English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I was born and raised a French Roman Catholic but don't consider my-self to be of this faith. I do not fully believe in any of the christian denominations or beliefs either. I consider my-self to be open minded and not at all conservative. I have very liberal and modern views of Jesus's life. Having said all this I have a great respect for Jesus and his message.

I know a fair bit of the new testament and have little interest in the old testament. Bibles have always intimidated me. I consider my-self intelligent and have a strong grasp of english. I say all this because I want to read the Bible now but don't know which version is best for me. I don't want to do King James because I feel it's outdated. Where do I start?

Also, I heard there was a slang Bible that used swear words. What is it called?

2007-03-10 14:43:40 · 22 answers · asked by weirdnez 1 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

22 answers

After becoming convinced that the King James Version of the Bible is God's perfect words in English, some are asking if all KJVs are the same and if there have been any changes since the original 1611 text.* The simple answer is: The King James Bible has no textual changes in any edition, whatsoever. Any changes relate solely to spelling or printing corrections.

Typesetting in the 1600s was a very laborious task. Each letter on each page had to be put into place. Since there are 3,566,480 letters in the Bible, that leaves a lot of room for mistakes. But in 1628, only 27 years after the first editions of the Bible were printed, 72% of the around 400 printing corrections were already accomplished. By 1850 all corrections of printing errors were made (with the exception of two which shall be detailed below).

The King James Bible was originally printed in Gothic type. That means "v" looked like "u," "J" looked like "I," and there was an "s" that appeared in certain words that looked a little like our "f." So "Iefvs" in Gothic type was the same as "Jesus" in Roman type. The Bibles we read now are in Roman type. Changing the type from Gothic to Roman has been labeled by some as a "change," but it really is not. The words themselves were not changed, only the way the letters were written.

But the spelling of words also changed. By the 1800s, "wee" was "we, "fheepe" was "sheep," "sayth" was "saith," and "euill" was "evil." But those spellings are not difficult. You can figure out what the words said, even from a 1611 copy.

There are actually two single mistakes that were introduced by printers at Oxford University Press over 60 years after the KJV was first printed. They are in 2 Chronicles 33:19, where it says "sins" instead of "sin," and Jeremiah 34:16, where they mistakenly printed "whom he" instead of the correct "whom ye." Both of these were originally translated correctly. But Oxford printers made these two mistakes. Cambridge University Press did not make the printing error. And all Cambridge-type texts have the correct readings. But some publishers misprint one or the other verse in their Bibles. Amazingly, the New King James also has the same Oxford mistake in Jeremiah 34:16! **


In the 1850s, after the typographical corrections and spelling changes were completed in the King James, the American Bible Society wrote two reports on the present condition of the English Bible. In the second report was this statement:

"[The] English Bible as left by the translators has come down to us unaltered in respect to its text."
The simple fact is that the King James Bible you can purchase in almost any bookstore, allowing for changes in spelling (and possibly the two printing errors), is the same Book of God's preserved words that was printed in 1611. We can thank God for that.

2007-03-10 14:51:03 · answer #1 · answered by NONAME 3 · 2 1

There are now more than 60 versions of the Bible(Different versions not translations The different versions of the Bible are not merely different translations, but are actually versions i.e. they add and remove things from other versions)



These revisions serve as concrete proofs that all the Biblical books are not at all divinely inspired. This is because it is beyond man's ability to correct the work of his Creator, who alone is Almighty and perfect

The Bible is a collection of writings by many different authors. The Qur'an is a dictation. The speaker in the Qur'an - in the first person - is God talking directly to man. In the Bible you have many men writing about God and you have in some places the word of God speaking to men and still in other places you have some men simply writing about history. Please read http://www.islamdoor.com/ and ask the Creator for guidance

2007-03-11 04:38:59 · answer #2 · answered by BeHappy 5 · 0 0

The Slang Bible is probably "Good news for modern man" I am not sure this is still in print. You should consider an NIV {New International Version} Or the New Living Translation, both are easy to read and do not use the kings English. I also like the English Standard Version. There is one called "Easy English version" for people learning the language, and it is available on the Internet. Happy reading!

