How do other Christians view the Bible translation debate

Question

I was just wondering how other groups such as Catholic or Orthodox view the Bible translation debate. I am Baptist and use the KJV, but was curious what Bible translation they use, or if they have a specific translation they are restrained to.

Answer 1

My native language is not English. So... Does it mean that I can open the door to translations into Spanish? What about French, Italian, or Japanese?

Language evolves. Meanings are thoroughly understood, and corrections are made.

There are several Catholic approved translations. The better ones are translated from the original Hebrew & Greek texts.

The key for a Catholic translation is the word "approved". It means that the translation

• has been reviewed by an authority (bishop)
• conforms to the Tradition, and
• does not inject any contradictions to the teachings of the Church.

This is consistent with Catholic teachings, that the Church has the authority to approve and recommend a specific translation. Some are targeted for academic use, some for a more colloquial use.

Some of these approved translations are elaborated by an interconfessional organization such as the United Bible Societies. So, in my opinion, there is not much debate.

There are some translations that are rejected by several denominations, not only by Catholics, because they contain clear manipulations to defend specific teachings.

Answer 2

If we exclude theologically liberal "Catholic" opinions, there are a few things we can say about Scripture from a Catholic perspective. The first is that all of the original manuscripts are inerrant and inspired (unfortunately, to my knowledge, all of the originals are themselves lost to time). Inerrant means that there is no error in whatever the biblical author intends to assert by his writing. So, for instance, it is not generally thought that the intention of Moses in writing Genesis 1-3 was to assert a particular age of the Earth, or to deny animal evolution (as opposed to human evolution), but to assert that mankind generates from two parents who were created in a state of preternatural grace and fell from that state because of sin. Thus, that assertion is inerrant - it is necessarily true. Inspiration means that the authors wrote all and only what the Holy Spirit willed them to write. This was done by cooperation on their part.

Following upon this, theologically "conservative" (so to speak) Catholics have a few things to say about copies and translations. The copies of the Scriptures are inerrant and inspired insofar as they are true to the original text, and translations are inerrant and inspired insofar as they sufficiently communicate the original meaning of the original text. It's unlikely that any translation does this perfectly in every respect, and so there is always something "lost in translation." Likewise, language is constantly evolving, and therefore new translations which faithfully communicate the biblical message to a new generation will always be necessary.

The United States Council of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) keeps a list of translations approved for private devotion and study. The USCCB requires that the New American Bible translation be used for readings at Mass. Other nations, especially nations that speak other languages, will have different lists of approved translations created by their bishops councils. The purpose of creating such lists is to ensure that Catholics know which translations, as much as is possible, faithfully transmit the original meaning of the Sacred Scriptures to the modern reader.

Answer 3

The Vatican II council introduced acceptance of critical thinking and modernism for the Bible and theology, denouncing traditional dogmatism, thus it ended the long-standing reign of the Latin translation Vulgate and its English version Douy-Rheims. Wiki:

The Second Ecumenical Council of the Vatican, commonly known as the Second Vatican Council or Vatican II, was the 21st and most recent ecumenical council of the Catholic Church. The council met in Saint Peter's Basilica in Vatican City for four periods (or sessions), each lasting between 8 and 12 weeks, in the autumn of each of the four years 1962 to 1965

Biblical Movement: Pope Pius XII's 1943 encyclical Divino afflante spiritu gave a renewed impetus to Catholic Bible studies and encouraged the production of new Bible translations from the original languages. This led to a pastoral attempt to get ordinary Catholics to re-discover the Bible, to read it, to make it a source of their spiritual life. This found a response in very limited circles. By 1960, the movement was still in its infancy

Since then, the Catholic Church has been fighting fundamentalism in its Biblical movement to raise awareness. See this article on Biblical Criticism. Although, the Douay remained the standard version for English-speaking Catholics until the twentieth century, there are still some Catholic believers who follow the Latin-onlyism for Douy-Rheims as their authoritative Bible by rejecting the great modern Bible versions like New Catholic Bible and New American Bible.

The NAB Little Rock Catholic Study Bible states in an essay on A Catholic Approach to Scripture:

Catholics and the Fundamentalist Challenge One of the unique challenges facing all contemporary interpreters of the Bible is that of biblical fundamentalism. A thorough reading of the historical documents in the chart above would indicate that, paradoxically, the Catholic Church at one time took positions that were virtually fundamentalist in outlook. Yet, as the church’s understanding of Scripture grew in the twentieth century, the real limitations of a fundamentalist position became apparent. Fundamentalism is currently the one approach to Scripture that is seen as inconsistent with a Catholic approach.

In brief, biblical fundamentalism is a loosely organized evangelical Protestant movement that emphasizes the literal truth of the Bible in every aspect, including historical and scientific data. Fundamentalists believe that the Bible could not possibly contain any error. Thus, they hold to a doctrine of “verbal inerrancy.” In contrast, the Catholic position holds that the Bible does not err in essential issues of faith or morals, but it could well contain errors of fact or history. These in no way impinge on the “eternal truth” of Scripture. The 1993 Pontifical Biblical Commission explains what is dangerous in a fundamentalist approach:

The fundamentalist approach is dangerous, for it is attractive to people who look to the Bible for ready answers to the problems of life. It can deceive these people, offering them interpretations that are pious but illusory, instead of telling them that the Bible does not contain an immediate answer to each and every problem. Without saying as much in so many words, fundamentalism actually invites people to a kind of intellectual suicide. It injects into life a false certitude, for it unwittingly confuses the divine substance of the biblical message with what are in fact its human limitations. (IBC 1.F)

Answer 4

The catholic translation system is rather easy: the Church has declared at the council of Trente, Sessio IV - Recipiuntur Libris Sacris et de traditionibus recipiendis, what books are in the canon, and that the Vulgata is to be seen as the correct translation. There is no room for debate there.

Any translation in any language needs to have approval of the Church. No room for debate there either.

So if you want to use any Bible, as a catholic, you learn Latin and read the Editio Vulgata, or you look for the “imprimatur” as we call the church approval of any book.