How much do the King James and other versions of the bible differ?

Question

I've heard many Christians say that the King James version was largely rewritten to fit the biases of James I. Like where it talks about witches, the word witch was used by James I to replace something else. I've heard there were many changes like this.

I should mention that most of these Christians I've heard this from grew up reading the King James version and discovered the others versions in their teen or adult years.

I wasn't asking about the number of books, but the changes in what was translated.

Answer 1

All that James did was remove the death penalty that was previously the sentence for those who translated the bible, and allowed a translation to be made.

The translater obviously had his biases. The work was done at the opening of the Reformation, and the translations was to serve as the basis of a new Christian faith. For example, in the KJV, the Greek word 'presbutaros' was translated as 'elder', where in previous works it was taken to mean 'priest'. "Ekklesia' in the KJV became 'congregation', where in previous works it meant 'church'.

There is some doubt, though, about the value of the KJV: "Some scholars[citation needed] working with Greek, Aramaic, and Hebrew versions regard the KJV as an inferior English translation of the Bible (see Dynamic equivalence). They suggest that its value lies in its poetic language at the cost of accuracy in translation. Because of linguistic research and more recently available manuscripts, the KJV is regarded as a poor representation of ancient scripture by such scholars. Many of today's leading exegetes (Walter Brueggemann, Marcus Borg, Warren Carter, James L. Crenshaw, Robert W. Funk, John Dominic Crossan, and N.T. Wright) do not endorse the KJV for Masters or Doctoral-level exegetical work."

Answer 2

The main difference is the way the Bible was translated. The Catholic Bible contains 1 Maccabees and 2 Maccabees which are not found in the King James version. The Bible was originally written mostly in Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic and some of the translations will use slightly different words, but the integrity should still be preserved.

Answer 3

You pose an remarkable question, in basic terms responded that's the version in language and manuscripts. Th KJV got here from the Textus Receptus and the catholic bible got here from the alexandrian texts that are the corrupt westcott and hort texts. Use the King James Bible my pal, that's that Bible and in straightforward terms that Bible in english in which you would be able to have a suitable e book and organic reality.

Answer 4

You are here: Truth >> Learn More about the Bible! >> Oldest Bible Version

What is the oldest Bible version?

"What is the oldest Bible version?" becomes a logical question today if you're trying to purchase a Bible. The choices of Bibles confronting today's reader are overwhelming. So what exactly distinguishes one version from another? Primarily, the difference lies in the language in which the text was written.

The Bible in one form or another can be found in scores of languages, including ancient languages. In fact, the Bible was originally written and preserved in two ancient texts. The Old Testament was written in Hebrew, and the New Testament written entirely in Greek. The oldest printed translation of the Bible into the English language dates back nearly five hundred years, when in 1524 William Tyndale first printed the New Testament.

So, what is the oldest Bible version? Centuries before Tyndale's English translation of the Bible, two versions existed in Latin. The Latin Vulgate is a translation into 'common' (vulgar, thereby vulgate) Latin completed by Jerome in 383 CE. Jerome did the translation himself directly from the Hebrew, and today it is commonly known as The Vulgate.

However, there is a much older Latin version of the Bible, used for centuries by Christendom. This version, called The Old Latin Vulgate (or Itala), is known to have been in existence by AD 157. Church father Turtullian, in his own writings dated around 200 C.E, cited various Latin quotations directly from The Old Latin Vulgate. This "original" vulgate (Latin) version continued to be used for nearly a millennium, until Latin basically ceased being a common language.

Jesus is the truth, the way and the life!

Answer 5

the bible that Jehovah Witnesses use is the way the people talk today. they put back the name of God Jehovah in place of Lord or God. the king james bible people do not talk that way. also years ago Witnesses did use the king james bible. the bible that we use is not screwed up. I have both bibles and I check both and they both say the same things except we have Jehovah's name in it.

Answer 6

There is no difference, just using different adjectives but they all have the exact same meaning..some translations are just easier to understand- but I know many who love the King James.

Answer 7

Well, the New world translation that the Jehovas witnesses have is so screwed up that almost every chapter has stuff added or changed that wasn't in the original hebrew text.

Answer 8

In language only. The concepts are the same.

KJV was written and translated for a generation of people who thought and spoke that way. God's concepts and teachings remain identical in all other translations.

Answer 9

James the 1 st of England had no hand in the writting .

Answer 10

Languga and dialect only. Althought he NIV left out a few passages.