why is there so many versions of the bible??

Question

hmmm im a muslim and i really wanna know why there is a Old testament new testament and all these others. in islam there is only one book (the Quran/ Koran) and it has never been changed so as to not change the meaning and commanndements in it. i really do wonder why it isnt the same with the bible?????

oh no! how am i gonna read all these an answers!

Answer 1

There are actually some 200 gospels, epistles and other books concerning the life of Jesus Christ. Writing such material was a popular literary form, particularly in the 2nd century. The pious fantasies competed with Greek romantic fiction. Political considerations in the late 2nd century led to the selection of just four approved gospels and the rejection of others. After three centuries of wrangling 23 other books were accepted by the Church as divinely inspired. The rest were declared 'pious frauds'. In truth, the whole lot belongs to a genre of literary FICTION.

In the past, those communities of faithful believers that out worked, out fought and out numbered competitors won in the game of survival and sacrifice. That means those ideological traditions that best motivated communities of faithful believers to out work, out fight, and out number competitors survived and those that did not were sacrificed. This explains the success of books like the Bible. Books like the Bible survive in part because books like the Bible motivate communities of faithful believers to out work, out fight and out number competition.

Conservative Christians would argue that success is proof that books like the Bible contain words expressing the will of God. Here is a problem with that line of reasoning. There are other books besides the Bible that have been successful in motivating communities of faithful believers to out work, out fight and out number their competition: the holy Koran being a notable example. I believe both books are products of an on going evolution within the global culture of ideological traditions where in those ideological traditions that best motivate communities of faithful believers to out work, out fight, and out number competitors survive and those ideological traditions that do not perish. I believe the much talked about clash of cultures between Islam and Christianity reflects an on going conflict to determine whose holy book best expresses the will of God as well as a fight between motivated communities of faithful believers over increasingly scarce natural resources of our body consuming biosphere of limited dimensions. I believe the much talked about race in racism is a race towards Armageddon run by communities of faithful believers motivated by conservative ideological traditions to out work, out fight and out number competition.

Answer 2

Good question. The Jewish Bible,the Catholic Bible, the Protestant Bible and "other Bibles" are significantly different from each other. There are over 50 different versions of the Bible in English alone.The Old Testament was originally written in Hebrew and the New Testament in Greek.If we could all read Hebrew and Greek,then we would have no need for an"English version"
Translation of the Greek New Testament is a very precise science.The New American Standard Bible,for example,was translated over 10 years,by over 45 scholars and was first published in 1962.Similar painstaking work was applied to the production of the New International, (1978) and King James (1611) and the New King James (1982) .These translations and others like them were the product of many years of work from scholars from many denominations.

Each translation has its own strengths and weaknesses. The King Version (KJV) is excellent,but you must use a dictionary as you read because it uses language typical of the time it was translated (1611)The New American Standard version (NASV) is believed by many to be one of the most accurate translations and is an excellent study Bible.The American Standard Version (ASV) is also excellent and highly accurate. The New King James Version (NKJV) is high on the recommended list.The New International Version (NIV) tries to make the text as easy to understand as possible and is an excellent reading Bible,but not a study Bible.The New World Translation (1950 ,the Jehovah's Witnesses Bible) should be avoided because it is actually corrupt,being a sectarian paraphrase rather than a true translation of the Holy Scrpitures. This is why Christians give different answers on who is God. They simply do not know. They can't even agee on the most important subject.They leave themselves wide open to ridicule from Atheists which they deserve.

Answer 3

Part of the problem with the Koran is that it can't be properly translated. When it was written down, by Caliph Uthman's regularisation initiative, there wasn't a proper Arabic script in place. So words written in those manuscripts can't properly record Mohammed's statements. This affects vowels. So a century or more later (2 centuries I think) when the proper vowel indications were added to the script, noone can be entirely sure that they got the words right, since two words written down can be the same without vowel markup.

There haven't been many Bible versions until recently. We live in a consumer age, so its not surprising. The New Testament source is not changed, but they use information on the extant 6000 manuscripts to create new translations (and doubtless see how other scholars translated awkward verses).

Lack of translations into native tongues was one reason for the crusades I think, as that was entirely contrary to the teachings of Christ. At that time the chruch was very rigidly controlled, and the Papacy refused to translate into native languages - they just had a Latin translation called the Vulgate, and no-one except scholars and monks could read it. If more people read the Koran in their native tongues, it may be there would be reduced violence amongst the Mohammedan believers - however there are some very nasty passages that will comtinue to inspire very sinful behaviour of the violent kind in many Mohameddans.
--
Good translations seem to be the most literal ones. So they can be harder to understand as they use some original allusions that may not make sense now without knowledge of ancient world (so one needs commentaries etc), as well as things such as horrendously long sentences which was common in Greek. New American Standard Bible is a good such translation. For an easy read choose a paraphrase such as the Message. Traditionalists love the King James Version.

Answer 4

The Old Testament is a collection of historical books which also provide the prophecies relating to the promised Savior. The New Testament is the collection of books which specifically deals with the birth, rise, and death of the Savior promised in the OT.

