I found the King James New Testament book on tape in my library. Is there anything I will be missing (from a Catholic standpoint) if I use this? There are no Catholic Bibles on tape in our library.
You won’t be missing much. The KJV New Testament translation is not so biased that it teaches false doctrine. Two differences you will find, though: In the last two verses of Jude there will be a difference based on a faulty manuscript they had which leaves out the name of Jesus and mentions only God the Father; they will also change an “or” to an “and” in 1 Cor. 11:23-27, when Paul talks about how eating unworthily the bread OR the wine in the Lord’s Supper is sacrilege to Christ’s Body AND Blood. That is important to a Catholic understanding of the Eucharist, and they changed it to accord better with Anglican theology which separates the Body and Blood into the Bread and Wine (respectively) alone. Other than that, there should be nothing wrong with it as far as I know.
I don’t have a copy of it in front of me, but most non-Catholic Bibles do not contain all the Books that the Catholic Bibles do. Such as at the end of the Old Testament is Macabees 1&2 included?
Catholic Bibles have Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur on the copyright page to insure you that Bible is free of error regarding teachings of the Church. This would include footnote explanations.
=jmb717;6687477]I found the King James New Testament book on tape in my library. Is there anything I will be missing (from a Catholic standpoint) if I use this? There are no Catholic Bibles on tape in our library.
The [singular truth] found ONLY in th Catholic Bible
The ENTIRE BIBLE [not missing seven entire books] an numerous changed text.
Love and prayers,
THANKS for asking:thumbsup:
The major problems with non-Catholic bibles is with the notes more than with the translation. This would probably not be a problem with tapes. I haven’t used them but presume they stick to text without comments.
The missing books are all in the Old Testament; so don’t seem a problem here. In any case they are an omission; not a source of positive error. The books that are there are good.
Note that some sects, e.g. Jehovah Witnesses, have their own bibles which do contain significant distortions in the translations.
I like this answer. I’d also like to add that Catholic apologist Jimmy Akin uses the KJV sometimes because it often gives a decent idea of the Greek of a passage since it is fairly literal (kind of like the Douay-Rheims). Of course, there is no perfect “translation” since the same words can fairly be translated more than one way sometimes. It’s probably advantageous to look at multiple good translations. I, along with the good folks at CA, prefer the RSV-CE.
KJV N.T. should be fine.
Yeah you have 7 books missing from the Old Testament, which along with their teaching will be missing… [book of] Tobit and almsgiving for example and 2 Macbees 12 in which one atones for the dead.
But you might find that there is a number of differences between Protestant and Catholic teaching… we cant even agree on the 10 commandments even though we translate Exodus 20 the same…
Not to mention the big differences in translation between KJB and NJB or any other catholic bible. Just see Col 2:16, read the same passage in both, [to my mind there is a big difference between the two - in relation to personal experience]…
The Protestants, preach “sola scriptura” (word alone) but catholics dont, this again comes across in their preaching… catholics have tradition passed down from the the LORD Himself to us…
The OP has only the New Testament on tape. So, no worries about the deuterocanonical books missing, because they are Old Testament books.
Normally, I use the KJV to disprove sola scriptura, since its wording in 2 Peter 1:20 is strong. Naturally, its interpretation is ‘soft’ regarding Catholic beliefs, such as Gabriel’s greeting to Mary in Luke 1:28 and Saint Paul’s teaching regarding the Eucharist in 1 Corinthians 10:16. Both examples leave “wiggle room” for the private interpretation that protestantism requires.