Why are there different versions of the Bible?

Question

There are different versions of the Bible. That suggests that they can not all be right. So which one is true? I know most are translations from the original Bible, but we know translating languages are never exact because some languages do not have a similar word that means the same thing.

Answer 1

There are ONLY TWO versions of the Bible, but there are many TRANSLATIONS of the Bible, which all say the same thing but in a different languages, and there are many TRANSLITERATIONS of the Bible, all of which say the same thing but using different words. ALL Bibles, except one, say EXACTLY THE SAME THING so far as the ideas and doctrines of Christianity go.



There is NO "word for word" translation of the Bible from either Hebrew or Greek, simply because there is no direct translation between these languages and any other language today. this is because both Greek and Hebrew used different SYNTAX and different IDIOMS to express their ideas.



The PRIAMRY translations of the Bible is that based on the original Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic (similar to Hebrew) languages. These are the most popular ones, and include the King James, the New King James, and NIV, and a few others.



There are many TRANSLITERATIONS of the Bible, which will typically use a modern language as their source (like the King James or NIV) and then translate idea-for-idea into a more common "street" language. The message is one of those. Transliterations are hard to study, because they depend on the current contractions and speech idioms, and so some ideas become unclear as the language changes



The SECONDAR "version" of the Bible is The New World Translation. This translation is written by and supported by ONLY the Jehovah's Witness Church, and it is NOT accepted by any other churches. this is because the New World Translation was intentionally MIS-interpreted in order to "prove" the Jehovah's Witness heresy that Jesus IS NOT God.



This idea is very similar to, and probably derivative of, the ideas of Arius of Alexandra around 300 A.D. Arianism, as this is called [not to be confused with Aryanism, which is the promotion of the Aryan race of super-people by Nazi Germany] says that Jesus, God, and the Holy Spirit are NOT the same thing, and thus promotes a doctrine totally against the truth taught by the Bible.



At the Council of Nicea in 325 AD, Arius of Alexandria was censured and physically exiled from the Christian Community.



It is recorded in history that Arius' ideas were so radical, so subversive, that Bishop Nicolas slapped him hard across the face. Yes, THAT Bishop Nicholas, the same who later became St. Nicolas -- the original Santa Claus.

Answer 2

1) There are different versions of the Bible. That suggests that they can not all be right.



Actually, that is not correct. Theoretically - logically - they *could* all "be right". The reason is this: in the fields of literature and publishing, the word "version" is synonymous with "translation", and that is almost always how the word "version" is used when applied to Bibles (there are a *very* few exceptions).



So: a different version of the Bible is, in fact, a different **translation** of the Bible, not an *alteration* of the Bible.



Now: ideally (things are not ideal, of course, but ideally) all translations of the Bible would be 100% accurate and 100% precise, and so no matter how many translations of the Bible there were, they would all convey *exactly the same meaning*. Consider this example from two modern Bible translations:

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=gen+2%3A2&version=NASB;CEV

Clearly these are two different Bible versions. However: isn't the meaning in both passages essentially identical? You can see from that comparison how just because there is more than one Bible version does NOT allow someone to **reasonably** conclude that one of them is right and one of them is wrong.



Different Bible versions use different words to convey - ideally and theoretically - the *very same meaning*.



Because knowledge of the Biblical languages is not perfect, there are - in fact - differences in meaning conveyed between some Bible versions in some passages. However, **for the most part** the ideal is realized and **for the most part** different Bible versions convey the same exact meaning, but using different words to do so.

Answer 3

There is only one version in the original language. (Or at least a number of manuscripts.)



Language changes, so a translation in the time of King James does not use the language we use in English today.



There are different styles of translation too. Some will deliberately try to translate each word accurately in place, but this can lead to it not reading so naturally in English. Other translations will try to make it read/sound better in modern English.



The key point is to understand the intention of the *author*, and reflect that in the language being translated to.

Answer 4

Because people do not speak the way they did in 1600 England, words and phrases used then do not mean to us what they did Then

The Bible is Translated into the language used by People today.many English versions of the Bible exist for the modern reader. While many quality translations exist, more formal translations provide a more direct understanding of the original languages of the Bible and can be enhanced through the variety of options available for today's reader. Of greatest importance is to both study and apply the teachings of the Bible in order to bring glory to its divine author, the Lord Almighty.

Answer 5

No two languages have a perfect one-to-one correspondence for every word. Word meanings and connotations vary, idioms vary, and slang varies. The different versions of the Bible do not differ that much. It's not like one version says that Jesus is a brutal hit man while another version says he's a loving pacifist.



Actually, EVERY version of the bible contains that precise contradiction.



To answer your question, the different versions of the Bible exist because different groups of translators thought they could do a better job than previous translators at making the Bible more literal, more idiomatic, more interesting, easier to understand, etc etc etc.

Answer 6

Good question and you are entirely correct, not all are true. The answer to your question is that Satan cannot destroy the Bible, but he can influence men to attempt their interpretation of the bible using not the original manuscripts but other attempts of translation--good or bad. To the lesser informed, many will be fooled for they do not know the truth--Satan always distorts the truth.

Which version is true---in my opinion it is the King James Version of 1611---why? He commissioned over 40 language scholars--each translated just a portion from the most relievable documents available. As each scholar completed his assigned portion---his work was reviewed by several other scholars---thus you have a check and balance condition to safe guard its authoritative and correct interpretation.

Answer 7

For English translations since the 1600s there are two sources of change one is the discovery of reliable copies of manuscripts that clear up problems in determining the wording of the original texts which no longer exist. The other is improvements in scholarship including archeology and research about the surrounding cultures.



