Is the Knox translation FishEasters approved?
#11
I've only read through the Gospels in Knox and I do like the ease of reading. Although there are instances where I know the phrasing of the DR version and Knox changed it and it just doesn't feel right. I've read a bit of the Psalms as well and being used to the DR versions (especially since praying the Divine Office version which uses DR), I'm not a huge fan of Knox version for them either. It's an issue of learning/knowing certain parts of scripture in a certain way and then seeing it unnecessarily changed when the original wording is well known/sounds perfect the way it is. It would be nice if someone redid DR in a way to make it read a little easier. The language can be difficult at times. I know I gave my mother my DR to read and she said that the language was too difficult for her and she gave up and went to some new fangled version that my local church gave to us during RCIA (if I had to guess it would be the Good News Translation).

Personally, I think that there's no perfect translation. If you like how Knox reads, use Knox. If you can handle the language in DR, then go with DR. If there's something else that's not too modernist, go with that. I'll probably continue to use Knox when I read the Bible just because it's a bit easier of a read than DR.

I'm sure if someone took the time, they could take DR and just make the language more palatable to the modern reader. Basically just take the book and use more modern language, not worrying about translation issues between Latin, Greek, Hebrew (as modern versions do). The main source would be DR & the Vulgate, maybe use Knox as a helper in terms of more modern language. I'm sure this could make things a bit difficult in some instances where the language isn't as clear or when there are words/phrases that are no longer in use in common English. A translator would obviously need to alter certain sentences in order to get across the same point while not using language that could completely change how the theology is interpreted. Actually, it would be awesome if a group of traditionalists (or anyone else who isn't a modernist and like DR) would band together and do a modern translation of DR in this manner. A big community project. You'd have to get various people who are traditional minded in terms of literary knowledge and theology to review it to ensure major things aren't being changed and that the language being used isn't poor. Then once you get a final product see if you can get some traditional institutions (SSPX, ICKSP, FSSP) to buy in. If you can get some support, then you move it to some American or English bishops. Lastly getting it approved in Rome as an official translation. Pipe dream, but it'd be really cool.
Blood of Christ, relief of the burdened, save us.

“It is my design to die in the brew house; let ale be placed in my mouth when I am expiring, that when the choirs of angels come, they may say, “Be God propitious to this drinker.” – St. Columbanus, A.D. 612
Reply
#12
Here's an example of how I figure Luke 15 could look:
Quote:Now the publicans and sinners drew near to hear him.
And the Pharisees and scribes murmured, saying: This man receives sinners, and eats with them.
And he spoke this parable to them, saying:
Which of you, if he has a hundred sheep: and he loses one of them, does not leave the ninety-nine in the desert, to go after the one that was lost, until he finds it?
And when he has found it, lays it on his shoulders, rejoicing:
And coming home, calls together his friends and neighbors, saying to them: Rejoice with me, because I have found my lost sheep?
I say to you, that there will be even more joy in heaven when one sinner does penance, than upon ninety-nine just men who do not need penance
Or what woman having ten silver coins; if she loses one coin, does not light a candle, and sweep the house, and seek diligently until she finds it?
And when she finds it, calls together her friends and neighbors, saying: Rejoice with me, because I have found the coin, which I had lost.
So I say to you, there will be joy among the angels of God upon one sinner doing penance.
And he said: A certain man had two sons:
And the younger of them said to his father: Father, give me the portion of the estate that falls to me.
And not many days after, the younger son, gathering everything together, went abroad into a far country, and there wasted his inheritance, living indulgently
And after he had spent everything, there came a mighty famine in that country; and he began to be in want.
And he went and clinged to one of the citizens of that country. And he sent him to his farm to feed swine.
And he would have desired to fill his belly with the husks that the swine ate; and no man gave to him.
And returning to himself, he said: How many hired servants in my father’s house overflow with bread, and here I am dying of hunger?
I will arise, and go to my father, and say to him: Father, I have sinned against heaven, and before you:
I am not worthy to be called your son: make me as one of your hired servants.
And rising up he came to his father. And when he was still a great way off, his father saw him, and was moved with compassion, and running to him fell upon his neck, and kissed him.
And the son said to him: Father, I have sinned against heaven, and before you, I am not now worthy to be called your son.
And the father said to his servants: Bring out the best robe quickly, and put it on him, and put a ring on his hand, and shoes on his feet:
And bring here the fatted calf, and kill it, and let us eat and make merry:
Because my son was dead, and is come to life again: was lost, and is found. And they began to be merry.
Now his eldest son was in the field, and when he came and approached the house, he heard music and dancing:
And he called one of the servants, and asked what these things meant.
And he said to him: Your brother has returned, and your father has killed the fatted calf, because he has received him safe.
And he was angry, and would not go in. His father therefore coming out began to plead with him.
And he answering, said to his father: Behold, for so many years I have served you, and I have never violated your commandment, and yet you have never given me a young goat to make merry with my friends.
But as soon as your son returned, who devoured his inheritance with harlots, you killed the fatted calf for him.
But he said to him: Son, you are always with me, and all I have is yours.
But it was fit that we should make merry and be glad, for your brother was dead and is come to life again, he was lost, and is found.

