Since most Christian will claim that bible is absolute truth then ...?

Question

may be some 1 can explain me how come we have different translations in english of the same bible. WHile some will start screaming look at the love msg from GOD and ignore what is not important i am still curious how come the truth even in the same language have many variations ( not talking about interpretation yet).
Example:
NIV bible ( english, most of europe) infamous Paul saying
Corinthians 7 (NIV): "It is good for man not to marry
King James ( another english version, most popular in US only)
Corinthians 7
7:1 Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman

ONe saying not to touch a woman, other saying not to marry.
I guess even fundamentalist won't be able to say its exactly the same.

Now the question is not which msg is right or wrong, the big Q is why in the same language we have different translations. THere are much more different translations from those english bible. Does it worry that some how ppl gets wrong msg?

Answer 1

Because its a free country & anyone can offer their interpretations of any writings & if they are lucky or if a publishing firm sees it as good business, they will publish it.

Answer 2

It is an easy question to answer. A language does develop during the time, like the word change meaning and I am sure that you can find examples in English too. I think that Paulus, an educated man wrote mostly in Greek an “international” language at that time and since hundreds of years. The fist version was written almost 2000 years ago and during those years the language has changed and different translators have been working with the scriptures. Both translations might be correct, but the word has change meaning or to touch should not be read letter by letter. Your language and mine works the same way and in older days one could express oneself like that. Not to touch, meaning not to be together. Isn’t it touching?
A friend of mine shook her head when she read the last version of The Bible and said this translation is a catastrophe. The oldest know version in Greek does not tell that and she gave me some examples. To see how it works, ask some friends of yours, who at least speaks two languages. Write something down on a piece of paper and hand it over to someone and ask this person to translate it into an other language and go on like this from person to person, the more you are the better. When the paper finally comes back to you, I am sure that the paper will tell you something you did not write down from the beginning.

Answer 3

Basically, it is a matter of the source of translation. The KJV was copied from the Septuagint which is the earliest extant Greek translation of the New testament and the Masoratic text which was the Hebrew translation of the Old Testament. The latter versions (NIV, NAS) were copied from newer texts, mainly the Codex Vaticanus. I use mainly the old KJV since I believe it is closer to the original writings. Oh, by the way, the earliest Scriptures were not written in Latin, it was Koinia Greek, the written language of the Roman Empire in the 1st Century.

Answer 4

The reason is that the NIV is a lot easier to understand for people the king james uses a lot of difficult language. The bible was translated in all kinds of languages and in all translations parts get lost. I mean originally it was written in Latin I believe but hardly anyone reads that anymore. It basically made the bible a lot more accessible for people who would otherwise give up reading the bible.

Answer 5

The reasons for so many translations or versions of the Bible are almost as many as the number of versions themselves. The main reason is that 99% of people can not read the original Greek and Hebrew languages the the scriptures were written in. (Even people who read modern Greek would have a hard time, because the Greek of the Bible is 2000 years old. Like trying to read Shakespeare)

The first major translation of the Bible was in the 400s AD by a scholar named Jerome. He translated it into the most common language of his day, Latin. His translation, the Vulgate (which meant "common" as in common language) was the Bible the church used for about 1000 years. Although copies of the original languages were still made for libraries and monasteries.

In the late 1400s Martin Luther would start the Protestant Reformation, a major split in the Christian church. Along with that came a flurry of Bible translation as people wanted to know for themselves, in their own language, what the book said.

One of those early English translations, the King James Bible, would become the most common Bible in the Protestant churches. In was written in 1611, the time Shakespeare was writing. Its popularity came not because it was the best translation (it was consider adequate at best when original written) but because it was the only English translated that was printed without columns of notes, commentary, etc. along side designed to sway the reader to a particular groups interpretation.

Have you read Shakespeare recently? It is often difficult to know what he means or easy to misinterpret him, as the English language has made major changes during the 400 years since he wrote, There are many differences in the language between a Bible translated in the 1600s and one translated today. For instant, in the King James the word "Suffer" means to "allow", while the word "let" means to "hinder". In the scripture in 1 Corinthians 7:1 the word "to touch" meant "to take" like we would "take a person's hand in marriage" today. So to a person in the 1600s, the wording meant "to marry".

Beginning in the 1900's, with the discovery of additional New Testament manuscripts that predated those used to translate the King James, many new translation began to appear. Some, like the New American Standard, are very scholarly and do an excellent job of translating the scriptures into English word for word - even if the resulting English is hard to understand. Some, like the Living Bible or the Message, are not translation, but paraphrases. Meaning they try to give you the meaning of the verses in their own word, rather than a word for word translation. Neither of them as intended as "study" Bibles. Some like the "Good News for Modern Man" are written for a specific audience, The Good News is for people who have English as a second language, and so it uses a limited vocabulary and simple sentences to make it easier to understand. The New International Version you quoted attempts to use English that is equally clear to both British and Americans (thus the international in the title). And the list goes on...

There is no way that any book (Bible or not) can be translated with one hundred percent accuracy between two languages. There will always be some of the color and shading of meaning lost. There may even be some question about what an original word means. For instance, since translators could not decide exactly what was mean by the Greek word "angel", it was not translated. The word was left as "angel" and it was up to the Bible reader to decide what an "angel" was. Same with the words "deacon" and "bishop" among others.

I do not know of anyone who claims that any translation was divinely inspired or without error. We only claim the originals were. But with the number of excellent translation available, it is easy to compare 4 or 5 translations and usually see what a scripture means. That's one of the reason you can purchase books like parallel Bibles, that have several version in columns next to each other, or the "Bible in 26 Translation" series, where the editors list the (I believe) American Standard Version (don't have one in front of me to be sure) followed by 5-10 other versions of verse - especially if there is one that reads different - so you can compare the different translators works and hopefully get the full meaning of the original.

Answer 6

I'll keep it pithi. The reason is that the language tends to evolve as time passes due to culture and geographical location. King James Bibles were considered the latest translation in the sixteenth century. NIV's and others are quite current according to what I've explained.
Mr. M on translations.

Answer 7

Each version of the Bible has to be 70% different from previous versions in order to receive copy rights. If you are looking for the closest translation to the Hebrew and Latin that it was written in...use the original KJV not the NKJV or NIV or NWT or anyting else.

Answer 8

Because it was origanally in latin. Every heard of the phrase lost in translation. Words can have more than one meaning and some phases can not be interpeted directly beacuse they have no word that means exactly the same thing in both languages. Thus, there are variations on the way they can be interpreted

Answer 9

That's was make spirituality so great. You can interpret the Bible for yourself. I know of the differing versions and I pray for understanding before I read. It helps me concentrate on the real message God has for me the individual. Sprituality is a personal thing. I don't knock anyone's belief.

Answer 10

Oh you'll get plenty of apologists and Pious Frauds lying about the various reasons for this.
Some will actually say that the King James version is the ONLY authorized version and that ALL others are written by satan.
Honestly, how to you argue with "logic" like that?

Answer 11

translations shouldn't be different. But a version is a different story. some translations differ but not very much i.e. glad - happy.
take two different versions and compare and you will end up with large differences. Also you will find that versions contradicts itself. translation however are much closer to the original writing and don't contradict.