Diff Versions???

Probably for the same reason that there are so many different makes or brands of automobiles...

They all do roughly the same thing but some may do it better than others or make your journey more comfortable.

So it is with Bibles. Man started translating the original parchment scrolls many hundreds of years ago. Some were commissioned by Royalty, some were done by individuals out to make some profits, some religious organizations did others THEIR OWN WAY and disregarded the Word of God in doing so, and unfortunately, some were done to deliberately deceive the readers.

There are as many opinions as to which Bible is best as there are Bible readers. It all depends upon which you think is 'better' and which one will 'make your journey comfortable.'

The general thought, by those schollars who know about such things however, is that the most error and bias free Bible is the Authorized King James Version of 1611. That is why Dr. Strong tied his Concordance to that version.

I have copies of all major 'modern' Bibles in our 5 Chapel libraries, and the one that gets the most usage by far by our students is the King James Version.
 
Great Response - Thank You

Pastor Gary said:
Probably for the same reason that there are so many different makes or brands of automobiles...

They all do roughly the same thing but some may do it better than others or make your journey more comfortable.

So it is with Bibles. Man started translating the original parchment scrolls many hundreds of years ago. Some were commissioned by Royalty, some were done by individuals out to make some profits, some religious organizations did others THEIR OWN WAY and disregarded the Word of God in doing so, and unfortunately, some were done to deliberately deceive the readers.

There are as many opinions as to which Bible is best as there are Bible readers. It all depends upon which you think is 'better' and which one will 'make your journey comfortable.'

The general thought, by those schollars who know about such things however, is that the most error and bias free Bible is the Authorized King James Version of 1611. That is why Dr. Strong tied his Concordance to that version.

I have copies of all major 'modern' Bibles in our 5 Chapel libraries, and the one that gets the most usage by far by our students is the King James Version.
Click to expand...
What an awesome response. Thank you!

I believe in and have much faith in God's Word, but I do wonder about the error in these translations. After all, it is imperfect humans who do the translating.

Thanks again for this response. It has helped me better understand what I truly believe about the Bible, and it is ALL good.

:goodpost: :heart: :heart: :heart: :heart: :goodpost:
 
Born2LoveYou said:
I thought the amplified version of the bible was for the hard of hearing, I was told otherwise.
Click to expand...

:DI don't know if that was meant to be funny, but it tickled my funnybone!;) I prefer the KJV, though I use the NKJ and the AMP. I don't much trust the newer versions that have come out lately, especially The Message Bible. But, I'm all for new Believers using whatever helps them understand the word better.

Sheba
 
I like the New International Version because it's the easiest for me to understand. We have I don't know how many different version of the Bible in our house but that's the one I always go back to. (A lot of times I'll look a verse up in a couple of different versions just to make sure I'm getting the true feel for it).

I agree with P-G - it's because there are so many different types of people!
 
I have almost 60 translations on my PC and althjough the wording may be a bit different there is no discernable contradiction- some have been around for many years ans are in the vernacular of thier era, some are expounded in great detail to fully convey the richness of the text, some are purposefully translated in as simple a language as possible to make the easy reading and easy to understand- I like so many of the " flavours of God's holy Word"- many translations can be a good thing!:D many blessings on your day- brother Larry
 
Sheba said:
:DI don't know if that was meant to be funny, but it tickled my funnybone!;) I prefer the KJV, though I use the NKJ and the AMP. I don't much trust the newer versions that have come out lately, especially The Message Bible. But, I'm all for new Believers using whatever helps them understand the word better.

Sheba
Click to expand...


I tottally agree I think these newer bibles change the word of God around..it just dosent mean the samething to me anyway when reading. I love the KJV but I bought a NKJV bible and I cant stand it! It is more confusing than anything else! ugh...
 
Can You Give Legitimate Documentation On That Statement?
 
I prefer the KJV, NKJV and the HCSB (Holman Christian Standard Bible) The HCSB seems to be a great translation as far I have studied, I am not sure hope popular the translation is nor do I know you alls feelings about the HCSB but I would like to hear your thoughts.
.:jesus-cross:
 
Sheba said:
:DI don't know if that was meant to be funny, but it tickled my funnybone!;) I prefer the KJV, though I use the NKJ and the AMP. I don't much trust the newer versions that have come out lately, especially The Message Bible. But, I'm all for new Believers using whatever helps them understand the word better.

Sheba
Click to expand...
:read:

That (Amplified Bible being for Hard of hearing or hearing impaired) made me chuckle too :) :read: I use the Revised Standard Version, NASB, NKJV, The New Living Translation. I saw the Homlman's Version and haven't really looked much at it but John 3.

:fish::fish::fish:
 
Just a reminder - Most Bible versions are available on tape, CD and DVD; for not only those with vision issues, but for those who wish to hear God's Word as spoken professionally and with voice inflection.
 
