What is the best translation of the Bible?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 25 лис 2024
- In this episode Trent explores the different philosophies behind Bible translations and how faulty translations can lead believers astray.
To support this channel: www.trenthornpodcast.com
I love you Trent. I have been listening to your apologetics audio now for about 10 years from Nigeria. This has given birth to a Catholic podcast which run. Thank you for the work you do
May God bless your podcast and use it to bring many souls to heaven
@@illumoportetcresceremeaute887 amen. I appreciate your prayer.
@@tony1685 it's painful you feel this way about the Catholic Church. If there is any Church that has been "investigated", it is the Catholic Church. But one point I feel you should hold on to while making your investigations is this: don't have your mind closed on the results you have...the result of your investigation might be shocking.
Go back to how it started....search history...reach the early Church Fathers about all Catholic Doctrines. Your next comment might be different if you do this with an open mind.
I appreciate the love with which you want to show me the truth. "Truth cannot contradict itself" "Jesus is the Way and Love". Keep the search going and don't be scared if it leads you back to the Church after so long.
@@tony1685 friend, you are either diabolically deceived or a willing agent of the devil.
The Catholic Church is the Church founded by Christ Jesus and it is the only through this Church that you have the Gospel today. Truly, one can say extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
I'll pray for the Holy Spirit to break the devil's stronghold on your heart and mind, Tony.
@@tony1685 thanks for your response Tony. My answer is yes to your questions in paragraph 3.
I then have a question about the real Church which supports the Word of Truth as you understand it. What's the name of this Church? So I can look more into its teachings about truth? Is this new/real Church physical so I can at least make some enquiries?
Your emphasis on the number of years spent in Catholicism is not a support to validate your leaving. Someone who joins the Church last year after 35 years in Pentecostalism must has found something you didn't. I wish we could find where the problem emanated from. But I doubt this conversation of ours can reveal that.
I would love to converse more with you on clubhouse maybe.
Trent I'm glad you tackled this topic.. We used to do missionary work work in Mexico and someone used the phrased "she was tickled to death to receive the new clothes" and the translator translated that phrase " the clothes scratched her until she died". Needless to say the crowd was shocked.
Lol that's kinda funny
I'm stealing this. LOL I'm noting it my bible as a teaching point about why Jesus gave us a Holy Spirit led Church and that's what we're to follow and not the bible alone.
Like when in the 1960s, people in China thought “Come alive with Pepsi” meant it would bring dead relatives back to life?
@@tabandken8562 your claim doesn't serve as evidence that the church has always accepted the leading of the Holy Spirit.
John 16.13 "he will GUIDE you into all truth." - it doesn't say you will always be compelled to ACCEPT his guidance.
ua-cam.com/video/s-iLc9Q4rHE/v-deo.html
That specific copy of the Douay-Rheims is the one I own, and I love it. Not only the translation, but the commentary that it provides.
Im a KJVA guy, and the rivalry between those two sides is very sad.
Catholics discredit the kjva because baptists use it, and baptists discredit the DR because catholics use it. In reality those two versions agree together better than any other two versions (in english) by far.
I've often shown both versions side by side to my baptist friends to prove that their anti-catholic arguments are wrong. - and they're shocked. 😆
@@tony1685 same for the half-truth baby Christians 7th day adventists. Hypocrite. again, did u ever forgive the Catholic Church that hurt u so badly?
@@essafats5728 the catholic church never hurt him, they preserved the bible they now read.
His problem is sectarian indoctrination that created a false hatred toward Catholicism and they just can't see it.
Think of Henry the 8th and his desire to divorce and marry who he wished whenever he saw fit
@@tony1685 Cool story heretic. How about read the Bible for once?
@@tony1685 you never actually made any credible points though, you made assertions.
You claim that Catholicism killed all who follows the bible.
Please elaborate more on this strange belief you hold
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation:
01:43 📚 Different translation philosophies: Formal equivalence (word to word) and dynamic equivalence (idea to idea).
03:02 📖 Translators must balance between literal meaning and readability, adding necessary articles or using idea-for-idea translation when literal meaning might mislead.
06:02 🔍 No single "best" translation of the Bible; it depends on the purpose and preference of the reader.
08:02 📜 Latin Vulgate holds a special place in the Latin rite but is not the official Bible of the Catholic Church; original texts of the sacred books are most important.
10:21 📚 Translation matters as different words can change the interpretation; use approved Catholic translations to avoid biased or erroneous interpretations.
14:04 📕 Various Catholic Bible translations: Dewey Reams, Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (RSVCE), and New American Bible (NAB) have their strengths and weaknesses.
16:20 🕯️ Caution with NAB study notes, as some may present questionable interpretations; RSVCE preferred for personal study, but the "best" translation is one that you will read and engage with.
Here are some popular translations and their characteristics:
Douay-Rheims Bible: This translation is approved by the Holy Apostolic Catholic Church and is favored for its faithfulness to the original Latin Vulgate. It maintains older English language style but can be more difficult for modern readers.
Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (RSV-CE): This translation is a formal equivalence, word-for-word translation that is favored for study and personal reading. Some prefer RSV-2CE, which eliminates archaic language like "thee" and "thou."
New American Bible (NAB): This is a dynamic equivalence translation that aims to make the text more accessible in modern language. However, it has some questionable study notes, and readers should be cautious about potential biases.
New Jerusalem Bible (NJB): Another dynamic equivalence translation with a more contemporary style, it's popular for liturgical use.
Knox Bible: This translation is a unique blend of formal and dynamic equivalence, making it helpful for both personal study and easy reading.
The best translation depends on individual preferences and needs. Some may prefer more literal translations for study, like RSV-CE, while others may prefer easier-to-read dynamic translations, like GNT or NLT. It's essential to choose a translation approved by the Holy See or local Catholic bishops to ensure fidelity to Catholic teaching.
Interesting take on the "avoid biased or erroneous interpretations" portion. In context, it still seems the Protestant bible had it correct, even if the intentions were in a particular direction. Albeit I knew about the meaning of this and the differences in the Protestant bible, it still sounds right when reading the rest of the passages and perhaps that was the point.
The fact the NAB has modernist notes is concerning.
But not surprising
Very true 👍.
To say the least! But unfortunately, that's what we get from the USCCB
😢
I always call the NAB, Not A Bible. Too many errors.
As a Latin student, I got a kick out of the literal translation of John 3:16, almost every sentence turns into that kind of mess when you translate it.
Can you give a exemple for us who are interested in biblical studie but lack knowledge on ancien language but got a good sense of humour?
I have the Jerusalem Bible, Good News Bible Catholic Edition, and also the Douay-Rheims Holy Bible. The best approved translation by the Holy Apostolic Catholic Church is the Douay-Rheims and it's my favorite currently. Yes, the language is a bit archaic but once you accustomed to it, it will be no problem.
Indeed. A perfect example is his quote from Ecclesiasticus (Sirach): Take all that shall be brought upon thee: and in thy sorrow endure, and in thy humiliation keep patience. For gold and silver are tried in the fire, but acceptable men in the furnace of humiliation. Believe God, and he will recover thee: and direct thy way, and trust in him. Keep his fear, and grow old therein.
Complete accuracy is less important to me because I will never be able to fully understand the Scriptures without deep-diving into the languages. The Douary-Rheims with the Haydock commentary is what I have and I love it.
This is by far, THE best explanation of translation differences.
You are a very good teacher. It would be great if you could do an online RCIA. I think we lose the opportunity to bring people into the church by just offering RCIA once a year. It would also be great if you could also teach the whys and hows of the mass.
It has been a while since I've looked at this, I believe it was to do so in order to bring them into the fold during the Easter season.
I understand this so well! I interpret the mass from English to sign language. It's all about getting the meaning and intention of the message correct, not the words.
Trent has a series on patreon that goes over the catechism.
About the Mass, a great book is Edward Sri’ _”A Biblical Walk Through the Mass: Understanding What We Say and Do in the Liturgy”_ by Ascension Press. They say it is fantastic. I have it on my Kindle but haven’t read yet, but still I would recommend on behalf of what I know about the author, the editor and some people I know who recommended that.
@@masterchief8179 Thanks! I will get a copy.
Congrats on the upgraded quality! I’m loving your videos. They are absolutely instrumental in the process of my conversion to Catholicism.
