What's funny is I am not Roman Catholic, but I want a Douay Rheims Bible because its a faithful translation of the Latin and gets the numbers game correct with the 37 unique numbers in the four gospels. Plus I like how there is 73 books. All part of the 137 pattern.
@@FirstNameLastName-is6yb In the Holy Writ the Holy Spirit weaves a nice numerical pattern with the numbers 1, 3 and 7 and any combo of these numbers. For instance the most common age in the Bible is 137. When Sarah died Abraham was 137 and Isaac was 37. There are 37 unique numbers in the four gospels. 37 unique miracles in the four gospels. 666 in the book of revelation can be divided as 37x18. There are 23 combinations of 37 in Genesis 1:1. The Greek word for "Logos" adds up to 373. Jesus' name in Greek add up to 888 which is divisible as 37x24 or 37x(8+8+8). The 153 fish can be broken down as 3x3x17 etc. these there numbers are everywhere you look really. You can find out more about this on my UA-cam channel if you'd wish(Dont mean to self promo).
The Latin Vulgate was translated by a great Saint! Who knew the Holy Church inside out and Holy Tradition of course. Its THE Bible. The DRB is an English translation of THE BIBLE.
I agree with you Robert, the few times I heard Taylor Marshall read out of the Douay Rheims ,I found it hard to follow. He stumbled over a lot of the words. I decided there and then, this version of the Bible translation, not for me. Enjoy your video's very much. God bless you.🙏
I'm a Douay Rheims fan because I grew up a KJV protestant and this is my comfort zone. I don't know all the arguments for different translations, thats for smarter men than me, but to me the douay rheims helps to encapsulate the beauty that is scripture, the olde english just reads better to me and the psalms can be downright beautiful. I don't think this needs to be dogmatic. Unless you use an NIV. That's bad.
If the D.Rheims is the text you have always used keep using it, some people who are new to the faith just find it hard to adjust to the text and I don't think we should make the text of the bible complicated for new Catholics.
@Hold Fast Anyone reading Shakespeare’s English would need a class first in the language of that period, how it was pronounced (because it has changed). As I said if you are comfortable with the DRB perfect, but the DRB is a translation and there have been thousands of Biblical translations. If I handed the DRB to someone who has never read the Bible before they might get caught facing a language we don’t actually use day to day in English, remember we should ever put obstacles when trying to evangelise and you have to feed people slowly
@Hold Fast As I said if you find the RDB comfortable for you there is no problem. The whole point of translating the biblical texts into the vernacular is so the people can understand the texts in the language AS spoken (vernacular) so if you were asking me which text we should use to reflect the english that we speak today I would not use a translation with "Ye,Yea,hath,becometh,proceedeth,shalt,thee,lightsome,darksome,scrip,thence,Art,thou,speaketh,didst,Whence,Wilt" They are simply not used today and if we were translating the bible into english for the first time today we would not use those words. I didn't say there were thousands of English Translations, I said there were thousands of translations which is factual in many languages over many periods. Very little of my faith formation was in English, vast majority of Catholics don't read the bible in English. So if someone asked me for a Vernacular translation (a translation into todays spoken English which was what they originally did, they used the spoken English) I would not recommend the DRB, now if the person was a professor of English then that person might find it better. The reality and you must agree is that the language of the DRB is not today's english vernacular.
I know! It’s a confirmation for me. I always believed that’s what bread we were praying about in the Our Father. It’s sort of like we’re all blessed to be living in 1Corinthians 14: “ what is hidden will be revealed .” Just paraphrasing.
I didn't even know there was a Catholic Bible until just over a year ago. I nearly got the Douay- Rheims but got the Ignatius RSV 2nd edition hardback, I also got the paper back New Testament and Psalms in the same translation as it's very portable to carry around with me. I bought it from the Latin Mass society so I thought it must be okay. I think I made the right decision as it's very enjoyable to read.
@Hold Fast Or just learn to read the beautiful English of the Douay Rheims and learn Latin for the Clementina Vulgate. I don't see why this is so hard.
@Hold Fast I agree. I tried sharing more information in a prior attempt to respond to you but yet again youtube has deleted my comment. I hope soon we will be able to get a faithful readable Catholic translation in modern English. Until then Dr. William von Peters has prepared the Douay Rheims for modern readers. First hand retyping the REAL Rheims New Testament in its entirety, with all the notes and annotations, into modern English text for easy reading. Then continuing on with the REAL Douay Old Testament, also with notes and annotations. It is to be emphasized that nothing in the text has been changed or modified. It has only been transliterated into modern English text, with archaic spellings updated to modern spellings. Where possible the archaic spelling has been left intact to preserve the "flavor" of this historic text.. I have the printed versions and (pdfs which you can find online by searching for them) from the real douay rheims website : The Original and True Rheims New Testament of Anno Domini 1582, The Original and True Douay Old Testament of Anno Domini 1609 volume I (Genesis - Job), Douay Old Testament of 1610 (Psalms - IV Esdras. I found out about the above after watching "Why So Many Different Bibles?" by Catholic Apologetics for Beginners he favors the modern Douay Rheims, it is better than the RSV, NABs since comments are not allowed on the videos cant let him know that>>> John Henry Newman in the July, 1859 "Rambler" published an article entitled "The History of the Text of the Rheims and Douay Version of Holy Scripture" He states: § 3. Dr. Troy's Bible "...The revisor was the Rev. Bernard Macmahon, a Dublin priest, who published his first edition in 1783, in 12mo, with the formal approbation of his Archbishop, Dr. Carpenter. There is reason for supposing that it professed to be a continuation of Dr. Challoner's labours& Eight years afterwards, in 1791, the same clergyman was selected by Dr. Troy, his then Archbishop, to superintend an edition... We doubt ...whether he is further from the Protestant version than Dr. Challoner." Thus, the Haydock Bible is NOT the Real Douay-Rheims Bible...
Protestant here, have used a range of translations from the KJV, NKJV, NIV, ESV, NASB, etc., prior to learning Greek and Hebrew, which has allowed me to progress into annotated original language readers. Though, I must say that Robert is quite right in stating that translations are many respects interpretations; but having recently learnt about the usage of the phrase ἐπιούσιον (The Greek word seems to be a compound word from epi+ousios. Now epi means over, above, beyond, in addition to, or some similar superlative. Ousious refers to the substance of something) in the Lord's prayer. I was impressed to find out about the boldness of the Douay-Rheims Bible in translating it thusly "[11] Give us this day our super-substantial bread." Generally, I think the Catholic catechism rightly captures the nuance here: 2837 “Daily” (epiousios) occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. Taken in a temporal sense, this word is a pedagogical repetition of “this day,” to confirm us in trust “without reservation.” Taken in the qualitative sense, it signifies what is necessary for life, and more broadly every good thing sufficient for subsistence. Taken literally (epi-ousios: “super-essential”), it refers directly to the Bread of Life, the Body of Christ, the “medicine of immortality,” without which we have no life within us. Finally in this connection, its heavenly meaning is evident: “this day” is the Day of the Lord, the day of the feast of the kingdom, anticipated in the Eucharist that is already the foretaste of the kingdom to come. For this reason it is fitting for the Eucharistic liturgy to be celebrated each day.
Douay Rheims on my lampstand by my bed. No problems in reading or comprehension. If one has read other English translations, one encounters less obstacle in understanding of content or usage.
That was a good video. You seem to be a nice intelligent young man. I like the way you present your ideas. You have taught me some interesting things. I didn't realize the Bible has so many translations.
thnx for this. i agree with you. i got the D-R on marshall's recommendation and didn't care for it either. what did you get all of those medals for? being an accomplished polyglot?
Great stuff; Douay-Rheims is a standard for Catholic Bible translation (into English), of course, being as it was (and is) geared (as much of Scripture seems to have been, originally) for tying into the Liturgical use (this was, more or less, the same with the older Authorised Bible versions - for use in Anglican church worship etc); the English, Irish, Scots, American versions of the DR Vulgate (via Dr Challoner/ St Joseph Apostolate) were all but nearly identical (a great benefit in setting out the Faith - its main purpose .. not in presenting textual analysis). The Shakspearean/ Jacobean language is not particularly appealing as a nice, simple go-to 'read' for non-liturgical centred use (a first step easy-to-understand and engage with kind of use in private study - without a dictionary and study guide to hand); I suspect that this literary style was meant to be heard rather more than glanced at. The Jerusalem versions, with their free equivalence of speech methodology, are easier to read and engage with, thus they can be good for tele-evangelisation or popular teaching projects, but rather misleading .. especially in more serious studies - e.g. involving a common concordance search; Ronald Knox's translation (for High School girls) is slightly more useful yet also quite a good read (as literature) .. but it is not readily available; the Navarre version, however, is much more reliable than some other 'recent' English translations (the New American Bible text is, if possible, even less trustworthy than the at times pedestrian Jerusalem format) .. however, Navarre is jolly expensive (and rather hefty all in one gulp, but the individual wee texts can be a Godsend for homeschooling and for just a quick dip in, on the go). Thanks for all the hard work. Keep the Faith; tell the truth, shame the devil, and let the demons shriek. God bless. ;o) P.S. The Word on Fire version is beautifully done.
