Which Bible translation would you recommend for Anglo-Catholics?

[MichaelNZ]

For those who are of a more Anglo-Catholic bent (as I seem to be), which Bible translation would be the best?

I personally have several different translations, but the ones I'd think would be among the best would be:

• Orthodox Study Bible (OT= Septuagint translation; NT = NKJV)
• Douay-Rheims Version
• Knox Version (pre-Vatican II Roman Catholic Bible)
• King James Version
• New King James Version
• Oxford Annotated Bible (RSV; no Apocrypha)

I also know a second-hand bookshop that has a Catholic Bible with a Douay OT and a Confraternity NT. I know that the Douay-Rheims translates Genesis 3:15 as "She shall crush thy head" when the Hebrew text actually has hu, meaning 'he'. I also don't like how the study notes of the Oxford Annotated Bible try to explain away the miraculous as merely natural occurrences.

Which of the above Bibles would you recommend for an Anglo-Catholic?

 

[ebia]

For those who are of a more Anglo-Catholic bent (as I seem to be), which Bible translation would be the best?

I personally have several different translations, but the ones I'd think would be among the best would be:


[*]Orthodox Study Bible (OT= Septuagint translation; NT = NKJV)
[*]Douay-Rheims Version
[*]Knox Version (pre-Vatican II Roman Catholic Bible)
[*]King James Version
[*]New King James Version
[*]Oxford Annotated Bible (RSV; no Apocrypha)


I also know a second-hand bookshop that has a Catholic Bible with a Douay OT and a Confraternity NT. I know that the Douay-Rheims translates Genesis 3:15 as "She shall crush thy head" when the Hebrew text actually has hu, meaning 'he'. I also don't like how the study notes of the Oxford Annotated Bible try to explain away the miraculous as merely natural occurrences.

Which of the above Bibles would you recommend for an Anglo-Catholic?

The best biblical scholarship has moved beyond the Catholic/evangelical divide. I'd have to say CEB or NRSV regardless of one's position on that scale.

I'm a bit wary of buying a bible to fit one's theology anyway.

 

[PaladinValer]

The best biblical scholarship has moved beyond the Catholic/evangelical divide. I'd have to say CEB or NRSV regardless of one's position on that scale.

I'm a bit wary of buying a bible to fit one's theology anyway.

I second the bolded portions, particularly the latter.

The RSV or NRSV with the Deuterocanonicals are what I used most often. I do plan on getting the EOB when it comes out, and I also sometimes reach out to the NAB.

 

[MKJ]

Best for what?

 

[christseeker45]

I second the bolded portions, particularly the latter.

The RSV or NRSV with the Deuterocanonicals are what I used most often. I do plan on getting the EOB when it comes out, and I also sometimes reach out to the NAB.

EOB?

 

[Scottish Monk]

I recommend the NRSV.
I do NOT recommend the ESV.

 

[Mary of Bethany]

EOB?

EOB - The Eastern / Greek Orthodox Bible based on the Septuagint (LXX) and Patriarchal Text

 

[MichaelNZ]

The best biblical scholarship has moved beyond the Catholic/evangelical divide. I'd have to say CEB or NRSV regardless of one's position on that scale.

I'm a bit wary of buying a bible to fit one's theology anyway.

Is the CEB the same as the CEV (Contemporary English Version) I have a CEV, TNIV, HCSB and Good News Bible as well, but I didn't think they'd be terribly Catholic. Of those, only the Good News Bible has the Deuterocanonicals.

 

[ebia]

Is the CEB the same as g the CEV (Contemporary English Version)

No.

 

[christseeker45]

EOB - The Eastern / Greek Orthodox Bible based on the Septuagint (LXX) and Patriarchal Text

Thank you

 

[Maid Marie]

CEB is Common English Bible

 

[HalupkiMonster]

I suppose I'd also be an "Anglo-Catholic." I used to be an Orthodox Christian. The OSB, while it is a treasure in many respects, has several denominational biases (usually in the footnotes.)

I've found the NRSV to be my favorite translation. It uses language that I can understand, and that help the overall meaning of the text sink in. If you're someone that needs to have the nitty-gritty of scripture (or as nitty-gritty as an English translation can get,) this may not be the one for you. I've found that it, for example, doesn't contain as much gender bias as there is in traditional English ("Peace to all people" instead of "peace to all men.") But, the trinity is still Father, Son and Holy Spirit. God is still "He," and all of that.

