Why are there different versions of the Bible?

[Chrystal]

I’m sure this question has been asked on here, but I did honestly do a search and I didn’t find it, so I hope nobody minds me asking.

Why are there different versions of the Bible, (King James Version, Catholic, NIV, etc) and how do you know which one you should buy, or read, etc? The Bible I own and read now is a King James Version. I know that there have have been Bibles written that are supposed to be to where it’s easy to understand or something like that, but other than that, why? I’m just curious.

 

[NotWorthy]

There are three main points of reference that will help answer your question.

a) There are Catholic Bibles and Non-Catholic Christian Bibles. The NT books are the same, but the Catholic Church adopted the the OT Canon consisting of 46 books. The Protestant Church didn’t recognize these books and adopted an OT Canon that consisted of 39 books. These 7 books are often referred to as “Deuterocanonical” by Catholics and “Apochrypha” by Protestants.

b) Each bible consists of translations from the original Scripture. When one translates a passage from one language to another, one has to make decisions on how to translate it. You can translate the best meaning of each word or you can translate the best meaning of the context. For instance, if one translates “It’s raining cats and dogs” to another language (say Spanish) do you translate “cats and dogs” into Spanish where the term may not make sense? Or do you translate into Spanish “It is raining hard and heavy”.? The numerous translations (NIV, NAB, KJV, etc.) have all went about it different ways, but each trying to create the most accurate translation.

c) Some have better commentaries than others.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

I’m sure this question has been asked on here, but I did honestly do a search and I didn’t find it, so I hope nobody minds me asking.

Why are there different versions of the Bible, (King James Version, Catholic, NIV, etc) and how do you know which one you should buy, or read, etc? The Bible I own and read now is a King James Version. I know that there have have been Bibles written that are supposed to be to where it’s easy to understand or something like that, but other than that, why? I’m just curious.

The 1st difference is between Catholic and Protestant bibles. Protestants came to believe that certain books were not corrrectly included within the canon they had received from Catholics (the one’s who created the canon) and removed those books.

The second reason is that some translations are simply done poorly. the KJV is one of the worst having many errors of translation, some lines were recopied, others omitted in error and the word choices were often incorrect because of a faulty understanding of greek, or the fact that they had very poor copies in the first place. The KJV also suffers from an attempt to render certain passages less Catholic and more in line with the then Protestant teaching.

If I were to chose, I would choose one of the modern versions as better translations haveing many more manuscripts to choose from than those used in earlier times. I’d avoid the NKJV completely because it suffers from some of the same problems of the original. It is universally the choice of fundamentalists who deny that there is any change in scripture from one translation to another and for reasons known only to them, choice to chose only teh KJV althought there were many many translations before it, and they are different in many respects.

There is and probably never will be a definitive translation that is completely accurate. Those who engage in this work are working from copies of copies of copies. There are no original texts of any of the books and haven’t been since the time well before a determination was made to translate and canonize them.

 

[lak611]

Why are there different versions of the Bible, (King James Version, Catholic, NIV, etc) and how do you know which one you should buy, or read, etc?

I would suggest that you read this article. There are so good links at the bottom of the article that provide more information.

 

[jblake]

Chrystal;:

I know that there have have been Bibles written that are supposed to be to where it’s easy to understand or something like that, but other than that, why? I’m just curious.

The major reasons for a new translation are:

• To present a specific theological bias: EG: The New World Translation;
• To reflect new scholarship in Biblical manuscripts, studies, and related fields: EG: The Jerusalem Bible;
• Publishers chasing profits: EG: The Holcomb Translation;
• To provide a version in the contemporary vernacular of a specific population group: EG: The Revolution Bible;

There is, arguably, no difference between the third and fourth category. The overwhelming majority of recent translations/versions are in the fourth category;

If that sounds cynical, justify the publication of two, or more translations of the Bible into English every year, when two thirds of the languages on the planet do not have any part of the Bible available in their language. Alternatively, justify why only 5% of the worlds languages have the entire Catholic Canon of the Bible available in the written form.

xan

jonathon

 

[NotWorthy]

If that sounds cynical, justify the publication of two, or more translations of the Bible into English every year, when two thirds of the languages on the planet do not have any part of the Bible available in their language. Alternatively, justify why only 5% of the worlds languages have the entire Catholic Canon of the Bible available in the written form.

xan

jonathon

This could be a little misleading. How many languages are there in China, for example. The 5% of the worlds languages statistics could easily lead one to believe that roughly 5% of the world has access to the Bible.