And John 6-32:72
Quote:Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say to you; Moses did not give you bread from heaven, but my Father gives you the true bread from heaven.
Because the bread of God is that which comes down from heaven, and gives life to the world.
They therefore said to him: Lord, always give us this bread.
And Jesus said to them: I am the bread of life: he that comes to me will not hunger: and he that believes in me will never thirst.
But I have spoken to you and you have seen me, and do not believe.
All that the Father gives to me will come to me; and he that comes to me, I will not cast out.
Because I came down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him that sent me.
Now this is the will of the Father who sent me: that of all that he has given me, I should lose nothing; but should raise it up again on the last day.
And this is the will of my Father that sent me: that everyone who sees the Son, and believes in him, may have life everlasting, and I will raise him up on the last day.
The Jews therefore murmured at him, because he said: I am the living bread which came down from heaven.
And they said: Is this not Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How then can he say, I came down from heaven?
Jesus therefore answered, and said to them: Do not murmur among yourselves.
No man can come to me, unless the Father, who sent me, draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.
It is written in the prophets: And they will all be taught of God. Everyone that has listened to the Father, and has learned, comes to me.
Not that any man has seen the Father; but he who is of God, has seen the Father
Amen, amen I say to you: He that believes in me has everlasting life.
I am the bread of life.
Your fathers ate manna in the desert, and are dead
This is the bread which comes down from heaven; that if any man eats it, he may not die.
I am the living bread which came down from heaven.
If any man eats this bread, he will live forever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world.
The Jews therefore disputed among themselves, saying: How can this man give us his flesh to eat?
Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say to you: Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you will not have life in you.
He that eats my flesh, and drinks my blood, has everlasting life: and I will raise him up on the last day.
For my flesh is real food: and my blood is real drink.
He that eats my flesh, and drinks my blood, remains in me, and I him.
As the living Father has sent me, and I live because of the Father; so he that eats me will also live because of me.
This is the bread that came down from heaven. Not like your fathers who ate manna, and are dead. He that eats this bread will live forever.
He said these things, teaching in the synagogue, in Capharnaum.
Many of his disciples after hearing it, said: This saying is hard, who can listen to it?
But Jesus, knowing within himself that his disciples murmured at this, said to them: Does this scandalize you?
What If you were to see the Son of man ascend up to where he was before?
It is the spirit that invigorates: the flesh profits nothing. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.
But there are some of you that do not believe. Jesus knew from the beginning, who did not believe, and who would betray him.
And he said: That’s why I said to you, that no man can come to me, unless it is given to him by my Father.
After this many of his disciples went back; and no longer walked with him.
Then Jesus said to the twelve: Will you also leave?
And Simon Peter answered him: Lord, to whom will we go? You have the words of eternal life.
And we have believed and have known, that you are the Christ, the Son of God.
Jesus answered them: Did I not choose twelve of you; and is one of you a devil?
He was speaking about Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon: because he was about to betray him, and was one of the twelve.
Blood of Christ, relief of the burdened, save us.

“It is my design to die in the brew house; let ale be placed in my mouth when I am expiring, that when the choirs of angels come, they may say, “Be God propitious to this drinker.” – St. Columbanus, A.D. 612
Reply
#13
(03-05-2018, 12:50 PM)GangGreen Wrote: I've only read through the Gospels in Knox and I do like the ease of reading. Although there are instances where I know the phrasing of the DR version and Knox changed it and it just doesn't feel right. I've read a bit of the Psalms as well and being used to the DR versions (especially since praying the Divine Office version which uses DR), I'm not a huge fan of Knox version for them either. It's an issue of learning/knowing certain parts of scripture in a certain way and then seeing it unnecessarily changed when the original wording is well known/sounds perfect the way it is. It would be nice if someone redid DR in a way to make it read a little easier. The language can be difficult at times. I know I gave my mother my DR to read and she said that the language was too difficult for her and she gave up and went to some new fangled version that my local church gave to us during RCIA (if I had to guess it would be the Good News Translation).