I recommend the NRSV with (or without) the Apocrypha. I have The New Oxford Annotated Bible in this translation. Even if it's not the most perfect Bible for you, I've found it to be the best translation for me, and I'm sure you could find a good used copy relatively inexpensively on Amazon.

A couple of points:
-Buying a translation of the Bible based on one's theological leanings seems like a spiritually unhealthy thing to do. How are we to grow from the words of scripture and the message if Jesus if they're conveyed in a way that suits our current state of mind? The NRSV is not free from bias (no translation is,) but it is being upheld as a Bible translation as unbias as they come in our language.

-No on the KJV. I have the KJV, and I read it when I want to take in some Elizabethan English. It's difficult to understand, and uses words that have fallen out of use in the English language, or words that have gained entirely new meanings. My priest claims that the KJV is extremely politically written. Though I've yet to see this, I wouldn't doubt it. Those who think that the KJV is God's favorite translation or something like that are misguided. A modern translation for modern speakers of English is needed.

 

[someguy14]

Which Bible translation would you recommend for Anglo-Catholics?

The Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit understands the KJV, though some would have you believe otherwise. God is all wisdom and understanding.

 

[MichaelNZ]

Thanks for all the replies. It seems that most people here agree than the NRSV is the best translation to use. What do you think about the use of gender-neutral language in the NRSV?

I was hoping to avoid having to buy yet another Bible translation. I have an RSV but it doesn't have the Apocrypha. Would the NRSV-CE (to get the Apocrypha) be better than a Roman Catholic translation like the Douay-Rheims or Knox? Are the pre-Vatican II Catholic Bible translations too biased in favour of the Roman Catholic Church?

 

[someguy14]

The RSV is a beautiful translation. Hold strong unto it. The Holy Spirit is good and is the only one worthy of praise.

It is all about God. God is all. The Holy Spirit is all.

 

[ebia]

Thanks for all the replies. It seems that most people here agree than the NRSV is the best translation to use. What do you think about the use of gender-neutral language in the NRSV?

I was hoping to avoid having to buy yet another Bible translation. I have an RSV but it doesn't have the Apocrypha. Would the NRSV-CE (to get the Apocrypha) be better than a Roman Catholic translation like the Douay-Rheims or Knox? Are the pre-Vatican II Catholic Bible translations too biased in favour of the Roman Catholic Church?

Why on earth would you want the D-R?

The NRSV is the translation used in most academic establishments here, including both Anglican and Roman Catholic theological colleges.

 

[someguy14]

Why on earth would you want the D-R?

The NRSV is the translation used in most academic establishments here, including both Anglican and Roman Catholic theological colleges.

The Holy Spirit speaks through the KJV. All that disagree, fail.

 

[MichaelNZ]

The Holy Spirit speaks through the KJV. All that disagree, fail.

Fail in what exactly? Are you one of these King James Only Christians? I've dealt with them before. I used to attend an Independent Fundamental Baptist church and they were fiercely KJV-Only. One visitor to the Bible study even said to me once that non-English speaking people should learn to read English so they can read the KJV. This is sheer and utter arrogance. One of the main guys involved with that church said that learning Greek and Hebrew isn't worth doing as you are relying on books written by human beings to learn those languages.

 

[MichaelNZ]

No on the KJV. I have the KJV, and I read it when I want to take in some Elizabethan English. It's difficult to understand, and uses words that have fallen out of use in the English language, or words that have gained entirely new meanings. My priest claims that the KJV is extremely politically written. Though I've yet to see this, I wouldn't doubt it. Those who think that the KJV is God's favorite translation or something like that are misguided. A modern translation for modern speakers of English is needed.

I like the KJV, but I can understand that it can be difficult to understand.

Gail A. Riplinger, in her book New Age Bible Versions, claims that the KJV has a lower Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level than the NIV, NASB, TEV (Good News) and the NKJV, meaning that the KJV is easier to read than these modern versions. What do you think of that?

 

[Maid Marie]

• Oxford Annotated Bible (RSV; no Apocrypha)

I also don't like how the study notes of the Oxford Annotated Bible try to explain away the miraculous as merely natural occurrences.

I have the Oxford Annotated Bible NRSV with Deuterocanical. It contains a few extra books in it that it calls the "Anglican Apocrypha" and not just what one finds in a RC bible.

I also own a Catholic Study Bible with the New American Bible version in it which I like.