Roman Catholic Bibles.

Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by mioque, Oct 15, 2003.

  1. mioque

    mioque
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    Several times I have read on this board that something is fishy with Roman Catholic Bible translations. I know about the use of the Vulgate (and translations thereof) as the official liturgical translation and the problems associated with that version.
    However for none liturgical use (preaching, bible-study) other translations are normally used. Those are created from the same texts used for Protestant Bible versions, with a couple of apocryphal bits and books added.
    Does anybody here know of any specific examples of questionable translating in those areas of Roman Catholic Bibles I haven't covered?
    I'm asking because my church is considering the possebility of switching to a new translation in a year or 2 and some of translators working on this brand new translation are RC. We will be buying the version with the New Testament, without the Apocrypha (except for me ofcourse I'm a sucker for Apocrypha :D )
    On a related note, some of the translators working on that Bible are Jews, so if somebody knows of dodgy bits of translating in Jewish Bible versions I'm also interested.
     
  2. Forever settled in heaven

    Forever settled in heaven
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2000
    Messages:
    1,770
    Likes Received:
    0
    mind telling us which version/s ur church has in mind?

    the apocryphal books r not tiny bits; they're there to prop up RCC doctrines that r not in God's Word. so u'll want to be sure they're not included as/between Scriptures.

    i'd look up references to "repent" as well as passages Luther pointed out that needed to be translated in a way that highlights Paul's INTENDED/embedded meaning (n not merely "translate" word forms in a formal way, as the RCC did n therefore missed the Meaning). Luther's brilliant comments r found here: http://www.augustana.edu/religion/lutherproject/On%20Translating/on%20translating.htm

    anyone who agrees w me is necessarily brilliant [​IMG]
     
  3. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    When sharing the Gospel with Roman Catholic adherents, I use the Confraternity Version (1960's revision of Douay). Pope Pius has a list inside its cover for "indulgences" and days out of Purgatory for "reading" and "memorizing" from it.

    I show that to RC, and faces light up. Then go to Romans Road to show them sin and salvation. I used to go to John 3, but the translation there is suspect. While the verb tenses are wonderful (better than most English versions) they add a couple words.

    You must be born of water and the Spirit
    or
    You must be born again of water and the Spirit

    The added "again" changes the meaning dramatically. We are BORN of water, NOT BORN AGAIN of water. But of course RC teaches such.
     
  4. Ransom

    Ransom
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2000
    Messages:
    4,132
    Likes Received:
    0
    The Confraternity Version is, I believe, the forerunner of the New American Bible. I have made use of this translation in the past, and I agree with Dr. Bob - the English is excellent, but the translation is suspect in places. If you're going to use any RC Bible for study, make sure you have a decent evangelical translation on hand as well.
     
  5. BrianT

    BrianT
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    3,516
    Likes Received:
    0
    Normally, I agree with you, but this time I had to read that three times, just because I didn't first believe I understood you correctly. [​IMG] How did Luther know the "intended/embedded" meaning, if not via the formal words themselves? How do the word forms in a formal way miss the meaning?

    Can you give specifics?

    BTW, I didn't find Luther's comments "brilliant", I found them very arrogant and completely lacking of patience and humbleness. [​IMG]

    Confused,
    Brian [​IMG]
     
  6. Daniel Dunivan

    Daniel Dunivan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2002
    Messages:
    374
    Likes Received:
    0
    mioque,

    The Vulgate is actually not the offical translation anymore. The Constitution on Revelation from Vatican II said that biblical translations (used in vernacular worship) should be taken from the original langauges and done in conjuction with non-Catholic Greek and Hebrew scholars, i.e. Protestant, Jewish, Orthodox, etc.

    BTW, Dr. Bob in using the notes from Pius you should be careful not to assume that such teachings are true of the post-Vatican II Roman Catholic Church. Many of my Catholic friend no longer speak of indulgences (they still exist, but have nothing to do with time and are not really spoken about at all anymore) or even purgatory (which has been spiritualized as a purification before meeting God--they also emphasize that Christ has done the work to get you there). Great variation now exists within the Church, especially among theologians, that was not true pre-V2.

