Which Translation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Penitant
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

Penitant

Guest
Which bible translation do you use? I’m going to start participating in a bible study soon and would like to have something as close to the original greek/aramaic as possible. I currently have a copy of the NAB, but I have heard mixed things about it.

Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.

-Penitant
 
NAB is a pretty reliable translation. The footnotes leave something to be desired.

I use the RSV.
 
NRSV-CE because it is the liturgical Bible of Canada, and I strongly dislike the mixed use of archaic and modern English in the RSV, although a little more poetic. Plus, the Indian German-speaking wise retired psychologist guy who led our Scripture Study group taught using the NRSV-CE.

(A guy at my church who teaches the Bible using the NAB I was talking to, and he thought that the bible used in the Canadian liturgy is the NAB, which is directly wrong… but that’s another story).

If you live in America, and it would seem most likely, the NAB would be good for the sake of uniformity. If not, there are other really good translations out there: the New Jerusalem Bible if you want the name of Yahweh in place of the traditional LORD (which I really adore, and wish it was restored in other translations) and the Christian Community Bible, which I also absolutely love, and reads as easily as the NLT or the NIV. You could use the Douay Rheims Version if you like a KJV-ish Bible in archaic Modern English…

The CCB is a good bible, and I don’t know why it doesn’t get enough spotlight. It translates more thought-for-thought in simple and modern English and uses the name Yahweh in the OT (except for the Psalms for some reason). The only thing is, it butchers some of my favourite verses.

Galatians 2:19-20

NRSV: “I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but it is Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.”

CCB: “I am crucified with Christ. Do I live? It is no longer me, Christ lives in me. My life in this body is life through faith in the Son of God who loved me and gave himself for me.”

Anyways, I’m probably parroting the others, but 😃

I also use the Catholic version of the New Living Translation in private readings, since it flows more than the Catholic Good News Translation.
 
Here are my choices in order of personal preference.

Douay-Rheims Bible

RSV-CE 2nd Edition (Just out this year!)

NAB- Decent enough translation, but some of the notes are not orthodox. Notes in Douay are excellent, as are RSV-CE

Jerusalem Bible- Also a good translation though a little weird in some places.

Confraternity Bible. Essentially an interim revision of the Douay-Rheims Bible. Hard to find.

That’s about it. I have several others, mostly n-C ones but I hardly ever even look at them any more. I don’t see the need.

You’ll notice a conspicuous lack of the other versions that begin with “New”. That is because all the rest have a reputation for inclusive language and in some cases notes that make the ones in the NAB look like a papal encyclical.

If I had to pick just one that falls between the more archaic language of the DRV (Much like KJV, since it came out 2 years before the KJV, but actually better reading) and the modern language of the NAB and yet remains readable and understandable it would have to be the RSV-CE.
I hope this helps somewhat.
Pax tecum,
 
I use the vulgata, or an italian translation made in 1964 by Padre Pasquera, in Italian. It’s a good edition.
 
the NAB is the version approved for liturgical use in the USA so if you are in a Catholic group bible study, that is what you should use, particularly if you will be focusing on the Sunday or daily lectionary readings. It is a literal translation from the original languages. Use the most recent version you can buy because it has been revised several times to correct problems.

If you are in an ecumenical class with non-Catholics, use the RSV-CE since its language will be more in harmony with what Protestants may be used to, it is a translation made under ecumenical auspices, and is approved for liturgy in some countries and for private study and devotion everywhere. It is also the version used by the Vatican in its translations of Church documents into English, so if you are going to be studying encyclicals, JPII, V2 etc. that would be the best version to use.

the version to use for your own study is any approved translation that is easiest for you to read.

unless your group includes people that speak English as a second language or those who might have difficulty with the written word in general, do not choose a Good News, Today’s english version or any modern translation such as that which are essentially paraphrases in one degree or another, not exact translations, into contemporary English.
 
I agree with Puzzleannie’s advice completely: it depends under what conditions you will be studying and with whom. I own several translations, kept for comparison purpose when doing in-depth study, but for my own private devotions and reading, I stick to the RSV-CE. However, when I lead a parish Bible study or Rite of Dismissal reflection for RCIA, for the sake of uniformity, I use the NAB. If I were to engage in apologetics or be in a mixed denomination group, I’d fall back on the RSV-CE.
 
I’m going to start participating in a bible study soon and would like to have something as close to the original greek/aramaic as possible.
Click to expand...
Has anyone actually answered the question? Which one is closest to the original Greek/Aramaic? I would like to know this as well.

TIA
 
JoeyWarren said:
Has anyone actually answered the question? Which one is closest to the original Greek/Aramaic? I would like to know this as well.

TIA
Click to expand...
Well if you really look at it asking for a translation that is closest to the orginal Greek/Aramaic is basically asking for the Latin Vulgate. Greek/Aramaic manuscripts have been restored and/or reproduced using the Latin Vulgate. Further you have a Church Father and a Saint translating it. St Jerome had spoken Latin and Greek fluently and had more than a working knowledge of Aramaic. So if translates literally from the Latin Vulgate, you have an extremely accurate translation. If you consider the Dead Sea Scrolls as well, the Latin Vulgate is more accurate than the Masoretic text. Hence I would say the Douay-Rheims.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top