Phatcatholic, I Need Something

[Lil Red]

Do you know where I could find a comparison chart on different Bibles? But not from an anti-Catholic source? That's all I can find is charts from anti-Catholic sources.

If you could find one, that would be great!

[phatcatholic]

what kinds of info do u need in the chart?

[Lil Red]

Well, what I would like to do is to create a thread for the Word phorum entitled "Which Bible is Right For You"

Info I would like to have:

-Name of Bible
-If there is a Catholic edition
-Who the printer was and the year
-A review of that particular Bible with how it corresponds (or not) with Catholic teaching

An example:

NEW JERUSALEM BIBLE
(Doubleday, 1985). A translation from the new French edition of this famous Bible, La Sainte Bible (1966), the text is the most poetic of the translations we are considering. Its poetic character lends itself to prayer. This Catholic Bible is also justifiably praised for its extensive footnotes, filled with informative background material.

The place where I found that review has other reviews of other Bibles, but I don't really trust the source.

Does that help you to help me? hee hee

[Lil Red]

i don't want a bunch of Bibles either, just like maybe the top ten? and a study edition?

i know for sure i'd like to have:

-RSV
-NRSV
-NIV
-NAB
-NJB
-REB
-GNT OR CEV

[phatcatholic]

ok, gotcha. until i can find some more, here are the pertinent paragraphs from Catholic Answers' [url="http://www.catholic.com/library/Bible_Translations_Guide.asp"]Bible Translations Guide[/url]

[b]NIV[/b][list]
[*]The disadvantage of dynamic translation is that there is a price to pay for readability. Dynamic translations lose precision because they omit subtle cues to the meaning of a passage that only literal translations preserve. They also run a greater risk of reading the translators’ doctrinal views into the text because of the greater liberty in how to render it.

For example, dynamic Protestant translations, such as the NIV, tend to translate the Greek word ergon and its derivatives as "work" when it reinforces Protestant doctrine but as something else (such as "deeds" or "doing") when it would serve Catholic doctrine.

The NIV renders Romans 4:2 "If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works (ergon), he had something to boast about—but not before God." This passage is used to support the Protestant doctrine of salvation by faith alone. But the NIV translates the erg- derivatives in Romans 2:6-7 differently: "God ‘will give to each person according to what he has done (erga).’ To those who by persistence in doing (ergou) good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life."

If the erg- derivatives were translated consistently as "work" then it would be clear that the passage says God will judge "every person according to his works" and will give eternal life to those who seek immortality "by persistence in working good"—statements that support the Catholic view of salvation.
[/list][b]Concordant Version[/b][list]
[*]One translation that carries literalism to a ludicrous extreme is the Concordant Version, which was translated by a man who had studied Greek and Hebrew for only a short time. He made a one-to-one rendering in which each word in the ancient originals was translated by one (and only one) word in English. This led to numerous absurdities. For example, compare how the Concordant Version of Genesis 1:20 compares with the NIV:

"And saying is God, ‘Roaming is the water with the roaming, living soul, and the flyer is flying over the earth on the face of the atmosphere of the heavens’" (Concordant Version).

"And God said, ‘Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky’" (NIV).
[/list][b]Cotton-Patch Version[/b][list]
[*]At the other extreme from absurdly literal translations are absurdly dynamic ones, such as the Cotton-Patch Version (CPV). This was translated from Greek in the 1960s by a man named Clarence Jordan, who decided not only to replace ancient ways of speaking with modern ones (like most dynamic translations) but to replace items of ancient culture with items of modern ones.

Compare the NIV rendering of Matthew 9:16-17 with what is found in the CPV:

"No one sews a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment, for the patch will pull away from the garment, making the tear worse. Neither do men pour new wine into old wineskins. If they do, the skins will burst, the wine will run out and the wineskins will be ruined. No, they pour new wine into new wineskins, and both are preserved" (NIV).

