Why does NAB footnote contradict Matthew 14:3


#1

In the story of the death of John the Baptist we read in Mark and Matthew that Herodias is the wife of Herod's brother Philip but the footnote says it was not Philip but another half-brother Boethus. Is this because later Bible scholars have uncovered other writings that indicate it was Boethus? And if so is the reason we don't correct the scripture verse because it is a minor detail?

I'm actually reading through Mark one story a day (bold heading within each chapter). I use the footnotes and cross references to gain a better understanding of the context and meaning, prayerfully reflect on what I read and then write my thoughts in a journal. I'm really enjoying reading the Bible like I never have before!

Thanks in advance for your time.

Billy Ray


#2

Remember that people at this time often had multiple names.


#3

The NAB has come under much criticism for exactly this issue. If you can obtain one, a Revised Standard Version, Second Catholic Edition (Ignatius Bible) is generally held to be a better translation with more consistent notes. Also, the Haydock Commentary is much more orthodox than the NAB commentaries.


#4

It's a bit complicated!

Josephus tells us:

Herodias was married to Herod, the son of Herod the Great by Mariamme the daughter of Simon the high priest. They had a daughter Salome, after whose birth Herodias, taking it into her head to flout the way of our fathers, married Herod the Tetrarch, her husband's brother by the same father, who was tetrarch of Galilee; to do this she parted from a living husband.

(Antiquities 18.5.3 136)

The first Herod, the son of Herod the Great, is sometimes called Herod Boethus because his maternal grandfather was Simon Boethus. However, there is really no evidence that he was called "Herod Boethus", just that he was called "Herod".

Herodias then married another Herod (her half-uncle, called Herod II). Eventually, however, after all sorts of interesting incidents, she took it upon herself to (scandalously) divorce him and try to marry Herod the Tetrarch (Antipas), who is causing John the Baptist and Jesus all that grief. This is the incident that both Josephus and the Gospels suggest cause all the trouble between John the Baptist and Herod Antipas.

Mark tell us Herodias was married to Philip (who, incidentally, was also called "Herod"), so the debate is whether Mark was confused here between Philip (Herod) and Herod II, or whether, in fact, Herod II was also a "Philip", in which case it would make sense of what was written.

As I said, this is complicated!


#5

Remember there’s a big difference between the text of the Bible, and the commentary which is the opinion of one person or a select group of people.

The commentary in the NAB gets LOTS of criticism.

The SPECIFIC example you give is an example of what is called Historical Critical method of bible interpretation. The vatican has explicitly banned the use of this method in isolation. it must only be used in accordance with other methods including the Traditional interpretations of the Church.

As others have said, the commentary in the Ignatius Bible is good… but it’s the Ignatius Catholic Study bible you need, if you dont get the Study Bible you’ll get nothing but a few crossreferences and no detailed notes.

The Study Bible is in incomplete project. Today (April 2013) the New Testament is available, and Genesis and Exodus are available. the rest of the Old testament is not yet published. The bible text used is the RSV-2CE which is a highly respected translation.

Another bible in which I like the Notes is the Christian Community Bible. This is not easy to find in the USA and not sold by Amazon.com, but it is available from some online catholic booksellers.

It has a “Pastoral Commentary”. it is, like the NAB a dynamic translation translated by an entirely catholic team, with a commentary written by catholic clergy.
It is not without criticism: the commentary tends to lean a bit in the direction of Liberation Theology, and it’s views on eccumenism can be at risk of being too far in the direction of “Live and let live” constantly warning against sectarian attitudes and far too frequently reinforcing the importance and validity of the Catholic Tradition.
I would strongly suspect that the authors of the commentary are members of a charismatic community, but that’s little more than a suspicion. (I am myself, and recognize some of the language used)
The Forward claims to reject gender inclusive language, I’ve seen editions ranging from the 15th to the current edition (53rd) and they have significant places where the translation does use gender inclusive translations.

Personally I use the CCB for my current reading of the whole bible, and am reading it’s commentaries.
I put that side by side with the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible when I’m attempting a more detailed study of a new testament passage or concept. The notes in the ICSB are truly excellent. I LOVE them and cant wait till the Old Testament is published.

