Differences in Bible versions?

Question

I'm going to be taking a Literature of the Bible class, and I need a copy of the Bible. I picked up a copy of the New International Version at a used bookstore one day, & thought that would be good enough. Does anyone know what the differences are between that version & say, the King James version? Which would you recommend for my class (as they did not specify a particular one)?

Answer 1

The canon of the Old Testament that Catholics use is based on the text used by Alexandrian Jews, a version known as the "Septuagint" and which came into being around 280 B.C. as a translation of then existing texts from Hebrew into Greek by 72 Jewish scribes .

The deuterocanonical books were, though, debated in the early Church, and some Fathers accorded them higher status than others (hence the Catholic term for them: "deuterocanonical," or what St. Cyril of Jerusalem called "secondary rank," as opposed to the other books which are called "protocanonical"). But all the Fathers believed as did St. Athanasius, who, in one of his many Easter letters, names the 22 Books all Christians accept and then describes the deuterocanonicals as "appointed by the Fathers to be read by those who newly join us, and who wish for instruction in the word of godliness." Church Councils listed and affirmed the present Catholic canon, which was only formally closed at the Council of Trent in the 16th century.

In the 16th c., Luther, reacting to serious abuses and clerical corruption in the Latin Church, to his own heretical theological vision ,see articles on sola scriptura and sola fide, and, frankly, to his own inner demons, removed those books from the canon that lent support to orthodox doctrine, relegating them to an appendix. Removed in this way were books that supported such things as prayers for the dead (Tobit 12:12; 2 Maccabees 12:39-45), Purgatory (Wisdom 3:1-7), intercession of dead saints (2 Maccabees 15:14), and intercession of angels as intermediaries (Tobit 12:12-15). Ultimately, the "Reformers" decided to ignore the canon determined by the Christian Councils of Hippo and Carthage and resort solely to those texts determined to be canonical at the Council of Jamnia.

It is the Church that is the "pillar and ground of Truth" (1 Timothy 3:15)! Jesus did not come to write a book; He came to redeem us, and He founded a Sacramental Church through His apostles to show us the way. It is to them, to the Church Fathers, to the Sacred Deposit of Faith, to the living Church that is guided by the Holy Spirit, and to Scripture that we must prayerfully look.
Luther wanted to remove the Epistle of James, Esther, Hebrews, Jude and Revelation. Calvin and Zwingli also both had problems with the Book of Revelation, the former calling it "unintelligible" and forbidding the pastors in Geneva to interpret it, the latter calling it "unbiblical".

This Council, among other things, simply affirmed the ancient accepted books in the face of Protestant tinkering. How could Luther have relegated the deuterocanonical books to an appendix if they hadn't already been accepted in the first place?

Answer 2

The King James Version was translated in 1611 in an attempt to get a single English translation to be used in the English churches. A wave of translations had appeared in the 1500's following the Protestant Reformation, and the church felt a need for a single version.

While it is a good translation, the 400 year old English is showing its age. Some words have changed meaning or become obscure. Often you have to spend more time figuring out the language then figuring what the Bible itself means.

The New International Version was translated in the 1980's, and is one of the most popular translations from the last half of the 20th century. It has a very easy to read style, and is designed to be equally usable by British or American readers of English. It has taken some criticism because it includes notes in the columns that point to some possible alternate readings for some of the Bible passages. (There are about 40 lines of the over 7000 of the NT on which there is debate on the original word or words).

If you are not familiar with the Bible, I would recommend using one of the newer translation rather then the King James. The New International is a good choice.

Answer 3

As for Bible versions, there are different levels of accuracy among the translations.

Roughly speaking, some translators try to get an accurate word-for-word translation, some use a thought for thought approach, and some books that call themselves "bibles" are just paraphrases.

The paraphrase will be the least accurate and they may actually contain doctrinal error. These are basically commentaries, more than actual "translations".

Next in accuracy is the thought-for-thought. In these the translators may not try to translate each word accurately, but they try to convey the ideas the text tries to convey. Many of these are pretty accurate as a whole, but the danger is the translators may interject their own bias. Also, if a translator does not correctly understand a passage, then the translation will also reflect that error, sometimes unintentionally. The most popular thought-for-thought translation is the New International Version.

The word-for-word tries to make sure every word is as accurate as possible. In my opinion, this is what you should look for. Let the Word of God speak with accurate words and the "thoughts" will convey what the writer intended. The best known translation that had this translation aim is the King James Version. The KJV, however, is difficult for some to read because it was translated in 1611 and it uses dialect from that period. Many find the New King James Version slightly more readable. Personally, I prefer the English Standard Version or the New American Standard Bible.

Your best bet is not to get one translation, but buy two (or more) of the more accurate versions. That way, if you have trouble understanding a verse, another version may be slightly worded another way.

Most literature classes are more interested in the language of the Bible, rather than the accuracy. They are looking for the beauty of phrases. Your teacher may prefer you get a certain version, if for no other reason than he may want the whole class using the same text. Ask the instructor!

Answer 4

The King James version was the standard for many many years. It was a translation created by a panel of experts from several different denominations. They agreed that the final work was a true translation into English.

Nowadays we think of this as difficult to read because the old phrases of Thee and Thou, which were standard English at the time of the translation, are no longer standard. We think of the Pilgrims and that era when we see all those old verbs and archaic phrasing.

NIV is a nice newer standard translation. It captures the "flavor" and tone of the older versions, but is more readable with more modern phrases.