"Nobody ever uses new, unshrunk material to patch a dress that’s been washed. For in shrinking, it will pull the old material and make a tear. Nor do people put new tubes in old, bald tires. If they do, the tires will blow out, and the tubes will be ruined and the tires will be torn up. But they put new tubes in new tires and both give good mileage" (CPV).
[/list][b]NRSV[/b][list]
[*]One translation that is hard to place on the spectrum is the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV). The basic text of the NRSV is rendered literally, following the RSV, but it uses "gender inclusive language," which tries to translate the original text into a modern "gender neutral" cultural equivalent. When you read the NRSV you will often encounter "friends," "beloved," and "brothers and sisters," and then see a footnote stating "Gk brothers." The NRSV also shows a preference for using "God" and "Christ" when the original text says "he."
[/list]

maybe this will give u some info you can put into a chart of your own, until i find a similar chart already created or more articles that expound upon the different translations of the Bible.

pax christi,
phatcatholic

[MorphRC]

[b]New American Bible[/b]

[b]Catholic Edition[/b]

[b]Copyright © 1987 by Thomas Nelson, Inc.[/b]

Scripture texts used in this work are taken from the New American Bible.
The Old Testament of the New American Bible © 1970 by the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine (CCD), Washington, D.C. (Books 1 Samuel to 2 Maccabees © 1969); Revised New Testament of the New American Bible Copyright © 1986 CCD; Revised Pslams of the New American Bible Copyright © 1991 CCD.

"The English Versions of the Bible"
Copyright © [b]CATHOLIC BIBLICAL ASSOCIATION[/b], 1969

Printed in the Republic of Korea


[url="http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/prefaceold.htm"]Review: Preface to the New American Bible[/url]

[url="http://www.bible-researcher.com/nab.html"]Review: The New American Bible[/url]

[Lil Red]

thanks, phatcatholic.

[MorphRC]

[b]New International Version[/b]

[i]With Helps, Words of Christ in Red Letter[/i]

[b]Protestant Translation[/b]

[b]ZONERVAN PUBLISHING HOUSE[/b]
GRAND RAPIDS, MICHIGAN

[b]The Holy Bible, New International Version ©
Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society[/b]

All Bible Study Helps, Copyright © 1984 by The Zondervan Corporation
All Rights Reserved

Published by Zondervan Publishing House
Grand Rapids, Michigan 49530, U.S.A.
[url="http://www.zondervan.com"]http://www.zondervan.com[/url]
Printed in the United States of America

98 99 00 01 02 02 35 34 33 32 31
[b]RRD[/b]

[b]Review:[/b] Use one of PhatCatholics quotes. They sum it up well.

[MorphRC]

Thought ya might like them from the books..thats all I got. Hope they help.

[phatcatholic]

[url="http://www.americancatholic.org/Newsletters/CU/ac0499.asp"]The Bible: How the Many Translations Came About[/url]

from this article you will find a brief history of the translations of the bible and info on how bibles are translated. the following paragraphs are most helpful for the chart you are trying to make:

[b]Revised Standard Version (RSV)[/b]. This translation is based upon a revision of the standard King James Version and is still a literal translation. It remains a standard for good Bible study because of its fidelity to the original text, but it retains some antiquated expressions in English and makes no attempt at inclusive language. There is a Catholic edition of the RSV.

[b]New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)[/b]. This is a wholly redone translation in line with the RSV but with sensitivity to inclusive language for human beings. It retains traditional language for God. Although it is fairly literal in its translation, the English expressions have been updated to reflect current American cultural preferences. There is a Catholic edition.

[b]New American Bible with Revised New Testament and Psalms (NAB-RNT)[/b]. This has become the standard American Catholic edition of the Bible. It is a revision of the New American Bible (1952-70) done with a sensitivity to accurate yet easily understood language that can be used in public worship. It is also sensitive to gender-inclusive language wherever references to human beings are concerned. This is the translation used in the Lectionary for Mass and other Catholic worship in the United States and many other English-speaking countries.

[b]Catholic Study Bible[/b]. This is an edition of the New American Bible that appeared in 1990. It incorporates the text of the NAB with a commentary—reading guide—written by noted American Catholic biblical scholars. This edition has an excellent cross-reference system between the text and the commentary. It is a helpful, user-friendly tool for Bible study groups.

