Fish Eaters Traditional Catholic Forum
May 22, 2013, 03:21:PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: The man still needs help!
 
   Fish Eaters    Forum Index   Forum Rules   Help Calendar Members Chat Room   Who's Chatting   Login Register  
Fish Eaters Traditional Catholic Forum > Church > Sacred Scripture & Church Documents > Help...I do not understand the bible!
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5]
 
Author Topic: Help...I do not understand the bible!  (Read 3031 times)
JamieF
Member

Gender: Male
Personality type: Choleric / Melancholic
Posts: 173
« Reply #40 on: May 22, 2010, 06:21:AM »
Quote from: Credo
Quote from: JamieF
The Douay Rheims is a translation of the vulgate.  The vulgate is the ONLY canonized Catholic Bible - it is THE perfect Bible containing no errors.  If you seek translations before that, you are not reading the Bible as canonized by the Church.  Therefore, the DR is not a translation of a translation - it is a translation of the only perfect translation.

Correction: The Vulgate has no theological errors. It has plenty of linguistics errors however. This includes an amusing rendering of Psalm 45 where the Psalmist - in Latin - "burps" his praises to God.  The Vulgate has gone through a number of revisions, the most recent being in 1986.

Reading the best translations, as the saying goes, is like playing Bach on a tin can. The Vulgate is no different.

If one wishes to hear not only the message of the Bible, which a good translation can relate, but the way in which God spoke to mankind, a knowledge of the original languages is necessary. No translation can convey the manner, the grammar and syntax, with which the Holy Spirit spoke to mankind.


The original versions do not exist.  The Vulgate is the ONLY copy of the Bible guaranteed by the Church to be completely free of doctrinal error.  You can not study the original texts if they don't exist.  Fortunately for us St Jerome did and his translation - canonised by the Church is still extant. 

Interestingly, you say: "which a good translation can relate" after deriding the canonized vulgate - what translation exactly do you think is better than the only canonized version of the Bible in the Catholic Church?  Please name some manuscripts or editions.  Oh - and if one wishes to hear the message of the Bible they should listen to the traditional teachings of the Catholic Church - not an "improved" Bible from the 1980s, 20 years after "the smoke of satan" ... "entered the sanctuary".

Just to reaffirm what I am saying (which I wouldn't do if I were debating a Catholic) - the Latin Vulgate of St Jerome is CANONIZED - ie, infallibly declared to be free of error - by the Catholic Church and no other copy of the Bible is or ever has been.  You can argue grammar all you like- but the Bible of St Jerome is perfect in that it is the ONLY copy of the Bible that exists in the way that God intends it to be (remember the whole, "bind on earth" thing?)
Logged
Resurrexi
Member

Gender: Male
Posts: 3,104
« Reply #41 on: May 31, 2010, 04:35:AM »
Quote from: JamieF
Quote from: Credo
Quote from: JamieF
The Douay Rheims is a translation of the vulgate.  The vulgate is the ONLY canonized Catholic Bible - it is THE perfect Bible containing no errors.  If you seek translations before that, you are not reading the Bible as canonized by the Church.  Therefore, the DR is not a translation of a translation - it is a translation of the only perfect translation.

Correction: The Vulgate has no theological errors. It has plenty of linguistics errors however. This includes an amusing rendering of Psalm 45 where the Psalmist - in Latin - "burps" his praises to God.  The Vulgate has gone through a number of revisions, the most recent being in 1986.

Reading the best translations, as the saying goes, is like playing Bach on a tin can. The Vulgate is no different.

If one wishes to hear not only the message of the Bible, which a good translation can relate, but the way in which God spoke to mankind, a knowledge of the original languages is necessary. No translation can convey the manner, the grammar and syntax, with which the Holy Spirit spoke to mankind.


The original versions do not exist.  The Vulgate is the ONLY copy of the Bible guaranteed by the Church to be completely free of doctrinal error.  You can not study the original texts if they don't exist.  Fortunately for us St Jerome did and his translation - canonised by the Church is still extant. 

Interestingly, you say: "which a good translation can relate" after deriding the canonized vulgate - what translation exactly do you think is better than the only canonized version of the Bible in the Catholic Church?  Please name some manuscripts or editions.  Oh - and if one wishes to hear the message of the Bible they should listen to the traditional teachings of the Catholic Church - not an "improved" Bible from the 1980s, 20 years after "the smoke of satan" ... "entered the sanctuary".

Just to reaffirm what I am saying (which I wouldn't do if I were debating a Catholic) - the Latin Vulgate of St Jerome is CANONIZED - ie, infallibly declared to be free of error - by the Catholic Church and no other copy of the Bible is or ever has been.  You can argue grammar all you like- but the Bible of St Jerome is perfect in that it is the ONLY copy of the Bible that exists in the way that God intends it to be (remember the whole, "bind on earth" thing?)

