Bible versions-Is there only one?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Is there only one true version of the Bible?


  • Total voters
    21

Kolistus

Active member
Feb 3, 2020
358
183
43
#21
I voted no, because certain phrases are difficult if not impossible to translate word for word, without making a complete mess out of the original meaning that is meant to be in the text.

Consider translating modern english phrases to foreign languages, it becomes unrecognizable nonsense.

Such as: Thats cool man. So roughly translated, something is cool, cold, not warm. That might mean something in english, but in Romanian? No such thing.
 
Jun 10, 2019
4,304
1,652
113
#22
Yes there is a timeline of Bibles and all influences the next. But that is the point. I know some people who believe the KJV is the closest to the original language just because they believe it is the oldest English translation we have.

Which is easily proven false.
If they think it’s the oldest English version they haven’t done any research on it, a 30 second search can find that out, There was a incomplete version in 1400’s which Tyndale continued with it and there’s the Wycliffe from the 1300’s though translated manuscripts not a single book. and the Coverdale was out there also.
 

NOV25

Active member
Nov 23, 2019
383
179
43
#23
There are many translations and revised versions of Bible’s(NIV, Amplified, King James, Living Translation, AS). Did any of these lose essential Biblical meanings and teachings via the translation process? If so, which ones? If true, should those versions be avoided by Believers?
Guess we’d have to define essential. If one false doctrine is formed through a bad English translation and damages the gospel in the eyes of one soul should we consider that essential?
I would have to say all English translations are flawed and can cause many truth seekers to veer off the proverbial doctrinal track. Thankfully we have so many tools at our fingertips, the concordance, early church father’s writings and don’t forget the the Holy Spirit who places in the believer the desire to seek and discern truth.
I read mainly from the Strong’s Concordance app on my phone which uses the KJV. This allows me to tap on any word/phrase and read the original Hebrew or Greek word, the definition, number of times used/location and even the pronunciation. What an amazing tool. 👏
I wouldn’t say there’s any to avoid necessarily but I wouldn’t go building or subscribing to doctrine from just one translation, if that makes sense.
 
Mar 28, 2016
15,958
1,520
113
#24
The oldest manuscripts to date found in the ESV, NET, NLT, prove valuable in showing the deity of Christ. They also use Granville Sharp's Rule which clarifies Christ's deity. I use the KJV but assist it with these and a few more.

Sample: “So I want to remind you, though you already know these things, that Jesus first rescued the nation of Israel from Egypt, but later he destroyed those who did not remain faithful.” Jude 5 (NLT)
Hi . I had not looked at that translation (NLT)

I use the King James and sometimes the Youngs literal or the Easy To Read .I thought the YLT was the only one that seemed to not to destroy the meaning of the word "rest" sabbath and turn it into a time sensitive word. So that men could fight over a day a time period and lose the principle in the process. . . . Rest

But then the NLT follows after the Youngs Literal following the same kind of pattern. When the word sabbath comes up in Luke they make the same error and say twice a week .Rather than twice of the Sabbath . The NlT changes the word 19 times in the new testament .And would seem to destroy the use of the word sabbath again making it into a time sensitive word week of first day of focusing on the day not the rest we have from the work .

From what I understand the Greek then did not use a word "week" to describe seven days . They used "seven days" .Not sure when they started to use the word "week" (in the Greek) "evdomád"

Rest sabbath "sávvato"

Luke 18:12(NLT)I fast twice a week, and I give you a tenth of my income.’

No commandment to fast twice a week and give another tenth

Matthew 28 New Living Translation (NLT) Early on Sunday morning, as the new day was dawning, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went out to visit the tomb.

King James uses the word week as a time sensitive word.

Matthew 28:1 KJ In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.

Young's Literal Translation....At the dawn, toward the first of the "new era" of sabbaths (plural)

Matthew 28 (YLT) And on the eve of the sabbaths, at the dawn, toward the first of the sabbaths, came Mary the Magdalene, and the other Mary, to see the sepulchre,
 

Roughsoul1991

Senior Member
Sep 17, 2016
5,115
2,163
113
#25
If they think it’s the oldest English version they haven’t done any research on it, a 30 second search can find that out, There was a incomplete version in 1400’s which Tyndale continued with it and there’s the Wycliffe from the 1300’s though translated manuscripts not a single book. and the Coverdale was out there also.
It really just comes down to the Hebrew/Greek scholars who translate it to English. Because in less you are a Hebrew/Greek scholar then us average folks have to trust their translations. Only option we have is cross examination from other translators and those who can interpret the ancient words on the scrolls.
 
Jun 10, 2019
4,304
1,652
113
#26
It really just comes down to the Hebrew/Greek scholars who translate it to English. Because in less you are a Hebrew/Greek scholar then us average folks have to trust their translations. Only option we have is cross examination from other translators and those who can interpret the ancient words on the scrolls.
There was a guy named James Murdoch 1800’s translated the Syriac Peshitta into English some the words he uses is quite fascinating he was quite the intelligent person. I like reading it and learning some of the older big words not used anymore lol.
 

