What kind of Bible would they read in Mexico or Latin America? You would say Spanish right? So Would it be the King James Spanish Version? NIV Spanish Version? Do you get what I am saying? The King James Version is an English language version. So all nationalities that do not read or speak the English language do they read the wrong version?
2007-07-28 07:26:32 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
People can not answer a simple question. I know all about the different Bible translations, Greek and Hebrew texts and the FEW Aramaic texts. Erasmus, Stephanus, Wescott-Hort...I know all about that. So don't try to be all cute and educated sounding with your "history of the Bible translations" lesson. Either answe the question or skip it. Is that so hard?
2007-07-28 07:50:21 · update #1
Read the Hebrew and Greek if you want what it really says...
Besides, only English speaking fundies get their "true word of god".
2007-07-28 08:27:06 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Hello,
Once the printing press got going the bible that had been in Greek and Latin was translated into other languages like German etc in protestant countries at first. The King James Version was great for English speakers in the 17th century but can be more heavy reading and tedious for many in my opinion, something like Shakespear.
That said there are better bibles translated for todays population in Spanish as well like Good News For Modern Man which are a little lighter and more pleasant to read.
Many other good ones are on the market to which have great footnotes and comments explaining the history and intrigue of the times as well as theological points.
Cheers,
Michael Kelly
2007-07-28 07:38:21 · answer #2 · answered by Michael Kelly 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The King James Version translated into different languages is still the King James Version.
2007-07-28 08:09:51 · answer #3 · answered by julie 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Do some research of the bible.... the King James version was the one done in 1611 in English... lots of things were left out... And of course until the middle 1400, everything was hand copied, changed, added to subtracted from at the whim of a copyist...only the very wealthy owned books and could read, and translation to the people was done by the priests only..... Add to this, many translations from the original Aramaic, Greek, Latin, Demotic, Egyptian, back to Latin for a long time, again, all done by scribes.... What we have now is barely what was had in the beginning... and things embarrassing to Jesus were simply omitted entirely... The Gospel according to Thomas and Philip, for starters are no longer part of the bible.. And gross mid -representation and translation.... virgin today, wasn't what was meant in 100CE for example.
So apart from the bible being the collection of the history and folk lore, fables, ideas, musings, thoughts etc. of a starving bunch of shepherds, (the tribe of Israel) living in a strife torn Middle East (same today) the sources were corrupted along the way. That folk lore isn't much different that the stuff left by the Hittites, the Assyrians, the Nubians or the Egyptians, all tribes living there.... Indeed, the story of Adam and Eve, is a Babylonian myth, the 10 commandments is like the 12 denials of Egypt, (and by the way, the 10 commandments have only to do with conduct of the Tribe of Israel... it was perfectly okay to murder your enemy, sacrifice some one else's wife, screw her even!!!!!! as long as she was not a member of the Tribe of Israel..... covet his goats and the rest of it. Indeed it it was as well, okay to sacrifice your own daughter... (see Judges, Genesis, and Numbers... women weren't treated very well.,,, again, not much different today in some parts of the M. E.)
2007-07-28 07:45:19 · answer #4 · answered by ladyren 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
If the King James version is THE correct translation, it follows that God only wants English speakers to understand Him. If that makes sense to anybody but an English speaker, I'd love to hear why.
2007-07-28 10:16:14 · answer #5 · answered by Daniel E 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You answered your own question, the bible is translated into thousands of different languages, no matter how it turns out, the truth comes through. As for the best translation, I read the Aramaic Peshitta by Dr. Lamsa.
2007-07-28 07:30:58 · answer #6 · answered by chris c 1 · 3⤊ 0⤋
The Word of God is a living thing. It's more than just words on paper, and God Himself makes sure that His truth can and will be found in whatever translation you read. Thus, there is no right or wrong translation of the Bible. He will reach you where you are.
2007-07-28 07:31:41 · answer #7 · answered by Steve 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Just realize that the KJV, for english speakers, has small 'errors' in it, just as a Hebrew scribe might accidentally or otherwise put a 'jot' or 'tittle' somewhere, changing the meaning of a word. Even with these problems, and going into other translations, the MEANING of things can come about by other passages which support it. "Line by line, precept by precept....'
Ultimately, you need the Holy spirit to seek the truth in it. And you will find it if you are diligent.
2007-07-28 07:32:59 · answer #8 · answered by witnessnbr1 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Doood . . . it's not even a *good* translation! It was translated from the LATIN translation of the original texts, and is full of archaic and anachronistic vocabulary and misleading syntactic constructions.
Other countries actually use translations they can read and understand, in modern versions of their own language. Try the NASB.
2007-07-28 07:34:37 · answer #9 · answered by Boar's Heart 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
The KJV has been translated into other languages as well, and it depends on what your church recommends. Some have no opinion on what translation you choose others such as the Jehovah's Witnesses or Catholics have specific ones. As to it being correct, I think it is the closest we have.
2007-07-28 07:31:38 · answer #10 · answered by The U.P. 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