Fascinating video. I think there can be a lot lost in translation. My youngest son is studying translations and the Greek seems easier to translate to English than Latin. Its all so interesting.
So appreciate this video! Your insights are sensible and wise. I do enjoy reading Bishop Barron’s “version” because the layout and commentary are beautiful and inspiring. For me, this Bible brings joy to my heart and soul. But I can be fussy about how Mark 9:29 is translated. As Catholics, prayer and fasting were always encouraged as a powerful spiritual pairing. The last few decades seem, to me anyway, to have diluted or downplayed the role of fasting. Our Lady of Medjugorie continues to remind us of the importance of prayer AND fasting. Which is why the RSV Bible is my favorite translation of Mark 9:29.
The Word on Fire Bible is based upon the New Revised Standard Version. The New Revised Standard Version is based upon the Revised Standard Version. The Revised Standard Version finds its English root in the King James Version. The King James Version was quite notably not translated by Catholics.
@@JoeMode213 I find it interesting that many Protestant bibles, such as the NIV, include the word “fasting” in Mark 9:29. From what I have been able to read of the Catholic-English translations, only the Douay Rheims and Revised Standard Version contain the word fasting in Mark 9:29. Why the NRSV was translated to omit that word, I don’t know why. But I wish they hadn’t. While I’m not as old school as Taylor Marshall, I’m old enough, that by default, I’m just old school. And fussy. 🙂
@@kathleenrosales7348 My advice is just to go back to the Douay Rheims and Latin Vulgate. They are the best texts to go off of imo. I like the way the KJV is written but it contains errors. Best to play it safe and honour mother Church by learning from the greatest of her works.
The Greek verse for mark 9:29 does not mention fasting. Just the word “proseuche” but in other verses where that word is used they also add fasting, but in Mark 9:29 it’s not mentioned in the Greek text (again open to correction)
@@thecatholicman The NKJV is helpful in this regard since it has footnotes pointing out variations from the Textus Receptus (which is the source for the translation) found in the Critical and Majority texts.
Interestingly, and similar to the Italian translation you presented, La Biblia de Navarra (Spanish version of The Navarre Bible) uses "el Verbo" ('verbo' is a masculine noun that means 'verb') , instead of "la Palabra" ('palabra' means 'word' in English, and as you pointed out is a feminine noun).
I mostly attend the Traditional Latin mass and I do have a love of the more archaic language in that it sometimes feels more reverent and maybe even sacred to me. But I know this is just a feeling for me and not a great reason alone to prefer the Douay-Rheims text. But all that said, I'm not a good reader and I've always struggled in my Bible reading. And as much as I am exposed to the the Douay-Rheims language during mass, I struggle to read it at home, especially the Old Testament. There are some phrases and terms that just fly right over my head in the archaic English and I end up pulling out my Great Adventure Bible (which is RSVCE2) and it makes more sense to me. However I am also aware that many of the more modern Bibles, though more readable, have their own issues. I guess for someone in my shoes, it's best to read the Bible that I will stick with and understand more as long as it is authentically Catholic. On a side note, the Great Adventure Bible, while not perfect, is an aesthetically beautiful Bible. The print is very easy to read and it just has an overall very pleasant layout and look. I wish I had a DR Bible that had a similar clean layout and pleasing font so it wasn't so jarring going back and forth between them.
The thees, thous, and verily's do not bother me. Thank you for explaining other Catholic options. I own an old version of the Jerusalem Bible which helps if I get stuck in an area that needs clarification.
I love how the bible comes down to personal preference, how we interpret it is personal, what we believe is also personal, even what we choose to follow is personal. Having several bibles myself, I discovered they don't all say the same things. So I look at Genesis 3:15 and choose to believe what all modern transportations say, "I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel", OR I can believe the Douay-Rheims which says: "I will put enmities between thee and the woman and thy seed and her seed : she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heal". Notice "enmity" vs. "enmities" , also is the head going to be "crushed" by "her" heel or are they going to simply "bruise" each other? And if it's about Satan and the "woman" (Mary, the new Eve) why does the bruising wording refer to "he" and "his"? All Catholic art shows Mary crushing the head of the surpent, no "he" "bruising".
Well thats why comments, notes are important. We read in Douay-Rheims: 15] "She shall crush": Ipsa, the woman; so divers of the fathers read this place, conformably to the Latin: others read it ipsum, viz., the seed. The sense is the same: for it is by her seed, Jesus Christ, that the woman crushes the serpent's head.
What edition of the DR Bible? There have been many updates and is no longer “just” a translation of a translation. The 1899 edition, for example, was compared with Hebrew, Greek, and other “diverse languages.” On a different point, I find it so much easier to understand than “modern language” Bibles.
As a Baptist youth, I grew up with the King James Version, which I was rather comfortable with and cherished for its poetic turns of phrases. This continued as I entered a Continuing Anglican congregation. Now being part of the Ordinariate, following the Anglican Patrimony in full union with Rome, I use the Challoner Douay-Rheims for my daily Scripture reading from the Divine Worship Daily Office. If Richard Challoner had not revised the Douay-Rheims, I dare say I probably could not use it. It was clunky because of the awkward Latinate phrases. Challoner used the King James Bible as his base, so that the language could flow more beautifully and naturally. There is in fact a Catholic version of the King James Bible, and the soon as it comes out in one volume, leather-bound, I intend to procure it. Keep up the good work, frater!!!!!
Any input for Catholic Study Bibles? I am deeply into a full read through of the whole Bible. Was going to be a 1 year plan but now it’s taking longer, still getting there! I am reading through Douay Rheims currently and have no problem with it. What I would like to find when I finish my read through is a study bible. Or maybe I will just go deep into some of the more extensive scripture commentaries.
indeed. in English we have the word "the Verb" which comes from Latin Verbo, but we would never use it in that way. Word in Spanish would be understood today as la palabra. El verbo in Spanish would be translated to English as the verb.
Great video! Could you please make a video showing us your amazing book collection? Looks like there are lots of interesting positions you have collected. I would love to see them! PS I was waiting for you reading some of the polish Bible also :D
This is bad advice. None of the modern English Bibles apart from the Douay-Reims, is dependable. Most of the "Catholic" Bibles, like the Word on Fire version, were translated by Protestants, and then given a makeover so as to be supposedly acceptable to Catholics. Bishops' conferences approve translations that they don't really know about, and have no business approving, since they are not concerned with orthodoxy. This is a highly unsatisfactory state of affairs. Even the Jerusalem Bible, translated by Catholics, is doubtful. The New American Bible is frankly heretical. In English, only the Douay Reims is completely trustworthy. The best option is to learn Latin, and read the Vulgate. Emphasizing the fact that the Vulgate is a translation is not helpful, since it received universal approbation by the Church, and was always considered to be completely free of error. I'll take St. Jerome over Bishop Barron any day. Incidentally, I cannot imagine why someone who knows languages would be flummoxed by the 18th century language of Challoner's revision of the Douay-Reims.
You have to specify exactly what is a translation is not Catholic. Amazing the number of people who don’t read them and rely on 3rd hand advice. If someone has a problem with a specific English translation then it’s important to specify exactly what the issue is, what has in their opinion been translated wrong or omitted.
@@thecatholicman It is quite an assumption to say that someone else is relying on 3rd party sources. I don't have the time to make a study of passages from different sources here, obviously. I know about them, and others should look into the matter themselves. My statement stands as is. In this time of diabolical disorientation, where even the popes are off track, one has to reconsider everything that has come to us since "The Council", even JPII, Benedict, and obviously Paul VI. Otherwise, one arrives at faulty conclusions.
@@thecatholicman I think the dynamic in play, in people insisting on the DRB and bring dismissive of other translations, is a desire to not even risk going astray, but not realizing it and seeing it instead as the only option. You have a number of advantages. 1, you've read the whole Bible straight through (I can can barely keep my place at mass with a missal). 2, you have an extensive knowledge of languages and scripture in those languages (so you see a language & a translation more clearly for what it is than people who know little outside English). 3, you are coming at this as a well-formed Catholic, not as someone who is repairing and rebuilding a poor formation (sel-inflicted or otherwise) and needing a trustworthy consistent Catholic Bible in a world dominated by Protestant Bibles (where we've been told of dubious aspects of the KJB and other Protestant errors in bibles). That isn't a criticism at all, but I hope it is good context for the very excellent information and light on the subject you've shared. I learned a lot more than I expected to, and I did watch expecting to learn. I think one other factor plays into what Bible someone should get, and that is the notes included. Deep legitimate concerns are raised about notes in the Catholic Bible I used before learning about the DRB. That has nothing to do with the translation. It has everything to do with the make-shift and on the fly formation most who are figuring out which translation to trust are dealing with. It is a kin to understanding where someone is who is wondering the best fingering for scales on guitar or piano: the question itself shows where a full set of needs are. It think it makes sense to play it safe and use a Bible with both a faithful translation and good notes and if not read it all cover to cover (I've not, so maybe this is more about me then) then at least the parts used at mass over a liturgical year along with everything that goes with that. I've not done that either though. But my 3rd Bible is on its way, the Knox Bible. In hearing so many voices talking about which Bible to trust, an intimate thing really, I failed to realize the place I'm in where I need to keep it simple. The notes in the edition might be more important than the translation. I think it is similar to people who want to learn an instrument but bounce from method to method and teacher to teacher while still forming the basic skill sets and broad understanding of music in a way a musician should approach it.
