LittleLes Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 While the Church doesn't emphasize it anymore, perhaps hoping that most will forget, Jerome's Vulgate remains the "official" bible of the Church. The English translation of the Vulgate is the Douay Rheims Bible and it can be found on the web. Douay-Rheims: Matthew 24:36 "But of that day and hour no one knoweth, not the angels of heaven, but the Father alone." New American Bible: Matthew 24:36 "But of that day and hour no one knows, neither the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone." New Revised Standard Version: 36 ‘But about that day and hour no one knows, neither the angels of heaven, nor the Son,* but only the Father. It would be embarrassing to have Jesus not know the day and hour of end times, so Jerome just deleted him from Matthew 24:36. Douay-Rheims: 1 Cor 9:5 " Have we not power to carry about a woman, a sister, as well as the rest of the apostles, and the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas? " New American Bible: 1 Cor 9:5 "Do we not have the right to take along a Christian wife, as do the rest of the apostles, and the brothers of the Lord, and Kephas? " New Revised Standard Veresion: 1 Cor 9:5 ""Do we not have the right to be accompanied by a believing wife,as do the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas? " It would not do to have a married clergy, so "wife" got changed to "a woman, a sister" But the most notable corruption Jerome introduced for doctrinal reasons is found in Tobias 8:4: "Then Tobias exhorted the virgin, and said to her: Sara, arise, and let us pray to God today, and tomorrow, and the next day: because for these three nights we are joined to God: and when the third night is over, we will be in our own wedlock." Jerome has poor Tobias pray for three nights before consumating his marriage to support Jerome's view of the exclusively procreative purpose for sex. Translating from the original Heberew texts, both the New American Bible and the New Revised Standard Version have dropped Jerome's interpolation, and Tobias consumates his marriage on the first night saying Tob 8:6 'It is not good for the man to be alone." Jerome omited this passage! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudate_Dominum Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 oh come on. .this type of thing is almost worthless. And everyone knows there are no extant originals of anything in the Bible. You might argue that translation X is based on a different manuscript tradition which is "superior", but this would largely be opinion. There are arguments for many different sides and approaches to translating the Bible; to have a meaningful discussion about it would require considerable expertise. I'd rather not discuss subject matter such as this in a non-specialized milieu. It's frivolous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cam42 Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 Now you know why I have him ignored...... more recycled tripe. That is all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudate_Dominum Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 [quote name='Cam42' date='Jul 23 2005, 06:29 AM']Now you know why I have him ignored...... more recycled tripe. That is all. [right][snapback]655553[/snapback][/right] [/quote] tee-hee.. it is a fun topic, but I can't forsee it becoming anything productive. haha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleLes Posted July 23, 2005 Author Share Posted July 23, 2005 [quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='Jul 23 2005, 05:43 AM']oh come on. .this type of thing is almost worthless. And everyone knows there are no extant originals of anything in the Bible. You might argue that translation X is based on a different manuscript tradition which is "superior", but this would largely be opinion. There are arguments for many different sides and approaches to translating the Bible; to have a meaningful discussion about it would require considerable expertise. I'd rather not discuss subject matter such as this in a non-specialized milieu. It's frivolous. [right][snapback]655534[/snapback][/right] [/quote] RESPONSE: I'm afraid that there are some pretty early Hebrew texts and they have been copied pretty faithfully. Thus it can be shown that Jerome altered texts to support Catholic teaching. These alterations, for the most part, have been corrected in the New American Bible's and the New Revised Standard Version's translations. And we have some early Jerome's too. An interesting finding is that Jerome originally translated the Greek word for wife as "uxor" which means wife. But he then changed it to "meliur" so he could turn those wives into "women." (Maybe he wanted to allow those apostles and brothers of Jesus to bring their girlfriends along and leave their wives at home! : ) And if you doubt my facts, perhaps you'd want to read up on textual criticism at you library. Bruce Metzger is a good place to begin. Incidently, dropping "nor the Son" made it into the King James Version too, which evidently used the Vulgate for Matthew's gospel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleLes Posted July 23, 2005 Author Share Posted July 23, 2005 [quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='Jul 23 2005, 06:37 AM']tee-hee.. it is a fun topic, but I can't forsee it becoming anything productive. haha [right][snapback]655556[/snapback][/right] [/quote] RESPONSE: Did you ever notice that those