You asked for original translations, and before someone makes a wise-crack in an offensive manner, that is in fact an oxymoron. I'll bet you meant the original transcriptions. Well, thats a catch 22, because of several reasons. The primary reason was not clearly explained, so I'll review it for you so you can see why it can be quite confusing.
First - There is no original Bible. There were books, or stories that abounded about God during the time of the Hebrews, and then multiple texts about the life and times of Jesus. This seemed to bother no one in particular and the growth of Chrisitainity was moving right along. It was first a particular faith practice within the Jewish tradition. Just as today on a well trafficed corner you might find a Catholic church, a Methodist church, a Jewish Temple and a Baptist church, the same was true during the early days of Christianity. Some temples were those that practiced there faith belief according to the life and times of Jesus and his message, and others held fast to the doctrinal beliefs of the early temple.
Second - Remember that Jesus was a Jewish Rabbi and preached and practice in the Temples of Judism. His message of different and radical, but he followed the tenements of the laws and principles of Judism. It was his message that was so very different, and in fact in retrospect, spirit-filled.
Third - During the writing of the stories now found in the Old Testament, more correctly reference in modernity as the Hebrew Bible, a long period of time elapsed. The Hebrew language went through many differenct dialets. Compare a Robert Burn's poem invariably sprinkled with Gaelic and old English (it is for most seemingly impossible to understand), to a Mark Twain or even more contemporary writer. They are both English, but even english speakers have a problem understanding the writings of Robert Burns.
Fourth - The majority of the Old Testatment or Hebrew Bible was an oral tradition for 2-4 thousand years. As scribes wrote, or capture parts of it they ultimately were collected. So the collected stories or verses of Leviticus, for example, are written with a little Gaelic, a little old english, some Aramaic, and some Greek. Now you can understand how an actual original transcription is complicated.
Fifth- And this is mine and others biggest concern with those that make reference to an original bible. What we have today is a man made collection of selected texts that was voted in or out by the Church of Rome in 381 C.E. (Common Era, or A.D.). King Constantine was a Pagan, but was trying to understand and make a decision of Converting. So by his command and edict he ordered the Priests of the early Roman Chrisitian Church to assemble a simple Book of the Texts. It was then by his command and order, as a Pagan ruler, that the book was canonized. So what about the other transcriptions. During the controversial meetings over a period of years the book of Peter was out, and the book of Thomas was in. Then the book of James was out and the book of Peter was in. Then, so they could all go home for the fouth of July recess, they pitched Thomas and left Peter and James in, and only at the last minute threw in Revelations, which during the early meetings of the councils, it was never given a second thought because it was considered non -sensical.
Sixth - Much of the Christian Bible or New Testament was written in Aramaic, the home language of Jesus, and then some was in Greek. So the first translations were actually the work of some individuals that translated the Aramaic texts into Greek. These were in no way possible literal translations, but at least they were in one language.
Then to go further the church of Rome translated everything that was canonized into Latin, the official language of the Chrisitan Church until the reformation. Except for England, no other translation was allowed. By this time it was accepted by most Christians that God favored Latin and any other version was blasphemous. But, King James did not like what he read, or what was translated and read to him from the Latin and by a Decree of the King it was translated to English. But, the translators were forewarned and it was to be to his liking.
So why do some Christians hold so hard and fast to the King James Version, as if it were sacred - beats me.
And this will light some on this board up, but why do people reference what we now know as the Bible, the canonized version of a compilations of the "most favorites" or in other words, "The oldies but goodies" by order of a Pagan King, as the "Word of God". As a personal affirmation, after reading scripture I listen for the Word of God.
2006-06-29 21:02:44
·
answer #1
·
answered by SA Rose A Billy 1
·
0⤊
2⤋
there is no such thing as an original translation of the bible.
the earliest versions of the bible we have are written mainly in greek and hebrew (there are bits and pieces of amharic, aramaic, coptic and what have you - but nothing really crucial).
the first complete bible in a single language was st. jerome's 'vulgate' bible, written in latin, around 405 ad.
modern european languages did not exist until 1100 (or later). parts of the bible were translated into czech, english, welsh and several other languages but when king james i (of england, king james vi of scotland) came to the throne he decided that as part of his attempt to control his country he would issue an 'official' translation of the bible and make all the other ones illegal.
this is why the king james bible [1611] is called the 'authorised' version: you weren't allowed to own any other one.
if you would believe in something called the 'george w. bush official version of the bible' then the 'original translation' you want is probably the king james bible.
but i have read much of the new testament in greek, and then the same passage in king james' english translation. to me they seem hardly the same book.
2006-06-29 20:57:35
·
answer #2
·
answered by synopsis 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
ummm, no. The Bible has been rewritten so many times that it's impossible to find the exact original version. Especially in today's day and age where people think their version is the right one. Sorry! I'd love to find that too! I think the King James Version is the closest to the original, from what I've heard.
2006-06-29 19:52:24
·
answer #3
·
answered by High On Life 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
What original translations of what bible?
The oldest known bible to exist was invented in the 4th century.
Not only is it not available, you wouldn't be able to read it if it was. It has no chapters and verses.
2006-06-29 19:51:54
·
answer #4
·
answered by Left the building 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Ha Ha! Yes there is-can you read Aramaic? Hebrew?? You obviously know very little about it...And if you DID manage to find it and understand it(takes more than one brain cell, y'see), you'd only be proved wrong in your shallow belief. Best keep believing the word of man, kiddo. LOL
:D
2006-06-30 01:04:39
·
answer #5
·
answered by googlywotsit 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I don't know about your question, but I had something I wanted to tell you, and there is no way of contactint your. You said you would have God come and give all of us a free ticket to heaven. Do you not realize that he did? That was the WHOLE POINT of the new testament.
2006-06-30 01:07:38
·
answer #6
·
answered by Rockstar 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Take the original text of New Testament per book in greeks
http://www.apostoliki-diakonia.gr/bible/bible.asp?contents=new_testament/contents.asp&main=
2006-06-29 20:00:20
·
answer #7
·
answered by thematofylaks 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes there is, but NO! I won't tell you!
I think it's more fun to be a troll. Didn't get anywhere with respect, so what the hell... might as well have fun.
2006-06-29 19:49:33
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
this link has the Latin Vulgate along with the Douay-Rheims and King James
2006-06-29 19:54:48
·
answer #9
·
answered by Voodoo Doll 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
yes several
for a large assortment try
www.earlychristianwritings.com
have fun
2006-06-29 19:51:38
·
answer #10
·
answered by centurion613 3
·
0⤊
0⤋