Why so many English versions of the Holy Bible?

[JohnB445]

Most languages have between 1-10 versions, with Spanish having around 20ish.

English has 60+ versions. While the majority of other languages will have less than 10 versions, some even less than 5.

It stuck out so I was curious why so many versions and is it neccessary? I can see it causing confusion to new believers.

I have only 2 versions. KJV and ESV. I used to use the NIV when I was brand new, then heard that it was just a commentary of the Bible, I wanted to get the actual word so I got the ESV instead. Then I wanted the original's so I switched the the KJV.

 

[Albion]

In our society, the freedom to speak and publish are cherished and respected. Since there is no end to people feeling that they can produce a version of the Bible that is more readable than the last one, this will continue to go on.

 

[Knee V]

I suspect that most of this is due to people thinking that other translations are not accurate enough or are biased. There are many "flavors" in the English-speaking christian world, and many of them disagree on what constitutes a proper rendering of many passages.

 

[timothyu]

You are forgetting the driving force today, capitalism. Own the copyright of a new version and get the world's best selling book out there. It's like when non-Messianic singers put out traditional Christmas carols. They don't believe a word of it but a guaranteed seasonal income couldn't hurt.

 

[Albion]

It's like when non-Messianic singers put out traditional Christmas carols. They don't believe a word of it but a guaranteed seasonal income couldn't hurt.

Well, that does not bother me. We, as a society, have been blessed with freedom, and if a non-believer produces a Christmas Card or a Bible that is acceptable to believers on the basis of its contents...more power to em! But if the thought is repulsive, don't buy them. It's that simple.

 

[Arcangl86]

And the number isn't as high as you would think. Yes there are a lot, but the majority, maybe even vast majority come out of the King James tradition, and attempts to modernize it's language. There also recently has been both a push in English language bibles to be more gender neutral and more and more scholarship to help indicate both the right way to interpret a word and what verses should or should not be included.

 

[paul1149]

why so many versions

Do you never go to biblegateway.com and use their "see verse in all english versions" function when you get a perplexing verse? That is why there are different translations. Different people pick up different things in the original text. Translation is not an exact science. What's more, the meaning of the author's original intent is up for debate, so that there's uncertainty on the Greek side as well as on the linguist mechanics of how to best bring it out on the English side (this latter consideration depending a lot on the target audience). That is why we have so many translations. They are a sign that the quest for understanding the Bible is in healthy condition. "In the multitude of counsel there is safety."

Then I wanted the original's so I switched the the KJV

Not sure how you mean this, but I would not recommend granting some kind of extraordinary authority to the way the KJV is translated.

 

[Athanasius377]

I used to use the NIV when I was brand new, then heard that it was just a commentary of the Bible, I wanted to get the actual word so I got the ESV instead.

That's not true. Whoever said that has an agenda they are trying to push. The NIV is a fine translation with its strong points and with its weaknesses as well. However I do prefer the ESV over the NIV (and all other English translations), but if you and I were discussing scripture I would have no issues with the use of NIV.

 

[Albion]

Not sure how you mean this, but I would not recommend granting some kind of extraordinary authority to the way the KJV is translated.

No, but a good case can be made for the KJV if we take everything in to account when judging. And by the way, the reading level for the KJV is rated at 12th grade, so I wonder when people almost automatically say it's too difficult to read.

 

[paul1149]

No, but a good case can be made for the KJV if we take everything in to account when judging. And by the way, the reading level for the KJV is rated at 12th grade, so I wonder when people almost automatically say it's too difficult to read.

The best bible is the one that speaks the most clearly to you, is easily memorizable, and that you enjoy reading. If that's the KJV, fine. I just don't like people to give it an exclusive hold on accuracy.

