The Bible has been changed in rewriting and translation?

Question

seriously asking: there are many debates on the interpretation of verses in the Bible. that the text has been altered according to the translator is often brought up.

is this true? have words and meanings been changed through translation? and if it is true, how should the Bible be interpreted? does it change the way the Bible should be read?

again: not trying to challenge anyone. some say that the Bible is the absolute word of God and others that it is the words of God or prophets secondhand from humans (with the human allowance for error and bias). it can't be both (can it?). so now i wonder, which is it?

Answer 1

I don't believe it's immaculately divine. It has been translated many times and has been edited also. I do think it changes the way we can interpret the bible, but then again, if we suppose that it is absolutely divine, anyways there are many ways to interpret it and on many different levels.

Answer 2

Yes, that are many revisions like KJV, NIV, RSV so on and so forth. There's some recent translations that almost seem very informal and conversational.

I prefer the KJV myself. I do have a NIV Bible and there was an extensive article in it about the methodology used to interpret the Greek and Hebrew texts into the NIV. It said there was many people involved in the translations and about how there had to be majority agreements on what the NIV text would be while still keeping true to the phrasing or concepts mentioned in the older texts. As a result, I feel pretty good knowing there are many others who strive to maintain the context and clarity of the written words.
Remember, the Bible is a collection of stories. God did not make the Bible, but he's the reason for it. A lot of the new testament was written by the apostles themselves.

Answer 3

The Bible has by no skill been rewritten. the place did you get that? The books have been written by way of scribes yet there is largely one version of each - the different account or concept approximately that's fabricated or assumed. do no longer try this. There are translations (King James, cutting-part English, baby's) however the translations are fake in the event that they alter any average meaning of the text cloth. some religions like the Mormons have faith in ongoing revelation, it makes them a cult - the Bible is entire and finished, it does no longer might desire to be rewritten. God would not prefer rewrites. Martin Luther did write some terrible issues approximately Jews - yet that's no longer the Bible. opposite to the above by way of definition all actual Christians will beleive that the BIble is the inspired word of God.

Answer 4

I think your question is perfectly legitimate.
I can't give you a complete answer in the space here, of course. However I have read through many different translations of the Bible, in different languages, Protestant and catholic, and with the exception of the Jehovah's Witness translation, they all really agree with eachother. As far as the original manuscripts are concerned, they have been scientifically studied to a far greater extent than writings from the 17th and 18th century, and so have greater proof!
In my Greek new testament, sometimes it gives an alternate reading in the footnote - because of some other manuscript, but there are no alternate readings that make a major difference. Today, because of serious archeological investigation, we no have thousands of different manuscripts of the new testament, and some have been dated to the 60's, and a tiny exerpt of the Gospel of Matthew is believed, according to an article in Time Magazine a few years ago, to the year 48! A far cry from what I was being told in my university days that no manuscripts even dated to the 1st century.
Personally, I am personally very satisfied with the Bible I have - and I continue to read it in different translations.

Piper, the Reed Sea story really does not stand up.

Answer 5

Well, hmmmm somewhat. If you use a trusted modern translation like NKJ, NIV, NASB, HCSB, NEV, and a few others-then you pretty much have the same as the original-except in a different language. You can absolutely trust these translations.
The old KJV is not recommended because too many English words have changed their meaning-not the Bible. For instance::: today the word "let" means- to allow. 400 years ago it meant-"not allow", or just the opposite, Today "prevent" means to -"not allow", back then it meant- "to go before". quiet a difference. In this way some things have changed, But in modern translations-the words are as accurate as they have ever been is a translation.

Answer 6

Yes, one expert point out one citation to us at an End of Times convention

MYSTERY BABYLON is generally capitaized, italicized or otherwise emphesized in most Bibles, however the original Greek has not object or article that allows for this, hence he said it should read as:

mystery Babylon

The Quran as the same problems and most English texts are translated by several people, each with a different view.

