When choosing your next Bible, It's all in the details. Know your Bible criteria before choosing ?
Feb 15, 2019 17:47:09 #
10/16/2016 What is the best Catholic Bible version and Bible criteria for choosing the Bible for you ? (Part 1)
When Choosing your next Bible learn the details.
Bible Canon, T***slation Principle, Formal Equivalence, Dynamic Equivalence, Paraphrase, and Biblical Greek T***slation Text Type.
Joe Fessenden
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-best-Catholic-Bible-version
Some thoughts on principles and English t***slations Bibles, but “best” is just not something that can be said because of all the Bible variations and t***slations.
How best to choose your English t***slation Bible criteria
Canon
This is the only really important one without different options.
You should make sure you have a bible that includes the full Canon of Scripture, that is, 46 Old Testament and 27 New Testament books. I am not going to engage in the debate about which canon is correct, here. Since you asked for the Catholic Bible, this is the canon.
T***slation Principle -
There are four basic t***slation principles used in scriptural t***slations. (I’m simplifying a bit, here, but you didn’t ask for a complete treatise on scriptural methodology.)
1. Formal Equivalence -
This is the most precise t***slation. It seeks to render the text as precisely from the original text as possible. There is a sort of formal equivalence on steroids that is a literal t***slation; these take each word and t***slate it then do as little as humanly possible to make sentences form.
2. Dynamic Equivalence -
This takes thoughts and phrases and t***slates them in a more thought-by-thought process. It renders an often easier-to-read bible, but it sometimes lacks the precision necessary for real deep study since specific words are sometimes important.
3. Paraphrase -
This is, as the name implies, a paraphrase of the bible itself. It’s GREAT for stories and readability, less so for study. I include the bible I give to kids as a default in this (The Picture Bible or The Action Bible, depending on age group). This category includes adult bibles ranging from The Message to complete adaptations like The Cotton Patch Gospel.
4. Biblical Text Greek T***slation Type:
1. Septuagint text-type e.g. Alexandrian text-type - Chisianus 45 version which was written around 200-150 B.C.
The Septuagint abbreviation (LXX), the ancient (first centuries BC) Alexandrian t***slation of Jewish scriptures into earliest Greek t***slation Koine Greek, which exists in various manuscript versions of the Old Testament from the original Hebrew.
The Septuagint was presumably made for the Jewish community in Egypt when Greek was the common language throughout the region. In the most ancient copies of the Bible which contain the Septuagint version of the Old Testament, the Book of Daniel is not the original Septuagint version, but instead is a copy of Theodotion's t***slation from the Hebrew, which more closely resembles the Masoretic text.
1 Timothy 6:20
Guard what has been entrusted to your care. Turn away from godless chatter and the opposing ideas of what is falsely called knowledge,
The Alexandrian text-type (also called Neutral or Egyptian), associated with Alexandria, is one of several text-types used in New Testament textual criticism to describe and group the textual characters of biblical manuscripts.
The Vatican Apostolic Library (Latin: Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana, more commonly called the Vatican Library is the library of the Holy See, located in Vatican City.
Formally established in 1475, although it is much older, it is one of the oldest libraries in the world and contains one of the most significant collections of historical texts.
It has 75,000 codices from throughout history, as well as 1.1 million printed books, which include some 8,500 incunabula.
In March 2014, the Vatican Library began an initial four-year project of digitising its collection of manuscripts, to be made available online.
The Vatican Secret Archives were separated from the library at the beginning of the 17th century; they contain another 150,000 items.
2. The Byzantine text-type (also called Majority Text, Traditional Text, Ecclesiastical Text, Constantinopolitan Text, Antiocheian Text, or Syrian Text) is one of several text-types used in textual criticism to describe the textual character of Greek New Testament manuscripts.
What is the Majority Text? The Democratic method, of textual criticism that uses the “majority rules”
https://www.gotquestions.org/majority-text.html
The Greek text as presented is what biblical scholars refer to as the "critical text". The critical text is an eclectic text compiled by a committee that compares readings from a large number of manuscripts in order to determine which reading is most likely to be closest to the original.
3. Textus Receptus (Latin: "Received Text") is the name given to the succession of printed Greek texts of the New Testament. ... Stanley Porter explains, "The Textus Receptus is any form of the Greek text that goes back to the edition of Erasmus and the several late manuscripts he used.
The biblical Textus Receptus constituted the t***slation-base for the original German Luther Bible, the t***slation of the extant New Testament into English by William Tyndale, the King James Version in 1611 and in 1769. The Spanish Reina-Valera t***slation, and most Reformation-era New Testament KIV t***slations is a copy of Theodotion's t***slation from the Hebrew, which more closely resembles the Masoretic Text.
The English Standard Version (ESV) is an Majority Text T***slation. English t***slation of the Bible published in 2001 by Crossway. It is a revision of the Revised Standard Version that employs an "essentially literal" democratic t***slation philosophy.