The New Living translation is very different from the older versions, and seems to be much simpler and easy to understand. It gets the message across but hardly any of the words match up to older translations, so if you are trying to follow along with someone reading aloud from a different translation, it may get confusing.

I might make one suggestion since you are about to enter a class. I find that in my own studies, a multi-version Bible is a great tool. You can usually find one with both King James and NIV, but there are some available with 4 or more translations.

The 4-version side-by side translation is the best for study purposes. I found mine at a Christian Book Store.

Send me a private message if you want me to point you to a specific store or web-site......

Answer 5

The New International Version (NIV) is pretty good to use. The King James Version is close to the original translation, though it is not the first translation. I say that the NIV is pretty good because they have not horribly mistranslated to King James Version (KJV) into modern day lingo, nor have they changed the scripture to make it mean something that was not intended. They also have not added or taken anything out. BE VERY CAREFUL with some of the other translations that are more modern. They have very twisted to make scripture say what man would like it to say. NIV will be easier for you to understand.

You might want to also pick up a Strongs Concordance to the Bible. It is VERY helpful and has translation and meaning to Hebrew and Greek.

Answer 6

large to work out some human beings attempt to play with the words. there's a extensive distinction between version and translations. Catholic Bible has seventy 3 e book and Protestant Bible has sixty seven. those are variations no longer translations. RSV version incredibly bumped off many verses and words from different Bibles as an occasion the be conscious "begotten" isn't modern in RSV version, thats makes it a version, no longer a translation.

Answer 7

King James is a very old translation when scholarship in Biblical languages was very weak, several centuries ago. NIV is a very good contemporary translation. The language of the King James is beautiful, although the translations are often bad. So, it depends on what you want to get out of your class and reading the Bible as to which is best.

Answer 8

I personally like the NIV. But I also have a bible that is very close to the Greek called "English study bible".
you can't get this version but you can get the Greek literally translated as a reference book-get that!

KJV that many say is the one and only really isn't that good. It used many old English words that have different meaning than we use today. So keep the NIV but go buy a reference book in Greek. Or also in Hebrew if you are studying the Old Test. also.
The NIV does NOT deny Jesus is lord-this is sillyness.
†

Answer 9

A new king james version is easy to understand and holds close to the 1511 version, ,,,not bashing but some of the easy to understand in updated language take away from some of the spritual aspects intended . They all tell the same truth, just wrote in diferent words..................God will reveal Himself and the truth to you if you are truly seeking Him....No matter what translation you read at first God will point you to the right one

Answer 10

JESUS THE WORD OF GOD is the author of all sacred scripture. The HOLY SPIRIT has been sent unto us that reminds us of all these things. the protestant kjv was translated by the efforts of the Early reformation. after the German Translation by Martin Luther in the 16th Century. These Bible lack typically the dueterocannonical books such as the book of Maccabbees and that of tobit. I believe there are 73 books in a Catholic Bible, but just 66 in the protestant Bible. Furthermore i believe there is a better nuance of language in the Catholic Translations such as the douay-rhiems. One word can make a difference. The standard being, i believe, the Latin Vulgate. Not being a Bible Translation Scholar, i have come to appreciate the subtle distinctions between the orginal Catholic versions and the protestant translations. Though JESUS spoke in parables in the Gospels to dispell language barries and make mysteries of the KINGDOM accessible to everyone. Though in the Early days of the Church before printing presses people could hardly read. They learned from readings at Mass, and pictures in Stained Glass Windows. One of the first uses of the printing press was to make Dictionaries to make the Bible more widely read. Then again there was an error in Early protestant Bibles which was termed the "wicked bible" as it read "thou shalt committ adultery" (I had heard this on the radio to name my source) they burned those bibles as many as they could find that they had sold. Prior to this the Bible was handwritten by monks, very expensive and the property of the rich and the kings.

All this is coming to the point that Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture go hand in hand and is handed down to us from the Apostles . .. that's where the Bible comes from the Jews and the Apostles . .. and that's the same source for Catholic Tradition . .. if we want to know how to read the Bible we must also heed sacred tradition . .. GOD does not change nor will one jot nor tittle of the law fall away . .. JESUS' WORDS shall never fall away . ..

Therefore we should read Sacred Scripture in the light of Sacred Tradition. As this is handed down to us from the Apostles. And therefore i recommend a good Catholic Bible like Douay-Rhiems.

Just to point out a few of the subtle differences i have noted between protestant kjv and Catholic Douay-Rhiems is 1. At the crucifixion the word "finished" is in the "DR" written as "consummated" which indicates the symbolism of JESUS as the BRIDEGROOM both mean finished but consummated is more accurate. 2. the name of Noah is written Noe, which is an anagram for "one" which is fitting as Noe is the "one" saved and we can show that this is significant in symbolism for the notion that "one" shall be saved from the sea, the BODY OF CHRIST which is ONE in the UNITY OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. 3. Joshua is written Josue Son of Nun there's much more of this sort of thing. We can show that the gist of what is meant is accuratly communicated by protestant revisionists but i would prefer to read a Catholic Bible . ..

MOTHER MARY is the MOTHER of a man who is the WORD OF GOD. Not of a Bible. The sayings of the book we call "The Book" or "The Bible" are given to us by GOD that we may understand HIM. But the Bible doesn't define GOD nor is it a road map for the blind in teh dark. It is a means to understanding who GOD is and what we must do to inherit HIS KINGDOM. The HOLY SPIRIT may teach us these mysteries. And they are better understood, fully understood only in the light of Sacred Tradition.

-LOVE your nieghbor as yourself.
Amen