The NABRE is OK- it might be a bit easier to read, but it’s not for study,
 
If you want a traditional version with very traditional language and notes which is the Catholic equivalent of the King James, go with a Douay Rheims or Confraternity.

If you want a modern scholarly version which is used widely by the Church in the USA, go with the New American Bible - Revised Edition (NABRE).

If you want a more traditional modern scholarly version, go with an Ignatius Catholic Study Bible, Ignatius Bible or Didache Bible of the Revised Standard Version - 2nd Catholic Edition (RSV-2CE).

If you want an easier to read Bible, get a CTS Jerusalem Bible or Good News Bible-Catholic Edition (GN-CE).

I would personally suggest you buy a Douay Rheims, a NABRE, and a GN-CE, and decide which one you like best and then go from there.

Some Bibles I recommend you stay away from: the Knox, the NJB, the NRSV, the Message.
 
Last edited:
The one you’ll actually read. Try several and see which one speaks to you.

Most of what’s been mentioned above are good choices. Although I’ll disagree with the previous poster on Knox - I really enjoy that translation for its poetic charm.
 
the Ignatius is my favorite. I have the “study” version with excellent notes and commentary by Scott Hahn and Curtis Mitch
 
Last edited:
Spyridon said:
Some Bibles I recommend you stay away from: the Knox
Click to expand...
What’s wrong with the Knox version? I just bought a copy based on recommendations on other threads. From what little I’ve read, it is a little formal but readable. I’m still not sure if I like his translation of the Psalms from songs to prose though.
 
It is the NABRE but not what you said. New American Bible Revised Edition. It has nothing to do with the RSV.

I use both on a regular basis. I prefer the RSV/CE. It is a more literal translation.

I also use the Duuay-Rheims for comparison. When I argue with Protestants, I use an old version of the King James with Apocrypha, not the one that was revised in the 19th century.

Different translations are good for different things, but as someone earlier mentioned, The best one id the one you read.

Patrick
AMDG
 
Last edited:
MikeInVA said:
What’s wrong with the Knox version? I just bought a copy based on recommendations on other threads. From what little I’ve read, it is a little formal but readable. I’m still not sure if I like his translation of the Psalms from songs to prose though.
Click to expand...
Nothing per se.

It’s just really awkward, and not a good translation at all, IMO.

It’s too literal to be a good dynamic translation, yet it’s too dynamic to be a good formal translation.

It’s got too much “old timey” language to be a good modern English version, but it’s got too much modern English to be a true “traditional language” Bible.

It is a translation of a translation instead of a direct translation - and it’s a dynamic translation on top of that - so it’s a translation, of a translation, with the translators idiosynchracies and biases added into that.

Lastly, the language is just awkward and unnatural in so many places - it reads more like “yodaspeak” than a Bible translation.

Seriously, read this Knox Bible passage in your head in a “yoda voice:”

Proverbs 15:3-4

“Go where thou wilt, the Lord’s eye is watching; good nor evil escapes his scrutiny. Tongue that speaks peaceably is a tree whose fruit gives life; tongue undisciplined can break hearts.”

Seriously? “Tongue that speaks peacably is a tree” - that is straight up yoda-speak.

I know this is a bit scathing, but it’s my honest opinion. I feel like the Knox is one of the poorest Bible translations available to Catholics today - there are a dozen better versions to choose from.

I know many Catholics love it - I don’t hate it, I respect it, but I just don’t like it or use it.

I have much respect for Saint Msgr Ronald Knox - he was placed under a lot of constraints in how he was to make his translation, and I think that’s a big reason why it is how it is.

So, considering all this, that’s why I recommend a Douay Rheims or a Confraternity to someone who wants a more traditional translation or a Latin Vulgate translation.
 
Last edited:
Thanks. I agree with you - I’m hoping that more narrative books, e.g. the Gospels, will be a better read. My usual litmus test involves checking Luke 1:28 to make sure is says, “full of grace”!
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top