The Bible comes from ancient Hebrew and most ancient Greek writings that are only partial. They are often called Codecs.

No known Greek or Latin Bible is known to be complete earlier than 3 AD or possibly even later.

No known Hebrew Tankah is known to be complete earlier than 300 BC.

The Bible is, thus, assembled from incomplete Hebrew scrolls, incomplete Greek Codec, incomplete Latin translations and in some instances middle ages English or German translations.

Since ancient Greek hasn't been a living language in centuries no one truly knows how to read or speak it anymore.

All you can do is be a linguist, read lots of ancient Greek writings and formulate an opionion on what a word or phrase means by looking at all these writings.

As taught in schools, they simply repeat what other Scholars think they know.

I know for a fact, for example, that EVERY single biography and history of Cinema has Canadian artist/animator Evelyn Lambert wrong, because they all used the same root text that was wrong,.

How do I know. I talked with her on the phone and she asked me to try and help straighten history out.

Thus EVERY text in every college has her history WRONG. She was NOT a science major in school, she went to ART SCHOOL.

Now, this one example will show you have you can get something wrong in a text or a translation by relying on a "Scholar" rather than diesceting every written word or Ancient Greek yourself and seeing if you agree or don't agree.

Answer 7

Some of the problems in translating ancient texts are the facts that written Hebrew had no vowels, yet different vowels in a word can render different meanings. Each translator had to insert vowels to determine to the best of their ability what the original author meant.
Secondly, neither the Hebrew or the Greek used punctuation, so words, phrases and sentences needed to be constructed in a manner which would yield some logical meaning. Now, that may not seem a difficult task, but suppose that in English, you had a group of words such as: "Verily I say unto thee this day thou shalt be with me in Paradise"

Where do the commas go? It could be rendered "Verily, I say unto thee, This day thou shalt be with me in Paradise", which suits protestants fine as they know they will be with God the moment they die.

But what about "Verily I say unto thee this day, Thou shalt be with me in Paradise." This really suits the Catholics as it says you'll be in Paradise, but doesn't tell you when.

(The above example from the book Eats, Shoots & Leaves by Lynne Truss)

And therein lies the difficulty of punctuation. So, Catholics and Protestants both claim to have an inerrant version of Scripture, authored by God. Some would say that the original texts were inerrant, but then, how do we trust the translators with the task of interpreting God?

I don't know. It's not my religion, and not my problem to sort out. I only know that it seems that there is just a bit of room to get the message a bit mixed up.

--Dee

Answer 8

In my opinion the words are the same in most, although they change over the years to be easier to read.

BUT I do think that some churches use single verses rather than a whole story to prove points and will use the bible in way to manipulate you into thinking something is not what it is. So when one asks you to read a verse. Do yourself favor and read the whole chapter, because they might be using the verse WAY out of context!!

Answer 9

The bible was written by men who were inspired by the Holy Spirit.And yes, the words have been translated and some of the translations have changed some words. Example= Everyone thinks Moses parted the Red Sea where in fact it was the Reed Sea.The basic meaning is still there.

Answer 10

some cases, yes. if you want your most accurate understanding, you have to learn Hebrew, Greek and Latin...

well, for the NT anyway, the jewish bible is all in Hebrew, pretty much,

>>"Asking this question is also questioning God's power. Good luck on Judgment Day! "<<

that people honestly feel this way is terrifying. that people can be so incapable of independent thought... faith is fine, but this is really just fanatacism.


anyway, there are some changes in the english versions.

for example at least one of the christian bibles translates one of the BIG lines they use as a old testament prophecy for jesus, to make it look like its pointing at jesus much more than it really is.

that is, the actual text says something along the lines of "held like a lion at hands and feet" which is relatively descriptive... but not that particular.
by "mistranslating" "lion" as "pierce" it changes the whole sentence to "pierced at hands and feet" which is FAR FAR more specific, and looks like its referring to Jesus alot more.