|
Post by ralfy on Oct 4, 2022 2:09:32 GMT
"Op-Ed: A new edition of the Bible, with 20,000 revisions, should spark 20,000 thoughtful conversations"
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Oct 4, 2022 5:08:24 GMT
"Op-Ed: A new edition of the Bible, with 20,000 revisions, should spark 20,000 thoughtful conversations"
The thought of 20,000 revisions to the Bible makes my brain hurt. And where was the Holy Ghost those 1900-odd years before all those revisions got made?
|
|
|
Post by theguvnor on Oct 4, 2022 10:01:33 GMT
This bit made me giggle and shake my head:-
Mark 14:69 (and similar verses) NRSV: And the servant-girl, on seeing him, began again to say to the bystanders, “This man is one of them.” NRSVue: And the female servant, on seeing him, began again to say to the bystanders, “This man is one of them.” This revision brings — with good reason — feminist consciousness to take away a demeaning translation that calls a woman a girl. So the “female servant” quickly becomes someone with more agency and character. Literally the revision makes her a bigger person, and the readers of the Bible today themselves have more room to be engaged.
The term for the servant is rendered as maidservant in Douay Rheims. I Now, I prefer the KJV and Douay Rheims as I like the more grandiose feel of the language but this character appears for a few lines as she is noting that Peter is one of Christ's disciples as this occurs in the context of Peter sitting on his own having betrayed Christ before the cock crows.
There are bits I can understand - such as the changing of the translation of sin-offering as that doesn't truly represent what the Jewish concept is but then neither does any translation as you are dealing with differing paradigms of religious thought but I can imagine a team of translators scurrying about going on about giving the characters agency and a forum dedicated to make sure the lives of ancient servants in the bible matter.
|
|
|
Post by tisbearself on Oct 4, 2022 21:27:21 GMT
I appreciate that the guy who wrote this is a big Bible scholar and thinks it is super awesome landmark stuff, but there's been so many updates and revisions of Scripture in my lifetime, most of them not approved by the Church, that I don't find yet another one to be particularly exciting or bring anything new to my party. I'm happy reading the DR, the NAB, the NABRE, and if my Latin gets good enough, the Vulgate. I'm also not a Bible scholar, so positioning the Word of God into some world cultural framework is of zero interest to me.
|
|
|
Post by jimg on Oct 5, 2022 3:05:50 GMT
My understanding from what I've learned in the past is that bible inspiration means that the writers of inspired scripture were guided somehow by the Holy Spirit to write what He wanted them to write, yet without interference with their own free will or writing style. Inspiration applies only to the original texts authored by the biblical authors. It does not apply to translations, The Holy Spirit does not guide translators.
Since we do not possess original manuscripts for any books of the bible, none of our existing bibles can be considered inspired scripture. Not being an adherent of "bible alone" theology, this does not really bother me.
|
|
|
Post by po18guy on Oct 5, 2022 5:27:31 GMT
The harder they try, the worse it becomes. So we now have the Revised Revised Standard Version, Politically Corrected Catholic Edition? By the time I ask the clerk for one, the winds will have shifted and it will be outdated. As to translations, many hold that the pinnacle of English Catholic bibles is any of the 1941-1969 Douay-Confraternity translations. Euthanized by the USCCB in favor of the mediocre (horrid) NAB, the Confraternity is Challoner Rheims and 1941 Confraternity New Testament. I like them as they read like the testament you are in. Old feels old and new feels "new covenanty" They are almost dirt-cheap on eBay and very collectible. If the USCCB wants to do something useful, they would grant license to print the completed 1969 Confraternity Bible - which never appeared under a single cover. It's pretty bad when even Franciscans lament the political correcting of the scriptures in the lectionary. www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYm7Z66GHJg
|
|
|
Post by theguvnor on Oct 5, 2022 13:17:12 GMT
It's not even the PC nature of the revision in this case it's the very minor nature of much of the corrections and the fact it strikes me as entering straining at gnats territory at points. It's nearly impossible for us to have a first century mindset and adjusting the text to introduce today's issues introduces the problems of presentism. It's like me moaning about my grandfather reportedly saying a woman's place was in the home and going that this meant he was part of the patriarchy. One he wouldn't have a clue what I meant if I could bring him back to life and he'd be approaching these issues with a mind-set which was forged in the last years of the Victorian era and the Edwardian era and via the world of the small villages he grew up in. I have more time for the attempts to try and reach better terms for some Jewish festivals when translating terms - although that is often very difficult.