The many different translations of the Bible (KJV, NASB, NIV) have come about for many reasons. The KJV has been considered by many to have a political slant to it. The NIV leaves out some verses (and some of the ones it leaves out are important!), then you have the BOM (book of mormon) which claims to be a final testament of Christ. There are also other translations, such as the one the JWs use. Each version has its supporters and detractors. I just try to develop my faith and follow the basic suggestions - don't intentionally harm anyone, and worship as I feel I am instructed to.

I can understand why one would be confused, looking from the outside in. It isn't any clearer looking from the inside unless you have spiritual discernment, do a lot of research, or are fortunate enough to know someone who can explain it to you in a way that makes sense.

The division of Chritianity and its different denominations are part of the appeal of Christianity. You can pick one that matches your specific views on what the Bible says, however I have always wondered if all of those people actually read the Bible (I suspect a lot do not) and I have also wondered if they all have prayed before reading the Bible as instructed to in the Bible.

Then again, if they have never read the Bible, it is kinda hard for them to read that - especially since it is near the middle of the New Testament.

Answer 5

I think the order went like this:

Torah ( The Old Testament )
New Testament ( Optional Apocrypha )
Quran/ Koran ( The Final Testament )
Book of Morman (Another testament of Jesus Christ – For the USA )

And Finally ...
The Gospel of the FSM ( Pastafarianism )

I think there are many versions because Each Bible or Gospel brings us closer to the truth. Some people just get stuck with what they know, for instance Islamic countries have mostly Muslims believers , Christian countries have many Christians. Jews will often have Jewish parents .....

..... Taznim have you studied any of the other Bibles / Gospels ? How did you decide become a Muslim ?

Answer 6

1) Why so many versions....
a) Translation is not an exact science. Scholarly translations tend to use different translation "philosophies" or "techniques". Even if they all used the same technique, translation from these ancient languages is ambiguous. Indeed, translation from *modern* languages is ambiguous, even among scholars who speak both languages fluently!
b) Three things pertinent to bible translation change continually with time: the accuracy of ancient languages scholarship, the English language, and the discovery of new, more ancient and more authoritative original language manuscripts. Scholarly translations attempt to include all of these gains into their versions.
c) $. The English-speaking world is primarily Christian and generally wealthy. Any scholarly bible translation is likely to make money for the publisher. This is why there are *so* many versions. If creating a new version always involved the collection of donations, we would likely have about 6 new versions per century (for the reasons mentioned in b above)

2) "and it has never been changed"
This is demonstrably untrue. There have been ancient manuscripts of the Qur'an found by archaeologists which differ from the current standard.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_and_development_of_the_Qur%27an#Oldest_copy_known_today

Understand that, though manuscripts of biblical texts *have* been altered (mostly by copyist error, sometimes by verse additions), we have *so many* manuscripts now that scholars are well able to detect the late additions and are usually able to detect copy errors as well. Considering that most of the bible books have been copied (by hand) for over 2500 years, and all for about 2000 years, it is a wonder how few copy errors have crept in over the centuries.

Thus, the *primary* reason for different versions is that they are different *translations* (as there are of the Qur'an). However, nearly are modern versions are based on copies of the same autographs.

Jim, http://www.life-after-harry-potter.com

Answer 7

The basic difference is, the Quran was (presumably) written by one author in it's entirety. Anything not written by him cannot be part of the Quran - that's something even Sunnite and Shiite muslims can agree on.

Now, Christianity, oh my. The bible, now that's a collection of texts by a variety of authors over about a millenium and a half!
Obviously, this would cause some dispute as to which texts by what authors are true (first-hand, if you will) accountings and which are just hearsay or even outright heresy.

The old testament, spanning over a millenium in terms of origination date, is actually the more problematic book. Protestant denominations generally consider 7 texts apocryphal that are considered canon in Catholicism; interestingly, all of them are old testament texts that are not considered canonical texts in Judaism.
Some other Christian denominations include even more obscure (according to mainstream) texts in their canon, such as the Book of Jubilees in the Etheopian Orthodox Church.

For the new testament, the situation is actually better, as the large denominations pretty much agree on canon, except for individual verses.
As a book, mostly Revelations can still be considered disputed as it is not (truly) accepted in Greek Orthodoxy and many eastern churches (hence a noticably large fraction of Christians); in fact, even among western churches, doubters still pop up regularly.
Some eastern churches consider extra texts canonical, but within the greater context; those aren't really particularly disputed, though, as the vast majority of denominations (and faithfuls) agree they're apocryphical.

Of course, that wasn't always so, many texts almost lost and now considered apocryphical were parts of bible compilations about the 2nd to 4th century AD, such as the Apocalypse of Peter or additional gospels (after all, there were 12 apostles).

Answer 8

The Old Testament predominantly talks about history and tells of the coming of the Messiah. The New Testament talks about Jesus, the Messiah, and the way he revolutionized the faith.

But current day Jews do not hold the New Testament as a credible literature. Christians, on the other hand, combined the Old and New testament into a single cohesive text known as the Bible to explicate the faith.