[b]New International Version (NIV)[/b]. Unlike the preceding versions, this is not a revision. This version is intended to be ecumenical and to appeal to a broad range of English-speaking people. The translation is considered somewhat more conservative than the NRSV. Its language is suitable for private study, public reading and young people's Bible studies. There is no Catholic edition of the NIV.

[b]Today's English Version (TEV)/Good News Bible[/b]. This translation was commissioned by the American Bible Society and completed between 1976 and 1979. It appears in the widely used Good News Bible and other editions. The purpose was to produce an accurate, original translation of the Bible in simple, clear, unambiguous English. Sentences were translated meaning-for-meaning in an effort to make the material as accessible as possible. The TEV is readable and can profitably be used alongside a word-for-word translation in Bible studies. Of the various TEV editions, there is a Catholic edition only of the Good News Bible.

[b]Contemporary English Version (CEV)[/b]. This is a new translation, in "clear, everyday language," published in 1995 by the American Bible Society. A major goal of this translation is sensitivity to the hearers of God's word. It employs contemporary English that is more colloquial in nature. There is no Catholic edition.

[b]Revised English Bible (REB)[/b]. This is a major revision of the New English Bible (NEB). This version was commissioned by the Anglican churches of Great Britain and is primarily a product of British scholarship. The translators rendered the original biblical languages into contemporary English on a meaning-for-meaning basis. It is readable and useful for study purposes. There is no Catholic edition.

[b]New Jerusalem Bible (NJB)[/b]. First published in 1985, it and its predecessor the Jerusalem Bible (JB), published in 1966, were inspired by French translations of the Bible by Dominican Catholic scholars at the L'Ecole Biblique in Jerusalem. The English version is based on the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek texts, but adopts the general outlook of its French counterpart. The text is the most poetic of the translations we are considering. Its poetic character lends itself to prayer. This Catholic Bible is also justifiably praised for its extensive footnotes and informative background material.

[b]New King James Version (NKJV)[/b]. Completed in 1982, it is an attempt to update the King James Version without significantly altering its renderings. Words such as thou, thee and other archaic expressions have been changed and some of the longer sentences have been broken up. Words not found in the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek texts are placed in italics. The editors based their New Testament work on the 16th-century Greek text, rather than on the evidence of older Greek manuscripts. There is no Catholic edition.

[b]New Testament and Psalms: An Inclusive Language Version[/b]. This is an adaptation of the NRSV that employs radically gender-inclusive language. Some have dubbed it the "PC Bible" (for Political Correctness). For example, the title used by Jesus, "son of man," becomes "child of the human one," and the Lord's Prayer begins with the address, "Father-Mother." The result of this approach is a clumsy and at times offensive translation. Scripture scholar Bishop Donald Trautman of Erie, Pennsylvania, then chairman of the U.S. Bishops' Committee on Liturgy, said of the translation when it came out in 1995: "It is a most irresponsible translation that offends the doctrine of the Church and the revealed truth of Father, Son and Holy Spirit."

[b]Condensations and paraphrases[/b]. Finally, mention should be made of the immensely popular [b]The Way[/b], the [b]Living Bible[/b], and [b]The Reader's Digest Bible[/b]. The Way and the Living Bible are not a translations but are paraphrases of the biblical text. Paraphrases are not reliable for Bible study, but they can be nonetheless inspiring and easy to understand. A successor to the Living Bible is the New Living Translation. Though a real translation and not a paraphrase, it has tendencies to translate text along the lines of predetermined judgments.
The Reader's Digest Bible (1982), on the other hand, is truly a condensation of the Bible. It has clipped out all repetition in the Bible. Unfortunately, the result is a distortion of the text because repetition is a vital part of the message of some biblical stories or poetry. The purpose of this condensation is to entice people to pick up and read the Bible. But using such shortcuts can cheapen the Word of God. There are no Catholic editions of these condensations and paraphrases.

[Lil Red]

phatcatholic, that's actually the site i wasn't sure about because www.americancatholic.org got a red light from Catholic Culture. But if you're using it, then I trust ya!