To get a clearer picture, IMO, how many of the worlds countries today have a Catholic Canon of the Bible available?

 

[RobHom]

One other reason for so many versions of the “Bible” is purely “political” or quasi-political. If you are a king who is in dispute with the Pope…you commission your own “version” with those minor little “editorial changes” that meet your needs… Or if you start your own religion…you write your own.

 

[Todd_Easton]

The books of the Bible were originally written in Hebrew and Greek. Unless you can read those ancient languages, you will need to read the Bible in a translation. There are a number of translations of the Bible in English that have been approved for use by the Catholic Church, such as the Douay-Rheims Bible, the New American Bible, the Jerusalem Bible, and the Catholic Edition of the Revised Standard Version.

The King James Version, though popular among English-speaking, non-Catholic Christians for a long time, was never approved for use by the Catholic Church.

 

[NotWorthy]

The books of the Bible were originally written in Hebrew and Greek. Unless you can read those ancient languages, you will need to read the Bible in a translation. There are a number of translations of the Bible in English that have been approved for use by the Catholic Church, such as the Douay-Rheims Bible, the New American Bible, the Jerusalem Bible, and the Catholic Edition of the Revised Standard Version.

The King James Version, though popular among English-speaking, non-Catholic Christians for a long time, was never approved for use by the Catholic Church.

Yeah, those seven missing books seems to stick in Mother Church’s craw, eh?

 

[Crumpy]

Yes, there are many threads on this very subject.

No version is considered to be without error or bias. I read all the posts, maybe I missed a mention of the Jerusalem Bible (1966) or the more recent New Jerusalem Bible (I don’t know anything about it).

I’m reading the Revised Standard Version - Second Catholic Edition. It’s very readable. It is based on the King James translation, but has been updated in speech. Some phrases in it are obviously modern, but for the sake of making the verses more understandable.

If you use this RSV-SCE, and you already have the King James, then you can use the exhaustive bible concordance of James Strong (Strong’s Concordance). Although it is a protestant book, I find it helpful. Don’t buy that unless you really look it over and figure out if you really want to get into it.

When you find a word that interests you, you can look it up in Strong’s to see all the places it is used in the KJV of the bible. You can look up the word in the Hebrew or Greek dictionary, to see what the meaning is. This book is handy for the majority of us who don’t know the original languages of the Bible, but it has gotten some people overly confident of themselves in interpreting the Bible.

Dr. Scott Hahn is a popular Catholic bible teacher, and you are in pretty safe territory on his website: salvationhistory.com/

Dr. Tim Gray has programs on EWTN about scripture, and now in 5/08 has a series called Adventures in Exodus which is outstanding. The program mentions a website called www.ascensionpress.com but I don’t know anything about it.

 

[jblake]

NotWorthy;:

This could be a little misleading. How many languages are there in China, for example.

I quit counting at 100, and wasn’t out of the “E’s”. ethnologue.com has a complete list.

The 5% of the worlds languages statistics could easily lead one to believe that roughly 5% of the world has access to the Bible.

If you split the population by language, and treat each language as a single unit, that wouldn’t be a false conclusion;
OTOH, if you look at the percentage of the world’s population who are native speakers of the language, then the data changes slightly.

To get a clearer picture, IMO, how many of the worlds countries today have a Catholic Canon of the Bible available?

Issue #1: The Deterocanonical books are only available in one of the official languages of a country;
Issue # 2: Deuterocanonical books are only available in a semi-official language of the country;
Issue # 3: Possession of the Bible is illegal in the country;

xan

jonathon