Which translation of the Bible do you prefer?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Holly3278
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

Holly3278

Guest
Out of the following Bible translations, which do you prefer? Please vote in the poll. The Bible translations are in the poll.
 
I prefer the Revised Standard Version Catholic 2nd Edition.
 
My second choice (after the D-R) is the New American Standard Bible. It’s not one of your options, and apparently it’s not the choice of many other people. But it’s my number two choice for a simple reason: IT’S PRETTY!!!

svid2 likes pretty!!

Accurate? Maybe. Faithful to the Magisterium? I hope so.

PRETTY?

Yes!
 
svid2 said:
My second choice (after the D-R) is the New American Standard Bible. It’s not one of your options, and apparently it’s not the choice of many other people. But it’s my number two choice for a simple reason: IT’S PRETTY!!!

svid2 likes pretty!!

Accurate? Maybe. Faithful to the Magisterium? I hope so.

PRETTY?

Yes!
Click to expand...
Well, I didn’t put the New American Standard Bible on the list because it is not a Catholic Bible. 🙂
 
Cat said:
I have the RSV-CE and really like it. What’s the difference RSV-CE and RSV-Catholic 2nd Edition? Thanks.
Click to expand...
Its the same except they took out the “inclusive” (PC) language.
 
figs said:
Its the same except they took out the “inclusive” (PC) language.
Click to expand...
In that case I voted the wrong way. I thought I had the RSV - CE.

Just got up and checked.

NRSV - CE, Anglicized text.

I like it a lot.
 
The Douay-Rheims, followed by the Jerusalem( original, not new). As a convert the language of the Douay-Rheims is much more pleasing to my Soul. The lack of PC-isms is a plus.
 
Challoner’s revision is a close second. But the NAB reads very easily, despite all those spotty notes, and its gender-neutral language.

I’ve never read any of the others in depth - except the Confraternity version (which is strangely absent) which I also like. Though that RSV-2CE sounds like a pretty good substitute.
 
Douay-Rheims. It is beautiful and poetic, like the King James Version, but it is Catholic, made for Catholics and by Catholics at a time when Catholics were being martyred in England. It is based mainly on the Vulgate, which was declared infallible by the Council of Trent (no other book has received such a declaration).

I appreciate how it holds on to our Catholic culture and traditions, as well, instead of giving in to the Protestant innovations. For example, the Psalm numbering follows the Greek instead of the Hebrew. Instead of “Revelation,” St. John’s book is called “Apocalypse.” Etc. It is important for us to retain our Catholic culture as a safe house, so to speak, for defending the integrity of the Deposit of Faith.
  • PAX
 
I do love the Douay-Rheims version, like someone mentioned, it’s poetic flow is beautiful…but also the Ignatius RSV-CE is a good choice.
When my husband and I do Bible devotions together he prefers the NAB - CE. So I don’t mind using that if that’s what’s he is comfortable with for that.
 
The RSV-CE, RSV-CE 2nd Edition and the Douay Rheims, in my opinion, are the most faithful translations. The New American Bible, New Jerusalem Bible seem to contain more Protestant-minded passages, such as the Annunciation narrative, where the angel Gabriel addresses Mary. In the NAB, NJB it reads, “Hail, O favored one.” whereas in the RSV and Douay Rheims, it reads, “Hail, full of grace!”
We can have favor with God by doing His will. It is another matter to be full of His grace, to be in complete union with Him.
 
Definitely the DR or DRC, as it’s beautiful, traditional language, has influenced so so so much of Anglophone Catholic culture, was translated by holy men in a time of persecution, based upon the Latin Vulgate (which is a prized translation, given special status by the Church, declared free from error). And the Psalm numberings, titles of the books, etc., are kept from the Septuagint.

The RSV-CE or 2nd CE are useful too, I keep them around, but don’t normally read from them.

I can’t stand the Jerusalem Bible … I suppose it’s a useful reference but especially using “Yahweh” instead of doing what nearly every other English Bible does and use “Lord” … it sounds awful.

The NAB is also just awful. Heretical notes are the worst. When we have a non-copyrighted DR available everywhere, it’s such a crime the bishops have kept the NAB in the lectionary. Why can’t a bishop just say “in my diocese any priest can read the DR instead”?
 
I feel like the NAB is the easiest to read and understand, but that the RSV-2CE is the overall best. The Ignatius Catholic Study Bible RSV-2CE New Testament is one of the finest things I’ve ever had the privledge to read through, I’d recommend buying this to anyone (~$25 for hardcover on Amazon).
 
newyorkcatholic said:
Definitely the DR or DRC, as it’s beautiful, traditional language, has influenced so so so much of Anglophone Catholic culture, was translated by holy men in a time of persecution, based upon the Latin Vulgate (which is a prized translation, given special status by the Church, declared free from error). And the Psalm numberings, titles of the books, etc., are kept from the Septuagint.

The RSV-CE or 2nd CE are useful too, I keep them around, but don’t normally read from them.

I can’t stand the Jerusalem Bible … I suppose it’s a useful reference but especially using “Yahweh” instead of doing what nearly every other English Bible does and use “Lord” … it sounds awful.

The NAB is also just awful. Heretical notes are the worst. When we have a non-copyrighted DR available everywhere, it’s such a crime the bishops have kept the NAB in the lectionary. Why can’t a bishop just say “in my diocese any priest can read the DR instead”?
Click to expand...
As a young bible user, I must humbly disagree with you, newyorkcatholic. I find the Douay to be quite cumbersome and the sentences are sort of in jumbled order :o And I find the newer dynamic translations to be more intuitive and fluid (the NAB and NJB). How can you comfortably read all of that old dusty english from 1604?

IMHO Yahweh is a beautiful word and is the original name of god :tiphat:
 
tritcher1988 said:
As a young bible user, I must humbly disagree with you, newyorkcatholic. I find the Douay to be quite cumbersome and the sentences are sort of in jumbled order :o And I find the newer dynamic translations to be more intuitive and fluid (the NAB and NJB). How can you comfortably read all of that old dusty english from 1604?

IMHO Yahweh is a beautiful word and is the original name of god :tiphat:
Click to expand...
I think it’s very nice and humble of you to admit you find the Douay English tough. For that reason the RSV-CE or CE2 would be nice alternatives, I suppose. Though through using the Douay you will get used to it. After all plenty of people in American history were very poor, had limited education, but learned mostly to read from the King James version.

The problems with dynamic translations is that you have to trust the people doing it, that they capture everything well. The NAB has heretical footnotes, for me that is dangerous enough. Nothing in the Douay is at all problematic from a faith point of view.

“Yahweh” is the name of God, but it’s a very, very old tradition from ancient times never to use this word at all. In the Catholic Liturgy this is never used in prayer, and pretty much every English bible translation has kept the phrase “The Lord” instead. The Church also recently issued an instruction (a few years ago?) on avoiding the word “Yahweh” – this is one of those Jewish traditions that’s not new but predates Christ and is something we inherited.

So it’s very awkward to read it in the NJB. No translation, especially one used in Mass, should have “Yahweh.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top