    Grace and Peace, Danny [​IMG]
     
  7. Taufgesinnter

    Taufgesinnter
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,135
    Likes Received:
    0
    The Precise Parallel NT is great for that: it contains the Greek text, the KJV, Douay, NAB, NASB, NIV, Amplified, and NRSV.
     
  8. mioque

    mioque
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    "mind telling us which version/s ur church has in mind?"
    When it is finished, we may want to switch to this one.
    http://www.biblija.net/biblija.cgi?m=Gen+1%2C1-50%2C26&id18=1&pos=0&set=10&lang=nl

    Owning multiple different translations of the Bible is encouraged within our church, however we like to have one 'official' default translation, that can be recommended to new members and that is used by our preachers during churchservices.
    It ought to be easy for new members to buy, so we want a Bible widely available and not an obscure translation that had one print run in 1972. We want a real Bible and not a simplified Good News for modern man version. We want one in Dutch. We want one that is reasonably understandable for the avarage person and that means not using the Dutch equivalent of the KJV. And using the translation of the RCC feels a bit funny so we are stuck using the 1951 translation of the Dutch Bible Society. The perfect study Bible, but dry reading.
    The 1951 translation will soon be replaced by this new translation, created in joined effort by the Dutch Bible Society (NBG) and their Roman-Catholic and Jewish equivalent. We are in the market for a new Bible, so we're interested. Only problem is, how will the various influences on the new version turn out.

    "the apocryphal books r not tiny bits; they're there to prop up RCC doctrines that r not in God's Word. so u'll want to be sure they're not included as/between Scriptures." :rolleyes:
    Don't forget to warn me against buying the Jewish version, because that won't contain the New Testament. :rolleyes:
    We will ofcourse be buying the Protestant edition, without the Apocrypha. [​IMG]


    Bob Griffin
    John 3, [​IMG]
     
  9. Elk

    Elk
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2003
    Messages:
    151
    Likes Received:
    0
    You might want to consider looking at the beginning of Ezekiel in the American Bible.
    Compare the verses (and order) with other Bibles.
     
  10. Forever settled in heaven

    Forever settled in heaven
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2000
    Messages:
    1,770
    Likes Received:
    0
    i'm not sure how this can be, if Vatican 2 specifically re-endorses Trent, which may allow for other translations but still anathemizes those who repudiate the Apocrypha. privately, Roman Catholics may repudiate this or that false doctrine, but we have to go by the official teaching, which by the RCC's claim is infallible n on par w the Scriptures. the practice or belief of a few means nothing--a few of them believe in liberation theology n abuse children. it's the official religion that's apostate, n unless repented of, it needs to be held up as a warning.
     
  11. mioque

    mioque
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    "You might want to consider looking at the beginning of Ezekiel in the American Bible.
    Compare the verses (and order) with other Bibles."
    Why would I want to do that?
    And especially why would I want to look at the beginning of Ezekiel in the American Bible, if I am shopping for a Bible translation in Dutch?

    Forever settled in heaven/Daniël Dunivan
    In this case I don't care what the official opinion on the Apocrypha is. because we won't be using those in any case.
     
  12. Elk

    Elk
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2003
    Messages:
    151
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is why I mentioned it.
    I believe I now do not understand what you are after. I am sorry.
     
