Differences in Translation Given Manuscript Discoveries

[ralfyman]

Given the discovery of manuscripts during the last few decades, what is the percentage of differences, or how significant were the changes, in translation from the RSV to the NRSV, from the NAB to the NABRE, and from the Jerusalem Bible to the New Jerusalem Bible?

 

[Jude1:3Contendforthefaith]

If you are looking for a readable modern spelling Pre Bishop Challoner version of The 1610 A.D. Douay Rheims Bible made from The Latin Vulgate this is a good place to find it :

They are available thanks to the work of Dr. William von Peters.
The REAL Rheims New Testament

Part 1 Old Testament
The Original & True Douay Old Testament of Anno Domini 1610 volume 1 by Dr. William von Peters (Paperback) — Lulu CA

Part 2 Old Testament
The Original & True Douay Old Testament of Anno Domini 1610 volume 2 by Dr. William von Peters (Paperback) — Lulu CA

Part 3 Old Testament
The Original & True Douay Old Testament of Anno Domini 1610 volume 3 by Dr. William von Peters (Paperback) — Lulu CA

Part 4 New Testament
The Original and True Rheims New Testament of Anno Domini 1582 by Dr. William von Peters (Paperback) — Lulu CA

There is also another readable modern spelling Pre Bishop Challoner version of The Douai Rheims Bible called "The New Douai Rheims" made by Straightway Ministries. It's missing The Apocrypha and is not an Official Catholic Translation though. But it is more convenient and not as expensive to buy :

https://www.amazon.com/New-Douai-Rh...ay-Rheims+Bible&qid=1558518820&s=books&sr=1-4

 

[tampasteve]

Given the discovery of manuscripts during the last few decades, what is the percentage of differences, or how significant were the changes, in translation from the RSV to the NRSV, from the NAB to the NABRE, and from the Jerusalem Bible to the New Jerusalem Bible?

Pretty significant in the case of the RSV-NRSV. The NRSV incorporates the Dead Sea Scrolls while the RSV did not (RSV was completed before they were generally available to scholars, IIRC). From Zondervan's FAQ:
"
Improvements over the RSV are of four different kinds:

• updating the language of the RSV, by replacing archaic forms of speech addressed to God (Thee, Thou, wast, dost, etc.), and by replacing words whose meaning has changed significantly since the RSV translation (for example, Paul’s statement in 2 Corinthians 11.25 that he was “stoned” once)
• making the translation more accurate,
• helping it to be more easily understood, especially when it is read out loud, and
• making it clear where the original texts intend to include all humans, male and female, and where they intend to refer only to the male or female gender."

 

[ralfyman]

I just found the preface to NABRE online here, and it enumerates the revisions (or some of them?) in the last paragraph. I'm guessing that the same was done for NRSV and NJB.

 

[hedrick]

I don't have a list of changes, but I'm guessing that the NT manuscript basis has changed less than the OT. RSV used the 17th edition of Nestle-Aland, NRSV in effect the 26th (actually UBS 3, but it's the same text). While I don't have a list of changes, between those time periods a number of early Papyrii were discovered. I'm sure there are differences based on that. Also, in early editions, readings came from secondary sources. Starting around 1952 they began checking against the original manuscripts. It doesn't sound like the original RSV would have benefitted much by that, although the 2rd edition of the NT (1971) would have.

I should note that the committee is preparing a new edition, currently called NRSV-UE (updated edition). Recommendations for text are due to the oversight committee on May 21, 2021.