I have also just ordered the ESV with Apocrypha by Oxford University Press. This is the version of the bible which is to be used for a new lectionary in the UK Ireland, Australia, New Zealand and many other countries, hopefully being published some time next year.
Currently there is no official catholic edition of the ESV, I suspect we’ll have to wait a while for that.
It has no commentary. - I’ll stick to Catholic commentaries for now.


#6

virtualreligion.net/iho/herod_b.html

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herod_II


#7

WOW! I just got home from work and was hoping that maybe I would be lucky if one person responded. Boy was I surprised to see so many people offering up information for me. I do appreciate all that you have shared. I plan to reread after dinner. Thanks again.

Billy Ray


#8

[quote="anruari, post:5, topic:323439"]
Remember there's a big difference between the text of the Bible, and the commentary which is the opinion of one person or a select group of people.

The commentary in the NAB gets LOTS of criticism.

The SPECIFIC example you give is an example of what is called Historical Critical method of bible interpretation. The vatican has explicitly banned the use of this method in isolation. it must only be used in accordance with other methods including the Traditional interpretations of the Church.

As others have said, the commentary in the Ignatius Bible is good... but it's the Ignatius Catholic Study bible you need, if you dont get the Study Bible you'll get nothing but a few crossreferences and no detailed notes.

The Study Bible is in incomplete project. Today (April 2013) the New Testament is available, and Genesis and Exodus are available. the rest of the Old testament is not yet published. The bible text used is the RSV-2CE which is a highly respected translation.

Another bible in which I like the Notes is the Christian Community Bible. This is not easy to find in the USA and not sold by Amazon.com, but it is available from some online catholic booksellers.

It has a "Pastoral Commentary". it is, like the NAB a dynamic translation translated by an entirely catholic team, with a commentary written by catholic clergy.
It is not without criticism: the commentary tends to lean a bit in the direction of Liberation Theology, and it's views on eccumenism can be at risk of being too far in the direction of "Live and let live" constantly warning against sectarian attitudes and far too frequently reinforcing the importance and validity of the Catholic Tradition.
I would strongly suspect that the authors of the commentary are members of a charismatic community, but that's little more than a suspicion. (I am myself, and recognize some of the language used)
The Forward claims to reject gender inclusive language, I've seen editions ranging from the 15th to the current edition (53rd) and they have significant places where the translation does use gender inclusive translations.

Personally I use the CCB for my current reading of the whole bible, and am reading it's commentaries.
I put that side by side with the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible when I'm attempting a more detailed study of a new testament passage or concept. The notes in the ICSB are truly excellent. I LOVE them and cant wait till the Old Testament is published.

I have also just ordered the ESV with Apocrypha by Oxford University Press. This is the version of the bible which is to be used for a new lectionary in the UK Ireland, Australia, New Zealand and many other countries, hopefully being published some time next year.
Currently there is no official catholic edition of the ESV, I suspect we'll have to wait a while for that.
It has no commentary. - I'll stick to Catholic commentaries for now.

[/quote]

Just for info, the Christian Community Bible is now available at Amazon for Kindle.


#9

[quote="txcanoeman, post:1, topic:323439"]
In the story of the death of John the Baptist we read in Mark and Matthew that Herodias is the wife of Herod's brother Philip but the footnote says it was not Philip but another half-brother Boethus. Is this because later Bible scholars have uncovered other writings that indicate it was Boethus? And if so is the reason we don't correct the scripture verse because it is a minor detail?

I'm actually reading through Mark one story a day (bold heading within each chapter). I use the footnotes and cross references to gain a better understanding of the context and meaning, prayerfully reflect on what I read and then write my thoughts in a journal. I'm really enjoying reading the Bible like I never have before!

Thanks in advance for your time.

Billy Ray

[/quote]

I am not a big fan of the commentary in the NAB. For one, it is anonymous. There is no accountability on what is written. Secondly, it almost completely ignores tradition as being a worthy testament to the truth. It is instead relying on purely historical criticism which sets an impossibly high bar for many events in the bible. I would stick to Haydock and the Catena Aurea if you want faithful commentary that does not ignore the Spiritual dimension of the scripture.

You can see Haydock's commentary here by clicking on the blue flags.
credobiblestudy.com/roman/en/catholic-bible-douay-rheims-nt-book-luke-lk-chapter-3/49/3/19

It was Phillip, but just not the Tetrarch


#10

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.