Which Catholic Bible is most accurate?

  • Thread starter Thread starter aball1035
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

aball1035

Guest
So I pose the question-which Catholic Bible is most accurate?
And why do you believe that?

I read the Duay (Douay?)-Reims myself.
 
In regards to which one I enjoy the most, not necessarily accuracy.

I would have to say the RSV. I find it the most readable, yet it still has enough thou’s, thee’s and tho’s to sound “official”. 🙂

I also like the fact that the foot notes etc. are kept to a minimum, and at the end of the OT and NT. I hate it, as I have a beautiful, in regards to the quality of the actual material used for the book, NAB bible from Fireside. Soft leather cover, bolded “headers” for different sections and stories, great binding etc. and actually a joy to even hold. However, after reading the RSV, I simply cannot stand the changes in the NAB. They drive me nuts, most particularly, the Psalms.

We also have a beautiful Douay-Reims Bible, in a cedar box, that has been in my family for a very long time. (Given at a funeral). While I love it, I do find it a bit difficult to read at times, and still stick by the RSV as my favorite. 🙂
 
aball1035 said:
So I pose the question-which Catholic Bible is most accurate?
And why do you believe that?

I read the Duay (Douay?)-Reims myself.
Click to expand...
I’ll stick with the Douay-Rheims as being most accurate outside the Latin Vulgate. I have both the Clementine Vulgate and the Douay-Rheims. I read them side by side. I also have 2 NAB and am not fond with some of it. I also have a Jerusalem NT and it isn’t bad. The RSV-CE makes me too uncomfortable to read it. I stick with the Douay-Rheims and the Clementine Vulgate.
 
As some one who grew up with the King James Bible, I often find the Douay-Rheims’s language to be comfortable to read, except in place where the translation is mistaken of course.
 
As to the most accurate, I do not know the biblical languages, so I cannot say myself, but I have most often heard that the RSV-CE is by people who do possess such knowledge. And I certainly do love that version.

But as for my favorite version, that would be the Douay-Rheims (which from what I understand is still fairly accurate). I find the language beautiful, and I love the footnotes (especially of the Haydock Bible).
 
Bible Translations Guide

At Catholic Answers we are often asked which Bible version a person should choose. This is an important question about which Catholics need to be informed. Some have been given very little help about how to pick a Bible translation, but keeping in mind a few tips will make the decision much easier…

http://www.catholic.com/library/bible_translations_guide.asp
 
Crimson_Seraph said:
As some one who grew up with the King James Bible, I often find the Douay-Rheims’s language to be comfortable to read, except in place where the translation is mistaken of course.
Click to expand...
The Douay-Rheims is a more accurate translation than the King James.

Tell us where the D-R has a translation error.
 
I do like the Jerusalem Bible - a good middle-point between the ‘theeing’ and ‘thouing’ of the D-R, and the NAB which veers too much in the opposite direction.

As for ‘errors’ in the D-R, don’t know that I’d call them errors, but the Genesis bit ‘SHE will crush your head’ translation, vs every other English translation which says ‘HE will crush your head’ - and what is with the order and numbering of the Psalms in the D-R?
 
The faithful need many different translations and editions, in many different languages, some from the Hebrew or Greek, some from the Latin, some more literal, some looser translations. It is very beneficial to own and use more than one version, so if you own a Bible based on the Latin, such as the Douai, it would be good to own another Bible basedon the Hebrew and Greek, such as the RSV CE. There is no one best or definitive or ultimate translation.
 
I am a convert from protestantism a little over 4 years and I still use my protestant bibles, my favorite is the HCSB. I use my catholic bibles for reference.🙂
 
eucharist04 said:
I am a convert from protestantism a little over 4 years and I still use my protestant bibles, my favorite is the HCSB. I use my catholic bibles for reference.🙂
Click to expand...
Then what do you do about the 7 deutrocanonicals. They aren’t in your HCSB.
 
Martin Luther remove some New Testament books as well, because they support catholic teachings(i.e. The book of James).
 
aball1035 said:
So I pose the question-which Catholic Bible is most accurate?
And why do you believe that?

I read the Duay (Douay?)-Reims myself.
Click to expand...

Spellings such as:​

  • Douai
  • Douay
  • Doway
    are all correct: “Doway” is a 17th-century Englishing of the place-name, so it’s best avoided if used in combination with a modern Englishing or a transcription of “Reims”: “Doway-Rhemes” is accurate 17th-century English (AFAIR).
“Duay” OTOH, fails to account for the O.

Like a lot of people on this site, I read a variety of Bibles: some Catholic, some not. I’m interested not in who is responsible for the translation, but in whether the translation is more or less accurate within the limits dictated by the methods the translator allows himself. So, if a passage is in verse, I think it should printed as verse - most modern versions (= those since about 1900) do this.

Since the understanding of the Bible has profited from the discovery of a great variety of extra-Biblical texts in modern times, ISTM that a version of which the makers are in a position to learn from them is preferable to one of which this is not true. So in principle I prefer translations that are later than 1960 or so - the trouble with these, is that they are instantly forgettable: a great virtue of the Authorised Version is that it is rhythmical, & therefore memorable. I like the 1970 NEB (the New English Bible), but it’s not exactly phrased in memorable English. The Jerusalem Bible (RC; ET 1966) has very good notes, but most of the translation, however accurate it may be, is stodge. 😦 And the same is true of the NAB of 1970.

BTW - whatever you do, avoid so-called “gender-neutral” Bibles & editions of Bibles. They are made by people without chests for people with cloth ears, & and are a menace to society, as are the makers of them, who should be publicly flogged.
 
eucharist04 said:
I let scripture reading at mass take care it or catholic books who quote from them.🙂
Click to expand...
Then what advantage of does the HCSB have over an approved translation by the Church?? How only getting 7 duetrocanonical books at mass other Catholics justifiable as opposed to your daily Bible reading???
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top