Jump to content
An Old School Catholic Message Board

Douay Rheimes Vs Rsvce


Maccabeus

Recommended Posts

In the recent couple weeks I feel in love with the Douay Rheimes bible translation, before it I use to study the KJV than the RSVCE and one thing that troubles me is that in the the DR just like the KJV at the end of [b]Luke 1:28[/b] it says "Blessed art thou amongst women" and in the RSVCE it omits that ending. Shouldn't both the Douay R, & the RSVCE be the same since their Catholic?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vincent Vega

[quote name='Maccabeus' timestamp='1314462243' post='2295824']Shouldn't both the Douay R, & the RSVCE be the same since their Catholic?
[/quote]
Just because it has an imprimatur does not mean that it isn't a garbage translation (cf. GNT).

Edited by USAirwaysIHS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' timestamp='1314462459' post='2295826']
Just because it has an imprimatur does not mean that it isn't a garbage translation (cf. GNT).
[/quote]
RSV-CE isn't 'garbage'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

faithcecelia

Quickly flicking to my Comparative Text Bible (4 in 1) both King James and Amplified do have the phrase, whereas NAS and NIV don't. There is a note to say that some early texts don't have it, so I guess that its been debatable from the beginning. It is things such as this that make me use at least 2 and often as many as 6 or more translations if I am doing actual study rather than just one, all translations are lacking in one way or another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

faithcecelia

Scanning a bit further on, I do wonder if this was a later addition to verse 28 to mirror Elizabeth's greeting in verse42.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vincent Vega

[quote name='Lil Red' timestamp='1314463172' post='2295834']
RSV-CE isn't 'garbage'.
[/quote]
I didn't say it was. I just said that having an imprimatur doesn't automatically certify that it isn't garbage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' timestamp='1314463514' post='2295839']
I didn't say it was. I just said that having an imprimatur doesn't automatically certify that it isn't garbage.
[/quote]
kay :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whew! That was a close call :o[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' timestamp='1314463514' post='2295839']
I didn't say it was. I just said that having an imprimatur doesn't automatically certify that it isn't garbage.[/quote]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Laudate_Dominum

There are thousands (hundreds of thousands according to Ehrman) of textual variants in the extant New Testament manuscripts and fragments. This one is perhaps easily explained as a copyist error--text duplicated from the identical phrase a few verses later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='faithcecelia' timestamp='1314463329' post='2295838']
Scanning a bit further on, I do wonder if this was a later addition to verse 28 to mirror Elizabeth's greeting in verse42.
[/quote]

Interesting point of few,
Since it is written in Verse42, than Verse 28 isn't necessarily wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

faithcecelia

[quote name='Maccabeus' timestamp='1314469953' post='2295905']
Interesting point of few,
Since it is written in Verse42, than Verse 28 isn't necessarily wrong.
[/quote]

I don't say it is wrong, merely speculate that as all (as far as I have available) translations have it in v42 and only half seem to have it in v28, it is possibly a mistake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Laudate_Dominum

[quote name='Maccabeus' timestamp='1314469953' post='2295905']
Interesting point of few,
Since it is written in Verse42, than Verse 28 isn't necessarily wrong.
[/quote]
FWIW, biblical inerrancy, as I understand it, does not assert that copies and translations are free of error.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

faithcecelia

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' timestamp='1314470546' post='2295909']
FWIW, biblical inerrancy, as I understand it, does not assert that copies and translations are free of error.
[/quote]

Indeed, its is commonly known that there have always been errors, such as the Vulgate stating that Moses had horns
[img]http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k216/ruthbale/michelangelo_moses1.jpg[/img]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Laudate_Dominum

[quote name='faithcecelia' timestamp='1314470735' post='2295912']

Indeed, its is commonly known that there have always been errors, such as the Vulgate stating that Moses had horns
[/quote]
Haha. That's epic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='faithcecelia' timestamp='1314470735' post='2295912']

Indeed, its is commonly known that there have always been errors, such as the Vulgate stating that Moses had horns
[img]http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k216/ruthbale/michelangelo_moses1.jpg[/img]
[/quote]
[size=8][font=comic sans ms,cursive]HUH?[/font][/size]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...