Whats the difference between different translations of the bible?

Question

I hear a lot of people swear that KJV is the ONLY bible to read but that seems a tad arrogant. I mean I've heard some people say that it should only be read in english which is god's language but that's preposterous.

I've also noticed heated debates between people that like NIV and people who see it as filth.

What gives?

Answer 1

Scripture is really the original manuscripts written by the ancient Bible writers.

The Old Testament (OT) was first written in Hebrew and Aramaic. The New Testament (NT) was written in ancient Greek.

The original manuscripts no longer exist. The best we can do is use the very oldest manuscripts which agree with each other.

These manuscripts are examined carefully by Bible language scholars and a modern text is written using these old Hebrew and Greek manuscripts as a basis.

The text used for the KJV, however, is old and corrupted in various places because of the scarcity of the oldest manuscripts used to make it.

Also, the ancient languages were less understood in 1611 by the KJV translators than they are now.

More accurate translations based on more accurate texts are the NASB, NAB, and ASV.

Those few, like the ASV, which use God's name in the 6000+ places where it originally occured in the OT manuscripts will have either "Jehovah" (see Psalm 83:16-18 in the KJV, or throughout the ASV) or "Yahweh" (see Jerusalem Bible throughout the OT) in place of the mistranslated "LORD" (all capitals) in most English Bibles.

Answer 2

There can be a world of differences between translations on certain scriptures. However, 96 percent of the scripture is similar in the various translations.

If you are searching for the purest English translation, it would almost be a tie between the Aland 27 and the Concordant Version of the Bible. The King James was a grand achievement in 1611 based on the original language documents they had to work with. However today, Comparing the Greek and Hebrew, it is not the most accurate, especially when using the word "hell".

4 original language words in KJV are translated into the word "hell"

NIV is popular but not substantially more accurate than the KJV. And in some cases, the NIV is blatantly inaccurate.

-Wily

Answer 3

The difference is only the wording. There are several translations that have the same basic point but are worded slightly differently in order to help us to understand the meaning. If someone wants to get to the original meaning of the scriptures, I would suggest using the KJV along with a bible dictionary that gives the Greek and Hebrew meaning of the word at the time it was written. That will eliminate much of the "translation lost" that many people complain about. It takes a little more studying on your part but it's worth it if you're really trying to get down to the original meaning.

Answer 4

The main difference is simplification of the words written. Many people have a hard time understanding the KJV and go to other versions such as the NIV, NASB, NRSV etc. IMO you can over simplify things making them more confusing. I grew up with the KJV so it's fairly easy for me to understand most of what's there, but I prefer the American Standard or the NRSV. My husband likes the NIV best but has a parallel Bible with 4 translations side by side.

Answer 5

The KJV is the most accurate English translation of the Bible as it uses older and more dependable manuscripts. For a literal transliteration of the Bible from the original languages into English try The Interlinear Bible. However, God can use His Word, regardless of the translation, to perform His will.

Answer 6

Different people like different translations of The Word. Most people wouldn't understand some parts of the KJV. The Bible translations change with the type of language used today. As long as ur not reading the NWT or the Book of Mormon, I'm not worried.

Answer 7

The KJV has withstood every challenge presented to it.

The NIV had a sodomite woman and man on the committee and surprise, surprise it took references out concerning punishment for sodomy. Go figure. There was no other English bible from approx 1611 to about 1920 did God not want his word out or was it perfect then and still remains?

Read them side by side. Things are left out

The book new age versions by Gail Riplinger is great to see the differences.

Answer 8

King James was translated from Latin I believe. The Latin was translated from Greek and Hebrew. Sometimes Latin did not have a word that corresponded with the Greek and Hebrew so they tried to extrapolate a word they thought was close.

Personally I like the translation that is done directly from the Greek and Hebrew instead of from the Latin. It is closer to the original interpretation of the Bible. The one thing you have to remember is some of the old words in Greek and Hebrew had different meanings in the old culture than they do today.

Answer 9

If you aren't using the KJV, there are important scriptures that are subtly changed, even whole portions that are omitted. The new age translations are based on the perverted translation of Rudolph Kittel who hated Jews. Kittel didn't use the Textus Receptus or received text that the original documents were based upon.

Answer 10

THE HOLY BIBLE KING JAMES VERSION 1611

is the best,and presrved word of God.Nothing ommitted,nothing added.

The other version they added and omitted some important words.

Revelation 22:18-19
For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto this things,God shall added unto plagues that are written in this book:

And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy,God shall take away his part out of the book of life,and out of the holy city,and from the things which are written in this book.