As a convert, it was mystifying how some of those study notes could be included with Scripture. Not only problematic, but refuted by current apologetics. It begs the question: “why is this the commentary we want to share with the faithful?!”
Interesting video. My favourite is the Douay Rheims. I read it every day, and it has become a part of me.
How you know if it is an accurate one?
"keep us alive with three square meals"
I don't know why but it destroyed my sides.
And if you think that rendering of the Pater noster is bad enough, Peterson's rendering of John 20: 23 will make you get apoplexy! “If you forgive someone’s sins, they’re gone for good. If you don’t forgive sins, what are you going to do with them?”
What got me was the "Yes. Yes. Yes." at the end!
Hey I mean some people think "daily bread" is referring to just bread and not our basic needs.
I do believe that the Vulgata is the best and most accurate translation of all the works pertaining to the sacred word of GOD. And the utilisation of classic sentence structure greatly enhances the understanding of what is printed ❤
Even the Latin Vulgate, later translated to the Duoay Rheims has some serious errors. One being Genesis 3:15. In the Duoay Rheims translation, as God is talking to the serpent/devil, God is saying that the woman would crush the serpent's head and he'd be lying in wait to strike her heel. This is a grave error because it's meant to be a future prophecy regarding Jesus who would crush Satan's head and the serpent/devil would strike His heel. The Catholic theologians want the people to believe that prophecy was referring to Mary when it really wasn't. Mary never had the grace to perform that, only Jesus when He came to earth as a human that He would accomplish that at the cross. The focus should always be on Jesus only; not anyone else because He alone was without sin, despite the excuses and traditions of men. Not all traditions are bad. Many help reinforcing faith. But traditions become problematic when they're on the same level as the scriptures.
@@stanleybroniszewsky8538 No, Vulgata just says "ipsum conteret caput tuum, et tu conteres calcaneum eius". This "ipsum" clearly refers to the text above 'semen' which is a neuter noun. If the text wants to mean 'woman would crush the serpent's head' as you put, it has to be 'ipsa' for the feminine form, not neuter 'ipsum'. So there's nothing wrong in the translation.
As a former Protestant turned Catholic, thank you for the discussion! When I was first learning about Bible translations, I was surprised at the great variety of influences and styles, even for just our language. I would sometimes have 3 or 4 translations open at once to try to get the "full meaning" of the text and considered the ESV to be almost as good as it could get. When I was first considering joining the Church, I was very disappointed by the NABRE study notes, but was okay with the text. I eventually found the (N)RSVCE and, between that, a Greek interlinear New Testament, and listening to the NAB in the liturgy, I'm content.
I'm so glad in 2017 we finally got a Catholic edition of the ESV! It is definitely my favorite Catholic translation
@@ShoelessJoeChristian From what I heard, it sounds great! It's just relatively difficult to get a cheaper copy here in the US, as it hasn't yet been approved by USCCB (but it's the liturgical translation for the Church in India).
@@PianoForte9096 I think copies are getting cheaper--for Christmas I bought someone a brand new copy for $20! Also, I don't think the USCCB really needs to approve it, since Rome approved it for use in the Liturgy!
@YAJUN YUAN The Greek "kecharitomene" in that verse is a unique title found nowhere else in any Greek literature and means on its own, "she who has been filled/imbued with grace." As mentioned in the video, translations often sacrifice accuracy for understandability.
@YAJUN YUAN Not only this, but in the Bible, the Greek "Chaire" (Hail) was only used for Jesus (i.e. "Hail, King of the Jews") and for Mary in this instance. Why would an angel address Mary as a royal if she was anyone less than the Mother of God?
Edit: Why would you try to argue for a Protestant interpretation of the Bible against an ex-Protestant who said that he was passionate about Bible translations?
I appreciate the break down for those who need it. I myself have Douay Rheims.
I have a Mexican friend who says “no pedo” which is an expression meaning “no problem” essentially, but it literally translates to “no fart”. So I joke by saying “no fart” instead of no problem.
The etymology of that phrase must be incredible.
This comment went in a much lighter direction than I was preparing for..
It would be better to have several translations in both the literal and dynamic in your known languages so that you can compare the meanings and readings.
St. Augustine says the same.
@@Arkangilos where?
@@zavoh227 “On Christian Doctrine: Book III, Ch: 12”
I used to belong to a Bible study group and there were a number of different Catholic translations among us which we sometimes compared. It was interesting and illuminative.
I just got an NRSV in the mail and my friend gave me the Douay-Rheims Bible for Christmas. Think I'll be studying those two side by side.
I'm struggling to find a nice looking Douay-Rheims Bible that isn't super expensive. Might you know of any?
There’s a nice black leather one on Amazon for less than 40
Those are the two best translations.
@@Arcticroberto9376 I STRONGLY disagree! The Douay-Rheims is fine, but the NRSV is ruined by its overly-extensive use of gender-inclusive language. A FAR better translation is the RSV-CE (1966); no inclusive language and more majestic sounding, since it preserves the thee/thou/thine form in direct address to God.
@Goodgnat Inclusive language is modernist and not an accurate translation
When I hear Tim Staples, Scott Hahn, and other Catholic apologists explain what the correct translation of a verse is from the original Greek, I almost always find that Douay Rheims version has it right, but the RSV-2CE is often wrong. Furthermore, it's not like the RSV-2CE is translated from original languages but the DR is a just a translation of a translation (and therefore not as close to the original language). In every copy of the DR that I own, the title page says "Translated from the Latin Vulgate...Diligently compared with the Hebrew, Greek, and other editions in diverse languages."
Add into the fact that Trent himself, when talking about sayings in Greek, confirms that we don't exactly know what they mean. Hence, while the DR may not be directly translated from the original texts, it is still more proximal because it is based on a translation of the original text with the proper context in mind. We can't assume that any modern Greek or Hebrew lexicon is 100% accurate because you have to account for the amount of time passed since those languages were actively used. Simply studying the words and phrases and comparing the use in a few other works, does not give the full picture of every possible usage. Also, another reason why Tradition has to be considered authoritative.
Thank you for the video Trent! I have found the Didache Bible to be my favorite. I believe it is the RSV translation, but the footnotes are based on commentary from the Catechism of the Catholic Church. I've found the footnotes to be extremely helpful in study, and from my experience much more Catholic in nature than the footnotes of the NABRE translation. I've come across many footnotes in the NABRE translation that would lead one to believe they were not written by Catholics or at least have questionable implications as you pointed out in this video. I'm surprised the Didache Bible isn't more widely known, as it is such a useful tool to reference official church teaching directly in the footnotes while reading scripture.
CLAIMS of the RCC
1. Catholics claim CHURCH refers to Roman Catholic Church. BIBLE says CHURCH refers to all churches. Acts 5:11, Acts 8:1, Mat 16:18. HISTORY tells us Roman Church was just one local Church a member of the Pentarchy.
2. Catholics claim Roman Church was the CHURCH CHRIST founded (First Church) or one true church. BIBLE says First Local Church was Jerusalem Church. Acts 2. Not Roman Catholic Church.
3. Catholics claim there is only One Church. BIBLE mentions both CHURCH and Churches.
“CHURCH” refers to the Body of Christ Eph 5:30, Col 1:18 consisting of all churches. Acts 5:11, Acts 8:1 Mat 16:18.
“Churches” refers to local churches Acts 9:31, Acts 15:41 and believers Romans 16:5, 1 Cor 16:19,
4. Catholics claim to be the first believers. BIBLE says first believers were Jewish Christians. Acts 2, Acts 11:26, NOT roman catholics.
5. Catholics claim Pope is the head of the CHURCH. BIBLE says JESUS is the HEAD OF THE CHURCH. Eph 1:22, Eph 5:23, Col 1:18.
6. Catholics claim outside Roman Church there is NO SALVATION. BIBLE says : The mouth of the Lord has spoken.”apart from Jesus there is NO SALVATION”. Acts 4:12, 1 Cor 3:11.
7. Catholicss claim the first day of the week is a Holy day, made by God. .
The Holy Bible says:
Isaiah 58:13-14
13 “If you turn away your foot from the Sabbath, From doing your pleasure on MY HOLY DAY, And call the Sabbath a delight, The holy day of the Lord honorable, And shall honor Him, not doing your own ways, Nor finding your own pleasure, Nor speaking your own words, 14 Then you shall delight yourself in the Lord; And I will cause you to tride on the high hills of the earth, And feed you with the heritage of Jacob your father. The mouth of the Lord has spoken.”part from Jesus there is NO SALVATION”. Acts 4:12, 1 Cor 3:11.