B. F. Westcott and F. J. A. Hort, Greek Text T***slation.
They preferred to label the ancestor of the Alexandrian text type the “Neutral text,” meaning that it was relatively unchanged and successively became the more corrupt type of text that they identified as the Alexandrian text.
The so-called Neutral text, chiefly represented by the fourth-century codices Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, formed the basis of their The New Testament in the Original Greek (1881).
This Bible Greek Text edition—which in Westcott and Hort’s view represented the most accurate and authentic version of the New Testament in the original language available in their day—furnished the death blow to the traditional text published by Erasmus in 1516, also known as Textus Receptus (the “received text”), which had dominated Greek editions and, indirectly, Bible t***slations (most famously the King James Version) for hundreds of years.
Although the theory of text types still prevails in current text-critical practice, some scholars have recently called to abandon the concept altogether in light of new computer-assisted methods for determining manuscript relationships in a more exact way.
To be sure, there is already a consensus that the various geographic locations traditionally assigned to the text types are incorrect and misleading.
The Greek text as presented is what biblical scholars refer to as the "critical text". The critical text is an eclectic text compiled by a committee that compares readings from a large number of manuscripts in order to determine which reading is most likely to be closest to the original.
Thus “Western text” is not the only misnomer: the geographical labels of the other text types should be considered with suspicion, too. Some scholars prefer to refer to the text types as “textual clusters.”
The Textus Receptus is very similar to the Majority Text, but there are in fact hundreds of differences between the Majority Text and the Textus Receptus.
The Textus Receptus was compiled and edited by Erasmus in the 16th century. Erasmus used several Greek manuscripts, which were eastern / Byzantine in nature.
This explains why the Textus Receptus is very similar to the Majority Text. However, Erasmus by no means had access to all of the Greek manuscripts, so there was no way he could develop a true Majority Text.
The Textus Receptus is based on a very limited number of manuscripts, all of them eastern, and all of them dating to around the 12th century. As a result, compared to the Electic Text and the Majority Text, the Textus Receptus is far less likely to have the most accurate reading.
In the Novum Testamentum Graece (The New Testament KIV in Greek) these differences are known as ‘varients' methods are used to conclude which reading is most likely the original one. This process of determining the most likely reading is known as 'text criticism.’
(End Part 1)
When Choosing your next Bible learn the details.
Bible Canon, T***slation Principle, Formal Equivalence, Dynamic Equivalence, Paraphrase, and Biblical Greek T***slation Text Type.
Joe Fessenden
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-best-Catholic-Bible-version
Some thoughts on principles and English t***slations Bibles, but “best” is just not something that can be said because of all the Bible variations and t***slations.
How best to choose your English t***slation Bible criteria
Canon
This is the only really important one without different options.
You should make sure you have a bible that includes the full Canon of Scripture, that is, 46 Old Testament and 27 New Testament books. I am not going to engage in the debate about which canon is correct, here. Since you asked for the Catholic Bible, this is the canon.
T***slation Principle -
There are four basic t***slation principles used in scriptural t***slations. (I’m simplifying a bit, here, but you didn’t ask for a complete treatise on scriptural methodology.)
1. Formal Equivalence -
This is the most precise t***slation. It seeks to render the text as precisely from the original text as possible. There is a sort of formal equivalence on steroids that is a literal t***slation; these take each word and t***slate it then do as little as humanly possible to make sentences form.
2. Dynamic Equivalence -
This takes thoughts and phrases and t***slates them in a more thought-by-thought process. It renders an often easier-to-read bible, but it sometimes lacks the precision necessary for real deep study since specific words are sometimes important.
3. Paraphrase -
This is, as the name implies, a paraphrase of the bible itself. It’s GREAT for stories and readability, less so for study. I include the bible I give to kids as a default in this (The Picture Bible or The Action Bible, depending on age group). This category includes adult bibles ranging from The Message to complete adaptations like The Cotton Patch Gospel.
4. Biblical Text Greek T***slation Type:
1. Septuagint text-type e.g. Alexandrian text-type - Chisianus 45 version which was written around 200-150 B.C.
The Septuagint abbreviation (LXX), the ancient (first centuries BC) Alexandrian t***slation of Jewish scriptures into earliest Greek t***slation Koine Greek, which exists in various manuscript versions of the Old Testament from the original Hebrew.
The Septuagint was presumably made for the Jewish community in Egypt when Greek was the common language throughout the region. In the most ancient copies of the Bible which contain the Septuagint version of the Old Testament, the Book of Daniel is not the original Septuagint version, but instead is a copy of Theodotion's t***slation from the Hebrew, which more closely resembles the Masoretic text.
1 Timothy 6:20
Guard what has been entrusted to your care. Turn away from godless chatter and the opposing ideas of what is falsely called knowledge,
The Alexandrian text-type (also called Neutral or Egyptian), associated with Alexandria, is one of several text-types used in New Testament textual criticism to describe and group the textual characters of biblical manuscripts.