Aerials1978

Well-known member
Dec 10, 2019
1,131
676
113
#27
I say no.

Because we do not have the original manuscripts to 100% be sure. But we have enough copies and fragments to be already 98% sure of what the originals had to say. 2% are places like the end of Mark or some areas where commas was added when in the scrolls there where no chapters, verse numbers or commas. All of those was put in later.

With these copies and fragments we can use textual criticism to compare and contrast to see what was the most common transcription over the years. And this is what Greek and Hebrew scholars translate to English. In translation to English according to the translator must try to use the best English word. Hebrew and Greek didn't have as many words as English so one word like love would have multiple interpretations in Hebrew or Greek where as love in English we have words to describe the different types of love.

This is how we get different translations. The translators prefer 1 English word to another. Usually they are so similar it doesn't make much of a difference. Sometimes it may change the whole meaning.

Also some Bible's are produced by certain groups with certain doctrines. So some words will be different to better convert to their doctrine.


Even using the Early Church fathers writing's helps to determine scripture due to their many writings that contain scripture.

So really it is always a good habit when studying to compare translations and if something still dont seem right then look up the Hebrew/Greek to English translation.

My personal opinion is most translations are not dangerous or a threat to accuracy. Rarely will I find a verse where the word used is completely wrong. I mostly use the NIV.
You are correct. There are enough codexes to use in comparison with each other to eliminate any errors that may have occurred.

When the topic of “Lost in translation” is brought up, that mythology used to show how as you said the texts are 98% accurate. I would say the Bible is pretty sound.
There was a guy named James Murdoch 1800’s translated the Syriac Peshitta into English some the words he uses is quite fascinating he was quite the intelligent person. I like reading it and learning some of the older big words not used anymore lol.
I will have to look into that. Another interesting collection of Greek codexes is the Chester Beatty Papyri. If you haven’t heard it if you should check it out.
 
Jun 10, 2019
4,304
1,652
113
#28
You are correct. There are enough codexes to use in comparison with each other to eliminate any errors that may have occurred.

When the topic of “Lost in translation” is brought up, that mythology used to show how as you said the texts are 98% accurate. I would say the Bible is pretty sound.


I will have to look into that. Another interesting collection of Greek codexes is the Chester Beatty Papyri. If you haven’t heard it if you should check it out.
I haven’t heard of it cool beans thanks for the info I’ll check it out.

here’s a link to the Murdock

http://aramaicnewtestament.org/peshitta/murdock/
 
Dec 30, 2019
1,266
290
83
#30
Hardly a few Christians are Hebrew or Greek scholars
They should be, what I am learning now about Hebrew they should be teaching in Kindergarten. I think during the 1,000 year reign of Christ they will be teaching this to everyone so they do not need anyone to teach them the Bible they can learn it for themselves. We have to go back to basics and we have to have the understanding of a Child. Then we can progress from there because we will have a good foundation to build on. Kindergarten is a German word because they understood that you have to indoctrinate people at a very young age.
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
12,605
5,586
113
#31
My personal opinion is most translations are not dangerous or a threat to accuracy. Rarely will I find a verse where the word used is completely wrong. I mostly use the NIV.
It is evident from your post that you have not really delved into this issue in-depth. And since you use the NIV, it is a further confirmation that you are not really aware of the issues or what is at stake. So let's look at the original Preface of the NIV to see that what has been given to you is a corrupt Bible.

Preface [The Committee on Bible Translation June 1978 (Revised August 1983)]

FALSE CLAIM: THE MOST CORRUPT TEXTS WERE USED
The New International Version is a completely new translation of the Holy Bible made by over a hundred scholars working directly from the best available Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek texts.

FALSE CLAIM: THE NIV IS NOT AN ACCURATE TRANSLATION
From the beginning of the project, the Committee on Bible Translation held to certain goals for the New International Version: that it would be an accurate translation and one that would have clarity and literary quality...

FALSE CLAIM: DYNAMIC EQUIVALENCE IS NOT A TRANSLATION BUT A PARAPHRASE
... At the same time, they have striven for more than a word-for-word translation. Because thought patterns and syntax differ from language to language, faithful communication of the meaning of the writers of the Bible demands frequent modifications in sentence structure and constant regard for the contextual meaning of words. [Note: that describes Dynamic Equivalence]

BOTH OLD ENGLISH AND GERMAN USE SPECIAL PRONOUNS
Neither Hebrew, Aramaic nor Greek uses special pronouns for the persons of the Godhead. A present translation is not enhanced by forms that in the time of the King James version were used in everyday speech, whether referring to God or man.