8. Catholics claim devote to Mary to be saved. BIBLE says “apart from Jesus there is NO SALVATION”. Acts 4:12, 1 Cor 3:11.
. BIBLE says “believe in Jesus to be saved”. Acts 16:30-31, John 3:16.
10. Catholics claim Roman Church inherited infallible authority from Peter. BIBLE does not say that in Mat 16 or John 20 or John 21.
11. Catholics claim Roman pontiff inherited infallible authority from Peter. BIBLE does not say that in Mat 16.
12. Catholics claim bishop of ROME = the pope. BIBLE does not say that.
13. Catholics claim there is an office of bishop of bishops/universal bishop/pope. BIBLE does not speak of such an office. History tells us the first bishop of bishops came in AD590-600s.
14. Roman Church has all the false unbiblical clergies - Roman priests, roman cardinals, roman pontiff, monks, nuns, friars, … BIBLE mentions only pastors, teachers, evangelists, prophets, apostles, deacons, bishop, elders. Titus 1:5, Eph 4:11, 1 Tim 3.
15. Roman Church claim its doctrines come from traditions of Apostles. BUT 95% of roman doctrines are Not from traditions of Jesus or Apostles or Scriptures; neither practised by the Church of the Bible.
For Catholic translations, my favorites are:
Most Accurate (Formal): ESV-CE (Catholic Edition of the English Standard Version)
Most Readable (Dynamic): NLT-CE (Catholic Edition of the New Living Translation)
Most Beautiful (but archaic): D-R (Douay-Rheims [Challenor Revision])
ESV was specifically written in an attempt to validate the doctrines of calvinism. I've had more faith in toilet paper than in that version.
@@kjvacp Wasn't the KJV also made to validate Protestantism of a sort?
I just bought the ESV-CE. I got really tired of thought for thought and I can hang with the word for word.
I didn't know there was a CE of the NLT, that's fantastic!
@@kjvacp 😂
I personally prefer the Douay-Rheims the best. Most editions sold today have a basic commentary included within it, but it is also compatible with the extensive commentary by Rev. George Haydock available online which compiles Haydock's own notes as well as notes by many Church Fathers (also note this commentary is heavily anti-Reformation). The Douay-Rheims is the only version I know of which preserves many of the Latinisms from the Latin Vulgate, so if you wanted to read the Latin, this would be the best companion version. Much of the Douay-Rheims in its final version is identical to the King James which many people will already be familiar with.
Another great version is the Ignatius Press Catholic Study Bible, which is the RSV-2CE translation. It gives a commentary in keeping with a more traditional interpretation of the text. It is also similar enough to the version Fr. Mike Schmitz uses in his Bible in a Year podcast that you could use it to follow along (although the Study Bible itself is New Testament only, and a full version is available without commentary).
Honorary mentions include the Word on Fire Bible, which looks amazing but is above my own personal price range. Another good one may be the Didache Bible which has Catechism and apologetics notes along with the RSV-2CE text. Also the Good News Translation, which I wouldn't want to rely on as a primary study bible, but is often handy when you need a paraphrase to reference to help you more easily understand what the text is trying to say.
It's extremely difficult for me to recommend the NABRE, since the other translations seem to do more justice to the text in every way. I find the commentary of the NABRE to be way too Modernist to actually recommend to anyone. It is like listening to a group of scholarly critics call into question every traditional teaching of the Church.
Trent Trent Trent is my best Professor. Very Clear, Very Accurate, Very logical, Very simple, Very CATHOLIC.
Answer: Revised Standard Version, Second Catholic Edition
I think it is always preferable formal over dynamic. The great many downfalls of dynamic outweigh its benefit. Formal translations great benefit is to instill the much needed belief that not any fool can read the Bible and instantly understand it. Get a formal translation and get a good commentary. The Bible is meant to be written in a certain place and time and not have modern bias and prejudices placed about it.
I tend to agree--whenever I hear the arguments for dynamic translations, I always come back to: Why not just put that in the footnotes, and keep the translation formal?
A good commentary is Lapide. He did the whole Bible but so far only a few from the new testament are in English.
His commentary on the Holy Gospel According to St. Mathew is two volumes alone, each volume being the physical size of the Bible.
Excellent video! The camera looks great! Keep up the great work!
Regarding the Douay-Rheims Bible, St. John Henry Newman gives an thorough review and history of this translation in The Rambler newspaper, July 1859 issue, available online.
He says that the original translation was essentially unreadable. This led to a legion of revisions, the results of which were to make it much closer to the KJV than the original translation.
Thank you so much for bringing out the serious issue with the notes in the NAB. I avoid reading those notes cause they instill doubt. For good solid notes the challoner notes in the douey rheims are so solid. I just wish there were more notes in that Bible! Thanks for what you do!!!
I agree! While some may like the KJV better for its translation, I think the Douay has the best notes especially in the Haydock version. A good example would be the parable of the good Samaritan where it combined multiple church fathers to show that the parable is also the church. Jesus is the good Samaritan who picks up the merchant who represents His disciples. He then gives Him to the innkeeper which is the church until He comes back and pays the innkeeper like the church appropriate recompense for the treatment of the traveller.
Excellent explanation! Understanding the Bible we understand the Word of God. Thank you Trent!
One of my favorite books is Ecclesiastes. I believe the NAB is the only version that has "all is vanity and a chase after wind" which is a spot on metaphor.
I don’t like the NAB. But I do like that exact passage.
The NAB is a horrible translation, plus it uses inclusive language!
@@dannydeluca5365 I also have the Douay-Rhiems. All the old timey language with none of the poetry. Seems to have been put together by accountants.
@@springinfialta106 it was a literal translation of the Vulgate so no surprise there 😂
A more poetic Vulgate translation is the Knox. It has old timey but poetic language. It’s popular for that reason.
@@springinfialta106 The NRSV has it too
The Bible of Jerusalem is the best translation. I got it in French, Spanish and English. It is the best one.
I got the Jerusalem Bible in Czech and I personally don't like it much for various reasons. There are pros to it, here are my cons: 1 - it reads hard, both because it sentence structures and wording. It just doesn't deliver the "punch". It shouldn't be because it's too formal as my preferred translation is another formal (study) one. I even don't get the right meaning from it often and I believe there are even a few errors. 2 - I don't like the translation of YHWH - Yahweh. It's correct, I know, but doesn't touch my heart. All other Czech Bibles use a different translation. Relates to point 1. And 3 - The commentary. Most of it is unnecessary for my needs, but still distracts from my reading as I have an urge to check it and probably worse - I feel it makes the Bible less divine. Makes it too much subject to historical "facts".
In my language I don't have a clear winner, not very good selection IMO and my current favorite is even a Protestant one :( I go to Catholic translations when I want to read what isn't there or to check certain words and passages - sometimes I check 4 - 5 translations including English ones :) English native speakers are fortunate, much better options.
@@lumpichu I agree with you. The Czech version of Jerusalem Bible isn´t very well done and I haven´t met anyone would say it´s his favourite translation. Fortunately like you I can read the foreign ones. I use Douay Rheims in English, because i like the beauty and well proven catholicity of this translation. I also try to improve my Latin to read the Vulgate one day (The Old Clementine edition, nothing against the New Vulgate - it´s just I´m one of those few hundreds Czechs regularly attending the traditional latin mass and the readings I´m used to in church are taken from the old version of the Vulgate). I also agree that there isn´t a very good selection in Czech. You can look for Svatováclavská Bible - 17th century Jesuit translation (basically our Douay Rheims) made in response to Bible Kralická (Czech KJV). It´s harder to read due to the archaic language, but it´s beautiful in it´s own way. Also it has a really unique commentary - partially catholic apologetics against protestants, partially explanation of morals based on OT stories (no historical and geografical context stuff like in modern commenatries) - both with quotes for Church Fathers. Unfortunately, there isn´t a full new edition, only Sunday mass readings. You would have to get a costly facsimile of the original, with really awkward spelling and also the books are just huge.
@Harry Waddington Reading and praying. The wording makes the meaning more dense.
