Skip to comments.New American Bible changes some words such as "holocaust"
Posted on 03/03/2011 1:54:56 PM PST by ColdOne
CHICAGO (Reuters) A new edition of one the most popular English-language Bibles will offer substitutes for words such as "booty" and "holocaust" to better reflect modern understanding, a Catholic group said on Wednesday.
Nearly 50 scholars from all faiths and a committee of Roman Catholic bishops have labored since 1994 over the first fresh edition of the New American Bible since 1970, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops said.
The annual best-seller to be issued by a dozen publishers beginning next week on Ash Wednesday "is a beautiful translation -- it's a new way to look at an old love," said Mary Sperry, who oversees Bible licensing for the bishops.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Answer: Who cares?
What will the word “Holocaust” be replaced with and what sort of definition will be used?
Trying to figure out where “Holocaust” was in the NASB - unless it’s some other version.
Nonetheless, I’m sure many non-Christians would be “pleased” with Holocaust not being mentioned.
Anybody know where this was at?
“to better reflect modern understanding”
Hey, I know: why don’t we get modern Americans to understand better, rather than changing to reflect their ignorant understanding?
Just a thought - nevermind...
When I was a kid, "booty" meant gold/jewelry/treasure looted by pirates. Ghetto trash have inflicted a different meaning on the rest of us.
After reading about it in the link it seems like it’s the PC version of the Bible. I use the NIV but read the latest King Jim for the poetry. I tell you, there will be a lot of chagrined people at the Final Judgment.
This article is talking about the NAB which, I think, it the most popular Catholic translation of the Bible. I don't have one to check out the concordance.
Why? Because they didn't read King Jimmy's pet version of the Bible?
If the King James Version was good enough for Paul and Silas, it's good enough for me!
In Scripture holocaust is used to describe a burnt offering to God. To modern readers Holocaust means the NAZI mass genocide of the Jews. I can understand why a change might be desired. Not to cover up something but to clarify what is meant.
The word "Holocaust," from the Greek words "holos" (whole) and "kaustos" (burned), was historically used to describe a sacrificial offering burned on an altar. Since 1945, the word has taken on a new and horrible meaning: the mass murder of some 6 million European Jews (as well as members of some other persecuted groups, such as Gypsies and homosexuals) by the German Nazi regime during the Second World War. To the anti-Semitic Nazi leader Adolf Hitler, Jews were an inferior race, an alien threat to German racial purity and community. After years of Nazi rule in Germany, during which Jews were consistently persecuted, Hitler's "final solution"--now known as the Holocaust--came to fruition under the cover of world war, with mass killing centers constructed in the concentration camps of occupied Poland.
The Holocaust is also known as Shoah
The KJV was good enough for Paul and the apostles, so it’s good enough for me.
Actually, I like the ESV, but keep the KJV, NIV and NKJV handy - with the online versions, even the Greek and Hebrew, it’s easy to compare.
Correct, as regards the English speaking world. It's not horrible (it's linguistically boring, and increasingly PC), but it's not my favorite.
IMHO, changing the word “virgin” to “young woman” is changing doctrine. I went to BibleGateway .com and looked at many of the Protestant Bibles, including modern english ones, and all I loked at use the word “virgin”. As we all know, not all young women are virgins. This is just not right. This us apostacy.
Don’t you hard cores prefer the old Douay Rheims translation.
Yeah, it’s KJV, NKJV and NASB for me. On rare occasion, the NIV, but it tends to transliterate in some places, rather than equivalent.
Yep same here on the King Jim. The ‘chagrined’ people are those who mocked and ridiculed both Jew and Christian regarding their faith in God and Jesus Christ during their lifetime. It’s real easy to poke fun at the religious. Okay, so if we’re wrong then what’s the cost? Lost time? Big deal. But, if we’re right, then what? People have been told, people have been warned. Some laugh and blow it off. Those are the ‘chagrined’ at the Final Judgment. They finally find out it was for real and not fraud.
My favorite Bible translation is that of the Jerusalem Bible, which has beautiful English.
And I'm not poking fun at the King James Bible, I'm poking fun at the almost idolatrous attitude that some folks have regarding that particular translation.
This implied for many “a virgin”. Sort of like the word “maiden” in English, implies that she might well still have a “maidenhead”/ hymen. But “virgin” is NOT a direct translation, especially in the context of that young woman giving birth.