The Vatican Apostolic Library (Latin: Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana, more commonly called the Vatican Library is the library of the Holy See, located in Vatican City.
Formally established in 1475, although it is much older, it is one of the oldest libraries in the world and contains one of the most significant collections of historical texts.
It has 75,000 codices from throughout history, as well as 1.1 million printed books, which include some 8,500 incunabula.
In March 2014, the Vatican Library began an initial four-year project of digitising its collection of manuscripts, to be made available online.
The Vatican Secret Archives were separated from the library at the beginning of the 17th century; they contain another 150,000 items.
2. The Byzantine text-type (also called Majority Text, Traditional Text, Ecclesiastical Text, Constantinopolitan Text, Antiocheian Text, or Syrian Text) is one of several text-types used in textual criticism to describe the textual character of Greek New Testament manuscripts.
What is the Majority Text? The Democratic method, of textual criticism that uses the “majority rules”
https://www.gotquestions.org/majority-text.html
The Greek text as presented is what biblical scholars refer to as the "critical text". The critical text is an eclectic text compiled by a committee that compares readings from a large number of manuscripts in order to determine which reading is most likely to be closest to the original.
3. Textus Receptus (Latin: "Received Text") is the name given to the succession of printed Greek texts of the New Testament. ... Stanley Porter explains, "The Textus Receptus is any form of the Greek text that goes back to the edition of Erasmus and the several late manuscripts he used.
The biblical Textus Receptus constituted the t***slation-base for the original German Luther Bible, the t***slation of the extant New Testament into English by William Tyndale, the King James Version in 1611 and in 1769. The Spanish Reina-Valera t***slation, and most Reformation-era New Testament KIV t***slations is a copy of Theodotion's t***slation from the Hebrew, which more closely resembles the Masoretic Text.
The English Standard Version (ESV) is an Majority Text T***slation. English t***slation of the Bible published in 2001 by Crossway. It is a revision of the Revised Standard Version that employs an "essentially literal" democratic t***slation philosophy.
B. F. Westcott and F. J. A. Hort, Greek Text T***slation.
They preferred to label the ancestor of the Alexandrian text type the “Neutral text,” meaning that it was relatively unchanged and successively became the more corrupt type of text that they identified as the Alexandrian text.
The so-called Neutral text, chiefly represented by the fourth-century codices Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, formed the basis of their The New Testament in the Original Greek (1881).
This Bible Greek Text edition—which in Westcott and Hort’s view represented the most accurate and authentic version of the New Testament in the original language available in their day—furnished the death blow to the traditional text published by Erasmus in 1516, also known as Textus Receptus (the “received text”), which had dominated Greek editions and, indirectly, Bible t***slations (most famously the King James Version) for hundreds of years.
Although the theory of text types still prevails in current text-critical practice, some scholars have recently called to abandon the concept altogether in light of new computer-assisted methods for determining manuscript relationships in a more exact way.
To be sure, there is already a consensus that the various geographic locations traditionally assigned to the text types are incorrect and misleading.
The Greek text as presented is what biblical scholars refer to as the "critical text". The critical text is an eclectic text compiled by a committee that compares readings from a large number of manuscripts in order to determine which reading is most likely to be closest to the original.
Thus “Western text” is not the only misnomer: the geographical labels of the other text types should be considered with suspicion, too. Some scholars prefer to refer to the text types as “textual clusters.”
The Textus Receptus is very similar to the Majority Text, but there are in fact hundreds of differences between the Majority Text and the Textus Receptus.
The Textus Receptus was compiled and edited by Erasmus in the 16th century. Erasmus used several Greek manuscripts, which were eastern / Byzantine in nature.
This explains why the Textus Receptus is very similar to the Majority Text. However, Erasmus by no means had access to all of the Greek manuscripts, so there was no way he could develop a true Majority Text.
The Textus Receptus is based on a very limited number of manuscripts, all of them eastern, and all of them dating to around the 12th century. As a result, compared to the Electic Text and the Majority Text, the Textus Receptus is far less likely to have the most accurate reading.
In the Novum Testamentum Graece (The New Testament KIV in Greek) these differences are known as ‘varients' methods are used to conclude which reading is most likely the original one. This process of determining the most likely reading is known as 'text criticism.’
(End Part 1)
Feb 15, 2019 17:49:38 #
10/16/2016 What is the best Catholic Bible version and Bible criteria for choosing the Bible for you ? (Part 2)
When Choosing your next Bible learn the details.
Bible Canon, T***slation Principle, Formal Equivalence, Dynamic Equivalence, Paraphrase, and Biblical Greek T***slation Text Type.
Joe Fessenden
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-best-Catholic-Bible-version
The Greek text as presented is what biblical scholars refer to as the "critical text". The critical text is an eclectic text compiled by a committee that compares readings from a large number of manuscripts in order to determine which reading is most likely to be closest to the original.