@@a.k.4486 has that text the New Testament
In session IV of the council of trent it says this, "If anyone does not accept as sacred and canonical the aforesaid books in their entirety and with all their parts, as they have been accustomed to be read in the Catholic Church and as they are contained in the old Latin Vulgate Edition, and knowingly and deliberately rejects the aforesaid traditions, let him be anathema."
There are some passages in the vulgate that are left out of newer translations like the RSVCE and the NAB. Doesnt that mean that canonical verses are being left out?
I'm not sure what to think about this
From the introduction to the RSV-CE: "It is admitted today that the decree of Trent declaring that Catholics must accept the books contained in the Latin vulgate with all their parts does not oblige us to accept passages which have been judged, according to the best critical principles, not to be part of the original text. Thus the passage known as the 'Three Heavenly Witnesses' or the 'Comma Johnnaeum' (1 John 5.7-8), which is in the Latin Vulgate and in versions based on it, does not appear in recent Catholic editions of the New Testament [1966]. This procedure is in accordance with the directives given in 'Divino Afflante Spiritu.'" Text of the encylical here: www.vatican.va/content/pius-xii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_30091943_divino-afflante-spiritu.html
ABSOLUTELY ...
DOUAY-RHIEMS 🙏
It's even more than that, since most critical editions of the Jerome Vulgate exclude it. @@timsauser4569
Hey. R&T and the professor catholics on CA helped me immensely to understand translations of the Bible 👏👏TY for sharing as well
My current top Catholic translations:
1. GNT - easiest to read without compromising faithfulness/meaning
2. RSV-2CE - great for study, moderately easy to read
3. Douay Rheims - great for it's connection to the Vulgate and Old English vocabulary
I strongly advice you to scrap the 2CE for the original RSV-CE: all the 2nd edition did was water it down and make language “gender neutral” 🤢
@@O_Rei I swear some passages are actually gender neutral in the original greek, but were gendered through translation. Could be wrong about that, but someome told me that. And Im not fully aware of all the gendered language translations that were done in 2ce
@@O_Rei I don't prefer gender neutral language but Gender neutral language is arguably closer to the Greek then the Masculine bias of the English language. If you think gender neutrality in translation is always bad - then you have a problem with the original Greek manuscripts
Any reason you prefer the GNT over the NLT? I find the NLT to be just as easy to read, and is less compromising in faithfulness/meaning than the GNT
@@SuperSaiyanKrillin That’s just false. I’ve done 5 years of Koine Greek and I can tell you that’s pure rubbish spewed by modern academics: what they do is, they say it’s improper to translate “anthropos” as “man”, and that it’s rather neutral for “human” because “andres” is man, but the reality is that BOTH mean “man”: “andres” is the equivalent to Latin “vir”, which cannot be used generically, and “anthropos” is equivalent to latin “homo”, which can be used generically - while still literally meaning “man”. The very word “man” can be used in a grammatically generic way, and “translations” like that (and the trash that is the NAB) capitulate to the culture and throw the Word of God under the bus, making it sound flat-out silly and goofy by turning, for example, “rejoice, man” into “rejoice, o human one”.
Before watching the video, I'm a huge fan of the Douay-Rheims and the Knox. They're both great.
To avoid Confusion. I prefer Douy Rheims Bible
1. I think all the translations Trent mentioned are fine, and I agree the one you actually read is best. After all, there's little use having the "best" translation (whatever that is) if all it does is collect dust vs. a subpar but still decent translation that gets read over and over again.
2. That said, I'm sympathetic to what the Catholic literary scholar Anthony Esolen has said regarding translations in general and Bible translations in particular (by the way, I really like Esolen's translation of Dante's Commedia). For example, see Esolen's article "A bumping boxcar language" about the NAB. I wouldn't go as far as Esolen does about "nabbish" and so forth, but I think he is fundamentally correct about the literary aspects of the translation.
3. Personally I like the ESV best, because I find it best updates the RSV, even better than the RSV-2CE, at least to my ears.
Still as a Catholic, I love the King James Version, but I only use the 1611 version which includes the Deuterocanonical texts. Such a beautiful translation.
I also love the KJV because I was raised on it as an independent, fundamental Baptist. Now that I'm Eastern Orthodox, my version of choice is the Third Millennium Bible. It is a revision of the King James that includes the deuterocanonicals. It updates the most archaic language, and leaves everything else pretty much as is.
I like going off the vulgate because I think that clearly shows the understanding of the context the fathers of the church had when the book we know as the Bible was originally codified in the 400's but I do think some of the verbage in the kjv gets the point across more clearly to modern english language listeners. HOWEVER you do have to compare translations because I have found a few verses (probably due to contextual translation) that don't mean the same thing.
Catholics and other false religions do not resemble true born-again Christians in any sense. True born-again Christians do not worship idols or Mary dollies or sing to her. Their pagan prayers are prayed to “Our Lady,” their false Mary. They believe her to be “The spouse of the Holy Spirit,” whereby, their false Jesus was created. Nor do true Christians adhere to other so-called saints, pray on beads, etc. They do not believe in Catholic mystics and praying to the bones of mystics.
True Christian believers know Mary was kept a virgin up till the time of Christ's birth; then she, as a wife, had other children, sons and daughters with Joseph, and their sons' names are listed in the Bible. She too had to receive Christ as her Savior to be saved, not superior to any other sinner. However, Christians recognize she revealed exceptional faith and obedience before God. Her cousin, Elizabeth, also exhibited exceptional faith and godliness. Joseph did too, he being a just man and one who obeyed all God commanded of him in the protection of Jesus Christ, God the Son, as his adoptive son.
The Bible declares idolaters (those who bow before idols, pray before them, touching beads, etc.) go to the lake of fire. Idolatry has no place in true Christianity. Revelation 21:8-“But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”
God eventually will judge-“The LORD has issued a command concerning you: "Your name will no longer be perpetuated. I will cut off idol and image from the house of your gods. I will prepare your grave, for you are contemptible."
(Nahum 1: 14)
Mary, the true Mary of the Bible was not a fertility goddess and called God her Savior. You have to be a sinner to need a Savior. Christ condemned Catholicism when people attempted to uplift Mary when He was on the earth. He would not allow it when people tried to bless her, he said, on the contrary, blessed are those who abide in Christ’s commandments.
Luke 11:27 And it happened, as He spoke these things, that a certain woman from the crowd raised her voice and said to Him, “Blessed is the womb that bore You, and the breasts which nursed You!” 28 But He said, “On the contrary, blessed are those who hear the word of God and keep it!”
Pointing to his disciples, he said, "Here are my mother and my brothers. For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother." (Matthew chapter 12, verses 49 and 50)
"Who are my mother and my brothers?" he asked. Then he looked at those seated in a circle around him and said, "Here are my mother and my brothers! Whoever does God's will is my brother and sister and mother." (Mark chapter 3, verses 33-35)
Now Jesus' mother and brothers came to see him, but they were not able to get near him because of the crowd. Someone told him, "Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to see you." He replied, "My mother and brothers are those who hear God's word and put it into practice." (Luke chapter 8, verses 19-21)
True Christians believe in receiving Christ Jesus, the Christ of the Bible from Genesis 1:1 to Revelation 22:21, with no additions or subtractions, as their personal Savior. They do not believe in salvation by works. The Holy Spirit indwells true believers, equipping them to live godly in Christ Jesus. Jesus Christ died for every person so anyone can be saved from their sins who call upon Him.
Christians are also to come and be separate from the unsaved and they are to have no fellowship with the children of satan. Catholics are the children of satan as those who worship idols, teach salvation by works and mock the Bible and its holy truths. Christians are not to fellowship with anyone who teaches false doctrines and this is viewed throughout the Bible, including 2 Peter, Galatians, Deuteronomy 13, etc.
A friend of mine was once Catholic and in her church they had a yearly ritual where they had an idol of Jesus that they laid down and made every one would kiss this idols’ feet. She performed this also before becoming a born again Christian.
Please watch video of popes praying before bones, including Augustine’s. John Calvin followed Augustine-a Catholic idolater and father of Catholic church: ua-cam.com/video/GtphyBYFgAg/v-deo.html
A so-called church full of satanic idolatry, akin to Babylon. "Therefore behold, the days are coming that I will bring judgment on the carved images of Babylon; Her whole land shall be ashamed, And all her slain shall fall in her midst.” (From Jeremiah chapter 51, and we read in Revelation God's judgment will fall on idolatry and that of Mystery Babylon’s idolatry.)