You don't seem to know what you're talking about. Maybe a look at Pope Pius XII's Divino Afflante Spiritu will help you better to understand the matter:

"And if the Tridentine Synod wished 'that all should use as authentic' the Vulgate Latin version, this, as all know, applies only to the Latin Church and to the public use of the same Scriptures; nor does it, doubtless, in any way diminish the authority and value of the original texts." (Pope Pius XII, Divino Afflante Spiritu, 21)

"Wherefore this authority of the Vulgate in matters of doctrine by no means prevents - nay rather today it almost demands - either the corroboration and confirmation of this same doctrine by the original texts or the having recourse on any and every occasion to the aid of these same texts, by which the correct meaning of the Sacred Letters is everywhere daily made more clear and evident." (Pope Pius XII, Divino Afflante Spiritu, 22)
Logged
Vita brevis breviter in brevi finietur,
Mors venit velociter quae neminem veretur,
Omnia mors perimit et nulli miseretur.
Ad mortem festinamus; peccare desistamus.
aquinas138
Member

Gender: Male
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 1,600
« Reply #42 on: June 01, 2010, 08:48:PM »
I think the Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition would be the way to go, all things considered.  It is not a translation of the Vulgate, but it would help in understanding certain passages.  The big limitation with the Douay-Rheims is that the language can be difficult to understand for a modern English speaker.  The Bible can be confusing enough in any language - using archaic English seems to me to add an extra layer of difficulty that is unnecessary for personal Bible study.  If you have to spend a lot of time with a dictionary, you might as well learn the original languages!

That said, you should ultimately follow your conscience informed by the advice of your priest.
Logged
Sicut canis qui revertitur ad vomitum suum, sic imprudens qui iterat stultitiam suam. (Prov. 26:11)

Esse nihil dicis quidquid petis, inprobe Cinna:
si nil, Cinna, petis, nil tibi, Cinna, nego. (Martial 3.61)
aquinas138
Member

Gender: Male
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 1,600
« Reply #43 on: June 01, 2010, 08:52:PM »
Credo, referring back to your post of May 16 on the Psalmist "burping" - though it is true that in classical Latin eructare means "to burp," it definitely attains the meaning "to utter" in later Latin; by the Middle Ages, it had completely lost its former signification.
Logged
Sicut canis qui revertitur ad vomitum suum, sic imprudens qui iterat stultitiam suam. (Prov. 26:11)

Esse nihil dicis quidquid petis, inprobe Cinna:
si nil, Cinna, petis, nil tibi, Cinna, nego. (Martial 3.61)
James02
Member

Gender: Male
Posts: 6,912
« Reply #44 on: June 01, 2010, 11:19:PM »
The DR is an excellent Bible.  When debating Protestants, my brother and I have occasionally come across some weird passages in the NASB.  Going back to the Greek, we always find that the DR is a perfect match.

I would recommend starting with the New Testament if you are interested in Bible study.  Having an RSV handy is good if you get stuck, but try to stay with the DR.
Logged
"God's Wrath is Glorious, and I have a front row seat"

"We can not guarantee success.  We can only deserve it."

"And who do you say that I Am?"
"That one simple question, whether Jesus of Nazareth was God Incarnate, becomes increasingly decisive between people, as history moves forward. .... The answer to this question cuts into human ties and seems to reflect even on the nature of inanimate things.  What if:  all that is folly in the eyes of the Greeks, and scandal in the eyes of the Jews, ... is Truth?"

And there was no doubt about it -- towards Him we had been running, or from Him we had been running away, but all the time He had been in the center of things.


DeVille
Guest
« Reply #45 on: June 02, 2010, 11:48:PM »
Quote from: Reena
I've been a convert to SSPX for almost 7 and a half years. I took a basic catechism class before I was baptized. I was always taught how important the bible is. Here's the thing...everytime I pick up the bible I get so discouraged because I really don't understand it. I have the Douay Rheims version. I have tried to "google" certain things from the bible, but get such different points of views...

Are there any study guides that go along with SSPX teachings? I'm sorry if this has been asked before...maybe you can direct me to the link. I just want to read parts of the bible and understand it.

Thanks!

I have trouble understanding Scripture either. And also, coming from a modernist environment, I was exposed to very bad exegesis. Now, I am very cautious and don't venture into reading Scripture by myself. Usually, I read small portions from the Scripture at each time and then the commentary of Fr. Lapide.

They can be consulted here:
http://www.catholicapologetics.info/scripture/newtestament/Lapide.htm

or bought here:
http://www.angeluspress.org/oscatalog/item/8284/commentary-on-the-four-gospels

It is very pricey and Angelus Press carry only the Commentary on The Four Gospels (there are commentary on some Epistles as well).

In fact, given that they are in the public domain,  I downloaded all volumes here:
http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=commentary%20lapide
and here:
http://openlibrary.org/search?q=commentary+lapide

You can see for yourself that they are awesome (I strongly recommend the downloadable volumes).

Also, before Mass, I read the more succinct but  very good Church's Year (Father Goffine):
http://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/The_Church_Year/index.htm

For the Old Testament, you can consult here :
http://www.catholicapologetics.info/scripture/oldtestament/index.htm
« Last Edit: June 03, 2010, 12:53:AM by DeVille » Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5]
 
 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.8 | SMF © 2006-2008, Simple Machines LLC