Apostasy is a bit of a strong word for ‘walking back’ a incorrect translation to one that is more accurate, if less directly prophetic of the doctrine of perpetual virginity.
If you examine the list of scholars and translators responsible for it, you'll find the name "J. R. R. Tolkien".
The main problem is a thing called “dynamic equivelency” What it is, is, there are some words or ideas that cannot be translated directly from one language to another. For example. In Russian there is no word for coal. The closest we can come to it is ‘the rock that burns’. Same thing for Biblical translation. Some Christian sects see a thought, word, or idea one way, another sect sees it differently. So with the case of the NIV, different sections of the most original scripture we have on hand were sent out to different committees. Long story short, of all of them they came to a consensus of what is closest to the original thought that could be translated into English. It took years to accomplish and about all the main denominations took part.
Agreed. The argument that the Hebrew of the passage in Isaiah from the mesoretic text would be better translated "young woman" disappears when you realize the Greek Septuagint specifically translated it as "virgin" despite several preferable Greek words available for "maiden" or "young women". The Septuagint was translated by 70 Jewish scholars, who spoke Biblical Hebrew as a first or second language, and were 2200 years closer to the original Hebrew text and usage. The proper translation is "virgin".
Yeah, gets to be a bit tiresome with those folks. We speak American and to me the NIV comes closest to the original texts. The KJV folks sometimes can’t explain what a text they’re reading means.
Somebody wants to make money selling new Bibles.
See my #27. Virgin is the proper translation as the Septugint would be a better source text than the 10th century masoretic text.
Gradual changes in the meaning or connotation of words is hardly unique to English.
And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.
I have nothing against the NIV, I got saved on it and cut my biblical teeth on it, but if anyone wants to go to a deeper level of Bible study and reading, get a literal translation. Many above have been mentioned. I am now, definitely sold on the ESV. The more I read it the more I fall in love with it. I have also spent lots of time in the KJV, NASB, NKJV and RSV and I would not hesitate to recommend any of them. My Catholic brethren can recommend Catholic translations, and several have above. Personally though, I've fallen hard for the ESV.
Aside from the hideously pedestrian "Newspeak" English that infests its pages, it's an inaccurate translation. These jokers aren't helping things as far as that's concerned.
Get a Douay-Rheims or an Ignatius Study Bible (CRSV). Or even the Oxford Study Bible is better.
I sure didn't convert to Catholicism on account of the excellence of this translation! au contraire, like the "contemporary Catholic" music (which is neither contemporary or Catholic), it was a stumbling block. And would be to any person of taste.
I also love e-sword. The only popular translation I don't have in e-sword is NIV.
I'm very put off by its (and the HCSB's) linguistic clunkiness. I couldn't believe what they did to the Lord's Prayer.
I prefer the RSV ( catholic edition).
I think the whole reason for the NIV is basically to reach those who have had a hard time with the KJV. The NIV is written in plain English. True it takes away the beauty of the KJV but on the other hand it makes it easier to read. I like to have both on hand.
Where (chapter and verse please) did the word “holocaust” appear in the original Bible?
Which is what makes the ESV so good. It has an even better readability than the NIV and is as literal (moreso) a translation as the KJV.
**to better reflect modern understanding**
This is a bad step. The NAB needs to go back to the original Vulgate and start over!
LOL! Check your dates. St. Paul the Apostle did not have the KJV!
I’m still laughing.
FYI, where do you think you got YOUR Bible from?
The Catholic Church, of course, only Luther left out books that he did not like.
Will have to check out the ESV and compare it. Thanks.
“IMHO, changing the word virgin to young woman is changing doctrine.”