Also, if you are also referring to the different versions of the Bible, this is because the Bible (and its many books) was written by many people in many different regions at many different times. As such, language changes with both location and time and the Bible had to be translated into many other languages. For instance, the English language only has one word for Love, while Greek has many words for different kinds of love (ie Eros for passionate and sensual love, Philia for love for family and friends, etc.). Translations vary among translators as well as with interpretation.

Answer 9

on the Jeopardy television software about 2 weeks in the past, contained in the category "Bible" the question change into: "what's the most precise translation of all Bibles?" the great answer change into "NEW international TRANSLATION" that Jehovah Witnesses use. King James version got here into existence. That change into in 1611. From very just about each and every quarter the King James Bible met competition. criticism change into regularly severe. Broughton, a Hebrew pupil of the day, wrote to King James that he “might want to fairly be torn asunder by wild horses than enable this style of version to be imposed on the church.” King James Bible has been replaced; at present no man or woman reads the King James version in its unique type. Explaining why it is so the e book The Bible in Its historic and English variations says: “very just about each and every version, from the very beginning, presented corrections and unauthorized transformations and additions, regularly including new mistakes contained in the technique. The version of 1613 shows over 3 hundred transformations from 1611, It change into contained in the eighteenth century, although, that the significant transformations were made, The marginal references were checked and confirmed, over 30,000 new marginal references were extra, the financial disaster summaries and dealing headnotes were thoroughly revised, the punctuation change into altered and made uniform in accordance with cutting-part practice, textual mistakes were bumped off, using capitals change into appreciably changed and decreased, and a thorough revision made contained in the kind of certain styles of words.” distinct transformations were made, lots of them contained in the readings of passages, that the Committee on variations (1851-fifty six) of the yank Bible Society chanced on 24,000 transformations in six diverse variations of the King James version! What, then, of the objections raised by persons who say they do no longer go with the King James Bible replaced? because the King James version has already been replaced, they lie on a crumbled beginning. If those persons do no longer go with it replaced, then why do they use, instead of a replica of an version of 1611, an version that has been replaced? between the significant motives the approved version is so significantly prevalent is its kingly authority. There seems no doubt that, had no longer a king approved this version, it would not at present be honored as even though it had come direct from God

Answer 10

BlessingBe...Please do not refer to Muslims as "Mohammadins." Many Muslims find this offensive as it seems to say that we worship Mohammad (pbuh) which we find extremely blasphemous as we believe that only God should be worshiped and not his messengers.

As for the other person who said that we also have the Haddith as a book, this is not a holy inspired book by Allah. What makes up the content of the Haddith are accounts that were relayed about the actions of the Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) that can help us to know the right way to act in certain situations. So this is not God's word. This is a compellation of sayings and deeds of our Prophet (pbuh).

I was a Christian and converted to Islam about 1 1/2 yrs ago due to the many unanswered questions that I had about Christianity such as the hundreds of bible texts, revisions and inaccuracies.

All I can say is that the majority of the Bible was written between 60-200 yrs after the death of Jesus (pbuh), they all give different accounts such as who found the tomb empty after the supposed crucifixion and so on. I also found it immensely distasteful how the bible spoke of the Prophets. Saying that Noah (pbuh) got drunk fell asleep naked and cursed his son, that Lot (pbuh) slept with his daughters, that David (pbuh) slept with another man's wife, that Solomon (pbuh) worshiped other Gods and so on. I feel horrible even repeating such things.

As for the supposed different texts of the Quran, it is irrelevant if a fake text did pop up considering millions of Muslims have memorized the Quran word for word since it was revealed. Muslims, during the time of the Prophet (pbuh) memorized the Quran word for word in mass numbers so even if a bogus text popped up this would have no effect on the text.

No, the Quran was not altered by "adding vowels" as was stated. The Arabic of the Quran was written the same way that Arabic is written nowadays. What happened is this:

There are three forms for each Arabic letter for example: Ma, Moo and Me. Or Fa, foo and fee. If you add a fatha (which looks like a little accent mark above a letter) to a letter it becomes fa. If you add Kasra (which looks like a little accent mark below a letter) it becomes Fe. Adding domma (which looks like a little comma above a letter) makes it foo. But when Arabs read Arabic they don't need these little "helpers". They read without them. But when Islam spread to other countries that had no knowledge of Arabic they needed to have these little marks on the letters to be able to read the Arabic properly. In Arabic you don't make a totally different word by adding a vowel sound. It is a much more simple language with a mathematical precision.

Asalaamu Alaikum Taznim

Answer 11

you've just named all the ''others.'' the old testament and the new testament comprise the bible. the truth and knowledge of God cannot be understood by one man, all at one time. it took 1400 years and more than 40 prophets to write the bible. that's why we have an old and new testament. the revelation of God takes time. if you're meaning ''translations'' instead of ''versions,'' there is more than one translation of the quran. it's available in at least two english translations that i'm aware of, and probably many more languages other than arabic.

and by the way... if the bukhari and the hadith aren't books, what do you call them?