What's with the way the Psalms are numbered?

[dizzy_dave]

Why are the Psalms always off by one? Example Psalm 100 (101),
I don’t understand why this is this way, in a booklet that list a Psalm for a particular day, which one do I read?, 100 or 101 my bible lists them this way 100 (101), so if the booklet says read 100 which do I read?

 

[Todd_Easton]

Psalm 10 in older Catholic Bibles is now divided into two psalms in newer Catholic Bibles, namely, Psalm 10 and Psalm 11. Also, Psalms 146 and 147 in older Catholic Bibles are now combined into one psalm in newer Catholic Bibles, namely Psalm 147. This means that all the intervening psalms in the older Catholic Bibles now are identified by the next higher number in newer Catholic Bibles, for example, Psalm 22 in older Catholic Bibles is now Psalm 23 in newer Catholic Bibles. Although I don’t know for certain, I suspect this renumbering was done in the newer Catholic Bibles to bring them more into conformity to the Jewish (and Protestant) numbering of the Psalms. My Revised Standard Version - Catholic Edition, includes both numbering systems, with the older numbering in square brackets, ].

If your booklet was published recently, I would guess that you use the higher number of the two to identify the correct psalm. If the booklet says read Psalm 23, read the one identified as Psalm 23 [22].

 

[Joe_Kelley]

Also, note that Psalm 113 in the older Catholic Bible is now split into Psalms 114 and 115. And Psalms 114 and 115 in the older Bible are now combined into Psalm 116.

 

[Todd_Easton]

Thanks, Joe. I missed those.

 

[Fidelis]

This is a good question for those who are confused by this, especially in Bible study groups where participants might be using different versions of the Bible. Most group study materials that are lectionary related in this country are based on the NAB, while the Bible of choice among serious Catholic Bilbe readers is increasingly the RSV-CE. It might would be helpful for at least one participant in these groups to have their Bibles keyed (maybe with notes in the margin) so it won’ t be a point of confusion.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

Fidelis - My RSV-CE gives both numberings for the Psalms. The current numbers are shown first with the older number in parenthesis.

 

[Fidelis]

Joe Kelley:

Fidelis - My RSV-CE gives both numberings for the Psalms. The current numbers are shown first with the older number in parenthesis.

Yes, so does mine. But my point was that it isn’t readily apparent how they match up with the NAB. I think you are correct that the large un-parenthesed numbers match with the NAB, and the smaller numbers in parentheses are the old numbering. To confuse matters further, however, some of the versing is different. For example, Psalm 92:1 in the RSV-CE reads “It is good to give thanks to the Lord, to sing praises to thy name, O Most High.” In the NAB, however, verse 1 of this Psalm is “a psalm. A sabbath song,” making verse 2 the equivalent of verse 1 (RSV-CE) where the NAB Psalm 92:2 reads: “It is good to give thanks to the Lord, to sing praise to your name, Most High.”

Of course this is compounded as you go further in the passage because every verse after that is one off. Thus Psalm 92 (RSV) ends with verse 15 while Psalm 92 (NAB) ends at verse 16. This seems to be the case where the Psalm has some sort of title or musical notation at the beginning. The NAB numbers them, the RSV-CE does not.

 

[SentimentalGent]

From what I’ve understood, the difference in numbering is the result of the Scriptures in the original languages not having any numbering of chapters or verses, both of which are relatively modern inventions. So it was up to the translators to decide where to break chapters. There’s a chapter break in one of the Gospels where it seems obvious that the first verse of one chapter should have been the last verse of the previous chapter.

That’s also a reason why the Ten Commandments are different for Catholics and Protestants. There are no numbers where the Commandments are mentioned in the Old Testament (Exodus and Deuteronomy, right?), so dividing them up in 10 can be subjective.