FALSE CLAIM: BIBLIA HEBRAICA IS A CORRUPTED MASORETIC TEXT
...For the Old Testament the standard Hebrew text, the Masoretic Text as published in the latest editions of Biblia Hebraica, was used throughout...

FALSE CLAIM: THE SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH IS A CORRUPTED TORAH
...The Dead Sea Scrolls contain material bearing on an earlier stage of the Hebrew Text. They were consulted, as were the Samarian Pentateuch and the ancient scribal traditions relating to textual changes...

FALSE CLAIM: THE SEPTUAGINT, IS A CORRUPTED HEBREW BIBLE
FALSE CLAIM: AQUILA, SYMMACHUS, THEODOTION WERE HERETICS
FALSE CLAIM: THE LATIN VULGATE IS BIASED TO SUPPORT CATHOLICISM
FALSE CLAIM: CONJECTURAL EMENDATION IS NOT ACCEPTABLE
...The translators also consulted the more important early versions—the Septuagint; Aquila, Symmachus and Theodotion; the Vulgate; the Syriac Peshitta; the Targums; and for the Psalms the Juxta Hebraica of Jerome. Readings from these versions were occasionally followed where the Masoretic Text seemed doubtful and where accepted principles of textual criticism showed that one or more of these textual witnesses appeared to provide the correct reading... [Note: this is "conjectural emendation]

FALSE CLAIM: THE "ACCEPTED PRINCIPLES" ARE EXTREMELY QUESTIONABLE
FALSE CLAIM: THE "BEST" CRITICAL TEXTS ARE THE WORST
The Greek text used in translating the New Testament was an eclectic one... Where existing manuscripts differ, the translators made their choice of readings according to accepted principles of New Testament textual criticism. Footnotes call attention to places where there was uncertainty about what the original text was. The best current printed texts of the Greek New Testament were used.

THERE IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM IF A TRANSLATION MUST BE CONSTANTLY REVISED

...There is a sense in which the work of translation is never wholly finished...
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
12,605
5,586
113
#32
Accessible in every language except modern English by your KJVO reckoning though.
Do you know why? Because every modern English translation resorted to corrupted Hebrew and Greek manuscripts and translations. If you found a rotten apple in a bunch of apples, you would throw it away. But when the critics found rotten manuscripts they praised them to high heaven as "the best", and then threw away the best!
 
Jun 10, 2019
4,304
1,652
113
#34
I put a sad face on your post because I know it cost him his life :(
Me too, that was quite sad that happen to him, he was trying to be helpful for those who only knew English
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
32,045
10,172
113
#35
Hi . I had not looked at that translation (NLT)

I use the King James and sometimes the Youngs literal or the Easy To Read .I thought the YLT was the only one that seemed to not to destroy the meaning of the word "rest" sabbath and turn it into a time sensitive word. So that men could fight over a day a time period and lose the principle in the process. . . . Rest

But then the NLT follows after the Youngs Literal following the same kind of pattern. When the word sabbath comes up in Luke they make the same error and say twice a week .Rather than twice of the Sabbath . The NlT changes the word 19 times in the new testament .And would seem to destroy the use of the word sabbath again making it into a time sensitive word week of first day of focusing on the day not the rest we have from the work .

From what I understand the Greek then did not use a word "week" to describe seven days . They used "seven days" .Not sure when they started to use the word "week" (in the Greek) "evdomád"

Rest sabbath "sávvato"

Luke 18:12(NLT)I fast twice a week, and I give you a tenth of my income.’

No commandment to fast twice a week and give another tenth

Matthew 28 New Living Translation (NLT) Early on Sunday morning, as the new day was dawning, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went out to visit the tomb.

King James uses the word week as a time sensitive word.

Matthew 28:1 KJ In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.

Young's Literal Translation....At the dawn, toward the first of the "new era" of sabbaths (plural)

Matthew 28 (YLT) And on the eve of the sabbaths, at the dawn, toward the first of the sabbaths, came Mary the Magdalene, and the other Mary, to see the sepulchre,
I really dislike the NLT. Have you looked at the Berean Bible? It is available on Biblehub.com :)
 

Aerials1978

Well-known member
Dec 10, 2019
1,131
676
113
#37
Me too, that was quite sad that happen to him, he was trying to be helpful for those who only knew English
Unfortunately ungodly rulers of the day saw this as a threat to their dominance. I don’t care what label they put on themselves, evil is evil. Still continues to this day.
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
32,045
10,172
113
#38
Unfortunately ungodly rulers of the day saw this as a threat to their dominance. I don’t care what label they put on themselves, evil is evil. Still continues to this day.
Yes, the Roman Catholic church has perpetrated many abuses, and continues to do so :(
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
12,605
5,586
113
#40
It really just comes down to the Hebrew/Greek scholars who translate it to English.
But you think it is funny to expose the lies of the corrupt NIV (a joke of a translation)? Which means you do not really want to truth.