Personally, I think that there's no perfect translation. If you like how Knox reads, use Knox. If you can handle the language in DR, then go with DR. If there's something else that's not too modernist, go with that. I'll probably continue to use Knox when I read the Bible just because it's a bit easier of a read than DR.

I'm sure if someone took the time, they could take DR and just make the language more palatable to the modern reader. Basically just take the book and use more modern language, not worrying about translation issues between Latin, Greek, Hebrew (as modern versions do). The main source would be DR & the Vulgate, maybe use Knox as a helper in terms of more modern language. I'm sure this could make things a bit difficult in some instances where the language isn't as clear or when there are words/phrases that are no longer in use in common English. A translator would obviously need to alter certain sentences in order to get across the same point while not using language that could completely change how the theology is interpreted. Actually, it would be awesome if a group of traditionalists (or anyone else who isn't a modernist and like DR) would band together and do a modern translation of DR in this manner. A big community project. You'd have to get various people who are traditional minded in terms of literary knowledge and theology to review it to ensure major things aren't being changed and that the language being used isn't poor. Then once you get a final product see if you can get some traditional institutions (SSPX, ICKSP, FSSP) to buy in. If you can get some support, then you move it to some American or English bishops. Lastly getting it approved in Rome as an official translation. Pipe dream, but it'd be really cool.

I think the Revised Standard Version, Second Catholic Edition comes close to meeting the criteria you're describing.  Of course, it's not based on the Vulgate, but the KJV instead....

Still, I like the idea of a modern traditionalist version
Reply
#14
The problem is, that if you do this, '(T)ake DR and just make the language more palatable to the modern reader. Basically just take the book and use more modern language, not worrying about translation issues between Latin, Greek, Hebrew (as modern versions do).'

You get this, 'It's an issue of learning/knowing certain parts of scripture in a certain way and then seeing it unnecessarily changed when the original wording is well known/sounds perfect the way it is.'

I am so steeped in the Authorised Version (KJV) and the Great Bible Psalter from my years as an Anglican lay-reader, that no matter what version I use, it's never going to sound 'right'.
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
  “Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog also.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'


Reply
#15
(03-05-2018, 06:01 PM)jovan66102 Wrote: The problem is, that if you do this, '(T)ake DR and just make the language more palatable to the modern reader. Basically just take the book and use more modern language, not worrying about translation issues between Latin, Greek, Hebrew (as modern versions do).'

You get this, 'It's an issue of learning/knowing certain parts of scripture in a certain way and then seeing it unnecessarily changed when the original wording is well known/sounds perfect the way it is.'

I am so steeped in the Authorised Version (KJV) and the Great Bible Psalter from my years as an Anglican lay-reader, that no matter what version I use, it's never going to sound 'right'.

True enough. It's why a lot of Prots don't touch anything other than KJV. You're never going to make everyone happy, but a more up-to-date DR would certainly be a good start compared to the modern translations that exist today. I know a lot of people like the old English when it comes to reading Scripture and anything involving religion. The average traditionalist would probably cry to see Luke 1:28 translated as "And the angel entered and said to her: Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you: blessed are you among women." They'd probably call this a modernist translation, when it's really just a modern translation. I can certainly understand not changing the prayer, but for a Biblical translation I see no issue with it.
Blood of Christ, relief of the burdened, save us.

“It is my design to die in the brew house; let ale be placed in my mouth when I am expiring, that when the choirs of angels come, they may say, “Be God propitious to this drinker.” – St. Columbanus, A.D. 612
Reply
#16
Of all the translations that purport to "return to the Hebrew & Greek sources" and translate directly from those with little conferring with St. Jerome's Vulgate Latin translation, the Knox translation is probably the best. However, those translations which are based in large part on the Vulgate, like the Douay-Rheims, are better because St. Jerome had access to more ancient manuscripts that no longer exist and because the Holy Council of Trent approved the Vulgate as the Church's official edition.

See: Which Bible Should You Read? A Short Comparison and Commentary on Modern Bible Translations by Thomas A. Nelson.
Reply
#17
It should be noted that until the Dead Sea Scrolls, the latest version of the Hebrew we had was from the 10th century AD.

This means that the Latin and Greek (of which we have far older edition) is a more ancient text.

The Dead Sea Scrolls also did not provide an entire old Testament, so still the latest complete Hebrew Old Testament is 10th century AD.

Any edition that claimed to go back to the Hebrew (before 1950) was going back to texts which were newer than the Latin Vulgate, even if it sounds older.

If you look at what Knox did (other critiques aside), he only uses the Greek or Hebrew when the Latin is not clear or where there are debates on a particular passage, and usually then he renders a probably Latin reading with a footnote explaining. That, in fact, is the most historically accurate way of doing it.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 4 Guest(s)