Which Bible do you use at home?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Indifferently
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A lot of people don’t care for this translation, but I have a real attachment to the book itself for many reasons! But I have a St. Jerome study bible. I love it.
 
Aelred_Minor said:
I mostly use the New American Bible (yes, I know the criticisms and often agree with them, but it has many good qualities too) …
Click to expand...
Me too. I’ve considered switching to another translation, but I have become somewhat competent at using this one. I am also attached to the headings. I own an Ignatius Catholic Edition. There’s something that feels “richer” to me in much of the translation. But if I am searching for a specific passage, I’m usually lost without those headings.

Does anyone know of another translation that uses those handy headings?
 
Christian Community Bible(Catholic Pastoral Edition)…45th edition
 
I have a DR, and NAB, and a KJV . Most often use the NAB each day, but refer to others as I need to. I also refer to the internet at times to look for further evaluation and study. I subscribe to Word Among Us magazine and read the daily liturgical readings and reflections.
 
I have a great affection for the Douay Rheims which was the bible of my childhood. For everyday reading the New Jerusalem bible.
 
I use “The One Year Bible - Catholic Edition” – and read by the day of the year every night before I turn out the light. There is usually a reading from the Old Testament – from the Psalms – then from the New Testament. I feel I’m pretty much covering the entire Bible in a year’s time and believe I’ve had this book for several years.
 
Used2beSherryG said:
Authorized by whom? Pls explain. Thx!
Click to expand...
Apparently the name does not refer to any specific authorization, but the King of England and Scotland, Parliament, and the Church of England all had a role in its approval. Anyway it’s just the more proper title of what we Americans usually call the King James Bible.
 
porthos11 said:
RSV-CE, RSV-2CE, Revised NAB. I also used to have a 1966 Jerusalem Bible back in the Philippines.
I don't think any Bibles are in print that are in old English.
Click to expand...
Well, if it comes to such nitpicking, notice that in neither the post you respond to nor in your response is the “o” of “old” capitalized. Therefore it would seem we are not dealing with the proper noun Old English (aka the Anglo-Saxon language) but with the idea of archaic English in general. In that sense I would certainly consider the King James and the D-R to be in “old English.” 😉
 
In order of preference I use the RSV CE, 1941 Confraternity (new testament), Douay-Rheims, and then the NAB. I also keep a few Protestant translations around for discussing doctrine with my non-Catholic friends and family.
 
Aelred_Minor said:
Well, if it comes to such nitpicking, notice that in neither the post you respond to nor in your response is the “o” of “old” capitalized. Therefore it would seem we are not dealing with the proper noun Old English (aka the Anglo-Saxon language) but with the idea of archaic English in general. In that sense I would certainly consider the King James and the D-R to be in “old English.” 😉
Click to expand...
Good catch. I was in fact toying with the capitalization of Old but unwisely decided against it. 😃

Technically, the KJV is Early Modern English, as are the DR and the Book of Common Prayer.
 
Used2beSherryG said:
Authorized by whom? Pls explain. Thx!
Click to expand...
The “Authorised Version” is a name used to refer to the “King James Bible”.

Unfortunately there is no specific record of a specific authorisation.
F.F. Bruce suggests it was “probably authorized by order in council” but no record of the authorization survives “because the Privy Council registers from 1600 to 1613 were destroyed by fire in January 1618/19”
Click to expand...
Why the British Parliament or Privy Council should be considered to have any authority to “Authorise” the use of one translation of the Bible in any church is highly dubious. For that to be adopted by Christians with no links to the Church Of England and considered to be in any way authoritative is nothing less than theologically perverse.

The CofE who owned this translation have largely abandoned this translation now in favour of the NRSV and other translations.
 
I’ve heard good things about the ESV. What do people think of it? Does it have an accompanying Apocrypha?

I have also heard that the NRSV is blasphemous and politically correct, obscuring a lot of OT prophesy in the name of “gender inclusive” language.

I stick to the AV mainly because I generally agree it’s a good translation which reads aloud well and reflects an honest attempt at a good, fairly literal tendering of the texts, and seems to sit “right” with the BCP Daily Offices. Not just that, but the AV sits in a wider cultural context which I appreciate in terms of the literary allusions and quotations it has generated over the years since 1611.

In terms of doctrine, I don’t try to quarry that out of the Bible myself anyway - relying instead on the Church Fathers. (Who am I, an amateur, to interpret Scripture?)
 
porthos11 said:
RSV-CE, RSV-2CE, Revised NAB. I also used to have a 1966 Jerusalem Bible back in the Philippines.
I don't think any Bibles are in print that are in old English.
Click to expand...
Haha, KJV and DR are Old English for this Spanish speaker here 😉

ETA - Notice I capitalized “old” now 😛 😃
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top