Catholic church revises NAB translation

[freelance lover]

So I found this article on Yahoo today. Apparently the Catholic church will be releasing an updated version of the NAB translation of the Bible. They've removed certain words like "booty" and replaced it with "war loot" and so on. Some verses have also been rephrased to sound more poetic or close to the intended meaning.

What does everyone think of this? I know some people are very particular about their translation, and many believe the older, KJV to be the best. I also know there's a overriding idea that the Bible is unchangeable and the perfect word of God, which changing it might speak against.

So.... thoughts?  

[rmcdra]

To be expected. As we gain new understandings and observations, our old understandings and superstitions pass away. If anything a new edition reflects the revelatory tradition and constant truth seeking that has been a key component in Christianity.

Besides they aren't changing any doctrine, if anything they are clarifying words that are difficult to translate and disusing words that have different meanings. Also I'm sure it's to subvert some of the less than critical critics who will thumb through and say, "Look they talk about 'booty', obviously the Bible is anti-women."  

[freelance lover]

I think updated the translation is good, simply because we have different understandings of words than we did when the original revision was done in the 70s. The word holocaust has been removed, and grain has nw replaced cereal. It's a good thing.

I just know there are so many people out there who are like, "The Bible say thsi word for word," that to me, changing even the translation would seem contradictory.  

[The Amazing Ryuu]

freelance lover

I just know there are so many people out there who are like, "The Bible say thsi word for word," that to me, changing even the translation would seem contradictory.

I know people like that too, and they really annoy me. For the sake of argument, let's agree that the Bible is the infallible word of God. Just because God is infallible doesn't mean man is. In fact, that whole book contains nothing but stories of just how fallible man really is.

I actually saw that article for the first time on Yahoo News and thought to myself about the outcry that was going to happen shortly after. It's a shame that no one gets this worked up over anything important. I think it's great that we're finally putting all that knowledge that we've gained about the Bible over the past 30-odd years to good use. I, for one, would love to see a few eliminations of the word "abomination" and use another phrase in its place to show the definition at the time. The updated Bible will be a great tool for new Christians, teenagers, and generations that are too young for the gritty parts.  

[Galad Aglaron]

Heh. I suppose it's overly optimistic to hope that they might fix up the mistranslation in the Pauline epistles that informs their condemnation of homosexuality. Still, updating one's understanding of ancient texts is a good thing. Scholars are always refining their technique. A new translation can only bring us closer to the truth of what was intended.  

[The Amazing Ryuu]

Galad Aglaron

Heh. I suppose it's overly optimistic to hope that they might fix up the mistranslation in the Pauline epistles that informs their condemnation of homosexuality. Still, updating one's understanding of ancient texts is a good thing. Scholars are always refining their technique. A new translation can only bring us closer to the truth of what was intended.

Amen to THAT.  

[freelance lover]

The Amazing Ryuu

Galad Aglaron

Heh. I suppose it's overly optimistic to hope that they might fix up the mistranslation in the Pauline epistles that informs their condemnation of homosexuality. Still, updating one's understanding of ancient texts is a good thing. Scholars are always refining their technique. A new translation can only bring us closer to the truth of what was intended.

Amen to THAT.

YES. Especially since there's not Greek work for homosexual.  

[The Amazing Ryuu]

Also, was anyone else the tiniest bit surprised the Catholics were the ones who incorporated this? Not in a denomination-bashing way, but they're usually the group that's most into tradition, and the unchanging word of God. Maybe the faith has gotten a little more modern in recent years, but I kinda see that as a big step for them.  

[freelance lover]

The Amazing Ryuu

Also, was anyone else the tiniest bit surprised the Catholics were the ones who incorporated this? Not in a denomination-bashing way, but they're usually the group that's most into tradition, and the unchanging word of God. Maybe the faith has gotten a little more modern in recent years, but I kinda see that as a big step for them.

Yeah, I was surprised by that too. Especially since the current Pope is so conservative. John Paul II was cool, but I don't like this guy D:

I should stop drinking vodka and posting on Gaia. This is hard.  

[Galad Aglaron]

freelance lover

The Amazing Ryuu

Galad Aglaron

Heh. I suppose it's overly optimistic to hope that they might fix up the mistranslation in the Pauline epistles that informs their condemnation of homosexuality. Still, updating one's understanding of ancient texts is a good thing. Scholars are always refining their technique. A new translation can only bring us closer to the truth of what was intended.

Amen to THAT.

YES. Especially since there's not Greek work for homosexual.

Well, there is, but it's not the word used in Paul.  

[The Amazing Ryuu]

Galad Aglaron

Well, there is, but it's not the word used in Paul.

Seriously. Paul MADE UP a word for his letters. He didn't use the established word of the day, which I think translates to "boy-love" but I'm not 100% on the translation. Either way, I hope that all these added notes are accurate too. Especially over controversial topics.  

[freelance lover]

The Amazing Ryuu

Galad Aglaron

Well, there is, but it's not the word used in Paul.

Seriously. Paul MADE UP a word for his letters. He didn't use the established word of the day, which I think translates to "boy-love" but I'm not 100% on the translation. Either way, I hope that all these added notes are accurate too. Especially over controversial topics.

It is generally understood a translating to "soft" or "effeminate." A man being feminine was seriously looked down upon in Paul's time, so being the receiver in a homosexual sexual relationship would have been shameful. Some theologians think Paul was more interested in that component of gay sex than anything else, which basically means gay sex is fine as long as you're not the bottom lol  

[The Amazing Ryuu]

freelance lover

I should stop drinking vodka and posting on Gaia.

Agreed. Or maybe you should just lay off the vodka altogether. wink  

[Galad Aglaron]

freelance lover

The Amazing Ryuu

Galad Aglaron

Well, there is, but it's not the word used in Paul.

Seriously. Paul MADE UP a word for his letters. He didn't use the established word of the day, which I think translates to "boy-love" but I'm not 100% on the translation. Either way, I hope that all these added notes are accurate too. Especially over controversial topics.

It is generally understood a translating to "soft" or "effeminate." A man being feminine was seriously looked down upon in Paul's time, so being the receiver in a homosexual sexual relationship would have been shameful. Some theologians think Paul was more interested in that component of gay sex than anything else, which basically means gay sex is fine as long as you're not the bottom lol

And that is a silly (and hypocritical) Roman idea. Nobody ever called the Sacred Band of Thebes soft, did they? Or the philosopher-warriors of Athens?  

[freelance lover]

Galad Aglaron

freelance lover

The Amazing Ryuu

Galad Aglaron

Well, there is, but it's not the word used in Paul.

Seriously. Paul MADE UP a word for his letters. He didn't use the established word of the day, which I think translates to "boy-love" but I'm not 100% on the translation. Either way, I hope that all these added notes are accurate too. Especially over controversial topics.

It is generally understood a translating to "soft" or "effeminate." A man being feminine was seriously looked down upon in Paul's time, so being the receiver in a homosexual sexual relationship would have been shameful. Some theologians think Paul was more interested in that component of gay sex than anything else, which basically means gay sex is fine as long as you're not the bottom lol

And that is a silly (and hypocritical) Roman idea. Nobody ever called the Sacred Band of Thebes soft, did they? Or the philosopher-warriors of Athens?

Pretty much. I just vaguely remember one of the books I had to read for my Pauline Letters class mentioning that. I need to reread it, but my books are at home so... later.