A less meaningful, but important is the change in meaning of English words. The words chosen by translators hundreds of years ago no longer have the meaning they were chosen for. An uneducated, naive, reading produces an incorrect meaning.

Answer 8

You just answered your own question. They are different TRANSLATIONS, not different Bibles. Understand that translating into different languages produces words that can be translated several words that are all correct. That is why someone wanting to know what Bible writers meant, use several translations.



But understand understand understand, these are not different Bibles. They all say the same thing in different words.

Answer 9

Most bibles were produced for political purposes.



The KJV was ordered by King James, because he did not feel that the existing bible(The Bishop's Bible,) supported the king's divine rights as well as it should.



When King Henry VIII, tossed the catholics out of England, he had the "Great Bible" produced. It was basically the Tyndale Bible with some parts the Henry didn't like redacted.



As they say, It's good to be king!

Answer 10

True in what way. They are all interpretations and the original was written by men. If you want to know the original, you have to learn ancient Hebrew and Greek for the New Testament. But Bible itself was selected and put together by men, it was not written as single book. It's kind of haphazard.

Answer 11

It is called freedom of religion and freedom of speech.



The oft revered Authorized King James Version (KJV) of 1611 was itself a revision and consolidation of the work done by William Tyndale, who did a series of translations from the original languages starting in 1522. But the archaic nature of the William Shakespeare version of English, for which the 1611 version of the King James Bible is based, demanded revision. Today there is a New King James Version (NKJV), dated 1982, in which the work for it started in 1975. In the mean time, there are a number of versions that are popular: New American Standard, NASB (first edition 1971, latest edition 1995) which is based upon the 1901 "American Standard Version"; the New International Version, NIV (1978, 2011); and others. The point being that there are a number of versions from which to choose. Why?



The WIKI says this about the NASB:



"Seeing the need for a literal, modern translation of the English Bible, the translators sought to produce a contemporary English Bible while maintaining a word-for-word translation style. In cases where word-for-word literalness was determined to be unacceptable for modern readers, changes were made in the direction of more current idioms. In such instances, the more literal renderings were indicated in footnotes.



"The greatest perceived strength of the NASB is its reliability and fidelity to the original languages, which, along with other literal translations, also allows for ambiguities in the text's meaning. Its corresponding weakness is that its readability and literary style sometimes prove confusing to the average reader. In addition, its printing of verses as individual units instead of paragraphs makes the text appear fragmented (though more recent editions are available in paragraph format)."



The WIKI says this about the NIV:



"The roots of the New International Version began in 1956 with the formation of a small committee to study the value of producing a 'faithful translation of the Scriptures in the common language of the American people.'"



Some translations are considered as "theologically liberal", like the Revised Standard Version (RSV), which includes the Catholic Apocrypha. The New World Translation (NWT) is the sole bible version produced and used by Jehovah's Witnesses and is considered an intentional perversion by evangelical Christians for purposeful changes to scripture in order to validate their beliefs. A common example is the insertion of the article "a" before "God" in John 1:1 in order to diminish the clear description of Jesus (i.e., the "Word", ref. verse 14) from being God to "a God". Hence, Jesus becomes not equal with the Father – the fundamental precept of JW’s and vehemently rejected by evangelical Christians.



Fortunately, the avid Bible student has the ability to compare versions of the Bible. For example, the "biblehub.com" website provides parallel access to 23 translations, but does not include the RSV and NWT, probably for reasons cited. The original language is also available so that complete passages and single words can be looked up to see from what the translators were working. Biblegateway includes 46 versions!



Obviously, the availability of versions confuses people. Here is a tip: the KJV, aside from the Catholic version, was the only version available for English speaking people for about 300 years. Now there is a newer version, the NKJV, that has some minor criticism but is available to people who view Shakespeare's English too difficult to understand. And the NASB and NIV are also good translations. Go to "biblehub" or "biblegateway" and compare versions and convince yourself.



We are truly blessed in this day and age to have this amount of resources and tools for studying God's Word. But with that richness comes some complexity and decision making.



By the way, the translation, while the main part and focus of the Bible itself, is one part of a reason to select a Bible for personal reasons. Various publishers, like Oxford University Press and Zondervan, provide an “envelope” to several versions that includes a tremendous amount of useful study material and help: maps, commentary, character profiles, historical background, etc. I recommend the Scofield and Life Application Study Bibles.

Answer 12

The church would have you believe that each new version includes updated translations, but that's a load of crap. Every new version is closer and closer to the beliefs of Christianity, and the actual translations are ignored. I wouldn't be surprised if the next "version" included passages like, "If you're gay, you're going to Hell."

Answer 13

Ancient Hebrew and Greek did not change and are considered dead languages. Our English language changes (definitions included) and is a living language. Example; gay -when I was a kid that meant a often happy person; now it means a homosexual; It seemed to start out as a male homosexual; but even that component seems to be changing.

Answer 14

There are not different "versions". All bibles* have the same number of books, and when you compare the verses, the différences is just in wording, for example one may say Young woman and another may say "maiden" (an old fashion word for Young woman).



You can find the truth about God from any translation (version) of the bible.

Answer 15

As usual, it all comes down to ... money.



You can't copyright the 1611 King James Version. But you CAN copyright an updated version, or a tweaked translation, or one with study notes, etc. etc. etc.



Collectively, all those different versions are the most printed books in the world, and there's big money in publishing.

Answer 16

because there was a war between the king and the pope and the king said i can do my own bible, and men really did believe there were conspiracies among the popes to alter the bible (i.e to control the population)

Answer 17

Traditions of man.

Answer 18

Because the over income of the fist season demands a second season

Answer 19

the king James version for it has not been changed and corrupted by man

Answer 20

so its easy to read