@Hold Fast thank you! Do you think my concern over the notes, and putting that nearly on par with picking a translation, is valid? I mean I don't accept the protestant notion that all interpret verses equally well and I don't want to presume I'm in no need of good notes. Currently I rely more heavily on saint's writings and pray books than scripture. The scripture I read is in keeping with those & with the Baltimore office or the Little Office of the BVM. That seems to work for me for now.
I've just compared my DR Bible with the Challenor-Rheims version of the New Testament, published by the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine in 1943. (Carries an official imprimatur). The text reads: "He was in the beginning with God".
6:07 it is not made to resemble the words of today but the true word of god translated into english from latin and then from Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. You'll find no closer a text of the word of god in the language we currently speak which is english.
How many languages do you know?! Despite not being an expert, as you say, you're obviously very knowledgeable and competent in theology, so I always appreciate your careful insights and the obvious love you have for the Faith. I prefer the Douay-Rheims for English because its particular translations tend to be more accurate and theologically correct, without some of the errors introduced in Protestant Bibles which many Catholic versions based on them preserve, or using inclusive language when it is not in keeping with the original text, but the Douay-Rheims of Challoner was compared to the Hebrew and Greek, so I feel it to be a reliable translation. Although the language is somewhat archaic, that can also be helpful to promote linguistic appreciation and to challenge the mind, preventing Scripture from becoming overly casual or commonplace and losing its reverence, as in the language of the Novus Ordo. However, for newer versions, the Ignatius, Great Adventure and Navarre are all admirable. I lack the linguistic dexterity to comment on the Polish, Slovak, Italian...!
@@thecatholicman I have only taken three courses in Ecclesiastical Latin, so that and English are all I can claim. As you demonstrated in your video, having such a wide experience of languages certainly gives a broader understanding of biblical translation. Thanks again!
I am Mexican , and the Jerusalem translation is flawed, they use the word as literal la palabra instead of using the el verbo that is word, look for The Latinoamerica Translation
La palabra literally means The word just because it uses "La" that is typically used when talking to a feminine like "La Nina" the girl does not make "La palabra" a feminine word , the Jerusalem Bible I believe intentional miss represents this to push social justice ideology. "My soul is sensitive enough when it gets near evil it go's Ahhh AAAAAAhhh AAAAAAHHH " -Alex Jones
Declan O'Doherty, my favourites are Revised Standard Version - Catholic Scripture Study -St Benedict Press, also a 1980's version of The New American Bible (very good footnotes) Thomas Nelson Publishers very easy to understand, old english translations not easy for me I prefer Holy Spirit not Holy Ghost, online version of the Knox bible I use occasionally. I am a very simple man not a theologian so I am happy with my knowledge and growth in my Faith, only 6 years at Latin Mass, most of my life Novus Ordo Masses which was very informative and very loving communities, God Bless and many thanks for your work.
Douay-Rheims is a good reference bible to troubleshoot the literal translation and intent. Other versions of the bible are on a spectrum between Dyanmic Equivalence to getting more literal...some vague translations loose the intent and meaning in scripture. Always read Catholic versions of the bible as a Catholic becauee it contains all the books vs Protestant versions which are missing 7 unless they add in what they call apocraphia. You can use Protestant KJV if for apologetics ie Jesus used the Scriptures of those groups of people who accept particular canons to evangelize. The litmus test or one litmus test is in Luke where it says Hail full of grace....when telling the virgin Mary she would behold a son...other modern translations say Greetings or greetings favoured one or Hail favorouved one which diminishes the doctrine of Mary Our Blessed Mother. Also be careful of the notes...there was an ecumenical push within the Catholic church where they invited scholars and protestants to contribute to the notes in some Catholic bibles which some are contradictory to Catholic Teaching...the Nil Obstat etc is valid for the translations not the notes...in this case would defer to Ignatious Press study bible with Scott Hahns commentary etc it is RSV CE.....be wary a new gender neutral translation of rhe bible is coming out in Protestant circles which I have no doubt will so confusion think calling God a she and the idea of women priests which is heretical.
I would add make sure that you have a Catholic bible. Many people have a Protestant one and don't realise there are seven books missing from the OT as well as not a complete book of Daniel or Esther.
7:12 tenebre non comprederont is the same as 8:15 and the darkness did not comprehend it Comprehend dose not seem to mean the same as overcome it Thanks
I completely agree regarding the old English dialect. I am awaiting for the day that the Church approves a modern dialect version of DR (or even better, a direct modern translation of the Vulgate). I know there is the Catholic Public Domain version. From what little I've read from that version, it looks rather good, however, there are some external issues. 1. It's not approved by the Church. 2. It was written by essentially a single layman, not by a group of experts. 3. I heard the writer is kooky with kooky beliefs. Even though these are just external, my 3rd issue makes me worry how much his incorrect beliefs would have influenced what he put. I do not have the expertise to be able to notice if some of the things he put was incorrect. From a glance, the text itself may seem good, but if I go into it more, I do not know whether or not it is correct based off his kooky beliefs.
I haven't had time to listen yet...just to say that I bought the Douay- Rheims Bible as a present for my husband recently following Dr Taylor Marshall's recommendation. I haven't heard any negative feedback so far.
I think the douay rheims is good for reference, because it's the first bible that ever came out and is latin vulgate, it's cool to compare with other bibles.
It's pity we catholics in india struggle to buy a duoay rheims and you say it's not for me... Do look at church latin for st John's bible 1901 facsimile... It's brilliant
Brenton's Septuagint for the OT, King James or New King James for the NT, I find to be the best English translations. I'm sure we all have our preferences though, and I'm a British convert to Orthodoxy so that probably influences my choices somewhat.
I am ignorant to all of these Bibles. However I just recently heard of the Geneva Bible. I was under the impression that a group of scholars interpreted the language verbatim. Why did KJV destroy it, it’s authors & anyone who practiced it?? What was such a controversial matter that made him feel so strongly? Is this what sleeps in the Vatican Library? KJV then continued to rewrite the Bible altogether. I do t know why but when I heard this it made me wonder if KJV was deceiving us.
Is your claim that He the Christ is not the one that shall ultimately crush the head of the serpent? Is Mary in your understanding more powerful than Jesus who is unable to crush the head of the serpent? If Mary can crush the head of the serpent in her own power outside of the Grace of Holy Spirit is Mary in your opinion a more powerful god than Christ?
@@adolphCat Of course, Jesus has the power to crush the serpent. He has assigned that task to Mary because of the great humiliation it will bring to Satan!
Exactly! It means it comes from protestant sources. Any Bible that is not faithful to the Vulgate, (which is the official Bible of the Catholic Church and always will be) is not to be trusted, period.
@@RADIOSALVACION So, the Septuagint Greek Old Testament used by both the Eastern and Western Churches as the standard Old Testament before the innovator St. Jerome decided to translate the Old Testament from Hebrew is to be discounted in spite of being the most favored version of the Old Testament as used most often by Christ and the Apostles? The Septuagint uses He will crush the head of the Serpent.
@@adolphCat Even if we could go back to the original Hebrew there would be contention because undoubtedly the pronoun could be translated "he", "she", "it" or "they" depending on context, and all those words have been used in various current Bibles. Jerome also had access to the Septuagint but he saw a problem: God placed enmity between the serpent and the woman, not between the serpent and Himself. Therefore the context demands "she" shall crush.
Copies of copies... so is the Vulgate. The original text was not in Latin. I currently have 4 Catholic bibles. The Douai reads like the KJV (which was intentional), The Jerusalem Bible reads like the ESV (the ESV is intentional). The New American is cripple with CT and other skeptical notes, the New Catholic returns all the verses that the Jerusalem Bible removed. Frankly, I prefer the New Catholic Bible. It reads well, and has most of the notes at the end of each book. But there is one thing that stands out about all catholic bibles, the notes are cynical. This is probably so you have to depend of preachers to tell you the TRUTH.
There have been two occasions when theological errors in the Roman Missal were only discovered after they had been translated into English. The DR bible is being insisted by the likes of Taylor Marshall because it is being offered as the "official bible of the Catholic Church". This is not true. The original imprimatur was given to the DR bible. But the DR bibles available today are actually the DR-Challenor bible. It was suggested that Challenor simply made updates to the language but in fact his translations were so in depth (highly KJV influenced) that the current DR bibles in print can no longer carry the same nihil obstat.
Hey Brother Robert from America Florida 🔥🤟 I Use the RSVCE2 as my go to it's close to what they use in the English version of the catechism of the Catholic Church, in America we use the version of The New American Bible a special revision for the Mass, the revision of the in NAB that was done in 2010 differs from the text that we use for Mass. Following Father Mike Schmitz he has to yearly apps when he does for the Bible it's the RSVCE2 this year he's doing a reading commentary on the catechism of the Catholic if you're available to you I recommend both.