|
|
|
Post by tisbearself on Oct 5, 2022 16:31:21 GMT
the Revised Revised Standard Version, Politically Corrected Catholic Edition It reminds me of "The New New Nixon" (Yeah I'm old)
|
|
|
Post by ralfy on Oct 6, 2022 3:16:34 GMT
Additional points: I think RSV is run by a council of churches and thus do not answer to any particular Church. Also, translators follow whatever secular beliefs they espouse. Meanwhile, I think the NAB is owned by U.S. Bishops but translators are from a Catholic Bible association. NRSV is a major updated from RSV given manuscript discoveries, etc. The same applies to NABRE. The Church has guidelines for translations in Liturgiam Authenticam, i.e., accurate translations are needed using the latest manuscript discoveries, etc. It also wants translations that are suitable for liturgy, e.g., use gender neutrality only when appropriate. That's why the latest Latin version of the Bible is the Nova Vulgata. Also, very old translations are not used in liturgy and in catechism. The Church wants translations that the faithful can understand. This refers to the reading levels of various translations: support.biblegateway.com/hc/en-us/articles/360001403747-What-are-the-reading-levels-of-the-Bibles-on-Bible-Gateway-and the average reading level in the U.S.: www.wyliecomm.com/2021/08/whats-the-latest-u-s-literacy-rate/The reading level of NABRE is around the 9th grade. The average reading level in the states is around the 7 to 8th grade. It's probably similar in the Philippines, which uses also uses NABRE. The reading level needed for RSV and NRSV are 11th to 12th grades. Given these points, U.S. Bishops have decided to come up with a translation that can be used for personal study, catechism, and liturgy: catholiccommonsense.freeforums.net/thread/1760/nabre-all-seasonsand it should be available by 2025. My understanding is that the translators will be working with both U.S. Bishops and the Vatican to make this possible. The commentator adds that this is what they should have done in the first place. Instead, they have a NABRE that can't be published without the critical notes, some of which question Church beliefs and an older version of NABRE needed for liturgy. Back to NRSV: there's nothing that the Church can do about that but wait for the updated version to come out, and then come up with a Catholic edition that's acceptable to the Vatican so that it can be used for liturgy. Side note: India uses the ESV Catholic Ed. for liturgy. Implications: Translations need to go through the Vatican in order to avoid different versions, e.g., appropriate for personal use but not for liturgy, etc. Those in other English-speaking countries have to come up with their own translations (which deal with peculiar uses of English in their region) in order not to be dependent on non-Catholics that mostly own the RSV and the ESV. That means they have to come up with their own version of the KJV (which is the base of the RSV) or start from scratch from the original texts (which is the case for the ESV). This can be very costly, and given a lack of manpower, may take lengthy periods and revisions. Translations are paid for only if they are licensed.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Oct 6, 2022 3:58:51 GMT
I know it is not a Catholic version, but I recently found a copy of the New International Version (NIV) among my books, scavenged from some long-forgotten book sale, thrift shop, or library discard bin, and I found it to be the most gracefully simple, smoothly flowing, readable Bible I'd ever encountered. Sadly it is not approved for Catholic use in teaching, liturgy, and so forth.
We are presently using the RSV-CE (and may use the NRSV) in homeschool, and it is all right, but it is heavily reliant upon pronouns, such that it is difficult to follow all the "he", "she", "him", "her", and so on. I refer not to any gender issues, but rather following the narrative where several people are involved.
|
|
|
Post by po18guy on Oct 6, 2022 5:24:54 GMT
the Revised Revised Standard Version, Politically Corrected Catholic Edition It reminds me of "The New New Nixon" (Yeah I'm old) Well, in any case we don't 'have Dick Nixon to kick around anymore'. May he RIP.
|
|
|
Post by po18guy on Oct 6, 2022 5:32:13 GMT
I know it is not a Catholic version, but I recently found a copy of the New International Version (NIV) among my books, scavenged from some long-forgotten book sale, thrift shop, or library discard bin, and I found it to be the most gracefully simple, smoothly flowing, readable Bible I'd ever encountered. Sadly it is not approved for Catholic use in teaching, liturgy, and so forth. We are presently using the RSV-CE (and may use the NRSV) in homeschool, and it is all right, but it is heavily reliant upon pronouns, such that it is difficult to follow all the "he", "she", "him", "her", and so on. I refer not to any gender issues, but rather following the narrative where several people are involved. Aside from missing 7 books, it is easily read - yes. It is also as doctrinally blurry as a stained glass window. IIRC, the Protestant scholar N.T. Wright has stated that it is impossible to know the mind of Saint Paul by reading the NIV. The usual Dispensational anti-Catholic bias, as well.
