For four hundred years, following upon the great upheaval of the Reformation, Catholics and Protestants have gone their separate ways and suspected each other's translations of the Bible of having been in some way manipulated in the interests of doctrinal presuppositions. Jerome accepted this as true, and rejected them as well. The quality of info, however, is certainly scholarly. Thus, for example, Catholics no longer make their translations from the Latin Vulgate; though it is arguable that before the development of textual criticism it was in certain respects a better way of making a translation than to make it from late and in some places corrupt Greek manuscripts as was done by some of the Reformers. So most of the changes are very minor and superficial.
Some ancient authorities conclude Mark instead with the following: But they reported briefly to Peter and those with him all that they had been told. So the last seven books of the Bible failed to meet the Jewish Bible standards and were rejected. However, ideas of this kind take time to penetrate all levels and many difficulties and delays ensued. The quality of info, however, is certainly scholarly. A small committee of members of the Catholic Biblical Association was formed and permission obtained to examine this translation and suggest any changes that might be required to make it acceptable to Catholics. Not since 1897 has their been a book, written by a Catholic, on the topic of the Old Testament.
Michuta traces the path of the Deuterocanon apocrypha from it pre-Christian roots through the Protestant Reformation to the nineteenth century and definitively settles the question of whether the Council of Trent added books to Scripture in reaction to Protestantism. Gary Michuta's study is a wonderful and thorough overview of the history of the deuteros and what really happened regarding those books at Trent and during the Reformation. The books in question are the seven most recent books in the Old Testament of Catholic Bibles that were removed from Protestant Bibles. Although twenty years have passed since the Encyclical Letter first appeared, there is still no Catholic translation of the whole Bible from the original languages available to English-speaking readers, though at least two are well on the way to completion. Protestants claim that the medieval Catholic Church added six extra books that had never been considered part of the Old Testament, either by Jews or early Christians. The book also lacked a lot of setup and background, and there were a lot of typos.
In the present edition the aim has been to make the minimum number of alterations and to change only what seemed absolutely necessary in the light of Catholic tradition. I think you are my new best friend. As you step forward in time, Michuta does a very fair job of quoting sources from both sides of the debate over the deuterocanonical books of the bible. In Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger, Gary Michuta presents a revised and expanded version of his authoritative work on this key issue. And after this, Jesus himself sent out by means of them, from east to west, the sacred and imperishable proclamation of eternal salvtion k Other ancient authorities omit verses 9-20.
Therefore will I trust you always, though I may seem to be lost and in the shadow of death. I will not fear, for you are ever with me, and you will never leave me to face my perils alone. But a change of mind has taken place and what seemed to many in 1953 to be a novel idea of doubtful value, or even of no value at all, is now generally recognized to be a legitimate and desirable goal. This objective could be achieved in the quickest and most practical way by editing the Revised Standard Version for Catholic use. The thanks of Catholics are due to their Bishops who have approved this edition and to the American Standard Bible Committee, who have throughout given and unfailing and generous support in spite of difficulties and delays. Nor do I really know myself, and the fact that I think that I am following your will does not mean that I am actually doing so. This book spends a chapter on Jerome, and a few more on Luther and the reformers.
I am wandering what people think about the revised standard version - second catholic edition. The historical facts speak for themselves. Register a Free 1 month Trial Account. Has no one condemned you? John Crysostom had to say about this or that? The Protestant position on the Bible simply can't stand up to a rigorous historical, theological, practical or biblical analysis. Michuta makes an airtight case and this is a great resource to have on the shelf.
I have found the intext maps useful during study without having to flip back and forth to the maps in the back. Also, the cross-referencing apparatus I think is not helpful, as well as the divide between the Sacred Text and the notes, which seems too similar. The Standard Bible Committee of the U. Michuta traces the path of the Deuterocanon apocrypha from it pre-Christian roots through the Protestant Reformation to the nineteenth century and definitively settles the question of whether the Council of Trent added books to Scripture in reaction to Protestantism. Personally, the original 1990 version of the Catholic Study Bible is much better. Michuta is clearly arguing the Catholic position, but much of the material is simply presented matter of factly. As a result, many readings are no longer in the official Latin Bible used by the Roman Catholic Church.
Do this in remembrance of me. Only later would Luther throw out these books. And after this, Jesus himself sent out by means of them, from east to west, the sacred and imperishable proclamation of eternal salvtion Lk. Since after the Babylonian exile most Jews wrote Greek, the most recent books of the Bible were written in Greek. I like the revision, I bought the genuine leather addition and like the quality. It was in fact with a view to filling this rather obvious gap in the shortest possible time that some Catholic scholars considered the possibility of so editing the Revised Standard Version, on its appearance in 1952, as to make it acceptable to Catholic readers.
God who is over all be blessed for ever 1 Cor 3. God who is over all be blessed for ever. Even though not a new translation but a new edition in which they cleared up the archaic language, they even changed a few words around to be a better translation for Catholics. It was felt that if such a thing could be achieved, it would be of incalculable benefit in wiping away remaining misconceptions and prejudices and in fostering still further good relations between the churches. However, the addition of a concordance in the back was a good idea. Perhaps then we can begin to move past our division and toward the unity Christ intends for his people.
I hope that I will never do anything apart from that desire. I also prefer the new font style, finding it more readable. In this fascinating book, Gary Michuta takes the reader on a journey through histo Why do Catholic bibles have more books in their Old Testaments than Protestant and Jewish bibles? But the Jewish Bible dismissed as unscriptural any books written after Ezra, and did not accept any books not originally written in Hebrew. But the existing translations he was working from had so many glosses, notes and baggage, that Jerome soon formed the opinion that the Hebrew Masoretic Text was the truest translation of Scripture available. Did the Catholic Church add books to Scripture or did Protestantism remove them? Other ancient authorities add after verse 8 the following: But they reported briefly to Peter and those with him all that they had been told. The books in question are the seven most recent books in the Old Testament of Catholic Bibles that were removed from Protestant Bibles. As you step forward in time, Michuta does a very fair job of quoting sources from both sides of the debate over the deuterocanonical books of the bible.