[FONT=Comic Sans MS, cursive]Bible translations are extremely difficult at best. It's a monumental task in my view. Consider this...[/FONT]
[FONT=Comic Sans MS, cursive]1. The NT writers thought in Aramaic and also Hebrew. But the Bible was written in Greek. So it was already translated once even before it was retranslated into our English. Translating it into Greek kind of stripped off a lot of the “Jewishness†of the Bible. But a few have tried to restore this “Jewishness†back again to the text. (See Davis Stern's translation Jewish New Testament. [/FONT]​
[FONT=Comic Sans MS, cursive]2. Words change meaning over the years. Example in our culture. Consider the Gay 90's of the 1800's. What did gay 90's mean in the 1900's. Big difference. This problem is usually solved by looking at the use of the same Greek words used in other passages and also works outside of the Bible that were written in the same time frame as the Bible books that are being translated. Book: Kittles Theological Dictionary. Some Greek words are only used once in the Bible so they are hard to translate with full certainly. Example: The word Authentein" (To dominate or rule over.) This is a key word in understanding Paul's controversial passages on women. It is found in the NT only once and has changed meaning over time.[/FONT]​
[FONT=Comic Sans MS, cursive]3. Greek words change in meaning as stated above, but so do the English words that the Greek is translated into. The classic King James for example - its language is out of vogue today, so translations become obsolete in their ability to convey the message of the Bible into the common language of the day. My wife got a Phillips translation years ago and she said it was like a completely different Bible to her after the King James.[/FONT]​
[FONT=Comic Sans MS, cursive][FONT=Comic Sans MS, cursive]4. The source of the translation is important. Example: Jay Green's interlinear OT is based on the Masoretic Text[/FONT]. When you read Genesis it says that Potipher was a eunuch and the chief executioner – much different than most translations. This seemingly little tidbit sure explains why his wife was after Joseph so intently - doesn't it? I'd like to know why so many translations have left this out? [/FONT]​
[FONT=Comic Sans MS, cursive]5. Chapters and verses were added late to the scriptures and they are not always placed correctly. Neither are the chapter labels added by the publisher or translator always accurate. Also, the vowels were added to the OT at a late date, so a lot of Hebrew words are but guesswork as different words that could be used. There are a lot of translation decisions to be made in the Hebrew, Example: the word Almah, which means unmarried maiden. In those times in Ancient Israel a maiden was a virgin in their culture, but not in ours today. [FONT=Comic Sans MS, cursive]A[/FONT][FONT=Comic Sans MS, cursive]lmah[/FONT] is typically translated as virgin, maiden, young woman, damsel or girl.But relative to Isaiah 7:14 it only makes sense to translate it virgin - in our culture.[/FONT]​
[FONT=Comic Sans MS, cursive]6. Hebrew began as a picture language - in other words a letter of the alphabet was a symbol of an object or idea. For example: Shalom means peace – right? In the Hebrew picture language it actually means “destroy the authority that causes chaos.†Another: The Hebrew word for humble is shach – it means to “destroy the wall†(of self protection) Repent - shoov - means to “destroy the house†(leave nothing to go back for) Last: Mother is the Hebrew "em" which means "the strong water" (water that never fails - life giver - around her grows an oasis of life) [/FONT][FONT=Comic Sans MS, cursive]The Hebrew to me is difficult to translate and has the most variables in it. That is why it is often good to look at different translations to try to get a feel for what is being said. But, I'm back into my terrible old habit of preaching to the choir again. Book: Hebrew Word Pictures by Frank Seekins[/FONT]​
[FONT=Comic Sans MS, cursive]Different translations serve different purposes. For study the NASB is considered more accurate technically, but doesn't read very well. The newer versions are better reading translations. Translators are supposed to just translate and leave the interpretation to others, but I don't see how this is possible as I think they have to translate certain words based on an interpretation of the context.[/FONT]


[FONT=Comic Sans MS, cursive]I guess the worst translation is better than nothing, therefore the best version is of course the one we pick up and read. Its nice to have a choice these days because in my day there was only one that was recommended and that of course was the King James – you guys are so fortunate to be flooded with translations. I wrote all of this, which is very incomplete to show how complicated translating is and why there is so much variation in different translations.[/FONT]


[FONT=Comic Sans MS, cursive]Lauren[/FONT]
 
yes i can,when i read the nlt and it mentions soldiers and carry there bags 2 miles.i laugh my socks of at the usa.who writes the bibles over there the politicians.:D
 
smellycat said:
yes i can,when i read the nlt and it mentions soldiers and carry there bags 2 miles.i laugh my socks of at the usa.who writes the bibles over there the politicians.:D
Click to expand...

I saw a Dr. Seuss version the other day. :) They have Bibles with annotations for everyone today - kids, women, men, teenagers. What next?

Lauren
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top