Judgment Day is coming Revelation 9:20-“The rest of mankind, who were not killed by these plagues, did not repent of the works of their hands, so as not to worship demons, and the idols of gold and of silver and of brass and of stone and of wood, which can neither see nor hear nor walk . . .”
Romans 10:9 in the Bible: "That if thou shall confess with thy mouth the LORD Jesus, and believe in thine heart that God raised Him from the dead, thou shalt be saved."
Val Lee of “val lee weblog” vallee7.wordpress.com
My mother sang in the Greek Catholic Church prior to immigrating to the US. I took 2 years of Greek at my Catholic University so that I could read the New Testament. In the Original Greek in Mark 11:24, Jesus commands His apostles to believe that they already received when they pray. In 2016, six specialists told my mother that she needed a pacemaker. She was so weak that she could only walk 20 feet in 10 minutes, and then had to sit down and rest. I shared Mark 11:24 with my mother. We prayed in the name of Jesus and then my mother praised God that she was already healed. The next day she walked a mile to go get her groceries, completely normal. She never did need a pacemaker. Just days before, she was so weak that she was hospitalized for 10 days.
My neighbor was sent home to die because he was so low on the list for a kidney transplant. He was bedridden. We prayed the same way and he rose up completely normal the next day. He stood out in the front yard and stopped all the neighbors and told them what happened. I could go on and on for hours telling you about several neighbors and several relatives that received this way. God confirms His Word with signs (Mark 16:20), the problem is that too many are using vain repetitions which Jesus said were vain in Matthew 6:7.
James 1:5 says that God want to give you wisdom in abundance.
Martin Luther translated the Bible from the Original Greek and Aramaic. His translation into German was excellent. He translated the scriptures because the Latin Vulgate of the Catholics was a poor translation. Martin Luther's Bible was so good, that the translators of the Bible across Europe used it as a guide to translate the Bible into their respective languages. The Catholic Church required all priests to speak Latin (up until recently) and used the Latin Vulgate as a guide to translate the Bible into their languages. For example, the Catholics switch Spirit and Soul at random even though Hebrew 4:12 says that the can be divided by the word of God (so they are not the same). Soul is the Emotions and is part of the mind and Spirit is the Spirit of Man. What makes it worse is that half the greek scholars interchange Reason and Mind.
I do like the book of Sirach in the Catholic Bible because it is missing in the protestant Bible, although I also read it in Greek.
It's vain if it's done through vanity.
Also, about the NAB I believe if I’m not mistaken, they are doing the whole pronouns thing. Changing men to people and stuff like that. when I had noticed this, a friend of mine, who was actually a teacher at a Catholic high school , said he wasn’t worried about it, he trusts the US catholic bishops. This was about 10 or 11 years ago. Even then I knew that was not necessarily where you wanted to put your trust. by this point, I hope he sees that unfortunately, many if not most of the US catholic bishops are corrupted and pushing pronouns, LGBT, etc. etc. etc. Personally I absolutely love the RSV CE. My first full read through of the New Testament was the Ignatius study Bible, which uses that translation, and it was outstanding. I think many books, Catholic books, use the RSVCE
Shopping for a pocket Bible as a gift for my son and needed some guidance with translations. This helped a lot. Thanks.
I wish we had modern Vulgate translations. The one in my native language is from the 16th century. I'm able to read it but it gets hard sometimes and the more time passes, the harder it will get and who knows when people won't be able to read it anymore.
Proverbs 13: 13 Whoso despiseth the word shall be destroyed: but he that feareth the commandment shall be rewarded.
I have a problem with the NAB on Luke 1:28
And coming to her, he said, “Hail, favored one! The Lord is with you.” This plays into the hands of Protestants by using "favored" instead of the more literal translation from κεχαριτωμένη or kecharitomene or having been favored with grace and still are continuing or full of grace from before and still continuing. I also have a couple other issues too but this one always stands out. I also wish there were a way in modern English to distinguish between you plural and you singular. I just can't see the Bible substituting you plural with "y'all" or for us Pittsburghers "yinz." This in a way is why "thou" for singular you and "ye" for plural you.
@YAJUN YUAN and of course, the faithful Douay-Rheims
“Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.”
@YAJUN YUAN again this claim was sufficiently refuted in another comment thread on this video
And the Douay-Rheims nicely solves the problem of you, singular vs plural.
Thanks for this Trent! I recently became a DRE at a smaller parish and we have a bible study using quite a faulty translation (Father Nicholas King SJ). This helped me when charitably bringing up that said translation and works with it should not be used in a study.
Catholics and other false religions do not resemble true born-again Christians in any sense. True born-again Christians do not worship idols or Mary dollies or sing to her. Their pagan prayers are prayed to “Our Lady,” their false Mary. They believe her to be “The spouse of the Holy Spirit,” whereby, their false Jesus was created. Nor do true Christians adhere to other so-called saints, pray on beads, etc. They do not believe in Catholic mystics and praying to the bones of mystics.
True Christian believers know Mary was kept a virgin up till the time of Christ's birth; then she, as a wife, had other children, sons and daughters with Joseph, and their sons' names are listed in the Bible. She too had to receive Christ as her Savior to be saved, not superior to any other sinner. However, Christians recognize she revealed exceptional faith and obedience before God. Her cousin, Elizabeth, also exhibited exceptional faith and godliness. Joseph did too, he being a just man and one who obeyed all God commanded of him in the protection of Jesus Christ, God the Son, as his adoptive son.
The Bible declares idolaters (those who bow before idols, pray before them, touching beads, etc.) go to the lake of fire. Idolatry has no place in true Christianity. Revelation 21:8-“But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”
God eventually will judge-“The LORD has issued a command concerning you: "Your name will no longer be perpetuated. I will cut off idol and image from the house of your gods. I will prepare your grave, for you are contemptible."
(Nahum 1: 14)
Mary, the true Mary of the Bible was not a fertility goddess and called God her Savior. You have to be a sinner to need a Savior. Christ condemned Catholicism when people attempted to uplift Mary when He was on the earth. He would not allow it when people tried to bless her, he said, on the contrary, blessed are those who abide in Christ’s commandments.
Luke 11:27 And it happened, as He spoke these things, that a certain woman from the crowd raised her voice and said to Him, “Blessed is the womb that bore You, and the breasts which nursed You!” 28 But He said, “On the contrary, blessed are those who hear the word of God and keep it!”
Pointing to his disciples, he said, "Here are my mother and my brothers. For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother." (Matthew chapter 12, verses 49 and 50)
"Who are my mother and my brothers?" he asked. Then he looked at those seated in a circle around him and said, "Here are my mother and my brothers! Whoever does God's will is my brother and sister and mother." (Mark chapter 3, verses 33-35)
Now Jesus' mother and brothers came to see him, but they were not able to get near him because of the crowd. Someone told him, "Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to see you." He replied, "My mother and brothers are those who hear God's word and put it into practice." (Luke chapter 8, verses 19-21)
True Christians believe in receiving Christ Jesus, the Christ of the Bible from Genesis 1:1 to Revelation 22:21, with no additions or subtractions, as their personal Savior. They do not believe in salvation by works. The Holy Spirit indwells true believers, equipping them to live godly in Christ Jesus. Jesus Christ died for every person so anyone can be saved from their sins who call upon Him.
Christians are also to come and be separate from the unsaved and they are to have no fellowship with the children of satan. Catholics are the children of satan as those who worship idols, teach salvation by works and mock the Bible and its holy truths. Christians are not to fellowship with anyone who teaches false doctrines and this is viewed throughout the Bible, including 2 Peter, Galatians, Deuteronomy 13, etc.
A friend of mine was once Catholic and in her church they had a yearly ritual where they had an idol of Jesus that they laid down and made every one would kiss this idols’ feet. She performed this also before becoming a born again Christian.
Please watch video of popes praying before bones, including Augustine’s. John Calvin followed Augustine-a Catholic idolater and father of Catholic church: ua-cam.com/video/GtphyBYFgAg/v-deo.html
A so-called church full of satanic idolatry, akin to Babylon. "Therefore behold, the days are coming that I will bring judgment on the carved images of Babylon; Her whole land shall be ashamed, And all her slain shall fall in her midst.” (From Jeremiah chapter 51, and we read in Revelation God's judgment will fall on idolatry and that of Mystery Babylon’s idolatry.)
