FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Protestant Translations of the Bible
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3
(08-12-2019, 09:42 AM)Alphonse il Segundo Wrote: [ -> ]Paul, I think this gets to the heart of the question. Why are there variant readings in the Greek? Is this what makes the Protestant translations deficient?

Because the original manuscripts don't exist anymore, and variations have crept in. That's why the Protestants include "For thine is the kingdom..." at the end of the Lord's Prayer. But that's not the only variant: the Clementine Vulgate gives 1 John 5, 7-8 as, "Quoniam tres sunt, qui testimonium dant in cælo: Pater, Verbum, et Spiritus Sanctus: et hi tres unum sunt. Et tres sunt, qui testimonium dant in terra: spiritus, et aqua, et sanguis: et hi tres unum sunt." Early versions of the Bible don't have that entire verse. It's "Quoniam tres sunt, qui testimonium dant: spiritus, et aqua, et sanguis: et hi tres unum sunt." St Clement quotes the verse in the shorter form, even though he writes much about the Trinity.

And then there's Genesis 3, 15, which St Jerome translated as 'ipsa conteret', 'she shall crush', when most Hebrew manuscripts have a masculine pronoun, although it could be translated 'it' where 'seed' is neuter. The ages in Genesis 11 are 100 years less in the Masoretic text (and the Vulgate) than in the Septuagint.

But despite these differences, Catholic translations - especially the Vulgate, which the Council of Trent declared free from error in faith and morals, and the Church uses in her liturgy - are approved by the Church. Protestant translations are not, and, as other posters noted, translate in a non-Catholic way. "Elders" instead of "priests", "favoured one" instead of "full of grace".

(08-12-2019, 09:42 AM)Alphonse il Segundo Wrote: [ -> ]And what makes the Vulgate superior over a Greek manuscript? I love Jerome, I would trust him over any modern "scholar", but he is just a translator.

St Jerome had access to manuscripts we don't, but what makes the Vulgate important is the Church and her use of the Vulgate in the liturgy. I wouldn't say superior to all versions - the Septuagint is up there, too, but even that isn't the original manuscript of the New Testament.

For liturgical purposes (and I'm talking of the Latin rites), if we have to have the vernacular, I don't think it matters what the Greek or Hebrew say. The original text of the Mass is in Latin, and translations should be from that. For private use, while there's nothing wrong with translating from the original languages instead of from a Latin translation, I don't really see a need for it. It's the role of the Church, not the laity, to interpret the Scriptures, and the modern emphasis on "reading your Bible" strikes me as very Protestant. There's plenty of Scripture at Mass. There's even more in the Office, but even if someone only goes to Mass on Sunday, he hears what he needs to from the Bible. I'm not saying it's sinful for the laity to read Scripture, but you need a good commentary, and have to be careful, especially if you go into it with a "where is that in the Bible?" or "how can both these passages be true?" attitude.
(08-12-2019, 02:01 PM)Bonaventure Wrote: [ -> ]I don't see how in good conscious, later (i.e., post VCII) translations could skip the et ieiunio (i.e., and fasting), or even relegate it to a footnote.

Because it's not in the Greek. Or at least not in all the Greek manuscripts.
(08-10-2019, 02:18 PM)jack89 Wrote: [ -> ]I seem to recall that the Catechism of Saint Pius X instructs us to burn or similarly dispose of any Protestant Bibles that comes into our hands.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

I have a couple of Protestant Bibles I acquired during my heretical years, a KJV and a NIV I think.  I haven't disposed of them, yet.

Here you go...

32 Q. What should a Christian do who has been given a Bible by a Protestant or by an agent of the Protestants? A. A Christian to whom a Bible has been offered by a Protestant or an agent of the Protestants should reject it with disgust, because it is forbidden by the Church. If it was accepted by inadvertence, it must be burnt as soon as possible or handed in to the Parish Priest.
The problem in the current day is not so much the translation as is the edition. Most cahtolic "bibles" are apostate filth whose commentary is pretty much reduced to saying taht all books are spuruious, following the insanity and lack of any basis of liberal "scholars". For example, my edition says that psalm 110 wasn't written by David but by Simeon because there is supposed to be an acronym n the first verses. That is a bizarre, nonsensical thing, and the very psalm says "by David", with nothing that contradicts this.

The translations, also catholic ones, also suffer from similar problems. For example, they translate "mono-geneis" as "one of a kind" where the context and the commentary by the first greek-speaking christians make it clear it is "only-begotten". Another example: they translate Daniel 3:25 as "son of the gods" when it should be "son of God".

Overall, I wouldn't get a translation that is less than 150 years old. And only editions with no notes or commentary of any kind.
I have a Zondervan NIV study Bible just for the historical background of the Bible including archaeological findings, artwork and tools of the time, along with tons of maps, pictures, charts, timelines, etc.

Obviously the theology in the footnotes, sidebars, and essays is often at odds with Catholicism. But, being a product largely of conservative Evangelical scholars, traditional authorship and dating of the books is given, and there is not a hint of the modernism that one sees in say, the NAB.

There just isn't a huge selection of Catholic study bibles that offer the same amount of extras like Protestant ones do. Furthermore, I got this one on sale for about $20 brand new - hardcover, printed in the USA, a bit less than 3000 pages. It is a handy reference.
Protestants are using the new International Version of the Bible. It doesn't follow all original Christian sacraments but is following the main idea of it, that the presence of Christ makes our world sacred, and we need to make good things for not poisoning it. I got in my kitchen wall art with ten commandments from, which always reminds me what I have to do to keep my would clean. All forms of Christianity follow these commandments, and I don't think we need to judge them because they made some modifications in the Bible.
Pages: 1 2 3