Which Catholic Bible is most accurate?

  • Thread starter Thread starter aball1035
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Which is a shame too. Then again, I don’t care much for alot of Luther’s theology. I much prefer John Wesley’s to any of the Reformers. They were too stuck on hardline predestination for my tastes. That and they didn’t believe you could fall from grace.
 
I like the Ignatius Bible (RSV) as well as the Douay-Rheims. I have the NAB only for the purpose of the USCCB has made it the standard translation, however I am displeased with some of the commentary and dumbfounded on how some of the comments were introduced. The Haydock commentary is wonderful as well. I would use the Catechism of the Catholic Church along with any bible study. The Ignatius bible study is a wonderful companion as well to the bible.
 
Crimson_Seraph said:
Which is a shame too. Then again, I don’t care much for alot of Luther’s theology. I much prefer John Wesley’s to any of the Reformers. They were too stuck on hardline predestination for my tastes. That and they didn’t believe you could fall from grace.
Click to expand...
We’re still waiting for you to tell us what the D-R translation errors are!
 
thistle said:
We’re still waiting for you to tell us what the D-R translation errors are!
Click to expand...
Yes we are. I have had too many people tell me about the errors in the D-R, but no facts have been presented :crying:
 
I also prefer the Douay-Rheims.
Some of the theological language seems more precise or something. I’m not really sure exactly why I like it so much, just do.

Pax Vobiscum
 
The Second Edition of the RSV by Ignatius is very well done. It removes the “thees” and “thous” for those of us that did not grow up with the KJV or DR. It is also better formatted than the first edition. I can not wait for the full edition of the Ignatius Study Bible to be published!

I also like the Jerusalem Bible for reading. It is a dynamic version that is not literal, but it is very poetic and has a plethora of notes. The Catholic Truth Society has published a newly revised edition with very nice covers and reasonable prices.

The HCSB is a very solid translation, but I doubt that it will ever have the full cannon as it is published by the Southern Baptist Convention.
 
tobinatorstark said:
Yes we are. I have had too many people tell me about the errors in the D-R, but no facts have been presented :crying:
Click to expand...
I’ve heard there are some errors in the OT like Moses having horns.

However, the Vulgate is the only Bible that has ever been declared free of doctrinal error by a Church Council (Trent) so, the Douay, as the literal translation, is free of all errors that matter.

God Bless
 
I like the RSV-2CE, I am not a fan of the ‘thees and thous’, and this second edition of the RSV-CE eliminated these. However, it does leave in the ‘thees and thous’ for the ‘Lords Prayer’ in Matthew. Another change from the RSV-CE, is the use of ‘chalice’ instead of ‘cup’ in the institution of the ‘Last Supper.’ This is used in the D-R version, at first I was kind of perplexed, until I saw the propsed changes to the Roman Missal in English, and we are going back to using the word ‘chalice’ instead of ‘cup.’

I have gone back and forth trying many different translations over the last 5 years since I have converted to Catholicisim, and I always come back to the RSV-2CE as my favorite.
 
I have heard that the Douay Reims on the shelves these days is a slightly different version than the ones published when they first came out-is this true?
 
The Douay was completed in 1582

About 200 years Later the Bishop Challoner version came out which updated the English and made it say some much more readable. This is the most common one on the internet and in book stores.

200 years or so after that came the Confraternity update.

In terms of accuracy the Douay wins hands down. Festidious to the original languages (I like the 1582 orignal the best), though the Latin scriptural tradition is not ignored.

The archaisms can be annoying, not just the thys etc, but the accuracy and fidelity of the translation wins me over every time. The RSV-CE is not enough CE for me.

For dynamic translations look no furthur than the original 1966 Jerusalem Bible. Dyanmic yes and Luke 1:28 obviously not literal 😦 but a great read, faithul to the Church it seems and unlike many dynamic translations it is actually of a high literary quality!
 
Thank you everyone for your suggestions. I am a newly converted Catholic and have read and own The Jerusalem Bible and I am currently reading the Douay-Rheims version. I will probably get the RSV-CE next. I have the RSV protestant Bible and love how it reads. I enjoy reading the Bible over and over. In fact I pray it over people that God chooses. I don’t know how many times I have prayed the Bible over someone. It is amazing how I keep finding scriptures that I never noticed before!
 
IrishDude45 said:
I also prefer the Douay-Rheims.
Some of the theological language seems more precise or something. I’m not really sure exactly why I like it so much, just do.

Pax Vobiscum
Click to expand...
Me too ! I think its the beautiful , poetic language which
glorifies God.
I also enjoyed learning Shakespeare plays in school. Perhaps old
English is more expressive .
 
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...
The Douay-Rheims is the best translation. I am glad to hear that you read it. God bless you.
 
I can’t say DR is the most accurate.I wouldn’t say that of any translated Bible. Translations can be troublesome and most of the antique Bible translations are not sufficient.The majority what we know of Biblical language and society came after the discoveries of the ancient libraries holding thousands of cuneiform tablets . These gave scholars great in sight to the culture and language of the time of the bible.These were 20th century discoveries-so the really old translations are missing a degree of scholarship not available to them.
 
Toss up between The Living Bible and the Cotton Patch Version. :eek:

Ok, just kidding. :D.

From what I’ve heard (since I don’t read any of the originals) would be Douay in a latin-based translation or the RSV from the original languages (with honorable mention to the Confraternity NT). A lot really depends on how much thees/thys/thous you want: DR - Confraternity - RSV - RSV 2nd Ed (lots — none)
 
Chad27 said:
I like the Ignatius Bible (RSV) as well as the Douay-Rheims. I have the NAB only for the purpose of the USCCB has made it the standard translation, however I am displeased with some of the commentary and dumbfounded on how some of the comments were introduced. The Haydock commentary is wonderful as well. I would use the Catechism of the Catholic Church along with any bible study. The Ignatius bible study is a wonderful companion as well to the bible.
Click to expand...
Some of the commentary in the NAB is too liberal for me.
 
eucharist04 said:
Martin Luther remove some New Testament books as well, because they support catholic teachings(i.e. The book of James).
Click to expand...
Luther’s Bible contains all the books that the Catholic Bible does (including the Deuterocanonicals) plus the Prayer of Manasseh. Please cite your source.
 
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...
What’s your criterion of accuracy?

If you want something that resembles the Septuagint (loosely, the Greek Old Testament), then probably Douay Reims or a direct translation of the Septuagint (Brenton) would be your best bet.

If you want something that sticks closer to the Hebrew text of the Old Testament, then the RSV would be better. I believe there is a Catholic edition.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top