Judgment Day is coming Revelation 9:20-“The rest of mankind, who were not killed by these plagues, did not repent of the works of their hands, so as not to worship demons, and the idols of gold and of silver and of brass and of stone and of wood, which can neither see nor hear nor walk . . .”
Romans 10:9 in the Bible: "That if thou shall confess with thy mouth the LORD Jesus, and believe in thine heart that God raised Him from the dead, thou shalt be saved."
Val Lee of “val lee weblog” vallee7.wordpress.com
Yes it is....use it as a reference.....to compare other bibles
Here is the Test...in Douey Rehms Luke it says Hail....Full of Grace.....ref Mary...go to these modernist Catholic or Protestant Bible it says Hail Highly Favored One...changes the meaning!!!!
I recall some story of a translator of the New American Bible, that once he found out what was going into the study notes for the print he demanded that they remove his name from the credit list. He wanted nothing to do with it.
The study notes in the NABRE replaced Mariology as the biggest stumbling block for me as I was converting to the Catholic Church.
the NAB is just awful, the notes being the biggest problem
@@tony1685 Idol worship? Nope. No worship of idols. Necromancy? Not possible as all who live and believe in Jesus will NEVER die; don’t you believe this? Paganism? That’s laughable. What do you think is pagan? Did you even bother to try to understand why an evangelical Bible Christian like me would choose to become a Catholic. I grew up with all the same propaganda, but once I saw it was false, I was able to investigate objectively and found the truth.
@@tony1685 What does John 11:26 say?
@@tony1685 Read it again. Jesus corrects Martha for the same error you just made.
@@tony1685 There are varying degrees of how well those in the Church know Jesus Christ.
Not catholic but found your explanation very good and easy to follow..thanks
The best is if one can read the original language text i read for the New Testament the original language koine greek all translations have mistakes
I prefer my bible translations to be word-for-word and as literal as possible. I want it to express the ideas of the author. Great video, and I appreciate your channel.
Daft. I want it word for word so I can understand idea for idea???
One important principle is this: writers, including the Biblical writers, use words imprecisely. If your theology is dependent on the precise meaning of a word or phrase, it is probably wrong. A second principle is that, if your interpretation of a passage is radically different from everyone else, you are probably wrong.
Depends where in the world 🌍 🌎 one is exposed to scripture as a English-speaker, or whichever one's first language is. For English speakers in the British Commonwealth, the different conferences of bishops would have held sway on both the liturgical and catechetical use of translations. Fortunately (or not), after Vatican II, there was a wider use of the RSV 2CE, although most youngsters are likely to have had the 'dumbed down' Today's Modern English version as their introduction to scripture. I found the New Jerusalem Bible a favourite for its Anglicised literary dynamic equivalence but quickly switched to the RSV 2CE for study. Did use the NAB (Little Rock Study Bible) for a while because of the notes but got very uncomfortable with some of the suggestions it made and dumped it for the DR, most recently getting a printed and digital Haydock version. Most recently got my hands on the NT RSV 2CE Ignatius Press hardbound and love it. Another edition I did want to get was the Navarre Bible in English for its Notes and reflections. It's all about investing money and then time using these, and not as decoration on one's bookshelf.
Thank you Sir, you are a wonderful teacher of the truth.
Dude!!! For the LONGEST time I have been frustrated with the wishy washy commentaries on the USCCB bible. So glad someone else recognized that.
I think a significant number of their theologians were protestants. Why let a prot translate and annotate your Bible? Why not let Jehova Witnesses join in? Or Muslims?
The madness of ecumenism. And it only flows in one direction. There are no Catholics working on the NIV, etc
We, who have the Magesterium and the duty to protect it (which is the fullness of truth) should not compromise.
NET (New English Translation) is free and has more than 60,000 scholarly notes that acknowledge how did they get to particular formation from Greek / Hebrew
NABRE is my personal favorite. Picked it up in 2011 when it came out not expecting much from it and loved the translation and notes so much that decided to read it in a year.
Father of us who in the heavens hallowed be the name of You. Come the kingdom of You be done the will of You as in heaven also upon earth. The bread of us daily grant us today. And forgive us the debts of us as also we forgive the debtors of us. And not lead us into temptation but deliver us from evil. For yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory for the ages. Amen.
Didache Bible (RSV2CE) with Catechism commentary is solid for study. DRA / KJV is good for spiritual reading but are more difficult.
Original 7 books removed.
Honestly I really appreciate the way you extrapolate the deeper themes in movies even if they aren’t necessarily the best movies. I’ve watched Superbad a couple times (because it’s hilarious) and you bringing it up kinda hit me like a brick wall.
This was extremely well done and informative. Thank you very much. (And I’m not saying this just because I am long of nose!)
Although I have been, and, I AM STILL a Latin Rite ( Roman) Catholic Christian, going on 54 on 03 April 2023AD, I AM in personal possession of 2 JPS Tanakhs, 2 NKJV , 1 NAB- RE, 1 RSV- CE New Testament, 1 Jerusalem Bible, 1 Good News Translation ( Catholic U.S. Veteran Edition), and , several Gideon's New Testaments in various Digi Cam ( Digital Camouflage) patterns. This Counsel of Trent Video, and Others on UA-cam , discussing which Bible translation is better or worse, and, what I can tell You All is that The Holy Bible, both Old and New Testaments, that You Yourselves read, study, and pray and praise GOD ( Father, Son, Holy Spirit) use is the One Holy Bible that is Your Translation.🇺🇸🇻🇦✝️☦️📖🙏❤️😇👼⛪🕊️
My go-to personal Bible is RSV-2CE. Unlike RSV-CE, it does not use the archaic thee’s and thou’s. 😁 Also, I recently ordered ESV-CE because I was told it’s a good translation as well.
The Latin vulgate is the only version authorized to be used for apologetics and disputations.
Your examples of formal and dynamic translations made this video really great 👍 As dynamic translations go, the New Living Translation is easy to read and I like it a lot. That's the main appeal of dynamic equivalence for me -- I can read the NLT for a long time before I get tired of reading. (It is a protestant translation though, so I'll stop and check another translation for anything that sounds wrong.) The Orthodox church (rightly) insists on using the Septuagint as a source for the Old Testament, because the Hebrew OT has undergone a bit of anti-christian revision. There may be a Catholic argument for using the Latin Vulgate for the same reason.
Regarding scholarship, it's a mixed blessing. It sort of needs to be allowed to operate without regard for church tradition, and that means it regularly goes off the rails. In the long run though, all truth is God's truth, and honest biblical scholarship does tend to find its way home 😊
Very insightful.
Petition to rename the Interlinear Greek translation as the Yoda Translation
Funny you are, many jokes have you.
My favourite edition is the ESV, really solid translation but reads well. Interestingly the example Trent gave the ESV translates both as traditions. The context in mark is where human traditions were followed rather then Gods actual commands.
I love the Bible in a Year podcast!
great video for all christians, we do not need to be drawing lines on issues before we educate ourselves properly! We can work through it
Thanks for the comment! -Vanessa
Trent, you’ve helped me much through out my growth from a lapsed cradle Catholic into a more mature faith, so I ask this hesitantly; why do Catholic apologist keep down playing the NAB (NABre 3rd), the NRSVce, & never mention the CTS New Jerusalem? (You know, the Bibles approved for liturgical use by their respective Bishop Conference.) I use to speculate it was because most popular Catholic Apologist are ex-Protestants so that was why they preferred the RSV, but now that the NCB & ESV-ce exist, and liturgical options are widening in Conferences of Bishops world wide, I don’t get the shade thrown at the NAB & NRSV. This is not a dig, it just sounds like apologists and their followers/subscribers are saying they know better than the bishops or the magisterium about what should or should not be approved for official or private use? I’m asking because I get asked this a bunch, I’d like to hear your response. Gratefully & respectfully. ~Ramon
I don't think many Americans really know about the CTS New Catholic Bible. And maybe the ESV-CE (my Bible of choice) is still new enough that people don't really know about it?
I think the NABRE and NRSV-CE get downplayed/shade thrown at them because they are more liberal and less faithful to the traditions of the Church--the NRSV-CE in the over gender-neutralization of pronouns, and the NABRE in both the footnotes and some gender neutralization.