Latin a lost language, less medicine and LAW (Land Air Water). Curious to know the meaning of "virus" in Latin.... In or out of Latin version(s) of scripture?
Ok. So this is my two cents. Any translation implies some sort of creation and interpretation. You either go Catholic or you don't. Latin Vulgata Bible is a proper Catholic interpretation of the Bible. You'll get perspectives that are more likely to guide you towards Catholic understanding of the text. Douay Rheims is a Catholic translation of this Catholic interpretation which further guides into this Catholic perspective. However, you still need to read and follow the comments, which are quite a lot. Many people try to get an unbias translation. That's impossible. Then, newer translators try to make this allegedly unbias interpretation a text that is easier to follow. By doing so, it further makes it more biased and in the process of trying to be more historical, they are less Catholic or even objectable translations. When you get a Rejoice Mary instead of Hail Mary, as a greeting, you realize people are realizing that while Rejoice was a greeting in ancient times in Greek, it is not a current English way to greet people. While you would've expected translations to become more Catholic and easier to read, you notice that they are increasingly anthropocentric portraying to be easier to read. That's why you get even feminist and LG... "bibles". A good Catholic translation should be an improved continuum of our Vulgata Bible - considering that even our new latin Neovulgata is disruptive and not Catholic.
I won´t never agree with the spanish catholic version of one of the sentences in the Lord´s prayer: "No nos dejes caer en la tentación". I think the correct translation is the english one: "Lead us not into temptation". A few years ago, pope Francis want it to change, saying that is an incorrect translation. No, the wrong translation is the spanish one, as matter of fact is a totally free translation. They should do those thinks with the something so important.
No, I’m saying the original Latin text is a translation and yes it had mistakes. The Hebrew word that is usually translated as ‘radiant’ or ‘shining’ (qaran) is closely associated with the word horns (qeren). So, when St Jerome was writing the Vulgate - the late 4th-Century Latin translation of the Bible - he chose to translate the description of Moses’ face as horned (cornuta).
@Hold Fast sure but remember it wasn’t until 1590 we had the Sistine Vulgate (different Latin edition to what St Jerome wrote) and then we had the clementine Vulgate which I think has been used until before Vatican II and then today as far as I’m aware we have the nova vulgate. Again I’m not a biblical expert, I’m just pointing out we have various manuscripts of sacred scripture.
@Hold Fast indeed it’s Trustworthy, but the actual Text he translated into Latin is a translation and the church has updated that same Latin text as they did after Trent. I suppose I’m picking at hairs here, but it’s just to help people understand the differences in the hundreds of sacred texts. (For example the differences in the Codex Vaticanus which has differences to the Vulgate)
@@thecatholicman I know what your are getting too. I did enjoy your comparison, between different texts . It was very well put together, and you should be proud of the work you are doing,as I am of you . I just wanted to point out that it seemed you were in a vague way saying it is( The vulgate ) in error. I also enjoyed your interview with Don Carlos such a great Priest keep up this work you are putting a target on your back , but Christ will cover you . God bless for now 🗣
The Douai-Rheims is a Catholic historical monument, but apart from the archaic language, it has all of St. Jerome’s mistakes in translation from the Greek and Hebrew.
"Mistakes" that's one way of thinking about it. SAINT Jerome knew the Holy Church inside and out and he knew the best way to correctly get across the Scripture in line with Holy Tradition. Holy Tradition and the Holy Bible are both sides of the lungs in a body - that's the magical thing about Holy Scripture when interpretted correctly with Holy Tradition. Literally translations of literal translations become void of meaning when interpretated by humans so far removed from the apostles and church doctors.
@@t.d6379 I’m afraid you give away the game with the word ‘magical’. It is not a doctrine of the Church that St Jerome was preserved from linguistic error in his translations. Indeed, several times revisions of the Vulgate have been mandated by the Holy See. If you read the letters between Jerome and Augustine on translating the Old Testament from the Septuagint vs. Hebrew you will get a sense of the realities of the matter - which are far from magical.
@ransomcoates546 okay at this stage I am going to need examples please... Because right now I'm thinking of "Mistakes" likes the translations of Elder and Overseer for Priest and Bishop etc. Wrongful translation in the literal linguistical sense but absolutely brilliant and historical in context of the Holy Church and its Holy Tradition.
The bible is the living word of God. It needs ZERO interpretation. Herein, lies the problem of human traditions. This wrongful practice was called out by jesus , in his teachings. Circa 200AD, anyone found in the possession of a bible was burnt alive., orderd so by the catholic church. The " laiety" , if they read the bible, might just get smart🤣 Catholocism is seen to be complex and full of "books and teachings" other..than the bible. God never ever said, you must follow this or that religion!!! All religion is flawed. To follow christ, is a way of life, NOT a religion. I am the WAY...THE TRUTH..AND THE LIFE..
Don't underestimate the works of saints...I learned a lot from imitation of christ...don't pass opinions on high matters namely the bible translation ...stich with st jerome ...God will provide the wisdom needed if you pray the rosary and have true devotion to mary
I like Douay Rheims but lately I prefer ESV CE by Augustine Institute. I grew up Baptist to Episcopalian to Roman Catholic. I grew up Baptist and love the KJV. The New Jerusalem Bible is not a favorite at all. I like the CSB, ESV CE, and NASB is better than the NAB which I never really have cared for. Now I shall watch your video from start to finish. I tend to like straight forward and not beating around the bush being literal and business trained in college and graduate school.
Ask your priest which version to read. Stop following Taylor Marshall he’s a convert with no office in the church as far as I know. Listening to a guru isn’t traditional Catholic
Actually Taylor Marshall has done great work and many people have become catholics because of his work. I don't agree with everything he says and he is very America focused (I'm not) what I say to those who don't like him is to offer and alternative. Expand the Catholic world of blogging and vlogging. Drive a discussion on the beautiful Catholic Faith,.
@@thecatholicman I was all for him at first, until I saw him sitting there ranting one day and I realized there was my dad and all the similar type of conservative Protestant men I grew up around as a kid, preaching rebellion against all authority and institutions. Same old stuff but wearing a cool hat 🎩 We must submit to and honor the Pope, not rebel against the pope or call him a heretic He’s anti institutional aka rebellious aka his Protestantism unfortunately resurfaced We should be following our leaders in the church if we believe in Catholicism. UA-camrs are not supposed to be steering the church This is a deeply non traditional and non Catholic thing If the Pope is wrong the Bishops and the Church and the next Pope will be the judge of that not Taylor Marshall or me or you
REMEMBER THIS IS JUST YOUR OPINON, SO WHY EVEN BOTHER WITH THIS VIDEO. WHO CARES IF THE DR BIBLE IS NOT FOR YOU. YES YOU ARE CRITICIZING, SO AGAIN WHY BOTHER MAKING THIS VIDEO.
@@thecatholicman Then keep the faith our holy Mother Church to the last. I read somewhere that St. Patrick will stand personally on the Judgment Day with all Irish Catholics to testify their lifestyle. This shows how the saint loved and still loves Ireland. No wonder he drove all serpents from the land.
What's funny is I am not Roman Catholic, but I want a Douay Rheims Bible because its a faithful translation of the Latin and gets the numbers game correct with the 37 unique numbers in the four gospels. Plus I like how there is 73 books. All part of the 137 pattern.
Never heard of the 137 pattern, fill me in?
@@FirstNameLastName-is6yb In the Holy Writ the Holy Spirit weaves a nice numerical pattern with the numbers 1, 3 and 7 and any combo of these numbers. For instance the most common age in the Bible is 137. When Sarah died Abraham was 137 and Isaac was 37. There are 37 unique numbers in the four gospels. 37 unique miracles in the four gospels. 666 in the book of revelation can be divided as 37x18. There are 23 combinations of 37 in Genesis 1:1. The Greek word for "Logos" adds up to 373. Jesus' name in Greek add up to 888 which is divisible as 37x24 or 37x(8+8+8). The 153 fish can be broken down as 3x3x17 etc. these there numbers are everywhere you look really. You can find out more about this on my UA-cam channel if you'd wish(Dont mean to self promo).
The Douay Rheims is an excellent bible. I know you'll love it
The Latin Vulgate was translated by a great Saint! Who knew the Holy Church inside out and Holy Tradition of course. Its THE Bible. The DRB is an English translation of THE BIBLE.
I agree with you Robert, the few times I heard Taylor Marshall read out of the Douay Rheims ,I found it hard to follow. He stumbled over a lot of the words. I decided there and then, this version of the Bible translation, not for me. Enjoy your video's very much. God bless you.🙏
I'm a Douay Rheims fan because I grew up a KJV protestant and this is my comfort zone. I don't know all the arguments for different translations, thats for smarter men than me, but to me the douay rheims helps to encapsulate the beauty that is scripture, the olde english just reads better to me and the psalms can be downright beautiful. I don't think this needs to be dogmatic.
Unless you use an NIV. That's bad.
If the D.Rheims is the text you have always used keep using it, some people who are new to the faith just find it hard to adjust to the text and I don't think we should make the text of the bible complicated for new Catholics.