Want a good daily reader? The Oxford-Cambridge "Revised English Bible" (w.Deuterocanon). It was translated (with UK Catholic input) so as to remove denominational bias from then existing bibles (late 80s). It does pretty darned good. Really affordable used, and a rather handsome bible.
|
|
|
Post by po18guy on Oct 6, 2022 5:47:48 GMT
I know it is not a Catholic version, but I recently found a copy of the New International Version (NIV) among my books, scavenged from some long-forgotten book sale, thrift shop, or library discard bin, and I found it to be the most gracefully simple, smoothly flowing, readable Bible I'd ever encountered. Sadly it is not approved for Catholic use in teaching, liturgy, and so forth. We are presently using the RSV-CE (and may use the NRSV) in homeschool, and it is all right, but it is heavily reliant upon pronouns, such that it is difficult to follow all the "he", "she", "him", "her", and so on. I refer not to any gender issues, but rather following the narrative where several people are involved. Aside from missing 7 books, it is easily read - yes. It is also as doctrinally blurry as a stained glass window. IIRC, the Protestant scholar N.T. Wright has stated that it is impossible to know the mind of Saint Paul by reading the NIV. The usual Dispensational anti-Catholic bias, as well.
Want a good daily reader? The Oxford-Cambridge "Revised English Bible" (w.Deuterocanon). It was translated (with UK Catholic input) so as to remove denominational bias from then existing bibles (late 80s). It does pretty darned good. Really affordable used, and a rather handsome bible. And, not overly Anglicised.
Another not-too-bad translation is the Tyndale (Ha!) New Living Translation - Catholic Edition. Often insipid, occasionally Protestant, but consistent with Catholic doctrine, it is decent enough. Reminds me of speaking with a neighbor over the back fence. Same with the Catholic Living Bible, except for the Deuterocanon. Those translations were provided to publisher Tyndale by Our Sunday Visitor and are quite good.
Nothing wrong with Knox for those in the UK or Commonwealth nations. Truly the magnum opus of Monsignor Knox.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Oct 6, 2022 14:05:03 GMT
I know it is not a Catholic version, but I recently found a copy of the New International Version (NIV) among my books, scavenged from some long-forgotten book sale, thrift shop, or library discard bin, and I found it to be the most gracefully simple, smoothly flowing, readable Bible I'd ever encountered. Sadly it is not approved for Catholic use in teaching, liturgy, and so forth. We are presently using the RSV-CE (and may use the NRSV) in homeschool, and it is all right, but it is heavily reliant upon pronouns, such that it is difficult to follow all the "he", "she", "him", "her", and so on. I refer not to any gender issues, but rather following the narrative where several people are involved. Aside from missing 7 books, it is easily read - yes. It is also as doctrinally blurry as a stained glass window. IIRC, the Protestant scholar N.T. Wright has stated that it is impossible to know the mind of Saint Paul by reading the NIV. The usual Dispensational anti-Catholic bias, as well.
Want a good daily reader? The Oxford-Cambridge "Revised English Bible" (w.Deuterocanon). It was translated (with UK Catholic input) so as to remove denominational bias from then existing bibles (late 80s). It does pretty darned good. Really affordable used, and a rather handsome bible.
I'll have to check it out. As for the NIV, yes, I know, I was referring merely to ease and pleasure of reading. I would never mistake that for orthodoxy. The Wanderer is doctrinally orthodox, but trying to read those long, long-winded articles, where the main points may be hidden far into the article in the fashion of a Latin American newspaper, made me want to smash my head repeatedly into a brick wall or something. I let my subscription lapse years ago, for that very reason.
|
|
|
Post by ralfy on Oct 6, 2022 23:17:33 GMT
|
|