Nope. There is no Church on earth which believes in Mary’s virginity more than the Catholic Church. The problem is that the Hebrew clearly means “young woman”. In the Septuagint it says “virgin”. The translators and editors decided to use the ACTUAL MEANING OF THE WORD. My complaint is not that, but that they also used a more poorly written footnote on the issue. I read both the old footnote and the new one and I though the old one was stronger in its explanation:
The sign proposed by Isaiah was concerned with the preservation of Judah in the midst of distress (cf Isaiah 7:15, 17), but more especially with the fulfillment of God’s earlier promise to David (2 Sam 7:12-16) in the coming of Immanuel (meaning, “With us is God”) as the ideal king (cf Isaiah 9:5-6; 11:1-5). The Church has always followed St. Matthew in seeing the transcendent fulfillment of this verse in Christ and his Virgin Mother. The prophet need not have known the full force latent in his own words; and some Catholic writers have sought a preliminary and partial fulfillment in the conception and birth of the future King Hezekiah, whose mother, at the time Isaiah spoke, would have been a young, unmarried woman (Hebrew, almah). The Holy Spirit was preparing, however, for another Nativity which alone could fulfill the divinely given terms of Immanuel’s mission, and in which the perpetual virginity of the Mother of God was to fulfill also the words of this prophecy in the integral sense intended by the divine Wisdom.
Here’s the new footnote:
[7:14] Isaiahs sign seeks to reassure Ahaz that he need not fear the invading armies of Syria and Israel in the light of Gods promise to David (2 Sm 7:1216). The oracle follows a traditional announcement formula by which the birth and sometimes naming of a child is promised to particular individuals (Gn 16:11; Jgs 13:3). The young woman: Hebrew almah designates a young woman of marriageable age without specific reference to virginity. The Septuagint translated the Hebrew term as parthenos, which normally does mean virgin, and this translation underlies Mt 1:23. Emmanuel: the name means with us is God. Since for the Christian the incarnation is the ultimate expression of Gods willingness to be with us, it is understandable that this text was interpreted to refer to the birth of Christ.
No apostasy, just an accurate translation. I just wish they had a better footnote.
Some traditional minded Catholics like the Douay Rheims. Many also like the RSVCE or the RSV2CE (my choice).
Because I Love the Bible
Where Is That Taught in the Bible?
When Was the Bible Really Written?
Three Reasons for Teaching the Bible [St. Thomas Aquinas]
The Smiting Is Still Implied (God of the OT vs the NT)
Where Is That Taught in the Bible?
Friday Fast Fact: The Bible in English
Bible Reading is Central in Conversions to Catholicism in Shangai, Reports Organization
Verses (in Scripture) I Never Saw
5 Myths about 7 Books
Lectionary Statistics - How much of the Bible is included in the Lectionary for Mass? (Popquiz!)
Pope calls Catholics to daily meditation on the Bible
What Are the "Apocrypha?"
The Accuracy of Scripture
US Conference of Catholic Bishops recommendations for Bible study
CNA unveils resource to help Catholics understand the Scriptures
The Dos and Donts of Reading the Bible [Ecumenical]
Pope to lead marathon Bible reading on Italian TV
The Complete Bible: Why Catholics Have Seven More Books [Ecumenical]
Beginning Catholic: Books of the Catholic Bible: The Complete Scriptures [Ecumenical]
Beginning Catholic: When Was The Bible Written? [Ecumenical]
The Complete Bible: Why Catholics Have Seven More Books [Ecumenical]
U.S. among most Bible-literate nations: poll
Bible Lovers Not Defined by Denomination, Politics
Dei Verbum (Catholics and the Bible)
Vatican Offers Rich Online Source of Bible Commentary
Clergy Congregation Takes Bible Online
Knowing Mary Through the Bible: Mary's Last Words
A Bible Teaser For You... (for everyone :-)
Knowing Mary Through the Bible: New Wine, New Eve
Return of Devil's Bible to Prague draws crowds
Doctrinal Concordance of the Bible [What Catholics Believe from the Bible] Catholic Caucus
Should We Take the Bible Literally or Figuratively?
Glimpsing Words, Practices, or Beliefs Unique to Catholicism [Bible Trivia]
Catholic and Protestant Bibles: What is the Difference?
Church and the Bible(Caatholic Caucus)
Pope Urges Prayerful Reading of Bible
Catholic Caucus: It's the Church's Bible
How Tradition Gave Us the Bible
The Church or the Bible
My guess is 'sacrifice', because isn't that what a holocaust was, in the Old Testament, a sacrifice of an animal on an altar?
Hubby and I went to a meeting this week about the changes coming in the New Missal for the Roman Catholic Mass. The Monsignor doing the talk mentioned Dynamic Equivalency, and how it had created so much angst among so many. They used Formal Equivalency for the new version to eliminate the personal biases that were prevalent in the previous translations, and to hew more closely to the original meanings. He also mentioned the changes being made in the NAB, for the same reasons.