@Hold Fast Anyone reading Shakespeare’s English would need a class first in the language of that period, how it was pronounced (because it has changed). As I said if you are comfortable with the DRB perfect, but the DRB is a translation and there have been thousands of Biblical translations. If I handed the DRB to someone who has never read the Bible before they might get caught facing a language we don’t actually use day to day in English, remember we should ever put obstacles when trying to evangelise and you have to feed people slowly
@Hold Fast As I said if you find the RDB comfortable for you there is no problem. The whole point of translating the biblical texts into the vernacular is so the people can understand the texts in the language AS spoken (vernacular) so if you were asking me which text we should use to reflect the english that we speak today I would not use a translation with "Ye,Yea,hath,becometh,proceedeth,shalt,thee,lightsome,darksome,scrip,thence,Art,thou,speaketh,didst,Whence,Wilt" They are simply not used today and if we were translating the bible into english for the first time today we would not use those words. I didn't say there were thousands of English Translations, I said there were thousands of translations which is factual in many languages over many periods. Very little of my faith formation was in English, vast majority of Catholics don't read the bible in English. So if someone asked me for a Vernacular translation (a translation into todays spoken English which was what they originally did, they used the spoken English) I would not recommend the DRB, now if the person was a professor of English then that person might find it better. The reality and you must agree is that the language of the DRB is not today's english vernacular.
@@holdfast53329/6/2023: I really appreciate your comment, holdfast. You made such good sense. Thank you.
I believe the Our Father in the Douay is " give us this day our supersubstainal bread."
Supersubstantial bread is nothing but the Eucharist. That's what our Lord alluded to...
@@dominickurian704 I thought that would be obvious, but thanks for clarification.
I know! It’s a confirmation for me. I always believed that’s what bread we were praying about in the Our Father. It’s sort of like we’re all blessed to be living in 1Corinthians 14: “ what is hidden will be revealed .” Just paraphrasing.
I didn't even know there was a Catholic Bible until just over a year ago.
I nearly got the Douay- Rheims but got the Ignatius RSV 2nd edition hardback, I also got the paper back New Testament and Psalms in the same translation as it's very portable to carry around with me.
I bought it from the Latin Mass society so I thought it must be okay. I think I made the right decision as it's very enjoyable to read.
The RSV is not really a Catholic translation. The RSV has it's English root translation in the King James Version. Make of that what you will.
@Hold Fast Or just learn to read the beautiful English of the Douay Rheims and learn Latin for the Clementina Vulgate. I don't see why this is so hard.
@Hold Fast I see your point. There really should be a faithful modern translation from the vulgate for the benefit of the Church.
@Hold Fast I won't be buying another one as Bibles are quite expensive. It's very true get one that you like to read. :)
@Hold Fast I agree. I tried sharing more information in a prior attempt to respond to you but yet again youtube has deleted my comment. I hope soon we will be able to get a faithful readable Catholic translation in modern English. Until then Dr. William von Peters has prepared the Douay Rheims for modern readers. First hand retyping the REAL Rheims New Testament in its entirety, with all the notes and annotations, into modern English text for easy reading. Then continuing on with the REAL Douay Old Testament, also with notes and annotations. It is to be emphasized that nothing in the text has been changed or modified. It has only been transliterated into modern English text, with archaic spellings updated to modern spellings. Where possible the archaic spelling has been left intact to preserve the "flavor" of this historic text..
I have the printed versions and (pdfs which you can find online by searching for them) from the real douay rheims website : The Original and True Rheims New Testament of Anno Domini 1582, The Original and True Douay Old Testament of Anno Domini 1609 volume I (Genesis - Job), Douay Old Testament of 1610 (Psalms - IV Esdras.
I found out about the above after watching "Why So Many Different Bibles?" by Catholic Apologetics for Beginners he favors the modern Douay Rheims, it is better than the RSV, NABs since comments are not allowed on the videos cant let him know that>>> John Henry Newman in the July, 1859 "Rambler" published an article entitled "The History of the Text of the Rheims and Douay Version of Holy Scripture" He states: § 3. Dr. Troy's Bible "...The revisor was the Rev. Bernard Macmahon, a Dublin priest, who published his first edition in 1783, in 12mo, with the formal approbation of his Archbishop, Dr. Carpenter. There is reason for supposing that it professed to be a continuation of Dr. Challoner's labours&
Eight years afterwards, in 1791, the same clergyman was selected by Dr. Troy, his then Archbishop, to superintend an edition... We doubt ...whether he is further from the Protestant version than Dr. Challoner." Thus, the Haydock Bible is NOT the Real Douay-Rheims Bible...
Protestant here, have used a range of translations from the KJV, NKJV, NIV, ESV, NASB, etc., prior to learning Greek and Hebrew, which has allowed me to progress into annotated original language readers. Though, I must say that Robert is quite right in stating that translations are many respects interpretations; but having recently learnt about the usage of the phrase ἐπιούσιον (The Greek word seems to be a compound word from epi+ousios. Now epi means over, above, beyond, in addition to, or some similar superlative. Ousious refers to the substance of something) in the Lord's prayer. I was impressed to find out about the boldness of the Douay-Rheims Bible in translating it thusly "[11] Give us this day our super-substantial bread." Generally, I think the Catholic catechism rightly captures the nuance here:
2837 “Daily” (epiousios) occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. Taken in a temporal sense, this word is a pedagogical repetition of “this day,” to confirm us in trust “without reservation.” Taken in the qualitative sense, it signifies what is necessary for life, and more broadly every good thing sufficient for subsistence. Taken literally (epi-ousios: “super-essential”), it refers directly to the Bread of Life, the Body of Christ, the “medicine of immortality,” without which we have no life within us. Finally in this connection, its heavenly meaning is evident: “this day” is the Day of the Lord, the day of the feast of the kingdom, anticipated in the Eucharist that is already the foretaste of the kingdom to come. For this reason it is fitting for the Eucharistic liturgy to be celebrated each day.
That was great, Thank you
The Last Gospel in the Latin Mass.
Douay Rheims on my lampstand by my bed. No problems in reading or comprehension. If one has read other English translations, one encounters less obstacle in understanding of content or usage.
That was a good video. You seem to be a nice intelligent young man. I like the way you present your ideas. You have taught me some interesting things. I didn't realize the Bible has so many translations.
There are hundreds (if not thousands) of translations of sacred scripture
thnx for this. i agree with you. i got the D-R on marshall's recommendation and didn't care for it either. what did you get all of those medals for? being an accomplished polyglot?
Great stuff; Douay-Rheims is a standard for Catholic Bible translation (into English), of course, being as it was (and is) geared (as much of Scripture seems to have been, originally) for tying into the Liturgical use (this was, more or less, the same with the older Authorised Bible versions - for use in Anglican church worship etc); the English, Irish, Scots, American versions of the DR Vulgate (via Dr Challoner/ St Joseph Apostolate) were all but nearly identical (a great benefit in setting out the Faith - its main purpose .. not in presenting textual analysis). The Shakspearean/ Jacobean language is not particularly appealing as a nice, simple go-to 'read' for non-liturgical centred use (a first step easy-to-understand and engage with kind of use in private study - without a dictionary and study guide to hand); I suspect that this literary style was meant to be heard rather more than glanced at. The Jerusalem versions, with their free equivalence of speech methodology, are easier to read and engage with, thus they can be good for tele-evangelisation or popular teaching projects, but rather misleading .. especially in more serious studies - e.g. involving a common concordance search; Ronald Knox's translation (for High School girls) is slightly more useful yet also quite a good read (as literature) .. but it is not readily available; the Navarre version, however, is much more reliable than some other 'recent' English translations (the New American Bible text is, if possible, even less trustworthy than the at times pedestrian Jerusalem format) .. however, Navarre is jolly expensive (and rather hefty all in one gulp, but the individual wee texts can be a Godsend for homeschooling and for just a quick dip in, on the go).
Thanks for all the hard work.
Keep the Faith; tell the truth, shame the devil, and let the demons shriek.
God bless. ;o)
P.S. The Word on Fire version is beautifully done.
Fascinating video. I think there can be a lot lost in translation. My youngest son is studying translations and the Greek seems easier to translate to English than Latin. Its all so interesting.
So appreciate this video! Your insights are sensible and wise. I do enjoy reading Bishop Barron’s “version” because the layout and commentary are beautiful and inspiring. For me, this Bible brings joy to my heart and soul. But I can be fussy about how Mark 9:29 is translated. As Catholics, prayer and fasting were always encouraged as a powerful spiritual pairing. The last few decades seem, to me anyway, to have diluted or downplayed the role of fasting. Our Lady of Medjugorie continues to remind us of the importance of prayer AND fasting. Which is why the RSV Bible is my favorite translation of Mark 9:29.
The Word on Fire Bible is based upon the New Revised Standard Version. The New Revised Standard Version is based upon the Revised Standard Version. The Revised Standard Version finds its English root in the King James Version. The King James Version was quite notably not translated by Catholics.