apologists who try to claim inerrancy for the Bible usually want to use the Douay-Rheims version. I wonder what the correlation is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Eremite Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 Is it just me, or does this new smiley ( : ) make LittleLes exceedingly more annoying. Thanks a lot dUSt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudate_Dominum Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 [quote name='LittleLes' date='Jul 23 2005, 09:38 AM']RESPONSE: I'm afraid that there are some pretty early Hebrew texts and they have been copied pretty faithfully. Thus it can be shown that Jerome altered texts to support Catholic teaching. These alterations, for the most part, have been corrected in the New American Bible's and the New Revised Standard Version's translations. And we have some early Jerome's too. An interesting finding is that Jerome originally translated the Greek word for wife as "uxor" which means wife. But he then changed it to "meliur" so he could turn those wives into "women." (Maybe he wanted to allow those apostles and brothers of Jesus to bring their girlfriends along and leave their wives at home! : ) And if you doubt my facts, perhaps you'd want to read up on textual criticism at you library. Bruce Metzger is a good place to begin. Incidently, dropping "nor the Son" made it into the King James Version too, which evidently used the Vulgate for Matthew's gospel. [right][snapback]655633[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Surprisingly I've actually studied the Bible in some depth, and I don't find your statements to be very professional. Unless you know Greek and Hebrew, I'd rather not discuss these things. I get the impression this is just a game for you and not an authentic attempt at dialogue. If I'm wrong I apologize. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleLes Posted July 23, 2005 Author Share Posted July 23, 2005 [quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='Jul 23 2005, 10:08 AM']Surprisingly I've actually studied the Bible in some depth, and I don't find your statements to be very professional. Unless you know Greek and Hebrew, I'd rather not discuss these things. I get the impression this is just a game for you and not an authentic attempt at dialogue. If I'm wrong I apologize. [right][snapback]655655[/snapback][/right] [/quote] RESPONSE: I can well understand why you don't want to discuss these facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudate_Dominum Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 [quote name='LittleLes' date='Jul 23 2005, 10:22 AM']RESPONSE: I can well understand why you don't want to discuss these facts. [right][snapback]655668[/snapback][/right] [/quote] haha, nice try.. I'm not manipulated that easily. I might play your game some time if I get bored. I'm just more into profitable and genuine discussions, not borish round-about exercises. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathan Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 Don't mind LittleLes, he's just mad because he's going to Hell -- what with the silly Protestantism and everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aloysius Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 we don't have the original texts... Jerome translated from texts older than ANY text we have now. so... can you in any way proove to me that the differences in the oldest texts we have now aren't curruptions from the OLDER texts that Jerome Translated from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleLes Posted July 23, 2005 Author Share Posted July 23, 2005 [quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='Jul 23 2005, 10:24 AM']haha, nice try.. I'm not manipulated that easily. I might play your game some time if I get bored. I'm just more into profitable and genuine discussions, not borish round-about exercises. [right][snapback]655671[/snapback][/right] [/quote] RESPONSE: I'm just comparing and contrasting the verses found in the on-line Vulgate and the New American Bible and the New Revised Standard version. Unless you feel that their translators made an error in the translation, you apparently don't have anything to add. Simple comparison shows that they are quite different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleLes Posted July 23, 2005 Author Share Posted July 23, 2005 [quote name='Nathan' date='Jul 23 2005, 11:14 AM']Don't mind LittleLes, he's just mad because he's going to Hell -- what with the silly Protestantism and everything. [right][snapback]655694[/snapback][/right] [/quote] RESPONSE: Just the facts, Nathan. Sorry if that's a problem for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleLes Posted July 23, 2005 Author Share Posted July 23, 2005 [quote name='Aloysius' date='Jul 23 2005, 11:19 AM']we don't have the original texts... Jerome translated from texts older than ANY text we have now. so... can you in any way proove to me that the differences in the oldest texts we have now aren't curruptions from the OLDER texts that Jerome Translated from? [right][snapback]655698[/snapback][/right] [/quote] RESPONSE: Please give the evidence for your assertion. Actually, with the finding of the Dead Sea schrolls and other archeological events, we have a number of older texts than Jerome used. I don't even think he even had the Codex Vaticanus or Codex Sinaticus available to him, did he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now