 

[Call me Nic]

Do you never go to biblegateway.com and use their "see verse in all english versions" function when you get a perplexing verse? That is why there are different translations. Different people pick up different things in the original text. Translation is not an exact science. What's more, the meaning of the author's original intent is up for debate, so that there's uncertainty on the Greek side as well as on the linguist mechanics of how to best bring it out on the English side (this latter consideration depending a lot on the target audience). That is why we have so many translations. They are a sign that the quest for understanding the Bible is in healthy condition. "In the multitude of counsel there is safety."


Not sure how you mean this, but I would not recommend granting some kind of extraordinary authority to the way the KJV is translated.

Do some research into the KJV and you’ll find how superior of a translation it really is. I personally find it to be the most faithful English translation in existence.

 

[Athanasius377]

Then I wanted the original's so I switched the the KJV.

The original is written in Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic. The KJV is a monument to 17th century scholarship but it is in no way "the original". In fact it is actually a revision of the Bishop's bible of 1572. There are better and easier to read translations out there. However, if you can read Jacobean English there is certainly nothing wrong with the KJV. Just don't allow someone armed with fallacious arguments to bully you into using the KJV only.

 

[paul1149]

Do some research into the KJV and you’ll find how superior of a translation it really is. I personally find it to be the most faithful English translation in existence.

Among the research I've done is translating over half the NT from the Greek, and I cannot begin to agree with you on this at all.

 

[Call me Nic]

The original is written in Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic. The KJV is a monument to 17th century scholarship but it is in no way "the original". In fact it is actually a revision of the Bishop's bible of 1572. There are better and easier to read translations out there. However, if you can read Jacobean English there is certainly nothing wrong with the KJV. Just don't allow someone armed with fallacious arguments to bully you into using the KJV only.

What about the precision of the language of the Bible’s which use Jacobean? Thee, Thou, and Thy are different from You, Ye, Your. One is singular, and one is plural. And in many cases this determines the context of a passage which the contemporary translations fail to make known. That alone makes the KJV superior. The Hebrew and Greek make the distinction between singular and plural in the second person, so why don’t the modern versions?

 

[Call me Nic]

Among the research I've done is translating over half the NT from the Greek, and I cannot begin to agree with you on this at all.

Your loss, then, friend. You may be using a Bible translation that omits certain scripture due to following the Alexandrian line of manuscripts.

 

[JosephZ]

No, but a good case can be made for the KJV if we take everything in to account when judging. And by the way, the reading level for the KJV is rated at 12th grade, so I wonder when people almost automatically say it's too difficult to read.

Most English speakers don't read at a 12th grade level which would explain why you hear people saying that a lot. In the US for example the average person reads at the 7th grade level.

 

[Arcangl86]

Your loss, then, friend. You may be using a Bible translation that omits certain scripture due to following the Alexandrian line of manuscripts.

Or on the other side, you may be treating things as scripture that weren't in the original texts because you are relying on Byzantine type text.

 

[timothyu]

The English word Jesus didn't even exist 400 yrs ago. Times change and so do translations.

 

[Call me Nic]

Or on the other side, you may be treating things as scripture that weren't in the original texts because you are relying on Byzantine type text.

The Byzantine text type is descended from the original Antioch manuscripts. The quotations of scripture in the writings of the early church fathers proves that. So no, I’m actually relying upon God given scripture that is faithfully translated into my native language.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Most languages have between 1-10 versions, with Spanish having around 20ish.

English has 60+ versions. While the majority of other languages will have less than 10 versions, some even less than 5.

It stuck out so I was curious why so many versions and is it neccessary? I can see it causing confusion to new believers.

I have only 2 versions. KJV and ESV. I used to use the NIV when I was brand new, then heard that it was just a commentary of the Bible, I wanted to get the actual word so I got the ESV instead. Then I wanted the original's so I switched the the KJV.

I recommend the Greek interlinear also. Even the KJV has some parts that are not as accurately translated as they could be due to the more complicated definitions of some of the Greek words. That with Strong’s concordance can really shed a lot of light. I’ve learned a lot more after studying the Greek texts.