@@JoeMode213 I find it interesting that many Protestant bibles, such as the NIV, include the word “fasting” in Mark 9:29. From what I have been able to read of the Catholic-English translations, only the Douay Rheims and Revised Standard Version contain the word fasting in Mark 9:29. Why the NRSV was translated to omit that word, I don’t know why. But I wish they hadn’t. While I’m not as old school as Taylor Marshall, I’m old enough, that by default, I’m just old school. And fussy. 🙂
@@kathleenrosales7348 My advice is just to go back to the Douay Rheims and Latin Vulgate. They are the best texts to go off of imo. I like the way the KJV is written but it contains errors. Best to play it safe and honour mother Church by learning from the greatest of her works.
The Greek verse for mark 9:29 does not mention fasting. Just the word “proseuche” but in other verses where that word is used they also add fasting, but in Mark 9:29 it’s not mentioned in the Greek text (again open to correction)
@@thecatholicman The NKJV is helpful in this regard since it has footnotes pointing out variations from the Textus Receptus (which is the source for the translation) found in the Critical and Majority texts.
Interestingly, and similar to the Italian translation you presented, La Biblia de Navarra (Spanish version of The Navarre Bible) uses "el Verbo" ('verbo' is a masculine noun that means 'verb') , instead of "la Palabra" ('palabra' means 'word' in English, and as you pointed out is a feminine noun).
Thank you is very fruitful information.
Bóg zapłać 🙏🏻❤
I mostly attend the Traditional Latin mass and I do have a love of the more archaic language in that it sometimes feels more reverent and maybe even sacred to me. But I know this is just a feeling for me and not a great reason alone to prefer the Douay-Rheims text. But all that said, I'm not a good reader and I've always struggled in my Bible reading. And as much as I am exposed to the the Douay-Rheims language during mass, I struggle to read it at home, especially the Old Testament. There are some phrases and terms that just fly right over my head in the archaic English and I end up pulling out my Great Adventure Bible (which is RSVCE2) and it makes more sense to me. However I am also aware that many of the more modern Bibles, though more readable, have their own issues. I guess for someone in my shoes, it's best to read the Bible that I will stick with and understand more as long as it is authentically Catholic.
On a side note, the Great Adventure Bible, while not perfect, is an aesthetically beautiful Bible. The print is very easy to read and it just has an overall very pleasant layout and look. I wish I had a DR Bible that had a similar clean layout and pleasing font so it wasn't so jarring going back and forth between them.
The thees, thous, and verily's do not bother me. Thank you for explaining other Catholic options. I own an old version of the Jerusalem Bible which helps if I get stuck in an area that needs clarification.
I love how the bible comes down to personal preference, how we interpret it is personal, what we believe is also personal, even what we choose to follow is personal.
Having several bibles myself, I discovered they don't all say the same things.
So I look at Genesis 3:15 and choose to believe what all modern transportations say, "I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel",
OR I can believe the Douay-Rheims which says: "I will put enmities between thee and the woman and thy seed and her seed : she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heal".
Notice "enmity" vs. "enmities" , also is the head going to be "crushed" by "her" heel or are they going to simply "bruise" each other? And if it's about Satan and the "woman" (Mary, the new Eve) why does the bruising wording refer to "he" and "his"? All Catholic art shows Mary crushing the head of the surpent, no "he" "bruising".
Well thats why comments, notes are important. We read in Douay-Rheims:
15] "She shall crush": Ipsa, the woman; so divers of the fathers read this place, conformably to the Latin: others read it ipsum, viz., the seed. The sense is the same: for it is by her seed, Jesus Christ, that the woman crushes the serpent's head.
What edition of the DR Bible? There have been many updates and is no longer “just” a translation of a translation. The 1899 edition, for example, was compared with Hebrew, Greek, and other “diverse languages.” On a different point, I find it so much easier to understand than “modern language” Bibles.
As a Baptist youth, I grew up with the King James Version, which I was rather comfortable with and cherished for its poetic turns of phrases. This continued as I entered a Continuing Anglican congregation. Now being part of the Ordinariate, following the Anglican Patrimony in full union with Rome, I use the Challoner Douay-Rheims for my daily Scripture reading from the Divine Worship Daily Office.
If Richard Challoner had not revised the Douay-Rheims, I dare say I probably could not use it. It was clunky because of the awkward Latinate phrases. Challoner used the King James Bible as his base, so that the language could flow more beautifully and naturally.
There is in fact a Catholic version of the King James Bible, and the soon as it comes out in one volume, leather-bound, I intend to procure it.
Keep up the good work, frater!!!!!
And the King James used Douay-Rheims as its base.
Any input for Catholic Study Bibles?
I am deeply into a full read through of the whole Bible. Was going to be a 1 year plan but now it’s taking longer, still getting there! I am reading through Douay Rheims currently and have no problem with it.
What I would like to find when I finish my read through is a study bible. Or maybe I will just go deep into some of the more extensive scripture commentaries.
"La Palabra" is interesting because the Torres Amat translation (Catholic) and the Reina Valera translation (protestant) use the masculine "el Verbo".
indeed. in English we have the word "the Verb" which comes from Latin Verbo, but we would never use it in that way. Word in Spanish would be understood today as la palabra. El verbo in Spanish would be translated to English as the verb.
@@thecatholicman Yeah the translations I mentioned are old so that makes sense.
Thank you for your informative videos. ✝️🙏😊
Robert, have you heard of the Divine Mercy Bible.
No not yet
Great video! Could you please make a video showing us your amazing book collection?
Looks like there are lots of interesting positions you have collected. I would love to see them!
PS
I was waiting for you reading some of the polish Bible also :D
The Haydock and Challoner versions are my favorite versions of the D.R. Bible
This is bad advice. None of the modern English Bibles apart from the Douay-Reims, is dependable. Most of the "Catholic" Bibles, like the Word on Fire version, were translated by Protestants, and then given a makeover so as to be supposedly acceptable to Catholics. Bishops' conferences approve translations that they don't really know about, and have no business approving, since they are not concerned with orthodoxy. This is a highly unsatisfactory state of affairs. Even the Jerusalem Bible, translated by Catholics, is doubtful. The New American Bible is frankly heretical. In English, only the Douay Reims is completely trustworthy. The best option is to learn Latin, and read the Vulgate. Emphasizing the fact that the Vulgate is a translation is not helpful, since it received universal approbation by the Church, and was always considered to be completely free of error. I'll take St. Jerome over Bishop Barron any day. Incidentally, I cannot imagine why someone who knows languages would be flummoxed by the 18th century language of Challoner's revision of the Douay-Reims.
You have to specify exactly what is a translation is not Catholic. Amazing the number of people who don’t read them and rely on 3rd hand advice. If someone has a problem with a specific English translation then it’s important to specify exactly what the issue is, what has in their opinion been translated wrong or omitted.
@@thecatholicman It is quite an assumption to say that someone else is relying on 3rd party sources. I don't have the time to make a study of passages from different sources here, obviously. I know about them, and others should look into the matter themselves. My statement stands as is. In this time of diabolical disorientation, where even the popes are off track, one has to reconsider everything that has come to us since "The Council", even JPII, Benedict, and obviously Paul VI. Otherwise, one arrives at faulty conclusions.
@@thecatholicman I think the dynamic in play, in people insisting on the DRB and bring dismissive of other translations, is a desire to not even risk going astray, but not realizing it and seeing it instead as the only option.
You have a number of advantages. 1, you've read the whole Bible straight through (I can can barely keep my place at mass with a missal). 2, you have an extensive knowledge of languages and scripture in those languages (so you see a language & a translation more clearly for what it is than people who know little outside English). 3, you are coming at this as a well-formed Catholic, not as someone who is repairing and rebuilding a poor formation (sel-inflicted or otherwise) and needing a trustworthy consistent Catholic Bible in a world dominated by Protestant Bibles (where we've been told of dubious aspects of the KJB and other Protestant errors in bibles). That isn't a criticism at all, but I hope it is good context for the very excellent information and light on the subject you've shared. I learned a lot more than I expected to, and I did watch expecting to learn.
I think one other factor plays into what Bible someone should get, and that is the notes included. Deep legitimate concerns are raised about notes in the Catholic Bible I used before learning about the DRB. That has nothing to do with the translation. It has everything to do with the make-shift and on the fly formation most who are figuring out which translation to trust are dealing with. It is a kin to understanding where someone is who is wondering the best fingering for scales on guitar or piano: the question itself shows where a full set of needs are.
It think it makes sense to play it safe and use a Bible with both a faithful translation and good notes and if not read it all cover to cover (I've not, so maybe this is more about me then) then at least the parts used at mass over a liturgical year along with everything that goes with that. I've not done that either though. But my 3rd Bible is on its way, the Knox Bible. In hearing so many voices talking about which Bible to trust, an intimate thing really, I failed to realize the place I'm in where I need to keep it simple. The notes in the edition might be more important than the translation.
I think it is similar to people who want to learn an instrument but bounce from method to method and teacher to teacher while still forming the basic skill sets and broad understanding of music in a way a musician should approach it.