4. The Masoretic Greek Text and Theodotion Greek text (MT or 𝕸) is the [/b]authoritative Hebrew and Aramaic text[/b] of the 24 books of Tanakh for Rabbinic Judaism. ... The Masoretic Text defines the Jewish canon and its precise letter-text, with its vocalization and accentuation known as the Masorah.
The Masoretes were rabbis who made it their special work to correct the faults that had crept into the text of the Old Testament during the Babylonian captivity, and to prevent, for the future, its being corrupted by any alteration.
They first separated the apocryphal from the canonical books, and divided the latter into twenty-two books, being the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet. Then they divided each book into sections and verses.
There is a great difference of opinion as to when the Masoretic Text was written, but it was probably accomplished in the 10th -11th century.
Several editions existed, varying considerably, but the received and authoritative text is that of Jacob ben-chayim ibn Adonijah, who carefully sifted and arranged the previous works on the subject. It was published in 1524.
Although the existing copies of the Masoretic Text date back only to the tenth century, two other important textual evidences bolster the confidence of textual critics that it is accurate.
The first is the successive discoveries of manuscripts at Qumran by the Dead Sea since 1947. These revealed portions of manuscripts several centuries older than any previously known.
The second is the comparison of the Masoretic text to the Greek t***slation called the Septuagint (or LXX), which was written around 200-150 B.C. The oldest existing manuscripts date back to the fourth century A.D.
Both the Septuagint and the Dead Sea Scrolls reveal an amazing consistency with the Masoretic Text, assuring us that God was indeed divinely and sovereignly protecting His Word through thousands of years of copying and t***slating.
b. Oregenes Adamantius, Greek T***slation Hexapla (“Sixfold”) Text. The multiplication of versions doubtless proved to be a source of increasing confusion in the 3rd century early historians assign his work of t***slation to c. 180–190 A.D. Which is a synopsis of six versions of the Old Testament.
Origen is a Catholic Church Father was an early Christian scholar, ascetic, and theologian. He was a prolific writer who wrote roughly 2,000 treatises in multiple branches of theology, including textual criticism, biblical exegesis and biblical hermeneutics, homiletics, and spirituality. He was one of the most influential figures in early Christian theology, apologetics, and asceticism. '
He has been described as "the greatest genius the early church ever produced.”
c. Theodotion, Greek T***slation Hexapla text, Early historians assign his work of t***slation to 230 and 240 CE, Hellenistic Jewish scholar and linguist and author of a Greek t***slation of the Old Testament.
Theodotion’s Greek T***slation Text version appeared in the sixth column of Origen’s Hexapla, a 3rd-century version of the Old Testament presenting six Greek and Hebrew texts in parallel columns.
It is not so much an independent t***slation as a revision of the Septuagint— But the earliest Greek t***slation, dating in part from the 3rd century BC—supplying its omissions.
Peculiar Hebrew words are not t***slated but t***sliterated into Greek letters, either in order to avoid conjectural readings or to give an authentic colour to the version.
The popularity of Theodotion’s t***slation in the early church can be deduced from its fragments that fill gaps in the Septuagint text of Jeremiah and from its version of Daniel that replaces the Septuagint t***slation.
It was quoted in the 2nd century in "The Shepherd of Hermas and by the Christian apologist Justin Martyr.
The replacement of Daniel was so thorough that only two manuscripts (one of about the 3rd century and one of the 11th century) of the Greek Old Testament contain the Septuagint version.
The Theodotion’s version of Daniel may go back to an older t***slation. The extant manuscripts of the Theodotion text were published in 1875.
d. The t***slation of Symmachus Greek T***slation 6th century work. Another Greek t***slation an otherwise unknown scholar, who made use of his predecessors. His influence was small, other than that, his t***slation is known largely through fragments of the Hexapla.
e. The Aleppo Greek Text (Hebrew: כֶּתֶר אֲרָם צוֹבָא Keter Aram Tzova or Crown of Aleppo) is a medieval bound manuscript of the Hebrew Bible.
The codex was written in the city of Tiberias, in what is currently northern Israel, in the 10th century C.E., and was endorsed for its accuracy by Maimonides.
The oldest extant manuscripts date from around the 9th century. The Aleppo Codex (once the oldest-known complete copy but now missing the Torah) dates from the 10th century.
The Masoretic Text defines the Jewish canon and its precise letter-text, with its vocalization and accentuation known as the Masorah.
A Few Examples:
1. Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (RSVCE) - older t***slation, formal equivalency
2. New Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (NRSVCE) - as the name implies, updated t***slation of RSVCE.
3. New American Bible Revised Edition (NABRE) - T***slated and published under the authority of the USCCB. Somewhere between formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence.
This is an update to the liturgical Bible for the Church in the United States.
4. Jerusalem Bible/New Jerusalem Bible - These are strict dynamic equivalence t***slations. This is the liturgical Bible for most of the English-speaking world.