My understanding is that the Holy See has rejected both the NABRE and the NRSV-CE for use (as-is) in the liturgy. This means that the US and Canadian lectionaries have to use edited versions in order to make the translations suitable for the liturgy. (This is the same situation with the JB, which is why there was a need for the CTS New Catholic Bible.) Meanwhile, the RSV-2CE and ESV-CE are both translations that are approved for use in the liturgy AS IS.
So to I think it makes perfect sense to favor the CTS-NCB, RSV-2CE, and ESV-CE because they have all been approved for use in the liturgy. It would also make sense, then, to be hesitant about using the JB/NJB/RNJB, RSV-1CE/NRSV-CE, or NAB/NABRE, as they have all been REJECTED by Rome for use in the Liturgy.
(Sidenote: I believe the NABRE is scheduled for a 2025 update that would make it in line with what we hear in the liturgy--here's hoping!)
@@ShoelessJoeChristian Let me say that the CTS Is my personal favorite translation as well along with the NRSVce, my two favorite protestant translations are the the NASB and the ESV, so the ESVce has me very excited (I just ordered mine this morning). My only two rejoinders would be a) that the NAB is still the only Catholic Translation approved for Liturgical use in the USA. And when I do the divine office/LOTH I do tend to prefer the anglicized HarperCollins (CTS?) translation to the Americanized CatholicBookPublishing NAB translation for prayer, especially if I do the singing. It’s just smoother.
B) & this is why I asked Trent the question, when I bring this up online, youtube, face-book, twit-ter; I get demolished in the comments, people, commentors get so upset that their favorite Bible, or the preferred Bible of their favorite apologists is not Liturgical in their own diocese that they go all inquisition trying to get me to approve of their bible or to downplay the Liturgical Status of the NAB, it is very frustrating & annoying.
@@alpha4IV I hope my comment didn't come across as trying to demolish you or "prove you wrong" or anything! The main point I was trying to make is just that neither the NAB nor the NABRE are actually approved translations for liturgical use in the USA--in fact, Rome specifically rejected them. The US Lectionary uses a unique revision of the NAB, which cannot be found in a complete Bible format. So until 2025 when the NABRE will (supposedly) be updated to match what Rome has approved, US parishioners cannot buy a Bible that matches the readings they hear at Mass.
I'm agreeing with your point (as I perceived it) that if we want to stick with translations that have been approved by Rome for use in the liturgy, then we can have the highest confidence in the KNOX, CTS-NCB, RSV-2CE, and ESV-CE
@@ShoelessJoeChristian I tried to ask this on my channel but I can’t seem to deescalate the tension on the finer point you just worded, so thank you for the reply; tell me what is the, I guess anger, that so many express over not having an at home bible that matches the Lectionary, from my point of view, and maybe this is what gets me in trouble and angers said posters but if we have a Missal that matches the Liturgy & if we really wanted to we could go out of our way & buy a lectionary, Perish books stores do sell them, why should this get under peoples skin so deeply. We can do the daily mass readings and the LOTH with office readings so why be offended or aggressive? Sorry if that sound like I am projecting but I get buried in those kind of comments to this day, as recent as this morning l, on vids I made 4 years ago when I had just come back into the church. Nice talking to you Joe. Thank you, I hope to hear more productive answers such as this . . . hopefully from Trent as well. lol
@@alpha4IV I like to read my Bible straight through (I find reading the daily readings to be too choppy/disjointed), so it is frustrating that the USCCB only offers a Bible that was not only rejected by Rome for liturgical use, but has heretical footnotes to boot! It would be great if Trent could chime in on this--I would love to hear his thoughts! Great talking with you Alpha Centurian :)
The best English translation is the one that does not change Our Lord's true words and intent. As Catholics we should all ne using the same version. Including at Mass.
I noticed some bad notes in the NAB regarding Jesus’ siblings and the identity of James the just :/
I got most of the Catholic Translations in English even the African Bible. Along with several Commentarys and what not.
But I still Got a KJ/AMP Parallel Bible. Been a few time I've tried to wrap my head around a passage or two. And after every thing else I pulled this out and it's helped me understand it better.
Been a few time it seemed Anti Catholic as well. But it is what it is.
As a Catholic, who loves the old Latin Vulgate, I'm puzzled by the fact that Psalm 22 (or Psalm 23 if you read a Protestant Bible), where the first line is "Dominus regit me, et nihil mini deerit", is often translated as
" The Lord is my shepherd. .."! ! ! !
I agree, and I prefer the DRC and the Vulgate, but it still works. A shepherd rules the sheep, and so poetically speaking it may not be a direct translation but it is a theologically accurate translation.
Vulgate itself is a translation not the original language text
I loved this! Really opened my eyes! I would definitely recommend the NRSV (New Revised Standard Version) the version sometimes has a CI at the end meaning Catholic Interconfessional, I %100 recommend it!
If this ends with "the one you read" I will scream.
Commence screaming
Haha I figured that would be he final thought. It does make sense though as sometimes one wants to read the Bible for a different focus.
Some days I’m ready for a deep dive into two paragraphs cause I want to dissect the meaning, culture, etc and I’m a need for that sort of stuff. Other times I want to read a narrative and don’t want to get overly tripped up on the words.
It really is a balance when it comes to this sort of stuff 😅
Its the one you'll read!
Seeing Trent Horn reading the message has to be the funniest thing I've seen on this channel.
When I was transitioning away from atheism, I bought a Protestant study Bible and a Catholic study Bible. I read the Protestant Bible first. I think if I read the Catholic Bible first, I would’ve saved myself 15 years of being caught up in Protestant incoherence.
Both are wrong the orthodox is the correct
@@ΓραικοςΕλληνας Can you point to any supposed mistranslation or error in the notes of a catholic Bible?
@@tafazzi-on-discord well i read only the original language text of the New Testament text NEVER translations .when you cay carholic Bible what you mean ? The New Testament original language text is greek not latin,and the OT the church uses is not the Masoretic but the Septuagint text in greek.
@@tafazzi-on-discord one example is the word ενέργεια that is not translated as energy and confussion in Theologian issues start, in the west of what actually are the energies of God.
@@ΓραικοςΕλληνας What does latin have to do with this? And by catholic Bible I mean any translation that is used in mass by catholic churches.
"Energies" is nonsense to my ears, I don't know what the plural of energy means
Thank you for the educational videos, great selection of examples also.
There's an italian saying: 'Tradutore, traditore' (the translator is a traitor). Nevertheless, the Holy Spirit conducted the scholars of Old, and as well said in the video, the IDEAS went on, by the Lord's will. Together with the 'Depositum Fidei'. Best regards from Sao Paulo, Brazil.
* Note: it is said that J. R. R. Tolkien worked in the team of English version for the "Bible of Jerusalem", great Bible for studying.
In later years, Tolkien put some distance between the 1966 JB and himself, because of the working version of the Book of Jonah he was handed. He edited it rather lightly, is my understanding.
A really excellent video! The Douay-Rheims is a very good version to read (I think better than the modern versions, as helpful as they can be at times). Actually, what we call the Douay-Rheims, is actually the "Douay-Rheims Bible, as revised by Bishop Richard Challoner in the years 1749-1752." The original Douay-Rheims of 1609 is very difficult to read, and English Catholics themselves often preferred the King James Bible (If discreetly). Recognizing this, Bishop Challoner, with the full support of the Church, sought to make the Douay-Rheims more readable, and, in doing so, brought it much closer in style to the King James Bible, which is so much resembles. Interestingly enough, the King James Bible translates II Thessalonians 2:15: "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle." However, the Douay-Rheims Confraternity revision reads: "So then, brethren, stand firm, and hold the teachings that you have learned, whether by word or by letter of ours." So, we have here an instance where the KJV reading is closer to the original Douay-Rheims reading than is the Catholic Church's Confraternity revision.
RSV Catholic Edition is my most trusted translation both when I were protestant and now that I am Catholic. When a protestant I would be in bible group (as we did as protestants) and people would say my version says this my version says that what does it mean? If we dont know we will just make it up. I would say "what it means is ..." and read the RSV Catholic Edition which made sense.
I am not sure that that is what formal equivalence is. It is generally more words in their syntactical relations being translated into another language as the words in their proper syntactical relations in that language.