@Hold Fast thank you! Do you think my concern over the notes, and putting that nearly on par with picking a translation, is valid? I mean I don't accept the protestant notion that all interpret verses equally well and I don't want to presume I'm in no need of good notes. Currently I rely more heavily on saint's writings and pray books than scripture. The scripture I read is in keeping with those & with the Baltimore office or the Little Office of the BVM. That seems to work for me for now.
@@loulasher Hi, I did a reply ua-cam.com/video/-dFs0LuLa2A/v-deo.html
I've just compared my DR Bible with the Challenor-Rheims version of the New Testament, published by the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine in 1943. (Carries an official imprimatur).
The text reads: "He was in the beginning with God".
6:07 it is not made to resemble the words of today but the true word of god translated into english from latin and then from Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. You'll find no closer a text of the word of god in the language we currently speak which is english.
I wonder if there is a 'You-version' of the Douay-Rheims Bible.
As long as the translation is an accurate translation of Jerome's codex that is fine.
I like the RSV, CE, 2nd edition.
How many languages do you know?! Despite not being an expert, as you say, you're obviously very knowledgeable and competent in theology, so I always appreciate your careful insights and the obvious love you have for the Faith. I prefer the Douay-Rheims for English because its particular translations tend to be more accurate and theologically correct, without some of the errors introduced in Protestant Bibles which many Catholic versions based on them preserve, or using inclusive language when it is not in keeping with the original text, but the Douay-Rheims of Challoner was compared to the Hebrew and Greek, so I feel it to be a reliable translation. Although the language is somewhat archaic, that can also be helpful to promote linguistic appreciation and to challenge the mind, preventing Scripture from becoming overly casual or commonplace and losing its reverence, as in the language of the Novus Ordo. However, for newer versions, the Ignatius, Great Adventure and Navarre are all admirable. I lack the linguistic dexterity to comment on the Polish, Slovak, Italian...!
I speak 4 languages fluently and read 8 ok. My faith formation was in Italian and Spanish so I usually read the Bible in other languages or in Latin
@@thecatholicman I have only taken three courses in Ecclesiastical Latin, so that and English are all I can claim. As you demonstrated in your video, having such a wide experience of languages certainly gives a broader understanding of biblical translation. Thanks again!
I am Mexican , and the Jerusalem translation is flawed, they use the word as literal la palabra instead of using the el verbo that is word, look for The Latinoamerica Translation
La palabra literally means The word just because it uses "La" that is typically used when talking to a feminine like "La Nina" the girl does not make "La palabra" a feminine word , the Jerusalem Bible I believe intentional miss represents this to push social justice ideology.
"My soul is sensitive enough when it gets near evil it go's Ahhh AAAAAAhhh AAAAAAHHH " -Alex Jones
Declan O'Doherty, my favourites are Revised Standard Version - Catholic Scripture Study -St Benedict Press, also a 1980's version of The New American Bible (very good footnotes) Thomas Nelson Publishers very easy to understand, old english translations not easy for me I prefer Holy Spirit not Holy Ghost, online version of the Knox bible I use occasionally. I am a very simple man not a theologian so I am happy with my knowledge and growth in my Faith, only 6 years at Latin Mass, most of my life Novus Ordo Masses which was very informative and very loving communities, God Bless and many thanks for your work.
Douay-Rheims is a good reference bible to troubleshoot the literal translation and intent. Other versions of the bible are on a spectrum between Dyanmic Equivalence to getting more literal...some vague translations loose the intent and meaning in scripture. Always read Catholic versions of the bible as a Catholic becauee it contains all the books vs Protestant versions which are missing 7 unless they add in what they call apocraphia. You can use Protestant KJV if for apologetics ie Jesus used the Scriptures of those groups of people who accept particular canons to evangelize. The litmus test or one litmus test is in Luke where it says Hail full of grace....when telling the virgin Mary she would behold a son...other modern translations say Greetings or greetings favoured one or Hail favorouved one which diminishes the doctrine of Mary Our Blessed Mother. Also be careful of the notes...there was an ecumenical push within the Catholic church where they invited scholars and protestants to contribute to the notes in some Catholic bibles which some are contradictory to Catholic Teaching...the Nil Obstat etc is valid for the translations not the notes...in this case would defer to Ignatious Press study bible with Scott Hahns commentary etc it is RSV CE.....be wary a new gender neutral translation of rhe bible is coming out in Protestant circles which I have no doubt will so confusion think calling God a she and the idea of women priests which is heretical.
I would add make sure that you have a Catholic bible. Many people have a Protestant one and don't realise there are seven books missing from the OT as well as not a complete book of Daniel or Esther.
7:12 tenebre non comprederont is the same as 8:15 and the darkness did not comprehend it
Comprehend dose not seem to mean the same as overcome it
Thanks
La palabra does sound woke to me since it is not the spanish translation I'm familiar with. I've always seen EL VERbO and that is a mqsculine word.
This guys on another level folks 😮
Very interesting. Thanks!
Esv catholic edition for me
I completely agree regarding the old English dialect. I am awaiting for the day that the Church approves a modern dialect version of DR (or even better, a direct modern translation of the Vulgate). I know there is the Catholic Public Domain version. From what little I've read from that version, it looks rather good, however, there are some external issues.
1. It's not approved by the Church.
2. It was written by essentially a single layman, not by a group of experts.
3. I heard the writer is kooky with kooky beliefs.
Even though these are just external, my 3rd issue makes me worry how much his incorrect beliefs would have influenced what he put. I do not have the expertise to be able to notice if some of the things he put was incorrect. From a glance, the text itself may seem good, but if I go into it more, I do not know whether or not it is correct based off his kooky beliefs.
What are your thoughts on the ESV-CE?
I haven't had time to listen yet...just to say that I bought the Douay- Rheims Bible as a present for my husband recently following Dr Taylor Marshall's recommendation. I haven't heard any negative feedback so far.
I love my Douay Rheims bible!
I think the douay rheims is good for reference, because it's the first bible that ever came out and is latin vulgate, it's cool to compare with other bibles.
It's pity we catholics in india struggle to buy a duoay rheims and you say it's not for me...
Do look at church latin for st John's bible 1901 facsimile...
It's brilliant
How many languages do you speak?
4
Brenton's Septuagint for the OT, King James or New King James for the NT, I find to be the best English translations. I'm sure we all have our preferences though, and I'm a British convert to Orthodoxy so that probably influences my choices somewhat.
I am ignorant to all of these Bibles. However I just recently heard of the Geneva Bible. I was under the impression that a group of scholars interpreted the language verbatim. Why did KJV destroy it, it’s authors & anyone who practiced it?? What was such a controversial matter that made him feel so strongly? Is this what sleeps in the Vatican Library? KJV then continued to rewrite the Bible altogether. I do t know why but when I heard this it made me wonder if KJV was deceiving us.
Very nice episode…….thank you
I've recently picked up a KJV with Apocrypha and a Douay. Want to do some comparisons.
Any day Douay Rheim is lot better.
Any translation that says, "HE shall crush the head of the serpent" (Genesis 3:15) is a fraud.
Is your claim that He the Christ is not the one that shall ultimately crush the head of the serpent? Is Mary in your understanding more powerful than Jesus who is unable to crush the head of the serpent? If Mary can crush the head of the serpent in her own power outside of the Grace of Holy Spirit is Mary in your opinion a more powerful god than Christ?
@@adolphCat Of course, Jesus has the power to crush the serpent. He has assigned that task to Mary because of the great humiliation it will bring to Satan!
Exactly! It means it comes from protestant sources. Any Bible that is not faithful to the Vulgate, (which is the official Bible of the Catholic Church and always will be) is not to be trusted, period.
@@RADIOSALVACION So, the Septuagint Greek Old Testament used by both the Eastern and Western Churches as the standard Old Testament before the innovator St. Jerome decided to translate the Old Testament from Hebrew is to be discounted in spite of being the most favored version of the Old Testament as used most often by Christ and the Apostles? The Septuagint uses He will crush the head of the Serpent.
@@adolphCat Even if we could go back to the original Hebrew there would be contention because undoubtedly the pronoun could be translated "he", "she", "it" or "they" depending on context, and all those words have been used in various current Bibles. Jerome also had access to the Septuagint but he saw a problem: God placed enmity between the serpent and the woman, not between the serpent and Himself. Therefore the context demands "she" shall crush.
Copies of copies... so is the Vulgate. The original text was not in Latin. I currently have 4 Catholic bibles. The Douai reads like the KJV (which was intentional), The Jerusalem Bible reads like the ESV (the ESV is intentional). The New American is cripple with CT and other skeptical notes, the New Catholic returns all the verses that the Jerusalem Bible removed.
Frankly, I prefer the New Catholic Bible. It reads well, and has most of the notes at the end of each book. But there is one thing that stands out about all catholic bibles, the notes are cynical. This is probably so you have to depend of preachers to tell you the TRUTH.
There have been two occasions when theological errors in the Roman Missal were only discovered after they had been translated into English.
The DR bible is being insisted by the likes of Taylor Marshall because it is being offered as the "official bible of the Catholic Church". This is not true. The original imprimatur was given to the DR bible. But the DR bibles available today are actually the DR-Challenor bible. It was suggested that Challenor simply made updates to the language but in fact his translations were so in depth (highly KJV influenced) that the current DR bibles in print can no longer carry the same nihil obstat.