2007-03-10 14:50:52 · answer #3 · answered by Roll_Tide! 5 · 0 3

somewhat, you will possibly be able to desire to alter your wording purely somewhat: Hebrew Bible Roman Catholic Bible Protestant Bible The Jewish scholars complete the version of the Hebrew Bible in relating to the 0.33 century. That text fabric is secure in the two the RC and Prot. Bible. The order of the books is distinctive, because of the fact of underlying assumptions. The Christian Bible (the recent testomony) wasn't somewhat nailed down till almost the 10th century or so. After that, it grew to become into locked in. This grew to become into carried out in a team of Church Councils. this text is an identical in the two the RC and Prot. Bible, and the previous testomony is especially lots an identical in the two of those Bibles, different than that the order may be slightly distinctive. the only distinction between the RC and Prot. Bibles is the presence of the Apocrypha -- a number of books that have been unknown in Hebrew, yet have been secure immediately in Greek language translations of the previous testomony that have been in primary use around the time of the early Church. That Greek translation of the previous testomony (referred to as the Septuagint) grew to become into so primary (maximum Jews did no longer at that element keep in mind a thank you to speak or study Hebrew anymore) that whenever you detect the previous testomony quoted interior the recent testomony, that's constantly the Septuagint text fabric they're quoting.

2016-10-18 02:04:13 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

You are probably thinking of the Message which I am not sure if it is actually considered a translation of the Bible. I have never read it but have heard people read from it. If you want a translation that is easy to read but not quite as "modern" as the Message then go for New International Version or New Living Translation. Both are great and easy to read and understand.

2007-03-10 14:52:05 · answer #5 · answered by Sarah S 2 · 0 2

If your truly open minded I would like you to pick up a Book of Mormon which is another testament of Jesus Christ. It is very plain in the understanding of the Gospel and how Jesus is the savior. It is not a substitute or replacement of the Bible but just another book that is to be included in the scriptures. If you read this book with faith that it has a true message, I promise you will have a better understanding of Jesus and his Mission upon this earth. Then If you want to know more you will be more than able to figure out what to do next.

2007-03-10 14:56:39 · answer #6 · answered by saintrose 6 · 1 3

I use the Oxford Study Bible. It's fairly clean on most translations. They are coming out with a new editon soon. I also use a book called The New Testament from 26 Translations. It sometimes clears confusion and sometimes makes it worse.

BTW, I am a Pagan, so I won't guide you toward any particular sects Bible.

2007-03-10 14:53:16 · answer #7 · answered by Terry 7 · 0 1

Are you looking for a Bible to suit your wants and desires or are you looking for the true, literal translation of the Bible? Often, our wants and wills don't coincide with what the Bible is teaching. For an up-to-date literal transation, I would suggest any Bible with a recent translation for better understanding, but translated directly from the original manuscripts of Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic. If you are looking for the Bible which makes Jesus an all-loving, all-forgiving, buddy ol' pal to whom you can give a pat on the back and say "thanks, dude for being a great orator and teaching some deep stuff", go ahead and find the slang Bible. I don't know what it's called.

2007-03-10 15:11:19 · answer #8 · answered by Kostan 2 · 0 2

I have always read the King James Version but it was very hard to comprehend, a friend recently gave me a new Bible as a gift, it is called THE MESSAGE Bible, and it is wonderful. I belong to a NON-denominations church and it fits right in. Check it out at a christian book store, it is great.

2007-03-10 14:48:47 · answer #9 · answered by mamabetty4888 1 · 0 3

Well, if you're looking for false doctrine, consider purchasing a Watchtower edition.

OR:

If you're looking for something legitimate, try the New King James Version. It's much easier to read then the original King James Version ---- not so many "thou's and thee's and thy's..."

Tthheh! (too many T's!)

God Bless.

2007-03-10 14:47:48 · answer #10 · answered by the_rose 2 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers