What do you think of the Catholic Church's misrepresentation of Genesis 3:15 in the Douay-Rheims "Bible"?
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
What do you think of the Catholic Church's misrepresentation of Genesis 3:15 in the Douay-Rheims "Bible"?
I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel. Douay-Rheims Edition.
The Douay-Rheims is an English translation of the Latin Vulgate, compiled by Jerome and probably completed circa 405. His use of the feminine ipsa rather than the neutual ipsum resulted in the difference between "she" and "he" in the English. Since Catholics and Protestants alike regard Jesus as the one who would crush the serpent's head, it would appear that Jerome got it wrong. Jerome was a huge fan of the Virgin Mary so it is not too surprising that he did this. It was, however, an easy error to commit from a linguistic point of view. This website http://biblescripture.net/First.html offers as good an explanation of the linguistics as I have found:I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; He will strike at your head, while you strike at his heel. New American Bible.
The only sermon I have heard on how we should regard the Protoevangelium was delivered by Albert Mohler at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary on October 10, 2007. You can listen to it on his website at http://www.albertmohler.com/sermons-and-speeches/ It's really pretty impressive how he brings this verse down through the ages as the promise of who would break the curse and how it was to be broken.This passage is striking! A message of hope is given humanity, for, even though God begins to punish the offenders, he speaks of mankind having offspring -so his blessing on mankind of future generations has not been removed. This is in itself a declaration of mercy.
God informs the serpent he will put enmity between the serpent and the woman. This is reinforced by the second part of the sentence, “between your offspring and hers.” The Hebrew word - zera - is the same for “offspring” and “seed”, accounting for the difference in English translations, but in both cases the word is masculine.
The second sentence begins with a personal pronoun. The word may refer either to the “woman”, or may refer to the offspring or seed of the woman. Thus the beginning of the second part of Genesis 3:15 is translated primarily in two ways. Both the Latin Vulgate and the Douay-Rheims translations convey this passage as “she will crush your head, while you strike at his heel “... whereas the King James version, the Revised Standard Version, and the NIV read “he will crush your head...” In view of the epicene personal pronoun (one form to indicate both male and female sex) as described above, both are correct!
That seems a pretty reasonable explination. Though on the front of it; it seems as though Mary uses Jesus to crush the serpants head. I'm curious about the lying in wait to strike his heel. Does the serpant strike the heel or not?The Douay-Rheims is an English translation of the Latin Vulgate, compiled by Jerome and probably completed circa 405. His use of the feminine ipsa rather than the neutual ipsum resulted in the difference between "she" and "he" in the English. Since Catholics and Protestants alike regard Jesus as the one who would crush the serpent's head, it would appear that Jerome got it wrong. Jerome was a huge fan of the Virgin Mary so it is not too surprising that he did this. It was, however, an easy error to commit from a linguistic point of view. This website http://biblescripture.net/First.html offers as good an explanation of the linguistics as I have found:
The only sermon I have heard on how we should regard the Protoevangelium was delivered by Albert Mohler at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary on October 10, 2007. You can listen to it on his website at http://www.albertmohler.com/sermons-and-speeches/ It's really pretty impressive how he brings this verse down through the ages as the promise of who would break the curse and how it was to be broken.
Mary using Jesus to crush the serpent's head is certainly one way of looking at this verse, in which case Jerome would have got it right and all the modern translations got it wrong. Have you checked the KJV, which uses neither "he" nor "she" but opts for the neuter "it"?That seems a pretty reasonable explination. Though on the front of it; it seems as though Mary uses Jesus to crush the serpants head. I'm curious about the lying in wait to strike his heel. Does the serpant strike the heel or not?
Mary using Jesus to crush the serpent's head is certainly one way of looking at this verse, in which case Jerome would have got it right and all the modern translations got it wrong. Have you checked the KJV, which uses neither "he" nor "she" but opts for the neuter "it"?
A lot more is written about head crushing than about heel striking. It is important to note the distinction between the two. One is fatal, the other is painful and inconvenient but not fatal. Yes, the serpent strikes the heel of our Lord by and through His crucifixion. It was a cruel blow but of course not fatal because He is alive.
An intresting thing about Genesis 3:15 is that I read it for years and thought it referred to nothing more than the natural hostility between people and snakes. It just goes to show that the Bible contains so much more than you can gain by a mere superficial reading.
But whether we read, She shal bruise, or, her sede, that is her sonne Christ, shal bruise the serpents head, we attribute no more, nor no lesse to Christ, nor to our Ladie by the one reading, then by the other
I am Catholic, and wasn't allowed to sign up until I named my religion as Christian. Any attempt to name it as Catholic met with a denial email of my registration. However, I am glad to be here to represent my Church's belief.
Gen. 3: 15
"I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; He will strike at your head, while you strike at his heel."
The Catholic Church teaches that this scripture is the foretelling of Mary's coming, and of course her offspring, Christ himself. That the woman spoken of, is of course the Theotokos, or Mother of God. Therefore her offspring, Christ himself, would crush the head of Satan.
It is both a foretelling of Mary, and one of Christ and his power over Satan.
That is what the Catholic Church teaches.![]()
So, how does Mary crush the head of Satan? And if it is Mary who defeats Satan, why does the Bible say repeatedly in other places that it's actually Jesus who defeats Satan?
Therefore her offspring, Christ himself, would crush the head of Satan.
I refer you to my post back to you on the subject. I didn't say Mary crushed Satan's head.
I didn't say you said it. Are you saying that the Douay-Rheims "Bible" is wrong?
I honestly don't own one of those. I do know that it was put together by Saint Jerome.
Could you give me the verse from the Douay-Rheims please?
Douay-Rheims translation is some 500 years old.
The New American Bible, which is arguably the most common English translation used by Roman Catholics today, reads, "I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; He will strike at your head, while you strike at his heel."
Fignar said:I can't say that it is wrong, no.
So then, you acknowledge that Catholicism teaches that it is Mary and not Jesus who will defeat Satan.
Wow John. Is there no end to their heresies?