Hey Brother Robert from America Florida 🔥🤟 I Use the RSVCE2 as my go to it's close to what they use in the English version of the catechism of the Catholic Church, in America we use the version of The New American Bible a special revision for the Mass, the revision of the in NAB that was done in 2010 differs from the text that we use for Mass. Following Father Mike Schmitz he has to yearly apps when he does for the Bible it's the RSVCE2 this year he's doing a reading commentary on the catechism of the Catholic if you're available to you I recommend both.
Latin a lost language, less medicine and LAW (Land Air Water). Curious to know the meaning of "virus" in Latin.... In or out of Latin version(s) of scripture?
Latin is very much a living language used all over the west.
Ok. So this is my two cents.
Any translation implies some sort of creation and interpretation. You either go Catholic or you don't.
Latin Vulgata Bible is a proper Catholic interpretation of the Bible. You'll get perspectives that are more likely to guide you towards Catholic understanding of the text.
Douay Rheims is a Catholic translation of this Catholic interpretation which further guides into this Catholic perspective. However, you still need to read and follow the comments, which are quite a lot.
Many people try to get an unbias translation. That's impossible. Then, newer translators try to make this allegedly unbias interpretation a text that is easier to follow. By doing so, it further makes it more biased and in the process of trying to be more historical, they are less Catholic or even objectable translations. When you get a Rejoice Mary instead of Hail Mary, as a greeting, you realize people are realizing that while Rejoice was a greeting in ancient times in Greek, it is not a current English way to greet people.
While you would've expected translations to become more Catholic and easier to read, you notice that they are increasingly anthropocentric portraying to be easier to read. That's why you get even feminist and LG... "bibles".
A good Catholic translation should be an improved continuum of our Vulgata Bible - considering that even our new latin Neovulgata is disruptive and not Catholic.
There is a channel called Christendumb that has a good series of videos going through the Old and New Testament. He's a former minister.
I find Knox to be pretty easy to read. I also got the mini pocket blue cover rsv oxford Catholic bible hardcover.
I won´t never agree with the spanish catholic version of one of the sentences in the Lord´s prayer: "No nos dejes caer en la tentación". I think the correct translation is the english one: "Lead us not into temptation". A few years ago, pope Francis want it to change, saying that is an incorrect translation. No, the wrong translation is the spanish one, as matter of fact is a totally free translation. They should do those thinks with the something so important.
Always preferred the Knox and the Didache, myself. To each their own.
I take that you are suggesting that the original latin text maybe in error , if so say so clearly ?
No, I’m saying the original Latin text is a translation and yes it had mistakes. The Hebrew word that is usually translated as ‘radiant’ or ‘shining’ (qaran) is closely associated with the word horns (qeren). So, when St Jerome was writing the Vulgate - the late 4th-Century Latin translation of the Bible - he chose to translate the description of Moses’ face as horned (cornuta).
@Hold Fast sure but remember it wasn’t until 1590 we had the Sistine Vulgate (different Latin edition to what St Jerome wrote) and then we had the clementine Vulgate which I think has been used until before Vatican II and then today as far as I’m aware we have the nova vulgate. Again I’m not a biblical expert, I’m just pointing out we have various manuscripts of sacred scripture.
@Hold Fast indeed it’s Trustworthy, but the actual Text he translated into Latin is a translation and the church has updated that same Latin text as they did after Trent. I suppose I’m picking at hairs here, but it’s just to help people understand the differences in the hundreds of sacred texts. (For example the differences in the Codex Vaticanus which has differences to the Vulgate)
@@thecatholicman I know what your are getting too. I did enjoy your comparison, between different texts . It was very well put together, and you should be proud of the work you are doing,as I am of you . I just wanted to point out that it seemed you were in a vague way saying it is( The vulgate ) in error. I also enjoyed your interview with Don Carlos such a great Priest keep up this work you are putting a target on your back , but Christ will cover you . God bless for now 🗣
Plain English drives me crazy...I can't understand it...give me old as possible....I don't know what that says about my brain!
The Douai-Rheims is a Catholic historical monument, but apart from the archaic language, it has all of St. Jerome’s mistakes in translation from the Greek and Hebrew.
"Mistakes" that's one way of thinking about it. SAINT Jerome knew the Holy Church inside and out and he knew the best way to correctly get across the Scripture in line with Holy Tradition. Holy Tradition and the Holy Bible are both sides of the lungs in a body - that's the magical thing about Holy Scripture when interpretted correctly with Holy Tradition. Literally translations of literal translations become void of meaning when interpretated by humans so far removed from the apostles and church doctors.
@@t.d6379 I’m afraid you give away the game with the word ‘magical’. It is not a doctrine of the Church that St Jerome was preserved from linguistic error in his translations. Indeed, several times revisions of the Vulgate have been mandated by the Holy See. If you read the letters between Jerome and Augustine on translating the Old Testament from the Septuagint vs. Hebrew you will get a sense of the realities of the matter - which are far from magical.
@ransomcoates546 okay at this stage I am going to need examples please...
Because right now I'm thinking of "Mistakes" likes the translations of Elder and Overseer for Priest and Bishop etc. Wrongful translation in the literal linguistical sense but absolutely brilliant and historical in context of the Holy Church and its Holy Tradition.
The bible is the living word of God.
It needs ZERO interpretation.
Herein, lies the problem of human traditions.
This wrongful practice was called out by jesus , in his teachings.
Circa 200AD, anyone found in the possession of a bible was burnt alive., orderd so by the catholic church.
The " laiety" , if they read the bible, might just get smart🤣
Catholocism is seen to be complex and full of "books and teachings" other..than the bible.
God never ever said, you must follow this or that religion!!!
All religion is flawed.
To follow christ, is a way of life, NOT a religion.
I am the WAY...THE TRUTH..AND THE LIFE..
@@basedsigma5634 never seen so much fakenews posted in a single comment
Fascinating topic. My takeaway? Polish needs more vowels.
Latin did nor make the cut to be a Biblical language.
In Polish it's "ono" cause the word "Słowo" is neutral in Polish and "ono(it)" refers to słowo
Don't underestimate the works of saints...I learned a lot from imitation of christ...don't pass opinions on high matters namely the bible translation ...stich with st jerome ...God will provide the wisdom needed if you pray the rosary and have true devotion to mary
I like Douay Rheims but lately I prefer ESV CE by Augustine Institute. I grew up Baptist to Episcopalian to Roman Catholic. I grew up Baptist and love the KJV. The New Jerusalem Bible is not a favorite at all. I like the CSB, ESV CE, and NASB is better than the NAB which I never really have cared for. Now I shall watch your video from start to finish. I tend to like straight forward and not beating around the bush being literal and business trained in college and graduate school.
Septuagent....hands down. Orthodox Christianity. Oldest unchanged Christian faith on earth. Period.
Ask your priest which version to read. Stop following Taylor Marshall he’s a convert with no office in the church as far as I know. Listening to a guru isn’t traditional Catholic
Actually Taylor Marshall has done great work and many people have become catholics because of his work. I don't agree with everything he says and he is very America focused (I'm not) what I say to those who don't like him is to offer and alternative. Expand the Catholic world of blogging and vlogging. Drive a discussion on the beautiful Catholic Faith,.
@@thecatholicman I was all for him at first, until I saw him sitting there ranting one day and I realized there was my dad and all the similar type of conservative Protestant men I grew up around as a kid, preaching rebellion against all authority and institutions. Same old stuff but wearing a cool hat 🎩
We must submit to and honor the Pope, not rebel against the pope or call him a heretic
He’s anti institutional aka rebellious aka his Protestantism unfortunately resurfaced
We should be following our leaders in the church if we believe in Catholicism.
UA-camrs are not supposed to be steering the church
This is a deeply non traditional and non Catholic thing
If the Pope is wrong the Bishops and the Church and the next Pope will be the judge of that not Taylor Marshall or me or you
Your doing great work Robert, but I like@ have great respect for Dr. Taylor Marchall to I listen to his videos .
I won't be buying Bishop Barron Bible, hear he blocked Dr Taylor Marshall, how that coming from Bishop.
Judge not @ we shall not be judged.
I have the D R Bible with commentary
Well said. Not to mention the Gaeilge versions!
REMEMBER THIS IS JUST YOUR OPINON, SO WHY EVEN BOTHER WITH THIS VIDEO. WHO CARES IF THE DR BIBLE IS NOT FOR YOU. YES YOU ARE CRITICIZING, SO AGAIN WHY BOTHER MAKING THIS VIDEO.
Mine are English Standard Version and Knox Version.
Thumbs alllll the way down!!!👎👎👎👎👎
Why ?
Reading the Latin Vulgate, you got typical bloody Irish accent.
I’m Irish :-)
@@thecatholicman Then keep the faith our holy Mother Church to the last. I read somewhere that St. Patrick will stand personally on the Judgment Day with all Irish Catholics to testify their lifestyle. This shows how the saint loved and still loves Ireland. No wonder he drove all serpents from the land.