Bible debate: RSV versus NRSV

by Letters Editor · April 17, 2012

From Cardinal Wilfrid Napier OFM, Archbishop of Durban

Concerning the RSV versus NRSV letter by Fr Szypula and Sr Coyle (March 21), a visit to websites on this topic will lead one to question those who are questioning the decision of the Holy See to opt for the 1971 edition of the Revised Standard Version of the Bible rather than the earlier 1952 edition or the New Revised Standard Version.

An interesting observation by one of the researchers is that at least one of the translators working on the New Revised Standard Version expressed surprise at finding inclusive language in the NRSV text where it had not been there when the text last passed through the hands of the translators. Is that translator implying that the text was doctored or emasculated post factum?

Two serious talking points on one of the websites focused on:

(i) the NRSV text of Isaiah which states that “the young woman is with child”, as if something has already happened; as compared with the RSV text which talks about something still to happen: “the virgin will conceive and bear a son.”

(ii) the NRSV text of John 7:39 which states: “For as yet there was no Spirit, because Jesus was not yet glorified.” By contrast the RSV reads: “For as yet the Spirit had not yet been given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.”

The latter has grave consequences for the doctrine of the Holy Trinity! So, while the NRSV maybe more accurate, is it better liturgy and for theology?

If you are interested google RSV versus NRSV. At least a dozen sites will come up all most informative!