In English , Douy Rheims is the best
Clearly the best translation of the Bible is the one that captures the meaning of the original text in the most convincing way
And that is?
@@jilbageorgalis1568 Probably D B Hart’s. So many translations of the Bible are confessional: Protestant, Catholic, etc, bibles. The Hebrew and the Greek should just be translated as accurately as possible without confessional bias.
For me, "best" is most accurate. New Jerusalem and NRSV are the most accurate and based on the older manuscripts so they're the best in my opinion. The ISV also looks good but it's an evangelical translation so probably won't have the deuterocanonical. 😔 I also heard David Bentley Heart's translation is also pretty accurate.
Your NRSV literally tells people to reject Jesus. Read titus 3.10 and luke 12.51
@@kjvacp i dont think sugarcoat to the verse by your preference translation leads people to jesus either. Thats what the original text is, the problem is, how yo interpret that. Duh.
@@theosteven3362 the original text in titus 3.10 says heretick. Not divisive man. Kjv and douay rheims are the only ones that got it right.
My "best" is most accurate, as well! Are you aware of the Catholic edition of the English Standard Version (ESV-CE)? It is also based on the older manuscripts, and is much more accurate than the NJB or the NRSV-CE.
@@kjvacp So the verse in Luke is Jesus telling people to reject Jesus?
Here's the KJV since it's in your username:
Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division
NRSV:
Do you think that I have come to bring peace to the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division!
Is the KJV telling people to literally reject Jesus too? Of course not.
The new camera looks great! I don't know much about cameras, but perhaps you could adjust the focus? You are definitely more "high-definition Trent" but your microphone looks "ultra-high-definition"! Thanks also for the content. I was struggling to find information on this topic the other day. Nowhere other than your channel have I found anyone break down dynamic vs formal to cover various translations.
Thanks Trent for illustrating yet another problem with Sola Scriptura. imagine this conversation...
Question: Do you believe in Sola Scriptura?
Answer: Yes!
Question: which translation?
@YAJUN YUAN but those are all poor translations of the original Greek.
Luke 1:28 (D-R): 28 And the angel being come in, said unto her: Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.
Is a much truer translation.
By the way, as a protestant who gets his doctrine from accurate translation of the Greek, which is your favorite translation of John 2:4?
@YAJUN YUAN yes. D-R is a literal from the Vulgate which is a literal from the Greek. It properly captures that kecharitomene has both the word favor or grace and a suffic mene indicating a permanence of that state (i.e. full of grace or ever-favored)
Which translation are you using for John 2:4? I am familiar with most of the translations you quoted above and note that they are strikingly different from what you gave. Btw, where are the brackets in the original Greek?
@YAJUN YUAN @YAJUN YUAN to be in the grace of God is to be sinless in His sight. If you are ever graced then you are ever sinless.
In your example (Acts 6:8) of full of grace, the context is magnitude but not duration. In Luke 1 (the only place in the Bible that grammatical construct is used), both magnitude and duration are indicated
And, as I said, that is just one of several verses that indicate that Mary was born without original sin and remained sinless throughout. I understand this doesn't fit your theology, but I humbly suggest that it is you (and not the Church which has stood since Pentecost) that is wrong on this point.
Btw, I know what the brackets indicate. But a true literal translation must not make use of such devices. And if the literal standard was truly literal it would have used ever-favored one (but that sounds way too Catholic, huh?)
I also just went to check for prot sabotage at work in Luke 2:35. I notice that the literal standard puts the clause (and also a sword shall pass through your own soul) in parentheses. Are there parentheses in the original Greek? Or is the literal standard edition not literal? It sure does show a heaping amount of modernist protestant bias in it's (not very literal) translating choices
@YAJUN YUAN I don't have time to do a full study on Ecclesiasticus 18:17, but I note that the words are not the same. There are two alphabetic differences. But "favored one" is also not how that verse is translated. My Bible says justified man. I also note that Ecclesiasticus is not considered the infallible Word of God by most protestants. Do Seventh Day Adventists accept it as canonical? If not, can you really use it as a comparison? I mean, what if Sirach made an error in the original word choice?
And "later" Catholic teaching is still a millennium older than the oldest 7th day Adventist teaching
THE ETERNAL BOOK OF TRUTH, THE NEW TESTAMENT SCRIPTURES is the best New Testament Translation because it is precise in its translation and brings forth the original intent.
Douay-Rheims (1609-1610, Bp. Challoner 1752, 1899 American)
Hands down. Closest translation and transliteration of Latin Vulgate. The older the better, as instead of wanting it to be "vernacular" back then, they prioritised accuracy of meaning over linguistic beauty.
Vulgate is itself a translation not the original language
@@ΓραικοςΕλληνας No, a transliteration. There is a difference.
In addition, there was no Bible (Book) before Vulgate. There were manuscripts that needed to be compiled by Church and Canon determined.
@@JeanMarieDuchesne are you ok in your mind the sinaiticus codex in the original language is before the Vulgate. Saint Constadin order to have 50 copies of the original language text New testament in greek Go educate yourself
@@JeanMarieDuchesne the greek speaking saint Athanasius was the first to use the word canon to show the correct books at mid 4th cent. when there was no vulgate translation. and as greek speaking use the greek word canon to show the 27 correct books of the New Testament text as the text original language is greek
@@JeanMarieDuchesne vulgate is just a translation from the original language koine greek .
Very much agree about the NAB. I have the a copy of the NAB Revised and even that still has some doozies in the notes.
It's very apparent that Protestants and agnostic theologians were involved in the process.
I still prefer the Douay. I like the more florid English with the "thy" and "thee" and that it says "hail, full of GRACE" and not "highly favored".
I prefer NRSV
I'm so glad I'm not the only one who has some serious problems with the NAB study notes.
I started with just using the Vulgate and Douay Rheims, though I have since really leaned on the Jerusalem (not to be confused with the New Jerusalem) and NRSV. The more I read the comments, I want to check out the Knox translation.
Vulgate is actually a translation not the original language text
Where Hebrew acrostics show up in the Bible, Knox wrote an English acrostic. Intriguing. He also has British English vocab and spelling and Anglicised Greek book names, viz., 'Paralipomena' for 'Chronicles'; and of course, the Deuterocanon (I'm not Roman Catholic; I just like collecting and reading different English translations, of which there are far too many. 180+ NT in English)
Your Friendly Neighborhood Proofreader here. At 7:31 Trent says "material"; a quick check for the original document (in English) shows what's written on the screen--"maternal"--is correct.
My personal favorite translations are the KJV and the Knox Bible. They are both very beautiful to listen to.
How you know if they are accurate from the original language text
@@ΓραικοςΕλληνας Well in the development of the Knox translation Msgr. Knox compared the Latin Vulgate to Greek and Hebrew texts, even opting to go with the meaning from the Septuagint over the Latin texts, and when Hebrew and Greek sources differed from the Latin he gave Greek and Hebrew primacy, putting the Latin meaning of texts in the footnotes. It's use was widely supported among clergy and laypeople. Pope Blessed Pius XII and Archbishop Fulton Sheen were among its supporters. On it's accuracy I can only say that I have trust in the magisterium of the Church that they know what they are doing.
@@uddermayhem well i read for the New testament only the original language text never Translations
@Γραικος Ελληνας well I'm sure that's good and well for you as you're obviously Greek or speak Greek. But where I am from unless you're of that heritage or you are studying the language as part of religious studies, it's not a common thing for people to know Greek. As I'm sure you can understand, that makes it pretty impossible for the majority of people to discern whether a translation is accurate by themselves. As a bilingual person, you tell us, is it accurate?
@@ΓραικοςΕλληνας
Well, I don't speak Greek, so I make do with translations that people who do speak Greek say are solid.
I have two DR's, the huge Haydock version and a Baronius Pocket edition. As well as a hardcover RSV-2CE and pocket RSV-2CE NT pocket edition. I love both translations, but lean toward the RSV for readability.
My favorite translation of the Psalms is that in the Clear Creek Abbey Monastic Diurnal. I'm sure it is it's own translations, but if not, would love to know if they come from another of the Bible itself.
Douay-Rheims
Simple as
The most objective answer I can give is this. The 1966 CATHOLIC ed. of the REVISED STANDARD is the one BIBLE that has been accepted by Catholics, Anglicans, Eastern Orthodox, and many Protestants. ✝