....does that mean that the readers of this translation are more in harmony wiht each other than those reading other translations?
2007-06-02 02:15:47 · 15 answers · asked by leech 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
First of all your premise is incorrect. In the 1500's only the Vulgate scrolls existed and they were written around 700 AD.
Current day translations of the Bible come from much older texts and the Scholars had many more scrolls to rely on for accuracy and to double check. The Qumran scrolls are from the 3rd century.
2007-06-02 02:18:38 · answer #1 · answered by Makemeaspark 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I Had a disscussion with my Mother regarding this issue.
Although she's right by telling my that it's not the version of the Bible that is important but the heart for Christ, It is still clear that the KJV is the most reliable translation of the Bible.
This is due to the fact that the KJV comes from the original Recieved Texts coming from Israel and Greece.
Almost all of the other Translations came from the KJV but the difference is that these translations took out a bunch of Scriptures and Making Interpretations that Doesn't give clarity but Confussion.
If you have another translation, I suggest you get a KJV (not the New KJV) to accompany it. It would be best to be on the safe side rather than making a bad interpretation towards God's Word.
God Bless....
2007-06-02 02:35:03 · answer #2 · answered by Edwardo L 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The English language has undergone dynamic changes since the KJV translation of the Bible. To some, there is a dignity to the KJV that modern translations do not provide. To others, the modern translations are more easily comprehensible. To each his own.
The key is that everyone fully understands and have grasped the true meaning of the scriptures. Every person's reference of understanding is different but the key is that the full import of the scriptures is acquired and that everyone has come to a clear and common understanding of the Bible.
2007-06-02 02:26:15 · answer #3 · answered by Andrew T 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
properly, once you're somewhat going for accuracy, yet you haven't any longer have been given a good draw close of the unique languages, you may attempt examining a number of translations and evaluating. The Message is extra of a fact than a translation, regardless of the undeniable fact that it could nonetheless be an exciting examine, in line with what your targets are. New worldwide Translation isn't a good translation. And specific, I certainly have in comparison it to the unique languages. upload: possibly i'm way off, yet to the remark good above mine, each LDS individual i be attentive to makes use of KJV.
2016-11-03 10:03:23 · answer #4 · answered by krone 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Holy Spirit who we (plural) talk to (tape recorded) recommended that we use the King James Version (KJV). He said that it is nearer the truth.
I believe that other translations are basically based on KJV. Authors may have also referred to the original versions in Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek for accuracy of translation. Others produce their own translation to suit their beliefs, e.g. the JW's John 1:1.
2007-06-02 03:10:57 · answer #5 · answered by Peace Crusader 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No translation of the Bible is really reliable as the people who wrote it were never questioned on it's contents for verification.
I do like the Bible in ebonics, however:
Our, Pops, What be all up in da Heezie,
Much respect to yo handle there be.
You regs be right on the Lil E all the way to the Heezie.
Gotta love the ebonics Bible!
2007-06-02 02:19:51 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
No, because it isn't a translation that brings harmony between people, it is the Spirit of God who brings harmony among believers.
The KJV is an excellent word for word translation but it is not a perfect translation and in fact there is no perfect translation because only the original Scriptures were inspired by God. One blatant example of a bad choice of words used in the KJV is found in this verse.
Romans 8:26 Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself (hautou) maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.
hautou - Contraction for G1438; self (in some oblique case or reflexive relation): - her (own), (of) him (-self), his (own), of it, thee, their (own), them (-selves), they.
The translators chose the word "itself" instead of "himself" as it is rendered in the NKJV. Obviously the person of the Holy Spirit is not an "it" but a "him".
2007-06-02 02:23:38 · answer #7 · answered by Martin S 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not necessarily, some don't take it literally and others do. When you have the baptism of the Holy Spirit, you have a teacher to help you understand the bible. Some people don't want the baptism in the Holy Spirit.
2007-06-02 02:40:10 · answer #8 · answered by ? 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
NO, the best tranlation isthe oneyou understand the best. The truth in the Bible is what is important.Iusethe New King James version, but that is choice of easy to understand.
2007-06-02 02:18:55 · answer #9 · answered by pastr_pat 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
This website has the most reliable translation of bible...
http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com
2007-06-02 02:21:15 · answer #10 · answered by X Theist 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