These are a little unique because it is influenced by a prior French t***slation from the École Biblique in Jerusalem.
They are, nonetheless, lovely t***slations for devotional purposes, and I have a hardcover copy of both.
5. Douay-Rheims - This is a t***slation from the Latin Vulgate to English. It is handy to see what the tradition of the Church and the Latin used for centuries for liturgical purposes said.
My comments and what I use:
I use a software package for my deep work, so I am able to do a lot of cross referencing.
Any Scripture scholar (of which I am not one - just a student) does extensive cross-referencing in t***slations as well as working with original texts/manuscripts (which have their own set of challenges).
My starting point is usually NRSV.
I will say that there are some issues I have with the NRSV that make it require a little care.
My go-to example is the fact that “Son of Man” is rendered as “Human Being” in Daniel, which removes some of the linguistic parallels between Christ and that book.
Catholics are perfectly happy using any good t***slation of Scripture, and we usually look quite a bit to modern t***slations based on careful scholarship and text criticism of original languages.
When I am doing research,
I frequently have several t***slations in front of me including NABRE, RSV, NRSV, Vulgate (both Clementine and New), Douay-Rheims (to see what the Latin text said), and I sometimes reference Jerusalem and New Jerusalem (even though both are a little outdated and use dynamic equivalence).
I also have references to original Greek and English texts (in a few different versions) available.
Some others I reference when I need more for comparison:
Lexham English Bible (LEB), The Cambridge Paragraph Bible of the Authorized English Version (KJV), English Standard Version (ESV), 1901 American Standard Version (ASV), Tanakh: The Holy Scriptures (1985), Tanakh: The Holy Scriptures according to the Masoretic Text (1917), The Holy Bible: King James Version (KJV), The King James Version Apocrypha (KJVA), The Message (Complete OT/NT) (MSG), The NET Bible (NET), Young's Literal T***slation (YLT), The Good News T***slation with Apocrypha.
Commentaries:
Whether you are reading for devotion, bible study, or research, commentaries can be very useful.
Even in devotional reading, I frequently peek at a commentary to get some starting point or other ideas to play with.
(End Part 2)
When Choosing your next Bible learn the details.
Bible Canon, T***slation Principle, Formal Equivalence, Dynamic Equivalence, Paraphrase, and Biblical Greek T***slation Text Type.
Joe Fessenden
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-best-Catholic-Bible-version
The Greek text as presented is what biblical scholars refer to as the "critical text". The critical text is an eclectic text compiled by a committee that compares readings from a large number of manuscripts in order to determine which reading is most likely to be closest to the original.
4. The Masoretic Greek Text and Theodotion Greek text (MT or 𝕸) is the [/b]authoritative Hebrew and Aramaic text[/b] of the 24 books of Tanakh for Rabbinic Judaism. ... The Masoretic Text defines the Jewish canon and its precise letter-text, with its vocalization and accentuation known as the Masorah.
The Masoretes were rabbis who made it their special work to correct the faults that had crept into the text of the Old Testament during the Babylonian captivity, and to prevent, for the future, its being corrupted by any alteration.
They first separated the apocryphal from the canonical books, and divided the latter into twenty-two books, being the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet. Then they divided each book into sections and verses.
There is a great difference of opinion as to when the Masoretic Text was written, but it was probably accomplished in the 10th -11th century.
Several editions existed, varying considerably, but the received and authoritative text is that of Jacob ben-chayim ibn Adonijah, who carefully sifted and arranged the previous works on the subject. It was published in 1524.
Although the existing copies of the Masoretic Text date back only to the tenth century, two other important textual evidences bolster the confidence of textual critics that it is accurate.
The first is the successive discoveries of manuscripts at Qumran by the Dead Sea since 1947. These revealed portions of manuscripts several centuries older than any previously known.
The second is the comparison of the Masoretic text to the Greek t***slation called the Septuagint (or LXX), which was written around 200-150 B.C. The oldest existing manuscripts date back to the fourth century A.D.
Both the Septuagint and the Dead Sea Scrolls reveal an amazing consistency with the Masoretic Text, assuring us that God was indeed divinely and sovereignly protecting His Word through thousands of years of copying and t***slating.
b. Oregenes Adamantius, Greek T***slation Hexapla (“Sixfold”) Text. The multiplication of versions doubtless proved to be a source of increasing confusion in the 3rd century early historians assign his work of t***slation to c. 180–190 A.D. Which is a synopsis of six versions of the Old Testament.
Origen is a Catholic Church Father was an early Christian scholar, ascetic, and theologian. He was a prolific writer who wrote roughly 2,000 treatises in multiple branches of theology, including textual criticism, biblical exegesis and biblical hermeneutics, homiletics, and spirituality. He was one of the most influential figures in early Christian theology, apologetics, and asceticism. '
He has been described as "the greatest genius the early church ever produced.”
c. Theodotion, Greek T***slation Hexapla text, Early historians assign his work of t***slation to 230 and 240 CE, Hellenistic Jewish scholar and linguist and author of a Greek t***slation of the Old Testament.
Theodotion’s Greek T***slation Text version appeared in the sixth column of Origen’s Hexapla, a 3rd-century version of the Old Testament presenting six Greek and Hebrew texts in parallel columns.
It is not so much an independent t***slation as a revision of the Septuagint— But the earliest Greek t***slation, dating in part from the 3rd century BC—supplying its omissions.
Peculiar Hebrew words are not t***slated but t***sliterated into Greek letters, either in order to avoid conjectural readings or to give an authentic colour to the version.
The popularity of Theodotion’s t***slation in the early church can be deduced from its fragments that fill gaps in the Septuagint text of Jeremiah and from its version of Daniel that replaces the Septuagint t***slation.
It was quoted in the 2nd century in "The Shepherd of Hermas and by the Christian apologist Justin Martyr.
The replacement of Daniel was so thorough that only two manuscripts (one of about the 3rd century and one of the 11th century) of the Greek Old Testament contain the Septuagint version.
The Theodotion’s version of Daniel may go back to an older t***slation. The extant manuscripts of the Theodotion text were published in 1875.
d. The t***slation of Symmachus Greek T***slation 6th century work. Another Greek t***slation an otherwise unknown scholar, who made use of his predecessors. His influence was small, other than that, his t***slation is known largely through fragments of the Hexapla.
e. The Aleppo Greek Text (Hebrew: כֶּתֶר אֲרָם צוֹבָא Keter Aram Tzova or Crown of Aleppo) is a medieval bound manuscript of the Hebrew Bible.
The codex was written in the city of Tiberias, in what is currently northern Israel, in the 10th century C.E., and was endorsed for its accuracy by Maimonides.
The oldest extant manuscripts date from around the 9th century. The Aleppo Codex (once the oldest-known complete copy but now missing the Torah) dates from the 10th century.
The Masoretic Text defines the Jewish canon and its precise letter-text, with its vocalization and accentuation known as the Masorah.
A Few Examples:
1. Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (RSVCE) - older t***slation, formal equivalency
2. New Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (NRSVCE) - as the name implies, updated t***slation of RSVCE.
3. New American Bible Revised Edition (NABRE) - T***slated and published under the authority of the USCCB. Somewhere between formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence.
This is an update to the liturgical Bible for the Church in the United States.
4. Jerusalem Bible/New Jerusalem Bible - These are strict dynamic equivalence t***slations. This is the liturgical Bible for most of the English-speaking world.
These are a little unique because it is influenced by a prior French t***slation from the École Biblique in Jerusalem.
They are, nonetheless, lovely t***slations for devotional purposes, and I have a hardcover copy of both.
5. Douay-Rheims - This is a t***slation from the Latin Vulgate to English. It is handy to see what the tradition of the Church and the Latin used for centuries for liturgical purposes said.
My comments and what I use:
I use a software package for my deep work, so I am able to do a lot of cross referencing.
Any Scripture scholar (of which I am not one - just a student) does extensive cross-referencing in t***slations as well as working with original texts/manuscripts (which have their own set of challenges).
My starting point is usually NRSV.
I will say that there are some issues I have with the NRSV that make it require a little care.
My go-to example is the fact that “Son of Man” is rendered as “Human Being” in Daniel, which removes some of the linguistic parallels between Christ and that book.
Catholics are perfectly happy using any good t***slation of Scripture, and we usually look quite a bit to modern t***slations based on careful scholarship and text criticism of original languages.
When I am doing research,
I frequently have several t***slations in front of me including NABRE, RSV, NRSV, Vulgate (both Clementine and New), Douay-Rheims (to see what the Latin text said), and I sometimes reference Jerusalem and New Jerusalem (even though both are a little outdated and use dynamic equivalence).
I also have references to original Greek and English texts (in a few different versions) available.
Some others I reference when I need more for comparison:
Lexham English Bible (LEB), The Cambridge Paragraph Bible of the Authorized English Version (KJV), English Standard Version (ESV), 1901 American Standard Version (ASV), Tanakh: The Holy Scriptures (1985), Tanakh: The Holy Scriptures according to the Masoretic Text (1917), The Holy Bible: King James Version (KJV), The King James Version Apocrypha (KJVA), The Message (Complete OT/NT) (MSG), The NET Bible (NET), Young's Literal T***slation (YLT), The Good News T***slation with Apocrypha.
Commentaries:
Whether you are reading for devotion, bible study, or research, commentaries can be very useful.
Even in devotional reading, I frequently peek at a commentary to get some starting point or other ideas to play with.
(End Part 2)
Feb 15, 2019 17:54:24 #
10/16/2016 What is the best Catholic Bible version and Bible criteria for choosing the Bible for you ? (Part 3)
When Choosing your next Bible learn the details.
Bible Canon, T***slation Principle, Formal Equivalence, Dynamic Equivalence, Paraphrase, and Biblical Greek T***slation Text Type.
Joe Fessenden
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-best-Catholic-Bible-version
This is especially helpful with some of the more confusing passages. Here are some of the commentaries I find particularly handy.
1. The Great Commentary of Cornelius A' Lapide (Awesome name, huh - he didn’t actually call it that, he wasn’t THAT egotistical) -
This one is a wonderful devotional starter (and it’s available free online).
2. Catena Aurea (at least for the Gospels) - This is Thomas Aquinas compilation of comments from the Church Fathers on the Gospels in a verse by verse format.
3. Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture - This is a contemporary scholarly commentary if you want real solid contemporary research.
03/14/2016 What is the difference between the King James bible and the Roman Catholic version?
Ian MacKinnell,
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-the-King-James-bible-and-the-Roman-Catholic-version
What most people think of as the King James Bible (KJB) is not the Bible published under King James, but a later cut-down edition of it.
In the 1600s it was normal for the KJB to include the books of the Apocrypha, which were regarded as edifying books, though not authoritative, in the Anglican Church.
The Puritans ruled against the Apocrypha being included in the KJB, and then later - when cheaper printing allowed mass production of bibles for popular use - it was easier (cheaper) to print the KJB without the Apocrypha, which especially appealed to the growing number of non-Anglican Protestants and became the common practice.
It is still quite possible to buy a KJB with Apocrypha:
So the original KJB included roughly all the books that are found in Catholic Bibles, though separating the Apocryphal books from the rest of the Old Testament.
The usual versions of the KJB printed today, by leaving out the Apocrypha, are more obviously different to Catholic versions of the Bible by having fewer books.
Most readers of the KJB would not even be aware that the original KJB contained more books than their bibles do.
But it is the KJB that effectively moved away from the Apocrypha over time, not the Catholic bible.
There is no single Catholic t***slation of the Bible into English. Indeed, there are Catholic editions of some descendants of the KJB and other popular "Protestant" t***slations: both the "Good News for Modern Man" and the Revised Standard Version of the Bible have Catholic editions including the Apocrypha.
The New English Bible also came in editions with the Apocrypha, as do various newer t***slations.
As Catholics do use several English versions of the Bible also used by Protestants, as noted above, there really is no textual difference between "Catholic" and "Protestant" bibles other than the definition of the canon (the list of authoritative books).
As far as I am aware, Catholics do not use the KJB because there were more modern t***slations available when the Catholic Churches in America, the UK, Canada, Australia, etc took up worship in English (especially after Vatican 2 which coincided with the Catholic t***slation called the Jerusalem Bible).
So the KJB has never had the traditional place within English-speaking Catholicism that it does in the English-speaking Protestant churches, but they do use some of the same English versions as Protestants.
For use in the Liturgy (that is, at Mass):
Revised Standard Version
Jerusalem Bible
New Jerusalem Bible*
New Revised Standard Version*
Grail Psalter (1963)
Grail Psalter (revised 1993)*
For the Divine Office:
Jerusalem Bible
Knox Bible
New English Bible
Revised Standard Version
The Grail Psalter (1963) is used for the Psalms.
Canticles are taken from:
Grail Psalter
Jerusalem Bible
Revised Standard Version
These versions may only be used for individual local celebrations and may not be used to produce a Lectionary (full set of readings)
The question of references the Codex Sinaiticus, which was discovered by Constantin von Tischendorf.
In its discovered form, it consisted of about one-half of the Old Testament and also the New Testament.
So, as a present day manuscript it is not a complete Bible.
Its Old Testament is considered to be based upon the Septuagint (LXX).
It should be noted that that the Dead Sea scrolls contain Old Testament manuscripts that are much older than the Sinaiticus.
Count Tischendorf considered the Sinaiticus to be the oldest copy of the Bible.
However, the Codex Vaticanus, is generally considered to be a few years older.
As to the alleged 14,800 differences between this manuscript and the King James Bible:
* There is a bit less than 1200 years difference in their production.
* To respond to the question, as written, one would have to identify the actual manuscript used by the KJV for each difference.
* Alleged differences between the various Biblical manuscripts of this magnitude generally are not of consequence as to the actual text and are often simple scribal errors which can easily be recognized.
Does the oldest text show the original just because it is old ?
Is the Alexandrian Text what the Bible Writers wrote ?
a. Codex-Sinaiticus, 4th century Bible Manuscript
http://CodexSinaiticus,4th-century-biblical-manuscript
b. Codex-Sinaiticus, Britannica.com
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Codex-Sinaiticus
c. The Masoretic Text ? Masoretic text, Jewish Bible
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Masoretic-text
d. biblical literature - New Testament canon, texts, and versions
https://www.britannica.com/topic/biblical-literature/New-Testament-canon-texts-and-versions
(End Part 3)
When Choosing your next Bible learn the details.