  13. Daniel Dunivan

    Daniel Dunivan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2002
    Messages:
    374
    Likes Received:
    0
    i'm not sure how this can be, if Vatican 2 specifically re-endorses Trent, which may allow for other translations but still anathemizes those who repudiate the Apocrypha. privately, Roman Catholics may repudiate this or that false doctrine, but we have to go by the official teaching, which by the RCC's claim is infallible n on par w the Scriptures. the practice or belief of a few means nothing--a few of them believe in liberation theology n abuse children. it's the official religion that's apostate, n unless repented of, it needs to be held up as a warning. </font>[/QUOTE]Can you quote a section of V2 that "anathemizes those who repudiate the Apocrypha"? Their statements on the Bible come from the "Constitution on Divine Revelation." Constitution on Divine Revelation

    Official teaching is not exactly on par with scripture--they would say that the scripture is a result of tradition, and they cannot be understood outside the tradition. As a Baptists, I don't think this is too far off (though I resist the idea, contra the RCC, that the tradition can be bound to any group--i.e. bishops). Most people I have seen post here take their understanding of scripture from the teachings of their church--not on the basis of their own scholarship.

    Grace and Peace, Danny [​IMG]
     
  14. mioque

    mioque
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    Elk
    "Originally posted by me:
    Does anybody here know of any specific examples of questionable translating in those areas of Roman Catholic Bibles I haven't covered?
    ---------------------------------------------------------------
    This is why I mentioned it.
    I believe I now do not understand what you are after."

    I'm after (hypothetical) sections of the Bible that are translated in a peculiar fashion by the Roman Catholic Church. I'm looking into them because my church may adopt in the forseeable future a Bible partly translated by RC scholars. All of our elders are currently doing similar research. We are a Dutch speaking church located in the Netherlands.

    and since when is there such a thing as:"the American Bible"?
     
  15. Elk

    Elk
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2003
    Messages:
    151
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am sorry, but I am even more confused. I suggested that you look at Ezekiel in the New American Bible (which is a Catholic Bible here in America). The way this translation has changed the order of the verses (in Ezekiel) is quite interesting/eyebrow raising if you will.
    At this time, I would like to withdraw from this topic. I do not understand what you are looking for. I am sorry.
     
  16. BrianT

    BrianT
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    3,516
    Likes Received:
    0
    I used to think James 5:16 in Catholic Bibles ("Confess your sins one to another..." instead of "Confess your faults one to another...") was an example of what you are looking for. That was until I discovered how the same Greek word was translated everywhere else in Protestant Bibles, then I began to wonder if the "something fishy" doesn't sometimes go both directions. [​IMG]

    I don't usually read a "Catholic" Bible, so I don't know any examples off-hand of things that might qualify. However, I have been poking through the New American Bible (not the New American Standard Bible, but the one published by the Catholics) quite a bit lately. All in all, it's a good translation.

    And I don't mind having the Apocryphal books in some of my Bibles. I have a 1611 KJV reprint, after all. ;)
     
  17. mioque

    mioque
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    Elk
    "I suggested that you look at Ezekiel in the New American Bible (which is a Catholic Bible here in America)."
    Now you make sense.
    Beginning of Ezekiel (Ezechiël in my case) added to the list. [​IMG]
    Elk for future reference, don't assume that every Christian on this board is familiar with all English language Bible versions.
     
  18. mioque

    mioque
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    Brian
    "And I don't mind having the Apocryphal books in some of my Bibles."
    Same here. [​IMG]
     
  19. mioque

    mioque
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    For completeness sake I'll add that Mark H. mentioned Luke 1.28 [​IMG] in a private message.
     
  20. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,165
    Likes Received:
    322
    For the most part Catholic Bibles are good (apart from the Apocrypha) but there are places:

    Douay-Rheims Luke 15:10 So I say to you, there shall be joy before the angels of God upon one sinner doing penance.

    KJV Luke 15:10 Likewise, I say unto you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth.

    ASV Luke 15:10 Even so, I say unto you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth.

    NIV Luke 15:10 In the same way, I tell you, there is rejoicing in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner who repents."

    NIB Luke 15:10 In the same way, I tell you, there is rejoicing in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner who repents."

    NAS Luke 15:10 "In the same way, I tell you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner who repents."

    HankD
     

Share This Page

Loading...