Catholics shake 'booty' out of Bible....ARRRGHHH!

CAN WE PLEASE NOT START DOWN THE ROAD OF THE EVANGELICAL PROTESTANTS and start changing the bible, leave the bible alone!

:mad:
deseretnews.com/article/700115179/Catholics-shake-booty-out-of-Bible.html

[quote="DChacon, post:1, topic:231503"]
CAN WE PLEASE NOT START DOWN THE ROAD OF THE EVANGELICAL PROTESTANTS and start changing the bible, leave the bible alone!

:mad:
deseretnews.com/article/700115179/Catholics-shake-booty-out-of-Bible.html

[/quote]

Wow, you've got a lot of attachment to a Bible that only dates to 1970. And anyway, on the other hand:
Reuters also reported that "The new edition will revert to more poetic versions of Psalm 23 to have it read, 'I walk through the valley of the shadow of death,' instead of 'dark valley.'
So not all changes are bad, wouldn't you agree? And you have to admit, "if the people had eaten freely today of their enemy's booty when they came across it" is pretty snicker-worthy. Besides, I don't know of any other translation that had "booty" in the first place. The D-R had "prey."

It's a translation, man. It's not even a very old bible, as was stated. Booty? Yes, it does sound silly. The change makes sense, sounds NICER, really, and still means the EXACT SAME THING.

It's not changing anything important, nor is it a road downhill to start changing other things. Relax, calm yourself, and get in arms when someone goes and re-writes something major.

you change words then you start changing meanings and people that are lazy and don't feel like following the rules will love change like this, whats next... taking out books from it like the protestants did?

change is NOT always good

do not change the bible

[quote="DChacon, post:4, topic:231503"]
you change words then you start changing meanings and people that are lazy and don't feel like following the rules will love change like this

[/quote]

DChacon, the words of the Bible have not been changed. The words of the one English translation of the Bible have been changed. And those changes did not change the meaning.

I think you would have a point if the source material for the Bible was changed, but that isn't what happened.

[quote="Dale_M, post:5, topic:231503"]
DChacon, the words of the Bible have not been changed. The words of the one English translation of the Bible have been changed. And those changes did not change the meaning.

I think you would have a point if the source material for the Bible was changed, but that isn't what happened.

[/quote]

This.

It's a matter of semantics. I can appreciate the concern some have with the word virgin being replaced. But seriously... booty?

If they start taking versus out because they don't think they fit anymore... THEN you can be angry. In the mean time you should probably calm down.

This article 'skims' over the fact that they are also replacing 'virgin' in Isaiah 7:14. "the virgin shall be with child" will now say "the young woman".

Article Here

That is the one that I take up issue with. Who care's if kids snicker at 'virgin'...maybe its time we actually TEACH them what it MEANS to be a virgin!!

I'm extremely bothered by this change...the others don't bother me so much...but taking out 'Virgin'...now that's heretical in my opinion.

Language changes, it evolves and words take on entirely new meanings. Bible translations have to keep up with that because otherwise you end up with outdated texts that don't actually mean what they should anymore. It's not changing the Bible, it's updating the translation so it is more in line with modern language. I seriously don't get what the fuss is about.

[quote="DChacon, post:4, topic:231503"]
you change words then you start changing meanings and people that are lazy and don't feel like following the rules will love change like this, whats next... taking out books from it like the protestants did?

change is NOT always good

do not change the bible

[/quote]

See that post right above this one? My first post in this thread?
THEY'RE NOT CHANGING ANYTHING IMPORTANT.
Start worrying and complaining later when someone DOES try and change something IMPORTANT. Until then, do not make such a fuss.

and people that are lazy and don't feel like following the rules will love change like this
Yes. Because people don't like following the rules, they'll love how one word was swapped out for a another word with the exact same meaning. How terrrrriiiiiblllleeeeee.

Now, swapping out virgin for young woman? That's annoying and bothersome. As it's an IMPORTANT LITTLE FACT.

But booty? And most the other changes? They're no bid deal.

I just wanted to throw my hat in the ring in the opinion race here. There is no perfect translation of the Bible. That's why I have so many translations at home. The NAB is user friendly, but I think it simplifies things, for instance, and this bothered me about the translation, it called the Tree in Eden the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Bad. But my favourite translation, the Douay Rheims, at least my copy, is riddled with spelling and grammatical errors which can be fairly discouraging to read. The NRSV is nice, but I'm told it's too ecumenical. The NRV is a fair balance, I think, between Duoay Rheims and NAB. I like the New Jerusalem because it uses, or used, the name Yahweh when referring to God. Every translation has her ups and downs.

God bless,

I just have the Ignatius Bible (RSV-CE) and often use the online Dhouay Rheims. Whats the NAB like and is it similar to either RSV-CE or DR?

I think the NAB tends to oversimply things. They can be pretty cheap, I bought a softcover NAB at Mardens for $7.00. Look up Sirach/Ecclesiasticus 22:7-23, that's my favourite passage in the Bible, it should begin with something like he who speaks with a fool is like one that glues pots together... The NAB simplifies language and includes heavy footnotes, for those who like footnotes. The simplification of language is good for initiates, one would assume, which is probably why it's used in the RCIA, but it can be bothersome to read. It has the feel of a kid's book, to me... but I am biased, because I began reading the NAB upon converting from atheism and its suggestions (via notes) that Satan might not be as bad as we think, and that the flood, giants; heroes of old and great renown, and certain other events in the Bible are based on older "myths" really bothered me. If you're already reading the Douay Rheims, I wouldn't stop. I haven't tried the Ignatius Bible, but I have one coming, should be here today. Anyway, if you get an NAB, I would recommend buying a cheaper model that doesn't include footnotes. As for your original question, it is like the RSV and the DR in that it is still technically a Bible, but it's prose is inferior to both the DR and RSV. Also, this may sound close-minded, but whatever, my measuring line for a Bible is her quotability. If Protestants and others can quote that Bible comfortably, than it probably isn't sticking to her originally Catholic guns. I've read quite a few Protestants quoting the New American to press their theologies. At any rate, I hope that helps...

P.S. if you feel compelled to buy an NAB and not the cheaper kind, the Fireside Bible folks have an NAB that has tremendous aesthetic appeal, I found one at Goodwill for three bucks, you probably won't though. The Fireside NAB has beautiful pictures and explanations of the Eucharist and the Rosary. It also has a family records section. The Fireside Douay Rheims is much cheaper, on Amazon one can be bought for twenty bucks and is of a simmilar quality.

God bless,

[quote="CntrySngr72, post:7, topic:231503"]
This article 'skims' over the fact that they are also replacing 'virgin' in Isaiah 7:14. "the virgin shall be with child" will now say "the young woman".

Article Here

That is the one that I take up issue with. Who care's if kids snicker at 'virgin'...maybe its time we actually TEACH them what it MEANS to be a virgin!!

I'm extremely bothered by this change...the others don't bother me so much...but taking out 'Virgin'...now that's heretical in my opinion.

[/quote]

One you understand the context of this and the reasoning beyond why the change is been implemented I can't see any problem with it whatsoever personally.

[quote="JharekCarnelian, post:13, topic:231503"]
One you understand the context of this and the reasoning beyond why the change is been implemented I can't see any problem with it whatsoever personally.

[/quote]

If I understand correctly the change is justified by the fact that the Greek word for virgin also means young woman that part does make sense to me. I do not however understand the reasoning. Can you explain it? I'm not trying to be sarcastic I sincerely want to know.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.