[phatcatholic]

[url="http://www.americancatholic.org/Newsletters/SFS/an0503.asp"][b]this article[/b][/url] gives more history behind the translations, but what i like about it--and what you may want to include in your chart--is that it gives an example of how the different versions of the Bible translate Psalm 47. putting this in ur chart will allow you to actually show the difference in the translations. here is the section in question:

In this comparison of the first two verses of Psalm 47, the most significant problem faced by the translators is the word nora, translated in both the Douay and the KJV as "terrible." "Terrible" in modern English no longer connotes something that fills one with terror or awe, so the word no longer conveys the original meaning. The 1970 NAB uses "awesome," but that word has now almost lost its meaning in modern American English. So the 1991 NAB replaces it with "inspires awe." The Jerusalem Bible used "dreaded," but perhaps that was too strong. So the NJB replaces it with "glorious." The RSV keeps "terrible" and the NEB uses "fearful." But the revisions of both use "awesome." A close comparison will reveal other differences.

[b]Douay-Rheims[/b]: O clap your hands, all ye nations: shout unto God with the voice of joy, / for the Lord is high, terrible: a great king over all the earth.

[b]New American Bible (1970)[/b]: All you peoples, clap your hands, / shout to God with cries of gladness, / for the Lord, the Most High, the awesome, / is the great king over all the earth.

[b]Jerusalem Bible (1966)[/b]: Clap your hands, all you peoples, / acclaim God with shouts of joy; / for Yahweh, the Most High, is to be dreaded, / the Great King of the whole world.

[b]New American Bible (1991)[/b]: All you peoples, clap your hands; / shout to God with joyful cries. / For the Lord, the Most High, inspires awe, / the great king over all the earth.

[b]New Jerusalem Bible (1985)[/b]: Clap your hands, all peoples, / acclaim God with shouts of joy. / For Yahweh, the Most High, is glorious, / the great king over all the earth.

[b]King James Version[/b]: O clap your hands, all ye people; shout unto God with the voice of triumph. / For the Lord most high is terrible; he is a great King over all the earth.

[b]Revised Standard Version (1952)[/b]: Clap your hands, all peoples! / Shout to God with loud songs of joy! / For the Lord, the Most High, is terrible, / a great king over all the earth.

[b]New English Bible (1970)[/b]: Clap your hands, all you nations; / acclaim our God with shouts of joy. / How fearful is the Lord Most High, / great sovereign over all the earth!

[b]New Revised Standard Version (1989)[/b]: Clap your hands, all you peoples; / shout to God with loud songs of joy. / For the Lord, the Most High, is awesome, / a great king over all the earth.

[b]Revised English Bible (1989)[/b]: Clap your hands, all you nations, / acclaim God with shouts of joy. / How awesome is the Lord Most High, / great King over all the earth!


i am thinking that you may want to compile all of the info i provide for you into a chart you can make on your own. we will be really lucky to find such a chart already created. if you don't know how to do this. i can make a chart in Word or Excel for you. just let me know.

pax christi,
phatcatholic

Edited July 1, 2004 by phatcatholic

[Lil Red]

i'll try to make a chart in Excel. I'm not sure how to post it though, so let me create it, i'll email it to you to see what you think. thanks!

[phatcatholic]

i did happen to find two charts which are pretty cool. they compare the NAB and the NRSV translations of The Catholic Youth Bible.

--[url="http://www.smp.org/images/bookimages/CYBnab&nrsvChart.pdf"]comparison chart of the history, features, and benefits[/url]
--[url="http://www.smp.org/images/bookimages/CYBnab&nrsvVerses.pdf"]comparison chart of selected verses from Genesis 1 and Mark 1[/url]

i hope this helps........pax christi,
phatcatholic

[phatcatholic]

[quote name='Lil Red' date='Jul 1 2004, 11:55 AM'] phatcatholic, that's actually the site i wasn't sure about because www.americancatholic.org got a red light from Catholic Culture. But if you're using it, then I trust ya! [/quote]
i hear what ur sayin, but i see nothing wrong w/ these short explanations of the different versions--which is really what ur looking for. (the only possible exception being in the explanation for the RSV where the phrase "makes no attempt at inclusive language" could possibly imply that this attempt should be made. but the author here could just as easily be stating an affirmative about this translation [it makes "no" attempt, instead of "it makes some attempt']). i would consult many different sources for the history of these translations anyway, so no need to worry about that section of the article.