Bible Canon, T***slation Principle, Formal Equivalence, Dynamic Equivalence, Paraphrase, and Biblical Greek T***slation Text Type.
Joe Fessenden
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-best-Catholic-Bible-version
This is especially helpful with some of the more confusing passages. Here are some of the commentaries I find particularly handy.
1. The Great Commentary of Cornelius A' Lapide (Awesome name, huh - he didn’t actually call it that, he wasn’t THAT egotistical) -
This one is a wonderful devotional starter (and it’s available free online).
2. Catena Aurea (at least for the Gospels) - This is Thomas Aquinas compilation of comments from the Church Fathers on the Gospels in a verse by verse format.
3. Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture - This is a contemporary scholarly commentary if you want real solid contemporary research.
03/14/2016 What is the difference between the King James bible and the Roman Catholic version?
Ian MacKinnell,
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-the-King-James-bible-and-the-Roman-Catholic-version
What most people think of as the King James Bible (KJB) is not the Bible published under King James, but a later cut-down edition of it.
In the 1600s it was normal for the KJB to include the books of the Apocrypha, which were regarded as edifying books, though not authoritative, in the Anglican Church.
The Puritans ruled against the Apocrypha being included in the KJB, and then later - when cheaper printing allowed mass production of bibles for popular use - it was easier (cheaper) to print the KJB without the Apocrypha, which especially appealed to the growing number of non-Anglican Protestants and became the common practice.
It is still quite possible to buy a KJB with Apocrypha:
So the original KJB included roughly all the books that are found in Catholic Bibles, though separating the Apocryphal books from the rest of the Old Testament.
The usual versions of the KJB printed today, by leaving out the Apocrypha, are more obviously different to Catholic versions of the Bible by having fewer books.
Most readers of the KJB would not even be aware that the original KJB contained more books than their bibles do.
But it is the KJB that effectively moved away from the Apocrypha over time, not the Catholic bible.
There is no single Catholic t***slation of the Bible into English. Indeed, there are Catholic editions of some descendants of the KJB and other popular "Protestant" t***slations: both the "Good News for Modern Man" and the Revised Standard Version of the Bible have Catholic editions including the Apocrypha.
The New English Bible also came in editions with the Apocrypha, as do various newer t***slations.
As Catholics do use several English versions of the Bible also used by Protestants, as noted above, there really is no textual difference between "Catholic" and "Protestant" bibles other than the definition of the canon (the list of authoritative books).
As far as I am aware, Catholics do not use the KJB because there were more modern t***slations available when the Catholic Churches in America, the UK, Canada, Australia, etc took up worship in English (especially after Vatican 2 which coincided with the Catholic t***slation called the Jerusalem Bible).
So the KJB has never had the traditional place within English-speaking Catholicism that it does in the English-speaking Protestant churches, but they do use some of the same English versions as Protestants.
For use in the Liturgy (that is, at Mass):
Revised Standard Version
Jerusalem Bible
New Jerusalem Bible*
New Revised Standard Version*
Grail Psalter (1963)
Grail Psalter (revised 1993)*
For the Divine Office:
Jerusalem Bible
Knox Bible
New English Bible
Revised Standard Version
The Grail Psalter (1963) is used for the Psalms.
Canticles are taken from:
Grail Psalter
Jerusalem Bible
Revised Standard Version
These versions may only be used for individual local celebrations and may not be used to produce a Lectionary (full set of readings)
The question of references the Codex Sinaiticus, which was discovered by Constantin von Tischendorf.
In its discovered form, it consisted of about one-half of the Old Testament and also the New Testament.
So, as a present day manuscript it is not a complete Bible.
Its Old Testament is considered to be based upon the Septuagint (LXX).
It should be noted that that the Dead Sea scrolls contain Old Testament manuscripts that are much older than the Sinaiticus.
Count Tischendorf considered the Sinaiticus to be the oldest copy of the Bible.
However, the Codex Vaticanus, is generally considered to be a few years older.
As to the alleged 14,800 differences between this manuscript and the King James Bible:
* There is a bit less than 1200 years difference in their production.
* To respond to the question, as written, one would have to identify the actual manuscript used by the KJV for each difference.
* Alleged differences between the various Biblical manuscripts of this magnitude generally are not of consequence as to the actual text and are often simple scribal errors which can easily be recognized.
Does the oldest text show the original just because it is old ?
Is the Alexandrian Text what the Bible Writers wrote ?
a. Codex-Sinaiticus, 4th century Bible Manuscript
http://CodexSinaiticus,4th-century-biblical-manuscript
b. Codex-Sinaiticus, Britannica.com
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Codex-Sinaiticus
c. The Masoretic Text ? Masoretic text, Jewish Bible
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Masoretic-text
d. biblical literature - New Testament canon, texts, and versions
https://www.britannica.com/topic/biblical-literature/New-Testament-canon-texts-and-versions
(End Part 3)
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.